Bicycle & Pedestrian Plan City of Greenfield Department of Parks & Recreation

Staff Experience [Draft 4/20/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Acknowledgements

Common Council Technical Advisory Committee Linda Lubotsky, District 1 Scott Jaquish, Director, Parks and Recreation Dept. Tom Pietrowski, District 2 Karl Kastner, Alderman Karl Kastner, District 3 Grant Dawson, Parks/Facilities Supervisor Don Almquist, District 4 Curt Bolton, City Engineer Pamela Akers, District 4 Jeff Tamblyn, Senior GIS Technician Shirley Saryan, District 5 Dan Ewert, Superintendent, Public Works Mayor Michael J. Neitzke Darren Rausch, Health Director Dennis Fermanich Parks and Recreation Board Catrine Lehrer‐Brey, Bike Federation of Wisconsin Kathleen Doonan, Chair Denise Collins, Vice‐Chair Ald. Shirley Saryan, Common Council Rep. Audrey Ellison, Greenfield SD Rep. Nancy Zaborowski, Whitnall SD Rep. Bruce Bailey, Member Donald Burns, Member David Smith, Member Marge Oelschlaeger, Member

Board of Public Works Ald. Donald Almquist Mr. Richard Bottoni Mr. Richard Kasza Ald. Thomas Pietrowski Ald. Shirley Saryan

Planning and Design Assistance by: CRISPELL‐SNYDER, INC. 2801 Crossroads, Drive, Suite 2000 Jeff Knudson, PE, PTOE, Project Manager / Author Madison, Wisconsin 53718 Crystal Buck, AICP, Community Planner / Co‐Author 608 244 6277 ph Ashley Wallace, Planning Assistant 608 249 6615 fx Jason Penning, GIS Technician planning@crispell‐snyder.com

[Draft 4/20/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 1 The Purpose of a Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan ...... 1 City of Greenfield’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Needs ...... 1 The Planning Process ...... 2 Existing Plans ...... 2 Existing Policies ...... 6 Commuting and Demographic Information ...... 8

2. Bicycle Facilities ...... 14 Overview ...... 14 Types of Bicycle Riders ...... 14 Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines ...... 15 Existing Bicycle Facilities and Network ...... 22 Proposed Bicycle Facilities and Network ...... 25 Goals ...... 32 Objectives...... 32 Policies ...... 32

3. Pedestrian Facilities ...... 34 Overview ...... 34 Pedestrian Facilities Design Guidelines ...... 34 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ...... 39 Proposed Pedestrian Facilities ...... 47 Goals ...... 51 Objectives...... 51 Policies ...... 51

4. Multi‐Use Paths ...... 52 Overview ...... 52 Multi‐Use Path Design Guidelines ...... 52 Existing Multi‐Use Facilities ...... 54 Proposed Multi‐Use Facilities ...... 55 Goals ...... 61 Objectives...... 61 Policies ...... 62

[Draft 4/20/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan 5. Implementation ...... 63 Implementation Framework ...... 63 Preliminary Cost Estimates ...... 63 Plan Consistency and Use ...... 63 Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan ...... 63 Plan Amendment and Procedures ...... 64 Priority Actions for Plan Implementation ...... 65

Appendices (Separate Document): Appendix A—Focus Group Interviews Appendix B—WE Energies and ATC Agreements Appendix C—State and School District Bus Policies Appendix D—Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities Appendix E—Endorsements

[Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Introduction

The Purpose of a Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Greenfield’s transportation network.

Walking and bicycling provide health, financial, and environmental benefits that improve our quality of life. City of Greenfield’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Needs Unfortunately, bicycle and pedestrian transportation The City of Greenfield has several characteristics that modes are often underutilized due lack of appropriate indicate a greater likelihood that origins and facilities and a heavy reliance on the automobile. As gas destinations are within walking and bicycling distance. prices and environmental/human health concerns The City itself has a relatively high population density increase, there is a greater need for alternative (3,072 persons per square mile), and has well‐ transportation options. Changing demographics, established residential, retail, and employment centers. including a large population of baby boomers reaching The nearby communities of West Allis, West Milwaukee, retirement age, also influence the demand for and Hales Corners, Franklin, New Berlin, Oak Creek, necessity of alternative transportation means. Milwaukee, St. Francis, Cudahy, and Greendale provide Addressing these issues by promoting and facilitating additional amenities. These retail and employment multiple transportation modes is a major priority for the centers are currently connected by bus services City of Greenfield. Providing and promoting these provided by the Milwaukee County Transit System. alternative modes helps the City meet the goals of its These services allow bicyclists and pedestrians to more recently completed community health improvement conveniently travel long distances, thereby enhancing plan, Healthiest Greenfield 2010. mobility.

The purpose of this Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan is to On the other hand, certain characteristics of the City make Greenfield a more pedestrian‐ and bicycle‐ and the region impede bicycling and walking as viable friendly community to live in by recommending transportation modes. Bicycling and walking are necessary infrastructure improvements and avoided for real or perceived safety and convenience transportation planning. This plan can: concerns, such as:

• Assist the City of Greenfield land use and • The presence of interstate highways; transportation planning efforts; • State and county highways that do not • Unify the efforts of residents trying to improve adequately accommodate bicyclists and conditions for bicycling and walking; and create pedestrians; a central resource of information for planning • Narrow shoulders; and review during implementation. • Lack of sidewalks; • Help to identify potential funding sources for future transportation improvement projects. • Multiple bridge crossings; This plan includes pedestrian and bicycle related • Inadequate roadway maintenance; policies, programs, design recommendations, and projects. It provides a strategy for the integration of • Lack of off‐road multi‐use trails; facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians in the City of • The high potential for auto‐pedestrian conflicts INTRODUCTION 1 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

along commercial corridors; and issues in the City and to solicit recommendations for improvements. Two additional stakeholders, American • The lack of a “share the road” ethic. Transmission Company (ATC) and Wisconsin Energy Corporation (WE Energies), were interviewed because of the significance the utility corridor can play in The Planning Process expanding trail use throughout the City.

The City of Greenfield completed its Comprehensive Local, regional, and state agencies were interviewed as Outdoor Recreation Plan in 2006. This Plan called for well. The county supervisor, County DOT and Parks, City making significant improvements in the City’s bicycle of Milwaukee Bike Coordinator, County Office of and pedestrian infrastructure, including potentially Disability, Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning installing a major multi‐use trail. Seeking more detail Commission Transportation Department, and the State and an in‐depth feasibility analysis for these DOT Bike/Pedestrian Transportation Planner for the infrastructure improvements, the City hired Crispell‐ Southeast Region were all interviewed. These Snyder to prepare a bicycle and pedestrian plan in 2008. interviews were conducted to ensure that the plan meets local, regional, and state needs and is integrated Technical Advisory Committee into surrounding bicycle and pedestrian systems and/or The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) guided the plans. planning process, made key decisions about future bike and pedestrian facilities, and reviewed early drafts of Open House and Plan Adoption project deliverables. Crispell‐Snyder met regularly with An open house provided an informal opportunity to the TAC to ensure that the project was on task and gather community feedback on the draft Plan prior to headed in the right direction. TAC members were the more formal adoption process. A draft Plan was selected by the City, and included the City Engineer, City completed in ______and an open house was held Parks and Recreation Director, City Forester (and local on ______. The Plan was then revised based on bike advocate), a representative from the County Trails comments received at the open house, and a final Council, a representative from the Bicycle Federation of plan was approved and adopted on ______Wisconsin, and local elected officials. following a public hearing. Bicycle and Pedestrian User Groups [Note: This section will be expanded on later.] Information to be added.

Interviews In December 2008, the City and Crispell‐Snyder Existing Plans conducted a number of personal interviews with various stakeholders and experts. The interview results State of Wisconsin and recommendations have been incorporated The Wisconsin Bicycle Transportation Plan 2020 throughout this plan (see Appendix C for interview presents a blueprint for improving conditions for notes). bicycling, clarifies the Wisconsin Department of Local community organizations, inlcuding local schools, Transportation’s (WisDOT) role in bicycle the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA), the Bike transportation, and establishes policies for further Federation and senior organizations, were contacted to integrating bicycling into the current transportation gain a better understanding of bicycle and walking system. Although there are no Greenfield‐specific recommendations, the plan does show three existing

INTRODUCTION 2 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan state trails and future “priority corridors and key arterial streets, bicycle accommodations in the form of linkages” for bicycling along the State Trunk Highway wide curb lanes, bicycle lanes, or paved shoulders, system. Potential future off‐street bicycle facilities should be made in accordance with local plans as well include: as in communities that don’t have bicycle plans.

• STH 100 The State identifies the following potential routes in • Loomis Road (STH 36) Milwaukee County:

• 27th Street (STH 41) • Along the Root River and Alan Kulwicki Park

The State of Wisconsin also adopted the Wisconsin • 51st Street to College Avenue Pedestrian Policy Plan 2020 in 2001. This plan outlines many similar goals as do the federal policies, such as Regional and Adjacent Communities reducing accidents and injuries, increasing the number of walking trips, and increasing the planning and design Milwaukee County Trails Network Plan guidance available for state and local officials, and The Milwaukee County Trails Network Plan was citizens. Working in partnership with local governments completed and adopted in 2007. This Plan addresses and other interested stakeholders, WisDOT will: the county‐wide trail system for snowmobile trails, trails/routes in adjacent counties, proposed soft multi‐ • Increase accommodations for pedestrian travel use trails, the Oak Leaf existing and proposed trail, and to the extent practicable along and across State other existing and proposed trails and corridors. Trunk Highways. The existing Oak Leaf Trail has been identified with a • Plan, design and promote new transportation proposed extension southwest, the Franklin Connector. facilities and retrofit existing facilities, where The utility corridor running east and west through the appropriate, to accommodate and encourage City and a corridor running north and south along pedestrian use. Interstate(I)‐894 are both considered corridors with trail • Expand the range of education activities, such potential. The east/west utility corridor is also a as technical workshops on planning and design proposed trail route for the county. The trail would facilities, pedestrian safety, and provision of connect to the Oak Leaf Trail running north and south public service information to provide consistent along both Lake Michigan and the western county line. safety measures to all roadway users. There is also a corridor identified running south of the • Work to improve the enforcement of laws to utility corridor sandwiched between I‐94 and the prevent dangerous and illegal behavior by Mitchell International Airport, which could provide easy motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. bicycle access from Greenfield to the regional airport.

• Encourage more pedestrian trips by promoting West Allis the acceptance and usefulness of walking and The City of West Allis, to the north of Greenfield, has by promoting pedestrian safety efforts. started its preparation to update its 1990‐2010 The State also has produced the Wisconsin Bicycle Comprehensive Plan, West Allis 2030 Comprehensive Transportation Plan 2020. This plan identifies the three Plan. In addition, the City is currently in the process of levels of state interest in or responsibility for bicycle finalizing a Bike and Pedestrian Plan as prepared by the transportation: state‐owned, state‐supported, and Bike Federation of Wisconsin. The document has not state‐interest. The urban strategy recommends that on yet been formally presented to or accepted by the Plan

INTRODUCTION 3 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Commission or Common Council so it is recommended future transportation problems and needs. The SEWRPC that communication be established and maintained Transportation System Plan recommends the following: between Greenfield and West Allis as these plans progress. The draft West Allis existing and proposed • Morgan Ave, between Forest Home Avenue and rd bike improvements plan, in relation to Greenfield, South 43 Street ‐ widen from two to four includes: lanes.

• Preferred streets for bike facilities: 92nd, 84th, • Establish a Walk Access Transit Service Area, 76th, 68th streets and Forest Home Road; and including the City of Greenfield.

• An off‐street trail running along I‐894. Village of Hales Corners The Village of Hales Corners’ A Land Use, Urban Design, City of Milwaukee Bicycle Master Plan and Transportation for Selected Arterial Street Corridors The City of Milwaukee is currently updating its bicycle Plan (1993), addresses improving vehicular, bicycle, and master plan. Currently, the following have been pedestrian circulation as a suggested urban design identified as existing bicycle/pedestrian routes in solution. In addition, the plan identifies a few relation to the City of Greenfield: pedestrian/bicycling issues on the 108th Street Corridor:

• Bike lane along Forest Home Avenue ending at • West Grange Street is an area that contains no Morgan Avenue; provision for pedestrian or bicycle circulation such as sidewalks or asphalt paths to link • Bike route spanning Morgan Avenue; various activities along the arterial.

• Existing trail along the Kinnickinnic River West • The intersections at West Grange and 108th th and extending North on South 84 Street, as Street, West Grange and Forest Home, West part of the Oak Leaf Trail System; and Edgerton and 108th Street, and West Janesville Road and 108th Street are identified as arterial • Existing trail along Alan Kulwicki Park and Root street intersections controlled by traffic signals River to the North and South. that provide no pedestrian crossing lights The plan also identifies proposed routes/trails, such as and/or crosswalk lines. the following: Village of Greendale

• South Side corridor power line as a proposed The Village of Greendale is in the beginning stages of trail creating a community‐wide comprehensive plan. The • I‐894 Power Line Corridor as a priority corridor City of Greenfield and the Village of Greendale should study area (ranked 15 out of 18) work closely together through intergovernmental relations regarding comprehensive and Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission bicycle/pedestrian planning.

The Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission City of Franklin (SEWRPC) recently updated its Regional Transportation System Plan for 2035. The Transportation System Plan The City of Franklin is currently updating its 1992 is a multi‐modal plan of recommended transportation approved Comprehensive Master Plan. Although the actions designed to address existing and anticipated City has yet to develop any transportation/pedestrian/ bicycle plans, it has collaborated with the City of Oak Creek on the 27th Street Corridor Plan. The one INTRODUCTION 4 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan recommendation that would affect the City of • Wider travel lanes and/or designated bike lanes Greenfield would be the proposed multi‐use trail (8‐10 for streets which do not meet the above foot wide) running along 27th Street. The plan identifies criteria. recommended greenway connections to the North and The City’s Comprehensive Plan also identifies areas West of Grobschmidt Park/Mud Lake. where pedestrian improvements are recommended. th City of Oak Creek Particularly along Layton Avenue from 108 Street to 27th Street, increased pedestrian lighting with banners, The City of Oak Creek adopted its Comprehensive Plan amenities (benches, trash receptacles, etc), signage, and of the City of Oak Creek Vision: 2020 in 2002. The most improved landscape should be provided. relevant recommendation to the City of Greenfield is their recommended alternative transportation system. The Plan states that bicycle and pedestrian facilities are The plan calls for College Avenue to have a planned “especially important in Greenfield, where schools are bikeway, as well as South along 20th Street extending to such an important part of the community and where Ryon Road. there is a large percentage of older residents.” The City of Greenfield has adopted the Comprehensive City of Greenfield Outdoor Recreation Plan (CORP). This plan identifies The City of Greenfield’s Comprehensive Plan has been the existing park and recreation facilities. This plan also adopted (revised August 2008) and identifies two major identifies recommended mini‐parks, neighborhood existing bike routes: parks, community parks, special open spaces areas, • An off‐street recreational trail along the unique recreational facilities, and recreation trails. Key entirety of the Root River through the City and recommendations include: beyond—Root River Oak Leaf Trail; and • Trail connection from Greenfield High School • An on‐street bicycle lane along West Forest through Konkel Park, connecting to Creekwood Home Avenue between Howard Avenue and Park to the south. Kelly Place. • Trail connections extended from Oak Leaf Trail These two routes intersect at Root River Parkway and to a potential park at the corner of West Beloit West Forest Home Avenue. Road and South 112th Street. Specific future recommendations the plan proposes are: • Area formerly known as Holt Park to be better • The development of a multi‐use recreation trail utilized ensuring connections to the Oak Leaf along the WE Energies right‐of‐way. Trail. • The development of a multi‐use recreation trail • Restoration of Honey Creek to accommodate a along Honey Creek to parallel the Oak Creek recreation trail paralleling Oak Creek Trail. Trail in the Root River Parkway and connecting to the Root River Parkway via the WE Energies • Provide possible opportunities for pedestrian right‐of‐way trail. bridges or tunnels across major roadways using • Streets with less than 2,000 cars per day, speed WE Energies Right‐of‐Way east‐west recreation limits of 30 mph or less and provision of routes trail, to useful destinations, including designated bike The Plan also identifies a number of recommended routes. planned on‐street bicycle facilities along:

INTRODUCTION 5 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

• Howard Avenue; Virtually all the major transportation funding programs provided by SAFETEA‐LU can be used for bicycle and th th • Cold Spring Road, 124 Street to 99 Street; pedestrian‐related projects. When considering ways to improve conditions for bicycling and walking, States and • 92nd Street; Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are • 68th Street; specifically encouraged to:

• 51st Street; • Include bicycle and pedestrian improvements as an intregal part of larger projects, as described rd • 43 Street; above, and

th • 34 Street north connecting with Edgerton • To review and use the most appropriate funding Avenue; and source for a particular project and not rely primarily on the Transportation Enhancements • Edgerton Avenue. program. Many bicycle and pedestrian projects are more suitable for funding under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Existing Policies Improvement program, Surface Transportation Program, or one of the other programs listed in Federal Appendix 2 of SAFETEA‐LU The current federal transportation policy, set by the States and metropolitan area plans are also required to National Bicycling and Walking Study, is to increase non‐ consider projects and strategies that will increase the motorized transportation to at least 15 percent of all safety and security of the transportation system for trips and to simultaneously reduce the number of non‐ non‐motorized users, increase accessibility and mobility motorized users killed or injured in traffic crashes by at options, improve the quality of life, and enhance the least 10 percent. The 2005 Safe Accountable, Flexible, integration and connectivity of the transportation and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for system. Specifically, federal bicycle and pedestrian Users (SAFETEA‐LU) provides a significant funding policy dictates that: source for achieving these long‐term goals. • The major policies for incidental projects are as: "Bicyclists and pedestrians shall be given due consideration in the comprehensive • Providing paved shoulders on new and transportation plans developed by each reconstructed roads metropolitan planning organization and State.”

• Restriping roads (either as a stand‐alone project • "Bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian or after a resurfacing or reconstruction project) walkways shall be considered, where to create a wider outside lane or striped bike appropriate, in conjunction with all new lanes construction and reconstruction and transportation facilities, except where bicycle • Building sidewalks and trails, and marking and pedestrian use are not permitted." crosswalks or on‐street bike lanes as a part of new highways, and requiring new transit • "Transportation plans and projects shall provide vehicles to have bicycle racks and/or hooks due consideration for safety and contiguous already installed routes for bicyclists and pedestrians."

INTRODUCTION 6 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

State standards and guidelines for pedestrian facilities include Wisconsin operates under a three‐year local recommendations specifying that: improvements program cycle. The plan outlines the • Sidewalks be provided along streets and highways WisDOT Facilities Investments and Cost Sharing Policy in areas of existing or planned urban (in Appendix G of this plan). The highlights are as development based upon identified criteria; follows (see WisDOT Program Management Manual for • Sidewalks be designed and constructed using more details): widths and clearances appropriate for the levels • Some project costs are eligible for state or of pedestrian and vehicular traffic in any given federal funding on urban non‐freeway projects area; for a State Trunk Highway. • Landscaped terraces, curb lawns, or other buffer • All usual items of street construction (grading, areas be provided between sidewalks and the paving, etc.) which are an integral part of a roadways paralleling them to enhance the construction project are eligible. pedestrian environment; and • Efforts be made to maximize pedestrian safety at • All preconstruction engineering costs which are street crossings, including the timing of the necessary for the construction projects are “walk” phases of traffic signals to provide for safe eligible (with some exceptions). pedestrian crossings, and the provision of • Acquisition of the necessary right‐of‐way for the pedestrian “islands” and medians in wide, heavily construction of the project is eligible. traveled, or otherwise hazardous roadways. The plan also emphasizes that all pedestrian facilities • Replacement of sidewalks necessitated by must be designed and constructed in accordance with street/road construction is eligible if the local the requirements of the Federal Americans with jurisdiction agrees to accept responsibility for Disabilities Act and its implementing regulations. sidewalk repair, maintenance, and replacement. Local • Where sidewalks do not exist, they will be included as part of the design for all The City of Greenfield’s local policies on pedestrian and construction and recondition type projects at bicycle activities serve to function for the safety, state expense. WisDOT will participate in costs welfare, and health of the community. City code 8.18, of new sidewalks only if they are installed at the regulation of the operation of bicycles, states that time of project construction. bicycle riding along sidewalk and pedestrian paths in any public park is prohibited. This regulation • WisDOT will provide reasonable sidewalk access emphasizes the importance of providing bicycling over bridges when sidewalks exist on either side infrastructure throughout these areas. of the bridge. Local ordinances also address General Requirements Regional and Design Standards for Subdivision and Platting (City Code Chapter 20). These regulations pertain to street The Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning arrangements and right‐of‐ways, which are an Commission, of which Milwaukee County is part important consideration when planning for pedestrian adopted its Regional Transportation System Plan for and bicycle activity. Southeastern Wisconsin: 2035 in June 2006. The

INTRODUCTION 7 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

• Streets shall be designed and located in relation considered on an individual basis with the health to existing planned streets being sensitive to and safety of the public in mind. (City Code environmental features and residential 9.02(2)(b)) characteristics and qualities of the neighborhood, • and the consequential impact on the No street, alley, or sidewalk shall be worked on neighborhood’s traffic volume shall be until the grade is established by the City Council considered. (City Code 20.05(2)(a)) and City Engineer. (City Code 9.01(1))

• Collector streets shall be oriented to facilities such as schools, churches, shopping centers and Commuting and Demographic Information population densities allowing easier direct access. Transportation to Work (City Code 20.05(2)(c)(2)) The US Census collects information on transportation • Minor streets shall be laid out to discourage use modes for employed people over the age of 16. Table by through traffics and require minimum amount 1.1 shows this information for the State of Wisconsin, of street necessary to provide safe access to Milwaukee County, and the City of Greenfield based on property. (City Code 20.05(2)(c)(3)) the 2000 Census. Compared to the State and County, Greenfield has a slightly lower percentage of people • A minimum sight distance, with clear visibility who either bicycle or walk to work. measured along the centerline, shall be provided of at least 300 feet on major streets, 200 feet for As bicycle and pedestrian amenity improvements are collector streets and 100 feet on minor made and proposed development in Greenfield allows streets. (City Code 20.05(2)(h)) residents to live closer to jobs and other destinations, these numbers are expected to increase. Map 2 depicts • Streets shall intersect as nearly as possible at the daily traffic counts drawing attention to the roads right angles, and not more than 2 streets shall with less traffic, which are safer for pedestrian and intersect at one point unless approved by the bicyclists. Plan Commission. (City Code 20.05(3)(a)) It is important to keep in mind that these Census figures Pedestrian accessibility along sidewalks requires the do not accurately portray the number of people who following City codes to be in place: bicycle and walk on a regular basis, such as children • Networks of sidewalks need to be installed for who walk or bike to school and people who conduct pedestrian safety and welfare throughout the City errands on foot or with a bicycle. on all section, quarter‐section, state and county trunk highways. (City Code 9.02(2)(a))

• Pedestrian crossways, not less than 10 feet wide, may be required by the Plan Commission through the center of blocks more than 900 feet long where deemed essential to provide circulation or access to schools, playgrounds, shopping centers, transportation and other community facilities.

• Sidewalk installation in other commercial, institutional, and recreation areas shall be

INTRODUCTION 8 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Table 1.1‐‐2000 Census Journey To Work Wisconsin Milwaukee County Greenfield Transportation Mode # % # % # %

Drove Alone 2,138,832 79.5 320,665 75 16,132 86.2 Carpool 267,471 9.9 49,293 11.5 1,580 8.4 Transit 53,340 2 29,454 6.9 341 1.8 Motorcycle 1,823 0.1 308 0.1 7 0 Bicycle 11,635 0.4 1,234 0.3 26 0.1 Walk 100,301 3.7 15,857 3.7 291 1.6 Other 11,907 0.4 1,853 0.4 16 0.1 Worked at Home 105,395 3.9 8,956 2.1 330 1.8

Chart 1.2—2000 US Census Percentage Vehicles Per Car Ownership Renter‐Occupied Housing Unit In the City of Greenfield, where reliance on vehicles is g quite heavy, most households have access to at least 60.0% 52.4%

one car. Owner‐occupied housing units have an average Housin 50.0% of 1.9 vehicles (see Chart 1.1), whereas renter‐occupied housing units have an average 1.2 vehicles (see Chart 40.0% occupied ‐ 28.1% 1.2). Despite this, 8 percent of households in Greenfield 30.0% Units Renter do not have access to a car. A majority of these 20.0%

of 14.8% households are renters, as renters tend to live in denser 10.0% 3.9% areas in closer proximity to work places and other 0.4% 0.4% 0.0% destinations. Percentage None One Two Three Four Five or more Chart 1.1—2000 US Census Percentage Vehicles Per Vehicles Available Owner‐Occupied Housing Unit

d 42.5% 45.0% Age 40.0% occupie 34.1% ‐ 35.0% Many communities around the country are experiencing 30.0% a growing population of residents 65 years and older, Owner Unit

25.0% and Greenfield is no exception. Compared to 20.0% 15.2% Total 15.0% surrounding communities, Greenfield has a slightly of Housing 10.0% 2.7% 4.3% older population and a lower percentage of residents 5.0% 1.1% 0.0% under 18 years of age (see Table 1.2 and Chart 1.3). The None One Two Three Four Five or number of city residents 65 years and older has been Percentage more increasing. Table 1.3 shows that in 2000 the percent of Vehicles Available residents over 65 years of age has increased approximately 10 percentage points since 1980.

INTRODUCTION 9 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

The middle‐aged population is also an important target for future use of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This Table 1.2‐‐Age Population Distribution, US Census 2000 working‐age population would benefit greatly from Percent being able to safely bike or walk to work. Community Median under Percent Age 18 over 65 Time to Work City of Greenfield 41.7 18.9% 20.5% The travel time for residents of Greenfield is on average City of Milwaukee 30.6 28.6% 10.9% 20.8 minutes to work, the same as the state’s mean City of West Allis 37.8 21.5% 17.2% travel time to work and less than the county’s mean City of New Berlin 39.8 24.8% 12.7% (21.9 minutes), see Table 1.4. Generally, biking or Village of Greendale 43.6 22.4% 20.1% walking to work is potentially viable for commuters who Viallge of Hales Corners 41 22.1% 18.5% travel less than 15 minutes to work. This population is Milwaukee County 33.7 26.4% 12.9% quite significant in Greenfield. Table 1.4 shows that approximately 28 percent of the commuting population travels less than 15 minutes to work. Chart 1.3—2000 US Census City Age Range of Total Population. If more residents were able to work closer to where 85 years and over 3% they live or had more direct bicycling and walking 8.2% 65 to 74 years 9.3% routes to their work place, many residents would not 4.6% have to rely on their automobile as much. Creating a 55 to 59 years 5.3% more extensive bicycling and walking trail/path system 14.4% throughout the city will help ensure that residents will Range

35 to 44 years 15.2% have more access to these modes of transportation to

Age 13.1% 20 to 24 years 6.1% their work place and other destinations in the future. 5.7% 10 to 14 years 5.6% 5.1% Under 5 years 4.5%

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% Percentage of Total

Table 1.3—Age Trends, US Census 1980‐2000

Percent Percent Percent over 65 over 65 over 65 1980 1990 2000 City of Greenfield 10.2% 17.1% 20.5%

As the city’s population ages, establishing an easy to use and accessible pedestrian system throughout the City is critical. Being able to walk and bike to basic services and community facilities enhances the quality of life for all residents, but especially for those who do not have access to a car.

INTRODUCTION 10 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Table 1.4‐‐2000 Census Travel Time To Work. Wisconsin Milwaukee County Greenfield Travel Time to Work # % # % # % Less than 10 minutes 533,891 20.7 51,883 12.4 2,349 12.8 10 to 14 minutes 476,569 18.4 69,055 16.5 2,831 15.4 15 to 19 minutes 440,637 17 81,921 19.6 3,605 19.6 20 to 24 minutes 372,180 14.4 80,606 19.3 4,026 21.9

25 to 29 minutes 159,448 6.2 32,348 7.7 1,571 8.5 30 to 34 minutes 248,714 9.6 52,971 12.7 2,333 12.7 35 to 44 minutes 120,661 4.7 16,984 4.1 834 4.5 45 to 59 minutes 120,028 4.6 16,444 3.9 395 2.1 60 to 89 minutes 68,071 2.6 9,960 2.4 178 1 90 or more minutes 45,110 1.7 6,492 1.6 271 1.5 Mean travel time (minutes) 20.8 ‐ 21.9 ‐ 20.8 ‐

BICYCLE FACILITIES 11 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

[Insert Map 1. Community Facilities and Destinations]

BICYCLE FACILITIES 12 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

[Insert Map 2. Traffic Counts and Functional Classifications]

BICYCLE FACILITIES 13 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Bicycle Facilities

Overview neighborhood ride, the kids heading to the movie theater or local ice cream shop, the general public Visibility of bicyclists, intuitiveness of bike routes, looking for aerobic exercise, and youths going to a perception of roadway safety, connection to popular friend’s house or after school activities. destinations, and quality of the physical environment are a few significant factors influencing the use and This type of rider is generally most interested in a enjoyment of bike facilities. The City of Greenfield’s smooth and quiet bicycling experience. These are geographic location provides a natural advantage for primarily casual cyclists who can relatively easily addressing these factors. Proximity to the Root River substitute other activities for their cycling if conditions Parkway, potential for development of a large utility aren’t perceived to be favorable for bicycling. greenway, and border connection with the expansive adjacent municipal bicycle and park system allow a This rider is generally a slow to moderate speed rider, natural, intuitive development of bicycle facilities more likely to enjoy the scenery and company of other throughout the City. cyclists during their journey. These riders typically have many alternate routes for their cycling trips, and are The purpose of this chapter is to discuss: more likely to frequently explore new roadways and paths than other types of cyclists. • Types of bicycle riders The ability to perceive a safe, quiet, and relatively • Bicycle facility design guidelines smooth bicycling experience is of critical importance to • Existing bicycle facilities and network this type of rider. Evidence of this exists in the demand for off‐street, often environmentally aesthetic, corridors • Proposed bicycle facilities and network by recreational bicycling groups.

Technical Recreational Cyclist Technical cyclists, while typically not nearly as great in Types of Bicycle Riders number as non‐technical cyclists, contribute greatly to A successful bicycle facility system requires several the perception of a bicycle friendly environment. The different types of facilities. A diverse set of facilities sight of healthy, technical bikers can draw inferences by allows the most effective “capture” of a diverse set of the general public as to the overall conditions and bicyclists. Most cyclists fall into one of three categories: quality of bicycle facilities in a region.

• Non‐Technical Recreational Cyclist Technical cyclists are those who are generally comfortable traveling at higher speeds, are less likely to • Technical Recreational Cyclist be afraid of traveling in high vehicular traffic conditions, • Commuter/Destination Cyclist are more likely to be advanced in their capabilities of recognizing dangerous conditions and taking corrective Non­Technical Recreational Cyclist actions, are generally more alert to their surroundings Most municipalities have far more non‐technical and more focused on the physics of bicycling, and more recreational cyclists than other types. Among many likely to cover significant lengths during their cycling others, these are the families out for a casual

BICYCLE FACILITIES 14 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan trips, and have a tendency to research and use only a quickest way to and from places of employment in the small number of routes for their regular cycling trips. absence of direct off‐street bicycle paths.

Technical cyclists generally do not have destinations for Typically the bicycle equipment used by commuter their trips, such as commercial establishments. Their cyclists is more utilitarian, heavier, and less costly than origin and destination is typically a place of residence technical recreational cyclists. This often is evident in and most have no in‐between destinations. the route choices acceptable by commuters, which often combine paved and unpaved surfaces, in the most The ability to maintain a reasonably high average speed efficient route. and be presented options for long distance routes is of high importance to this type of rider. Also critically Commuter cyclists are the only type of cyclist that is important to these riders, based on the high precision likely to regularly travel in dark conditions or in and high cost of their bicycles, is a smooth paved route. inclement weather. Routes that have many short segments with multiple slowdowns or locations requiring stops, high levels of competing pedestrians or slower recreational cyclists, Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines or rough paved or unpaved surfaces are generally avoided by the technical cyclist. The purpose of this section is to define:

Commuter/Destination Cyclist • Types of Bicycle Facilities The commuter cyclist is held in very high regard. They • Common Facility Improvements are highly sought after in nearly all urban communities because they help minimize vehicular and parking Types of Bicycle Facilities congestion, air and noise pollution, and energy use, and The most common bicycle facilities are: generally contribute greatly to the perception of health and well‐being in a community. • Shared Roadways

Commuter cyclists are those who regularly travel to and • Bicycle Routes from their places of employment or regular weekly or • Shoulder Bikeways daily activity, rather than using an automobile. They are most likely to research, determine, and use the single • Bike Lanes quickest route to their regular destination. Usually this chosen route is one where some bicyclist safety is • Shared Use Paths sacrificed for a more direct and efficient path. Shared Roadways This type of rider can vary from high speed technical to Because a bicycle is a vehicle, any roadway (except low speed non‐technical cyclist. What is most limited access highways, freeways, and others important is the perception of regular efficiency and specifically prohibiting bicycle traffic, such as moderate safety in their route. While recreational Interstate 43/894) may be considered part of the on riders can choose their time and location of travel, road bicycle network. Because existing roads typically commuter cyclists do not typically have the luxury of offer the most direct route to many destinations, they varied schedules. tend to be favored by commuter cyclists. Commuter cyclists are often resigned to on‐street Shared roadways are most appropriate for low volume travel, since using the street network is usually the and low speed streets, and are great for getting around BICYCLE FACILITIES 15 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan neighborhoods. They are not as practical for longer Photo 2.1 for a typical application of paved shoulders distances, unless they are specifically designed as a for bicycle use. The photo is looking east on Cold Spring bicycle through street with limited vehicular access. Road near the freeway overpass. Wide outside lanes are often used on busier streets when a bike lane is not able to fit. To safely Paved shoulders provide a number of other benefits, accommodate bicycles, outside vehicle lanes should be including: regular maintenance, pedestrian space, and at least 14 feet wide when adjacent to a curb and ability for motorists to pull out of traffic safely. gutter, or a minimum 3 foot paved shoulder should be provided in the absence of curb and gutter.

Older roadways may have drainage grates with openings parallel to the path of the bicycle that could trap the narrow wheel of a bicycle. Drainage grates should have openings that are perpendicular to the flow of traffic to ensure that bicycle tires do not become lodged in the grate.

Bicycle Routes

Bicycle route designations are used to denote streets that can see significant bicycle usage or are a link in the bikeway network. Designation and improvement as a Photo 2.1—Paved shoulders along Cold Spring Road bike route may warrant a higher level of street maintenance than a shared roadway, and may also Bicycle Lanes influence access for motor vehicles. Particular attention to intersection bicycle accommodations should be Bike lanes are recommended for streets with motor applied along bicycle routes. For key bicycle routes, vehicle speeds greater than 35 mph or with average limiting motor vehicle access can help to create safe daily traffic (ADT) volumes greater than 10,000 vehicles and efficient bicycle routes or boulevards. per day. These are most appropriate on urban thoroughfares. Bike lanes are marked portions of the Shoulder Bikeways roadway that are designated for exclusive use by bicycles. They allow for effective travel to different Bicycle riders who commute long distances or ride for parts of the city and are highly desired by commuter sport or recreation can safely make use of smooth, cyclists. paved roadway shoulders, where available. Shoulders should be 6 to 8 feet wide including a minimum 3 foot The standard minimum clear width for a bike lane is wide paved section. Shoulders should be paved, 4 feet, when adjacent to a curb and gutter. If roads all‐weather surfaces with no ridges, seams or other include curb and gutters or adjacent parking, at least obstructions, and should be generally smooth as 5 feet is recommended from the vertical curb face of opposed to rough in surface texture. Rumble strips, if the gutter or edge of parking lane to the outside edge of provided on the shoulder, should occur within the first the bike lane. There should generally be no raised two feet from the edge line and should be either cut‐in barriers between bike lanes and vehicular traffic. Bike or ground‐in grooves that are not disruptive to lanes wider than 6 feet without designated parking may bicyclists, in keeping with guidelines prepared by the encourage parking or other inappropriate uses. Refer Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Refer to to Figure 2.1 for a depiction of a typical desirable bike

BICYCLE FACILITIES 16 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan lane. bike lane is also of concern to bicyclists, as the “dooring” of a bicyclist can happen very quickly and A typical two lane road with bike lanes and curb and without advance indication. gutter (no parking) is about 35 feet from back of curb to back of curb. This assumes: Shared Use Paths

• One‐11 foot wide travel lane in each direction A bike path is an off‐road bikeway that is physically separated from roadways by open space or a barrier. It • One 4 foot bike lane in each direction may be within the roadway right‐of‐way, a utility right‐ of‐way, or an independent right‐of‐way. These facilities • 2.5 foot curb and gutter width on each side are sometimes referred to as bike trails or hike and bike If parking is added to this scenario on both sides of the trails. An excellent example of this type of facility is road, the width requirement is raised to about 53 feet. found in the Root River Parkway on the west side of This additional width is due to two 8‐foot parking lanes, Greenfield. and increased bike lane width from 4‐foot to 5‐foot Bike paths should be 10 to 12 feet wide, as a desirable each. standard depending upon activity levels, with a Bike lanes should be signed and marked with a 4 to minimum width of 8 feet. Maintenance vehicles driving 6‐inch wide stripe. As vehicles, bicycles must ride with on 8‐foot wide paths tend to damage the edges. the flow of traffic. Bike lanes, therefore, are always one‐ Therefore, 8‐foot wide paths should be avoided unless way and should be clearly marked as such on both sides physical limitations cannot accommodate a greater of the street. width. Refer to Figure 2.2 for a depiction of a typical desirable shared use path. A bike lane may be established adjacent to a parking lane, with bicyclists positioned between the travel lane Bike paths should have an additional 2 feet of smoothly and the parking lane. However, cars entering and graded area on either side of the pavement. In addition, leaving the parking lane will need to be mindful of the there should be 3 feet of horizontal and 10 feet (8 feet bike lane operation. The opening of car doors into the minimum) of overhead clearance on either side of the pavement. Bike paths should be constructed of smooth, hard, all‐weather paving such as concrete or asphalt. Although more expensive, concrete paths require less maintenance than asphalt paths, which can buckle, crack, and erode quickly. Good maintenance is essential for bike paths to avoid hazardous conditions.

Figure 2. 1—Typical bike lane schematic

BICYCLE FACILITIES 17 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

More details are located in the Multi‐Use Path chapter in this report.

Common Facility Improvements Most bicycle facility improvements are those designed to create, improve, or advance one of the following:

• Bike Storage

• Bike Lane/Route Designation

• Railroad Crossings

• Traffic Calming Figure 2.2—Typical Multi‐Use Path Schematic • Traffic Signals and Detection

Curb cuts and ramps for access to bike paths should be Bike Storage provided at all street intersections. Slopes should comply with current requirements of the Americans Bike storage is critical if a community would like to with Disabilities Act (ADA). Curb cuts should be a encourage bicycling. minimum of 8 feet wide. There are numerous bike rack styles available, but Good path locations should be used: as short cuts to preferred models should: bridge obstacles (freeway, rivers etc.), to connect cul‐de‐sacs and dead ends, as connections to land uses, • Keep the bike upright by supporting the frame along protected corridors with links to street systems, in two places, and next to railroad lines. • Allow the frame and one or both wheels to be Shared use paths should have the following secured with a U‐lock, characteristics for success: • Be securely anchored or heavy enough that it • Separation from traffic cannot be stolen, and

• Complement on‐road bicycle facilities • Be durable enough to resist being cut or vandalized. • Scenic views and routes Use the guidelines below to determine where to place • Connectivity to land‐use and the road‐way bike racks on a site. Racks should be visible, convenient, system and protect bicycles from the weather.

• Shorter trips than on‐road travel • Bike racks should be located within 50 feet, but no more than 120 feet, from the entrance • Limited at‐grade street crossings bicycliss use.

• Illuminations and good sight lines • Racks should be as close ‐ if not closer ‐ than the nearest car parking space. • Proper maintenance and construction • Whenever possible, racks should be in a BICYCLE FACILITIES 18 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

covered area protected from the elements. • Pavement Markings Outdoor parking should be located under awnings or overhangs. These elements must comply with the Manual on Uniform Control Devices (MUTCD). Colored bike lanes • Racks should be located in a clearly visible area are represent a new technique communities have with high pedestrian activity and lighting to begun to use. deter vandalism. Signage Bike racks should be installed to allow easy access to the bicycle and placement away from objects that may The basic bike route sign should be used on all local not allow proper use of the bicycle rack. designated bike routes. For the longer regional routes, the numbered bikeway sign should be utilized. One • Position racks so there is enough room between scheme used in some cities is to number bike routes adjacent parked bicycles. If it becomes too sequentially east to west and north to south, with difficult for a bicyclist to easily lock their bicycle, north‐south routes having odd numbers and east‐west they may park it elsewhere and the bicycle routes having even numbers. capacity is lowered. For example, a row of Refer to the Wisconsin Bicycle Facility Design Handbook inverted “U” racks should be situated on (“Design Handbook”) for detailed guidance on signage. 30‐inch centers. Pavement Marking • Bike racks should be located at least 24 inches from a parallel wall. As identified in The Design Handbook, bicycle lanes should be demarcated with 4‐ to 6‐in. (100 to 150 mm) • Allow a 5‐foot aisle behind parking to enable white lines using traffic paint or equivalent (e.g., epoxy, bicyclists to maneuver in and out of a parking cold plastic, etc.). At most locations, lines should be spot. solid, with dashed lines at certain intersections or at bus • Empty racks should not pose a tripping hazard stops. Some materials (e.g., some types of for visually impaired pedestrians. Position racks thermoplastic) have been found to be slippery. As a out of the walkway’s clear zone (space reserved result, materials should be warranted by the for walking). manufacturer as “skid‐resistant.”

Bike racks provide short‐term parking, but commuters Symbolic pavement markings are used, in conjunction often want parking that provides long‐term protection. with striping and signing, to identify bicycle lanes. The Bike lockers, bike lids, and attended bicycle parking standard marking is a combination of a bicycle symbol allow bicyclists to store their bicycles in a place that and a directional arrow. The pavement marking should protects it from the weather and vandalism. Employers be white, as identified in The Design Handbook. may also choose to devote space inside their building Designers may, if they choose, select one of the for employee parking. following as an alternative pavement marking: Bike Lane/Route Designation • The words “Bike Lane” with a directional arrow. The two primary elements that identify a bicycle lane • The words “Bike Only” with an arrow. and those that most often require improvement or maintenance to efficiently convey the designation are: • The bicycle or bicyclist symbols followed by the word “Lane” and the arrow. • Signage BICYCLE FACILITIES 19 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Colored Bike Lanes

Colored bike lanes increase motorists’ awareness of bicycles on the roadway by distinctly delineating right‐of‐way for bicyclists, which also helps bicyclists by showing their recommended path. Colored bike lanes are commonly used where bicycle/motorist conflicts are high, such as highway on‐ and off‐ramps where merging motorists must cross a bike lane.

Railroad Crossings

Railroad tracks can be particularly dangerous obstacles Photo 2.2—Example of traffic calming circle for bicyclists. Wheels can easily get trapped in the rail flange way, causing the bicyclist to lose control. Typical approaches include street closures, small traffic Wherever possible, bikeways and trails should cross circles (Photo 2.2), chicanes, chokers/squeeze points railroad tracks at right angles to the rails. If the crossing (Photo 2.3) raised medians, and speed humps. They angle is less than 45 degrees, the approach should should not hamper bicycling traffic or create new provide additional width so bicyclists can cross at a bicycle hazards but are designed to improve bicycle safer angle, preferably perpendicular. safety.

As an additional safety feature, the flange way should also be filled. Compressible flange way fillers fill in this gap while allowing low‐speed trains to continue to operate. Crossing surfaces also influence bicyclist (and pedestrian) safety. Rubberized or concrete crossing surfaces require less maintenance and provide a smoother surface than asphalt and timber crossings.

Refer to The Design Handbook for detailed specifications and designs. Photo 2.3—Narrowing in roadway slows traffic

Traffic Calming Traffic Signals and Detection

Traffic calming measures include features designed to Bicycles often encounter challenges at traffic signals. slow motorists and divert or discourage traffic. In turn, Often traffic signals are designed for most efficient use traffic calming provides the bicyclist with a calmer, by motorized vehicles and walking pedestrians. Bicycles safer, and more enjoyable biking experience. add a level of challenge for the traffic signal designer.

Bicycle‐sensitive loop detectors are rare but are the preferred treatment for transferring right‐of‐way to bicycles at signalized intersections. Traffic signals are often triggered by automobiles that are detected by inductive loop detectors buried in the pavement that work like a metal detector. Loop detectors can also detect the metal in bicycle wheels but are rarely

BICYCLE FACILITIES 20 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Extended Push Button for Bicyclists

Figure 2.3—Typical pavement marking and signing details for bicycle detection at signalized intersections Photo 2.4—Extended bike‐accessible push button constructed with the required sensitivity for bicycles. The pattern of the loop detector affects where it will An alternative to bike lane loop detectors is to provide most likely sense a bicycle. Round loop types are the push buttons that are more easily accessible by cyclists most sensitive type but are not as commonly used as than the typical pole mounted pedestrian push buttons square or rectangle loops. at the sidewalk. The easy accessibility is accomplished by mounting a cyclist push button as close as feasible to A loop detector is more likely to detect a bicycle on the the bike lane, or by providing extension shafts for outside edges rather than in the middle, therefore a bicyclist push buttons so bikes don’t have to leave their pavement marking should be placed at the spot where lane to access them. Photo 2.4 shows what this bike the detector is most sensitive to bicycles. This, lane push button may look like, mounted so a bicyclist combined with an informational sign, can allow doesn’t have to significantly alter their path to access it. bicyclists to place themselves at the most sensitive spot This intersection is located near the Town of Somers, on the loop detector. Refer to Figure 2.3 for a detail Wisconsin. showing typical pavement marking and sign application for proper placement of bicycles at loop detectors that are bike sensitive. This typical installation detail is referenced from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The sensitivity of the sensor can also be adjusted to distinguish small amounts of metal. Left turn lanes at signalized intersections should have bicycle sensitive loop detectors.

BICYCLE FACILITIES 21 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

bikes and less sensitive vehicles will receive a green phase during each signal cycle.

Existing Bicycle Facilities and Network The City of Greenfield roadway system is well suited for north‐south and east‐west bicycle travel throughout the community. Within this roadway system is a linked network of specific and non‐specific bicycle facilities. These include:

• On Street Bike Routes

• Bike Lanes

• Bicycle Friendly Roadways Photo 2.5—Countdown pedestrian timers increase visibility and overall safety • Off Street Multi‐Use Paths

Highly visible pedestrian signals with countdown timers On Street Bike Routes add considerable utility for bicycle and pedestrian There are no designated on street bike routes within crossing traffic. They provide informative feedback to the City of Greenfield, but there are County and State the user in determining if time exists for their crossing designated “preferred streets” as designated by the City maneuver. This can help approaching bicyclists make of Milwaukee and the Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin the decision whether to cross the upcoming in February 2008. intersection or slow down and prepare to stop. Using pedestrian signal heads with countdown timers is the These preferred streets include Beloit Road (CTH T), th th preferred method to control pedestrian and bicycle Forest Home Avenue (STH 24), 116 Street, 84 Street, th st movements at signalized intersections. Photo 2.5 60 Street, 51 Street, Edgerton Avenue, and Morgan shows of a pedestrian signal head. This intersection is Avenue (see Map 3). Generally these roadways have a located in Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin. paved shoulder area or additional width that allows safe bicycle riding. Another method to ensure bicyclists receive a green light at a signalized intersection is through signal Bike Lanes “recall”. Recall is a mode of operation that can be easily Forest Home Avenue north of Morgan Avenue is the programmed into a traffic signal controller. This mode only roadway segment near the City of Greenfield to of operation forces the traffic signal to show green have on‐street bike lanes with signing and pavement signals for each programmed recall phase around the marking to indicate as such. intersection during each signal cycle. This “recall” happens regardless of the vehicular demand. Even in With the exception of the freeway segment between th the complete absence of vehicles on the intersection 84 Street and Cold Spring Road, the entire length of approach, the green will be forced to show for that Forest Home Avenue has a wide paved shoulder lane approach during each signal cycle if it’s recalled. commonly used for biking and parking, although the Although this type of operation reduces overall lane does not have pavement markings or signage efficiency, it is a cheap and effective method to ensure within the City to indicate a bicycle lane. BICYCLE FACILITIES 22 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

[Insert Map 3. Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities]

BICYCLE FACILITIES 23 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

[This page intentionally left blank.]

BICYCLE FACILITIES 24 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Cold Spring Road east of 92nd Street has a wide paved Off Street Multi­Use Paths shoulder lane commonly used for bicycling and parking. The most significant system of off street paths in or These lanes operate similarly to bike lanes, but do not near the City is the Root River Parkway system. This have signage or pavement markings to designate them. natural area runs continuously from north to south through the western section of the City of Greenfield. Bicycle Friendly Roadways Between Morgan Avenue and Layton Avenue, several Bicycle friendly roadways can exhibit many different high quality off‐street paths for bikes and pedestrians qualities. A few of these roadway types exist within the exist. This off street path system directly connects to City of Greenfield and exhibit: bicycle friendly cross roads including Morgan Avenue, Howard Avenue, and Cold Spring Road. North of • No exclusive bike lanes or travel areas and low Morgan Avenue and south of Layton Avenue the traffic volumes and low operating speed parkway continues on a very bicycle friendly public (residential roadways typical) street (the Root River Parkway) and crosses • Exclusive or reserved bike facilities but high Interstate 43 by an underpass system. traffic volumes and varying operating speeds Another off street path system exists through Konkel (urban collector roadways or inter‐municipality Park, south of Layton Avenue, connecting to 51st Street connecting highways typical) on the south edge of the park. This park contains • No exclusive bike facilities but very low traffic boardwalks suitable for pedestrians and unpaved and volumes and high operating speeds with good paved sections of paths suitable for bikes and visibility for bicycle passing maneuvers (rural or pedestrians. This path system offers an excellent suburban low volume highway typical) connection between Edgerton Avenue and Layton Avenue. Many roadway corridors within the City of Greenfield are bicycling friendly. These include nearly all low Proposed Bicycle Facilities and Network speed, low traffic volume residential streets. These Although the City of Greenfield has a limited number of streets provide short connection from residences to officially designated bicycle routes, several roadway nearby collector systems. corridors within the City can contribute to a suitable network of bicycle routes. Bike friendly roadways also include those that have curb or shoulder lanes designated for parking and commonly The Technical Advisory Committee chose proposed used for bicycling, as discussed above with Forest Home routes that allow relatively easy crossing of the Avenue and Cold Spring Road. Interstate corridors, roadways that are currently perceived as bicycle friendly by local users, and Major roadways within the City that are commonly used roadways that contribute overall to an efficient grid of for bicycle traffic and have segments that are future routes (see Map 3). considered bicycle friendly include 92nd Street, 68th Street, 51st Street, Honey Creek Drive, 35th Street, The following roadways have segments that are Morgan Avenue, Howard Avenue, Cold Spring Road, perceived as bicycle friendly and have been identified as Edgerton Avenue, Forest Home Drive (STH 24), and the future bicycle route roadways by the Technical Advisory Root River Parkway. Committee.

• 92nd Street

• 68th Street

BICYCLE FACILITIES 25 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

• 51st Street

• Honey Creek Drive

• 35th Street

• Morgan Avenue

• Howard Avenue

• Cold Spring Road

• Edgerton Avenue

• Forest Home Drive (STH 24) Photo 2.6—92nd Street has ample gravel shoulder space • Root River Parkway for ultimate paved bike lane

92nd Street Recommendations 92nd Street is a continuous north and south aligned roadway, and the posted speed limit is generally 30 • Provide bicycle route guide signing as mph. It connects the Root River Parkway and points to appropriate. the south (Hales Corners, Franklin, etc) with the north • Pave existing gravel shoulder and provide side of Greenfield and points to the north (Milwaukee, pavement marking for exclusive bike lane. West Allis, etc). It is primarily a two lane undivided roadway with gravel shoulders. Most of the length of • At signalized intersections of Layton and the roadway is considered a no passing zone for Howard Avenues, provide larger, easier to see vehicles. Refer to Photo 2.6 for a view looking north LED pedestrian signal heads with countdown along 92nd Street. Note the large gravel shoulder lane. timers.

Traffic signals with full pedestrian crosswalks and • Allow bicycle‐friendly vehicle detection at the signals with push buttons for each approach exist at the intersections of Howard and Layton Avenues. nd intersections of 92 Street with Layton and Howard This could be accomplished by providing in Avenues. pavement (bicycle lane) bicycle‐sensitive loop detectors, bicycle‐sensitive video detection, 92nd Street passes over Interstate 894 on a two lane traffic signal timing modifications, or accessible bridge with large paved shoulder lane. bicycle lane street side push buttons.

68th Street 68th Street is a north and south aligned roadway, and the posted speed limit is generally 25 mph. It continues south into Greendale and connects to the north side of Greenfield and points to the north (Oak Leaf Parkway Drive, Milwaukee, West Allis, etc). It is primarily a two lane undivided roadway with curb and gutter. Overall pavement quality is very good for its length.

BICYCLE FACILITIES 26 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Traffic signals with full pedestrian crosswalks and the roadway is temporarily broken at Konkel Park, north signals with push buttons for each approach exist at the of Edgerton Avenue, where mixed use bike and intersection of 68th Street with Forest Home Avenue pedestrian paths continue through the park to the (STH 24). continuation of the roadway north of Layton Avenue.

68th Street passes over Interstate 894 on a two lane 51st Street passes under Interstate 894 with two lanes bridge with large paved shoulder lane. and a wide gravel shoulder. It also crosses Howard Avenue where the intersection is controlled by four way Recommendations stop signs with flasher warning assemblies.

• Provide bicycle route guide signing as Recommendations appropriate. • Provide bicycle route guide signing as • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike appropriate. lane where feasible. • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike • At signalized intersection with Forest Home lane where feasible. Avenue (STH 24), provide larger, easier to see LED pedestrian signal heads with countdown • Improve pedestrian safety and visibility at the timers. intersection of Layton Avenue. This may involve median reconstruction, advanced warning • Allow bicycle‐friendly vehicle detection at the signage with flasher assemblies, improved intersection Forest Home Avenue (STH 24). This intersection lighting, and realigning and could be accomplished by providing in repainting crosswalks. pavement (bicycle lane) bicycle‐sensitive loop detectors, bicycle‐sensitive video detection, • Provide lighting for vehicles and pedestrians traffic signal timing modifications, or accessible under the Interstate 894 bridge to encourage bicycle lane street side push buttons. nighttime use.

51st Street • Pave existing gravel shoulders as feasible for 51st Street is a north and south aligned roadway, and use by on street bicycles. the posted speed limit is generally 25‐30 mph. It Honey Creek Drive continues south into Greendale and connects to points south (Oak Leaf Parkway Drive, Scout Lake Park, Honey Creek Drive is generally a north and south Franklin, etc) and connects to the north side of aligned roadway. The speed limit is 25‐30 mph. It Greenfield and points to the north (Kinnickinnic River allows connection to the more heavily traveled street Parkway, Milwaukee, West Allis, etc). It is primarily a system from residential areas in the far southeast two lane undivided roadway, alternating between section of the City of Greenfield and points south sections with and without curb and gutter. One urban (Grobschmidt Park, Elmdale Elementary School, etc). It section with four lanes and a narrow median exists is primarily a two lane undivided roadway with curb and between Cold Spring Road and Crawford Avenue. gutter and wide paved lanes. South of Ramsey Avenue Pavement quality is acceptable for much of its length it is a narrow two lane roadway with no shoulders. but poor for certain sections. Intersections with Parnell Avenue and Grange Avenue North of Edgerton Avenue, 51st Street is a wide two lane are stop sign controlled and exhibit low traffic volume. urban roadway with curb and gutter. The continuity of

BICYCLE FACILITIES 27 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Recommendations Road. Note the lack of directional or crossing informational signs for pedestrians and bicyclists. • Provide bicycle route guide signing as appropriate. Recommendations

• Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike • Provide bicycle route guide signing as lane where feasible. appropriate.

35th Street • Improve guide signing and possible warning 35th Street is a north and south aligned roadway, and signage for the pedestrian crossing at Loomis the posted speed limit is generally 25‐30 mph. Road. Functionally within Greenfield, it terminates at • Construct paved on‐street bike lane and provide Edgerton Avenue. It continues regionally north pavement marking for exclusive bike lane throughout the City of Milwaukee and points to the where feasible. north (Kinnickinnic River Parkway, Jackson Park, etc). South of Loomis Road it is a two lane undivided • At signalized intersections with Morgan Avenue, roadway with no shoulder north of Cold Spring Road Howard Avenue, and Layton Avenue, provide and small paved shoulder south of Cold Spring Road. larger, easier to see LED pedestrian signal heads North of Loomis Road it is a two lane urban section with with countdown timers for all approaches. curb and gutter and a paved shoulder/parking lane. Pavement quality is good for much of its length. • Install full pedestrian crossings (crosswalks, signal heads, push buttons, etc) at all th 35 Street passes over Interstate 894 on a two lane approaches to intersection of 35th Avenue and bridge with large paved shoulder lane. Layton Avenue.

Traffic signals with full pedestrian crosswalks and • Allow bicycle‐friendly vehicle detection at the signals with push buttons for each approach exist at the signalized intersections with Morgan Avenue, th intersections of 35 Street with Morgan and Howard Howard Avenue, and Layton Avenue. This could Avenues. be accomplished by providing in pavement (bicycle lane) bicycle‐sensitive loop detectors, Traffic signals control the intersection of 35th Street and bicycle‐sensitive video detection, traffic signal Layton Avenue. At this intersection, pedestrian crossing timing modifications, or accessible bicycle lane signals only exist on the east approach for crossing street side push buttons. Layton Avenue. This requires all pedestrians to move to the east side of 35th Street to access crossing signals.

The intersection of 35th Street and Loomis Road is confusing and large with restricted north and south crossing movements. It is stop sign controlled for 35th Street and requires pedestrians and bicycles to detour west along Loomis Road to a mid block unsignalized crossing of Loomis Road, then returns via sidewalk to 35th Street south of Loomis. Refer to Photo 2.7 for a view along 35th Street looking north towards Loomis

BICYCLE FACILITIES 28 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Howard Avenue Howard Avenue is a nearly continuous east and west aligned roadway, and the posted speed limit is generally 30 mph in the City of Greenfield. It connects the Root River Parkway and off street multi use path, and northwest Greenfield with points to the east (Milwaukee, etc). It is primarily a two lane undivided roadway with no shoulder within the City of Greenfield.

Howard Avenue intersects Beloit Road (County Highway T) at a signalized intersection with no specific pedestrian signal facilities.

Recommendations

• Provide bicycle route guide signing as Photo 2.7—Looking north along 35th Street towards appropriate. Loomis Road…where do pedestrians go? • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike Morgan Avenue lane where feasible. Morgan Avenue is a nearly continuous east and west aligned roadway, and the posted speed limit is generally • At signalized intersection with Beloit Road 30 mph in the City of Greenfield. It connects the Root (CTH T) provide pedestrian signal facilities to River Parkway and off street multi use path, and allow pedestrians and bicyclists to safety cross northwest Greenfield with points to the east Beloit Road. (Milwaukee, etc). It is primarily a two lane undivided roadway with narrow paved shoulder within the City of Cold Spring Road Greenfield. Cold Spring Road is an east and west aligned roadway, and the posted speed limit is generally 25 mph. It Morgan Avenue intersects 108th Street (STH 100) at a connects the Root River Parkway and western stop sign controlled intersection. Greenfield to points to the east (Milwaukee, etc). East nd Traffic signals control the intersections of Morgan of 92 Street it is a two lane undivided roadway with Avenue with Forest Home Avenue (STH 24) and 43rd curb and gutter and paved parking/bicycling lane. West nd Street. Full pedestrian crosswalks and signals with push of 92 Street it is primarily a two lane rural roadway buttons for each approach exist at these intersections. with either a very narrow paved shoulder or no shoulder. Recommendations Traffic signals with full pedestrian crosswalks and • Provide bicycle route guide signing as signals with push buttons for each approach exist at the appropriate. intersections of Cold Spring Road with 108th Street (STH 100), Forest Home Avenue (STH 24), 76th Street, • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike th and 60 Street. No pedestrian facilities exist at the lane where feasible. signalized intersection of Cold Spring Road and Loomis Road.

BICYCLE FACILITIES 29 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Cold Spring Road passes over Honey Creek on a bridge lane undivided roadway but does have one segment of that is currently under reconstruction (December 2008). four lane composition near the Southridge Mall It also passes under Interstate 894 with a newly between 75th Street (CTH U) and 68th Street. The reconstructed roadway section with two lanes and a roadway is generally rural in nature without curb and wide curbside pedestrian lane. gutter except in the segment between 75th Street (CTH U) and Loomis Road. The intersection with Cold Spring Road and Beloit Road (CTH T) is an acute intersection with Cold Spring Road Traffic signals with full pedestrian crosswalks and controlled by stop signs. The acuteness of the signals with push buttons for each approach exist at the intersection and the relative high speed of Beloit Road intersections of Edgerton Avenue with 108th Street traffic contribute to a perception of inadequate safety. (STH 100), 75th Street (CTH U), 74th Street, 60th Street, and 27th Street (USH 41). At the signalized intersection Recommendations of Edgerton Avenue and Loomis Road, pedestrian push • Provide bicycle route guide signing as buttons and signal heads only exist for the movements appropriate. crossing Loomis Road. Recommendations • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike lane where feasible. • Provide bicycle route guide signing as

th appropriate. • At signalized intersections of 60 Street, Forest th Home Avenue (STH 24), and 76 Street, provide • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike larger, easier to see LED pedestrian signal heads lane where feasible. with countdown timers. • West of 75th Street (CTH U), and east of Loomis • Allow bicycle‐friendly vehicle detection at the Road, where feasible, construct a paved th intersections of 60 Street, Forest Home shoulder lane. Avenue (STH 24), and 76th Street. This could be accomplished by providing in pavement (bicycle • At signalized intersections of Edgerton Avenue lane) bicycle‐sensitive loop detectors, with 108th Street (STH 100), 75th Street (CTH U), bicycle‐sensitive video detection, traffic signal 74th Street, 60th Street, and 27th Street (USH 41), timing modifications, or accessible bicycle lane provide larger, easier to see LED pedestrian street side push buttons. signal heads with countdown timers. At the signalized intersection of Edgerton Avenue and • Install full pedestrian crossings (crosswalks, Loomis Road, install full pedestrian push signal heads, push buttons, etc) at all buttons and signal heads for the entire approaches to intersection of Cold Spring Road intersection. and Loomis Road. • Allow bicycle‐friendly vehicle detection at the Edgerton Avenue signalized intersections. This could be Edgerton Avenue is a nearly continuous east and west accomplished by providing in pavement (bicycle aligned roadway, and the posted speed limit is generally lane) bicycle‐sensitive loop detectors, 25‐30mph in the City of Greenfield. It connects the bicycle‐sensitive video detection, traffic signal Root River Parkway and off street multi use path with timing modifications, or accessible bicycle lane points to the east (Milwaukee, etc) close to the City of street side push buttons. Greenfield’s southern boundary. It is primarily a two

BICYCLE FACILITIES 30 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

• In the urban four‐lane section of Edgerton Avenue between 75th Street (CTH U) and 68th Street, provide pavement markings and/or signing indicating bicycles use the outside (curb) lane.

Forest Home Drive (STH 24) Forest Home Drive, also known as STH 24, is a large four lane median divided roadway with curb and gutters and a paved curb lane that is used for bicyclists and parking. The posted speed limit is generally 40mph.

Between 84th Street and Cold Spring Road, no paved bicycle/parking lane exists and the roadway takes on a Photo 2.8—Forest Home Avenue has poor pavement “freeway” condition at the junctions with Layton quality but does offer a curb lane for cyclists

Avenue and Interstate 894 with no access and no pedestrian, parking, or bicycle traffic. In this freeway Most pavements along Forest Home Drive (STH 24) are section, the roadway goes under and over several poor quality. Photo 2.8 is a view looking north along bridges. Forest Home Drive (STH 24); note the poor pavement quality and the large paved curb lane. The section of roadway north of Morgan Avenue previously had bicycle lane pavement markings that are Recommendations now degraded and difficult to distinguish. • Provide bicycle route guide signing as Traffic signals with full pedestrian crosswalks and appropriate. signals with push buttons for each approach exist at the intersections of Forest Home Avenue with Cold Spring • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike Road, 68th Street, Howard Avenue, 60th Street, Morgan lane where feasible. Avenue, Oklahoma Avenue, and 43rd Street. The • Repair and repave poor quality sections of intersection of Forest Home Avenue with 84th Street is pavement along the roadway within the City of signalized but does not have pedestrian facilities. Greenfield. North of the intersection with 43rd Street, Forest Home • At signalized intersections provide larger, easier Avenue enters the City of Milwaukee and has well to see LED pedestrian signal heads with established and marked bike lanes. countdown timers.

• Allow bicycle‐friendly vehicle detection at the signalized intersections. This could be accomplished by providing in pavement (bicycle lane) bicycle‐sensitive loop detectors, bicycle‐sensitive video detection, traffic signal timing modifications, or accessible bicycle lane street side push buttons.

BICYCLE FACILITIES 31 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

• In the freeway section between 84th Street and Cold Spring Road, provide signing and marking to indicate no bicycles or pedestrians allowed. Goals, Objectives, and Policies Provide route guide signs at these two The following goals, objectives, and policies are intersections to guide bicyclists on an alternate intended to provide a comprehensive approach for route. achieving the recommendations outlined in this plan. The order in which these goals, objectives, and policies Root River Parkway are listed does not necessarily denote their priority. Root River Parkway is a bicycle friendly roadway that connects to the Root River off street multi use path Goals system north of Morgan Avenue and south of Layton Goals are broad advisory statements that express Avenue. Within the City of Greenfield, it is a two lane general public priorities about how the City should roadway with curb and gutter in a rural type setting. approach bike and pedestrian issues. Speeds limits are rarely posted but operate generally at 25‐30 mph. G1.1 Enhance and promote the use of bicycles as viable form of transportation and enjoyable form Bicycles commonly travel on the roadway in shared of recreation by providing multi‐use trails, lanes with automobile traffic, but very low traffic bicycle routes, and bicycles lanes throughout the volumes and slow operating speed contribute to the city. bicycle friendly environment. Objectives The Root River Parkway intersects Morgan Avenue, Objectives suggest future directions in a way that is nd Layton Avenue, 92 Street, and Forest Home Avenue at more specific than goals. The accomplishment of an stop sign controlled intersections. Of these objective contributes to the fulfillment of a goal. intersections, only Layton Avenue has marked O1.1 Provide safe bike access to all residential crosswalks and pedestrian warning signs. neighborhoods, schools, community facilities, Recommendations and commercial areas. O1.2 Establish an interconnected network of on‐street • Provide bicycle route guide signing as bike lanes and off‐street bike paths. appropriate. O1.3 Provide bicycle routes and facilities that meet • Provide pavement marking for exclusive bike the needs of all cyclists, including non‐technical lane where feasible. recreational cyclist, technical recreational cyclist, and commuter/destination cyclist. • Repair and repave poor quality section of pavement along the roadway within the City of Greenfield. Policies • Provide pedestrian and bicyclist crossing Policies are rules, courses of action, or programs used to warning signs at the intersections with Morgan ensure Plan implementation and to accomplish the Avenue, and Forest Home Avenue. goals and objectives. P1.1 Encourage or require all new non‐residential development to provide on‐site bike racks and connections to bike paths/routes.

BICYCLE FACILITIES 32 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

P1.2 Establish official bike routes in the City, and of transportation facilities, including the install bike lanes and bike signs where incorporation of such ways into local appropriate and feasible. transportation plans and programs. P1.3 Create and periodically update an official map of References: bike routes in the city. P1.4 Pave existing gravel shoulders and/or provide • American Association of State Highway and pavement marking for exclusive bike lanes along Transportation Officials, Guide for the potential bike routes identified in this plan. Development of Bicycle Facilities, 1999

P1.5 Install LED pedestrian signal heads with • Wisconsin Department of Transportation, countdown timers and bicycle‐friendly vehicle Wisconsin Bicycle Facility Design Handbook, detection at key intersections along the potential 2004 bike routes identified in this plan. P1.6 Repair and repave poor quality sections of • Wisconsin Department of Transportation, pavement along the roadways designated at bike Facilities Development Manual, Current Update routes within the City of Greenfield. • Federal Highway Administration, Manual on P1.7 Actively pursue funding opportunities for Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and proposed bike facility improvements identified in Highways, 2003 Edition this plan. P1.8 Bicycle and pedestrian ways shall be given full consideration in the planning and development

BICYCLE FACILITIES 33 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bike and Pedestrian Plan

Pedestrian Facilities

Overview pathway width and slopes; and

A livable community is an accessible community. All • Maintenance of the pathway. desirable communities possess this trait, providing interconnectivity between community social centers There are a vast array of “best practices” design guides and residential areas with sidewalks, multi‐use paths, available through the U.S. Access Board, U.S. and complementary facilities that are readily accessible Department of Transportation, U.S. Department of for all citizens. Justice, and numerous special interest groups that should be consulted when planning and designing A pedestrian is often defined as a person who is facilities. A few of these documents are listed in the traveling on foot. While this classic definition is References section at the end of the chapter. frequently in mind when designing pedestrian facilities, critical importance should be placed on accessibility of A critically important focus while planning and pedestrian facilities for those of limited mobility. designing pedestrian facilities is the Americans with Consider the elderly person with a walker or cane, or Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). This is a major federal the handicapped person in a wheelchair, or the civil rights law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sight‐impaired citizen attempting to cross a street, or disability and establishing design requirements for the the child riding a skateboard to school. These often construction or alteration of facilities. It covers facilities overlooked pedestrians are equally important when in the private sector (places of public accommodation considering facility additions and improvements. and commercial facilities) and the public sector (state and local government facilities). Under the ADA, the The purpose of this chapter is to explain the most U.S. Access Board is responsible for accessibility commonly used pedestrian facilities, describe the guidelines covering newly built and altered facilities. In existing pedestrian facilities within the City of 1991, the Board published the ADA Accessibility Greenfield, and identify desirable proposed Guidelines (ADAAG) to serve as the basis for standards improvements or additions to this pedestrian network. used to enforce the law. These guidelines must be adhered to in an attempt to plan and design accessible

facilities. Pedestrian Facilities Design Guidelines This section describes some of the essential A significant percentage of the pedestrian population components needed in an accessible community and consists of children, elderly, and handicapped persons. offers suggestions for improvements and additions to Ample consideration must be given to the needs of the facility network to make it more pedestrian‐friendly. these pedestrians when determining such parameters as: Sidewalks Sidewalks are the pedestrian’s domain; nothing is more • Pedestrian crossing time at intersections; important to a pedestrian than a well‐designed, • Placement of street furniture and signs; smooth, connected system of sidewalks.

• Curb cuts and ramps at street crossings; A sidewalk corridor can be categorized into four “zones” (see Figure 3.1). Each zone has particular functions that

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 34 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Figure 3.1—Typical Sidewalk Facility provide and enhance the pedestrian experience. These the sidewalk. four zones are the: • Pedestrian Zone – This zone is the space • Curb Zone – The three functions of this zone are reserved for pedestrians; nothing should be in to prevent street water from entering the the zone. This zone should be at least five feet pedestrian area, discourage vehicles from wide along residential streets and wider where intruding on the pedestrian space, and make it pedestrian volume is high. easier for street maintenance vehicles to access. • Frontage Zone – This zone is the space between the Pedestrian Zone and the property line. This • Furnishings Zone – This zone buffers the area provides pedestrians with “shy” distance pedestrian from the roadway. This space is from buildings, fences, and hedges. This zone where one will find elements that do not belong may include elements normally found in the in the street or in pedestrian traffic: street trees Furnishings Zone, sidewalk dining, and elements and other vegetation, parking meters, hydrants, typically found on buildings such as rails, signs, street lights, driveway aprons, sign poles, etc. flags, awnings, etc. This area also shields pedestrians from open car doors. The wider the Furnishings Zone, the Curb Ramps more comfortable pedestrians feel when using Curb ramps provide a transition from the sidewalk to

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 35 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan the street for a variety of sidewalk users – people in Curb ramps should always have a detectable warning wheelchairs, parents pushing strollers, small children on field, typically in the form of a truncated dome grid bicycles, delivery people using handcarts, and people texture pad, to alert sight impaired users that a with mobility impairments that have difficulty stepping roadway crossing is imminent. Photo 3.2 shows a from curbs. To a person with vision impairments, the standard application of the truncated dome detectable curb delineates where the street is located. According warning field. to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), all new or altered streets and sidewalks must have ramps or sloped areas wherever sidewalks or pathways cross curbs or other barriers.

Photo 3.2—Detectable warning fields allows pedestrians to "feel" they are adjacent to a roadway crossing

Crosswalks Crosswalks are generally marked to indicate the preferred locations for pedestrians to cross a roadway Photo 3.1—Curb ramps should be in line with crosswalks for accessibility and to designate right‐of‐way for motorists to yield to pedestrians. They provide an increased level of Determining whether an intersection corner should awareness by motorists to the possibility of pedestrian have one or two curb ramps depends upon the conflict. characteristics of that particular corner, such as the In general, crosswalks may be marked under the curb radius, location of hydrants, poles, traffic signals, following conditions: and drainage facilities. Wherever possible, curb ramps should be aligned with the direction of the crosswalk, • At locations with traffic signals or stop signs which typically requires two ramps on the corner. Photo 3.1 shows a desirable application of an aligned • At unsignalized crossings in designated school curb ramp and crosswalk. This provides orientation for zones visually impaired pedestrians and safer conditions for wheelchair users. Diagonal curb ramps at the apex of • At unsignalized locations where engineering the corner direct users toward conflicting traffic, rather judgment may find a crosswalk desirable due to than in line with the safe crosswalk area. With these the number of vehicle lanes, traffic speeds, non‐aligned curb ramps, wheelchair users are required traffic volumes, and the geometry of the to turn at the top and bottom of the ramp so they can location. access the ramp straight on to reduce their risk of In some instances, marked crosswalks alone, without tipping over. traffic signals or other regulatory measure, may not be

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 36 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan sufficient: Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS)

• On streets where the speed‐limit exceeds 40 At intersections where it is difficult to pass for miles per hour. pedestrians with visual disabilities (location with complex signal • On roadways with four or more lanes, average operations, right turn on red, wide daily traffic over 12,000 vehicles per day, and streets, quiet traffic, traffic circles, without a raised median or crossing island. etc.), APS devices are recommended. They are devices • On roadways with four or more lanes that have that communicate to the pedestrian a raised median or crossing island but with through audible tones, verbal average daily traffic exceeding 15,000 vehicles messages, and/or vibrating surface. per day. The sound will be activated during the WALK interval when audible sounds are used and can be bells, buzzing, birdcalls, or speech messages. Photo 3.3 shows a typical application of audible push buttons.

Countdown Signals

Countdown signals display how many seconds remain in the pedestrian change interval with a flashing upraised hand also displayed. This technique is used to reduce the number Photo 3.3—Accessible pedestrian push buttons have audible of pedestrians that get stranded in the middle of the tones to guide sight impaired users street during light changes. These can be useful at wide crossings and where there are a high number of These locations call for enhancements to increase mobility‐impaired pedestrians. They offer increased pedestrian safety in addition to crosswalk markings. visibility and safety for the pedestrian. These can include traffic calming measures (curb extensions, raised crosswalks, “road diets”, etc), traffic Push Buttons signals and pedestrian signals, enhanced overhead Push buttons at a signalized intersection are the lighting, colored or texture stamped crosswalk primary method of pedestrian detection. They offer pavement, or other substantial crossing improvements. pedestrians the ability to simply push a button for the Pedestrian Signals transfer of right‐of‐way to them. The ADA requires that There are a number of additional or alternate push buttons be a minimum of 2 inches in diameter so pedestrian signal technologies to use other than the they can be operated with a closed fist, especially traditional walking person and raised hand or “Walk” helpful for persons with mobility impairments. Larger and “Don’t Walk” at traffic signals. buttons are also helpful for people with full hands and thus would enhance crossing for a wide variety of users.

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 37 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

They should be located way to narrow crossing widths (typical application as conveniently for both ease shown on Photo 3.4). They extend the sidewalk into the of pedestrians and people curb lane and usually reduce the radius of the corners with wheelchairs, no more to slow turning traffic, bringing pedestrians closer to the than five feet from the travel lanes and making them more visible to motorists. crosswalk and should be Figure 3.2 shows a schematic of the typical application placed on a signal pole if of the curb extension method for narrowing pedestrian they are adjacent to the crossing widths. crosswalk area. If nearby signal or utility poles are more than five feet from Pedestrian the crosswalk, separate Bulbouts pedestrian push button posts should be used. All push buttons should be accessible from a paved flat surface. Users should not have to traverse grass, gravel, sloped pavement, or other obstacles to reach them.

Crossing Width Reducers Reducing pedestrian crossing widths is always recommended where possible. This technique allows the pedestrian to cross the street in less time, minimizing the zone of automobile conflict. Photo 3.4—Pedestrian bulb‐outs slow traffic and minimize pedestrian crossing distance Center islands and medians both reduce cross walk distances. These also provide traffic calming effects Transit Stops because they narrow the roadway, often slowing Transit riders usually begin and end their trips as vehicle speeds. A well‐designed island (or ramps with pedestrians. People with disabilities and senior citizens flat landing pad) provides a cut‐through at least four often rely on transit as a primary means of feet wide and eight feet long with detectable warning transportation. For this reason, accessible routes to fields on both ends. and from transit stops and accessible site design must accommodate their needs. Curb extensions or pedestrian bulb‐outs are another

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 38 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Figure 3.2—Bird’s eye schematic of typical crosswalk narrowing using curb extensions (bulbouts)

Generally, riders are willing to walk one‐quarter mile to • Trash receptacles and from transit stops. At minimum, paved sidewalks, curb ramps, and safe crossings should be placed • Landscaping can create a more inviting throughout the quarter mile radius of transit stops. pedestrian environment; trees for example, can provide shade on warm days. They should not Bus stops must also be designed with well equipped bus however, intrude upon pedestrian space so as stop signage, lights, trash receptacles, bicycle parking, to block motorists’ ability to see them. and shelters with seating. Stops should be located on the far side of intersections so pedestrians cross the street behind the bus where motorists are more likely Existing Pedestrian Facilities to see them. Wide sidewalks should also be provided at bus stops to allow enough room to operate wheelchair The City of Greenfield has a well‐developed network of lifts. pedestrian facilities. Sidewalks, paved areas, and multi‐use paths all contribute to the flow of pedestrians Support Facilities in the City. Enhancements to the pedestrian environment are not Pedestrian facilities are desirably placed adjacent to all always necessary but do provide for a more roadways within a city. This may not be feasible and, comfortable and pleasurable setting. Some based on low traffic volume minor roadways, may not enhancements to pedestrian facilities include: be considered practical or necessary. In the absence of • Benches near retail, park, and bus stop areas full coverage pedestrian facilities, a good system of and every 300‐400 feet along trails pedestrian facilities should exist adjacent to:

• Drinking fountains • Collector and Arterial Roadways

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 39 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

• School Areas Primary roadways within the City with very little or no sidewalk coverage include: • Municipal Centers • 124th Street Collector and Arterial Roadways Although most significant collector and arterial • Beloit Road (CTH Y) roadways within the City have some sidewalk on one or • Morgan Avenue both sides, most residential neighborhoods within the City lack internal sidewalks. • 92nd Street

Primary roadways within the City with nearly full • 51st Street sidewalk coverage include: • 43rd Street • 116th Street • 35th Street • 108th Street (STH 100) • Loomis Road (STH 36) • 76th Street (CTH U) • Grange Avenue • 68th Street As important as an interconnected sidewalk system is to • 60th Street the average pedestrian, without pedestrian crossing facilities at major roadways, these roadways become • 27th Street (USH 41) artificial barriers for many users. • Ramsey Avenue A successful pedestrian crossing requires accessible Primary roadways within the City with at least partial geometry and location, proper control, and adequate sidewalk coverage (major missing sidewalk segments visibility. In general, signalized intersections within the listed in parentheses) include: City of Greenfield have pedestrian accommodations including connected sidewalks, push buttons, • Edgerton Avenue (west of 76th Street and east pedestrian signal heads, crosswalks, curb ramps, and of Loomis Road) median cut throughs, where applicable. Not all signalized intersections within Greenfield are fully • th Layton Avenue (west of 108 Street and east of equipped with pedestrian signals (see Map 4). These Loomis Road) include the intersections of: • th Cold Spring Road (west of 84 Street and • Beloit Road and Howard Avenue between 68th and 51st Streets) • Beloit Road and Interstate 894 NB and SB ramps • Howard Avenue (east of Loomis Road, 50th Street to 43rd Street, 68th Street to Forest Home • Oklahoma Avenue and Interstate 894 NB and SB Avenue, and west of Beloit Road) ramps

• 84th Street (south of Forest Home Avenue)

• Forest Home Avenue (92nd Street to 76th Street)

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 40 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

[Insert Map 4. Existing and Proposed Sidewalk Facilities]

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 41 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

[This page intentionally left blank.]

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 42 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

• 84th Street and Forest Home Avenue (STH 24) schools are young, often less predictable, and more (WisDOT project adds ped. signals in 2009) likely require accessible facilities.

• Layton Avenue and Loomis Road The City of Greenfield has several school areas that have substandard pedestrian facilities. This often leads • Cold Spring Road and Loomis Road to inappropriate shared use of roadways by pedestrians, unexpected roadway crossings, and • Edgerton Avenue and Loomis Road (pedestrian degraded awareness of pedestrians by motorists. signals exist for crossing Loomis Road but not Inadequate pedestrian facilities throughout the city also for crossing Edgerton Avenue) make it necessary to provide school bus service to a • Loomis Road and IH 894 East Bound (EB) and large portion of the student population, creating a West Bound (WB) ramps (no sidewalks or any significant cost for the school districts. other pedestrian facilities exist at these The Whitnall and Greenfield School Districts have both intersections) designated specific roads as “unusual hazards”. These • Loomis Road and Howard Avenue are roads that the school district, in conjunction with local police, has determined to be too hazardous for th • 76 Street and Forest Home Avenue school children to safely cross and/or walk along. School (pedestrian signals exist for crossing Forest children who must cross or walk along these roads to th Home Avenue but not for crossing 76 Street) get to school are provided with school bus service in accordance with state regulations (see Appendix C). • 60th and Interstate 894 EB and WB ramps (pedestrian signals exist for crossing ramp but In some instances, providing safe pedestrian access to th not for crossing 60 Street) school would require building new sidewalks on roads designated as unusual hazards. In other cases, • 27th Street (USH 41) and Interstate 894 EB and improving pedestrian facilities on alternative routes to WB ramps school is more appropriate. The following section • 27th Street (USH 41) and Cold Spring Road discusses pedestrian facilities around public schools in (pedestrian signals exist for crossing 27th Street the City of Greenfield, with a particular focus on roads but not for crossing Cold Spring Road) that have been designated as unusual hazards. Map 4 identifies pedestrian improvements needed to address Though the above bullet list describes signalized these gaps in the pedestrian system. intersections without pedestrian accommodations, it should not imply pedestrian facilities are desirable at all Greenfield Middle School signalized intersections. Intersections with a roadway Location: 3200 Barnard Avenue that is barred from use by pedestrians (like Interstate 894 ramps) or is never planned to have This school is adjacent to three very active roadways, all pedestrian interconnections using sidewalks or paths lacking sidewalks in the area. 35th Street is posted at may be inappropriate locations for pedestrian facilities 25 mph, and is a 2 lane roadway with a narrow gravel because they may encourage pedestrian use in an area shoulder and no sidewalks. Layton Avenue (CTH Y) is a that is inherently dangerous. posted 35 mph four lane highway with a gravel shoulder and no sidewalks. Edgerton Avenue is a posted 25 mph School Areas two lane roadway with a narrow shoulder and no Adequate pedestrian facilities adjacent to schools are sidewalks. This school area does not have the minimum very important because the primary pedestrians near PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 43 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

sidewalks. This school area does not have Layton Avenue the minimum facilities necessary to be considered pedestrian‐accessible.

Edgewood Elementary School

Location: 4711 47th Street

This school is located on Layton Avenue (CTH Greenfield Y), a six lane heavily traveled highway with a Middle Street posted speed of 35 mph. The intersection of School South 47th Street and Layton Avenue is a

35TH signalized intersection with pedestrian cross‐ walks. Sidewalks exist along Layton Avenue near the school, ending east of the school at Loomis Road (STH 36). East of Loomis Road, Photo 3.5—Greenfield Middle School isolated from pedestrian no sidewalks exist along Layton Avenue. accommodations East of the school is the signalized facilities necessary to be considered intersection of Layton Avenue and Loomis Road (STH pedestrian‐accessible. Photo 3.5 shows a bird’s eye 36). This intersection does not have pedestrian view of the school area, illustrating the lack of sidewalks crosswalks or pedestrian signals. Loomis Road is a along major roadways to and from the school. posted 40 mph six lane heavily traveled highway Elm Dale Elementary School without a completed sidewalk system. Sidewalks exist for 1,000 feet south of the intersection with Loomis Location: 5300 Honey Creek Drive Road on the west side only. Otherwise no sidewalks exist along Loomis Road near the school. 51st Street is a The three primary adjacent roadways to this school lack nearby 25 mph two lane road with gravel shoulders and sidewalks. Honey Creek Drive is a posted 25 mph 2 lane st no sidewalk. The intersection of 51 Street and Layton curbed roadway with no sidewalks except immediately Avenue has pedestrian crosswalks but the angles of in front of the school. Edgerton Avenue is a posted 25 crossings and curb ramp facilities are not desirable for mph two lane roadway with a narrow gravel shoulder all users. Although this school area does have the and no sidewalks. Grange Avenue is a posted 25 mph 4 minimum facilities necessary to be considered lane curbed roadway with no sidewalks. This school pedestrian‐accessible, many of the nearby residential area does not have the minimum facilities necessary to areas have gaps in the sidewalk system and are not be considered pedestrian‐accessible. directly connected to the sidewalk system adjacent to Glenwood Elementary School the school.

Location: 3500 51st Street Greenfield High School

th This school is positioned along two busy roadways, both Location: 4800 60 Street without sidewalks for pedestrian traffic. 51st Street is a This school is at the intersection of two heavily traveled posted 25 mph two lane roadway with steep ditches, a streets with sidewalks. Layton Avenue (CTH Y) is a narrow gravel shoulder, and no sidewalks. Morgan posted 35 mph six lane highway, and 60th Street is a Avenue is a posted 25 mph two lane roadway with no posted 30 mph four lane roadway. On ramps and off

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 44 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan ramps for Interstate 894 are located on 60th Street posted 30 mph four lane roadway with sidewalks. approximately ¼ mile north of the school. The sidewalk Interstate 894 westbound on ramp and east‐bound off system along 60th Street continues seamlessly through ramp are approximately ¼ mile south of the school on these interchange ramps. The signalized intersection of 84th Street. 92nd Street, a posted 30 mph two lane Layton Avenue and 60th Street is adjacent to the school roadway with gravel shoulder and no sidewalks, and and has pedestrian crosswalks and pedestrian signals. 76th Street (CTH U), a posted 35 mph heavily traveled six lane roadway with sidewalks, both exist nearby. Another significant roadway nearby is Cold Spring Road, a major two lane east‐west oriented roadway north of Although sidewalks exist east, north, and south of this the school. This road is posted 25 mph and does not school, the lack of sidewalks west of the school have a continuous sidewalk system near 60th Street. contributes to challenging conditions for pedestrians. Based primarily on this western pedestrian traffic, this This school area has the minimum facilities necessary to school area does not have the minimum facilities be considered pedestrian‐accessible. necessary to be considered pedestrian‐accessible.

St. John the Evangelist Catholic School Maple Grove Elementary

Location: 3500 Cold Spring Road Location: 6921 Cold Spring Road

There are two busy roadways adjacent to this school. Maple Grove Elementary is in the southwest quadrant Cold Spring Road is a 25 mph two lane curbed roadway of the intersection of Cold Spring Road and 68th Street. It is bordered by Bottsford Avenue on the south. All three roads are two lane roadways, generally posted 30 mph or less. Cold Spring Road has sidewalks on the south side of the roadway, west of 68th Street. No sidewalks exist east of 68th Street. 68th Street has sidewalks on both sides of the road near the school. Bottsford Avenue has no sidewalks in the school area. Maple Grove Elementary School Many of the nearby residential areas have gaps in the sidewalk system and are not directly connected to the sidewalk system adjacent to the school. The most important gap in this Photo 3.6—Maple Grove School has various pedestrian facilities but lacks facility adjacent sidewalk system is interconnections for eastern and southwestern students along Cold Spring Road, east of 68th Street. Based on these with no sidewalk west of 84th Street. 84th Street is a gaps, this school area does not have the minimum

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 45 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan facilities necessary to be considered Although the primary access road to the school, 116th pedestrian‐accessible. Photo 3.6 shows a bird’s eye Street, does have adequate sidewalk facilities, many of view of the school area. Note the lack of sidewalks the nearby residential areas have gaps in the sidewalk south of the school and east of 68th Street. This lack of system and are not directly connected to the sidewalk sidewalk typically encourages pedestrians to walk in the system adjacent to the school. Appendix C lists the street. specific roads of unusual hazard identified by the Whitnall School District. Map 4 identifies priority Whitnall School District pedestrian improvements necessary to address these Location: 5000 116th Street hazardous conditions and provide safe pedestrian routes to school. The most important gap in this Two primary roadways are adjacent to the Whitnall adjacent sidewalk system is along Edgerton Avenue. School District. 116th Street and Edgerton Avenue are both two lane roadways with 30 mph posted speed Based on these gaps, this school area does not have the limit. 116th Street has sidewalks but Edgerton Avenue minimum facilities necessary to be considered has no sidewalks. 116th Street crosses over Interstate pedestrian‐accessible. Photo 3.7 shows a bird’s eye 43 about 1,000 feet north of the school. The 116th view of the school area. Although sidewalks are along th Street sidewalk system continues seamlessly over this 116 Street, the lack of sidewalks along the other bridge. roadways leading to and from large neighborhoods near the school encourages pedestrians to walk in the street.

Layton Avenue

Street

Whitnall th School 116 Edgerton Avenue

Photo 3.7—Whitnall School: sidewalks along 116th Street but not along Layton Avenue or Edgerton Avenue, thus lacking good pedestrian connection to nearby residential neighborhoods

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 46 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Municipal Centers • Perception of a healthy and livable city Municipal centers are those that are open to the public, • Overall healthier populace may require attendance for certain occasions, and typically have diverse users. Post offices, city offices, Sidewalks are desirable along all major collector and community centers, parks, polling places (churches, arterial roadways within the City to encourage etc), and libraries are a few examples of municipal pedestrian use connecting between and within different centers. land use types (residential to retail, residential to office, etc). Described previously are “gaps” or missing The Greenfield Public Library and City Hall building at segments of sidewalk along primary collector and the corner of Forest Home Avenue and Cold Spring arterial roadways within Greenfield. Road has adjacent sidewalks on the north, west, and south side. Sidewalks are only partially constructed Although new development should include sidewalks nd along 72 Street on the south side of the buildings. along all internal and adjacent roadways, it may be This sidewalk system does not connect to impractical to install sidewalks along many existing neighborhoods to the southeast. minor residential roadways that were originally built without them. Roadways adjacent to school areas are

an exception to this generality. Proposed Pedestrian Facilities Since school areas are often areas of intense pedestrian The purpose of this section is to describe desirable use, having an interconnected and accessible sidewalk additions to, or modification of, the pedestrian facility system on all adjacent roadways and along key network within the City of Greenfield. These pedestrian routes to school is important. Described in descriptions are placed in one of two categorizes: the previous section, several school areas within Greenfield have a lack of desirable sidewalks leading to • New Facilities and from the area (see Map 4). Addressing these gaps • Improved Facilities would help to improve safety and access to school, and should be a priority. Refer to the “Multi‐Use Paths” and “Bicycle Facilities” sections of this report for additional recommendations Municipal centers are another area that typically regarding pedestrian facilities. receives intense pedestrian use. Sidewalk systems interconnecting these areas to residential areas are New Facilities critical for a desirable pedestrian‐accessible City. Sidewalks and roadway crossings are the primary new The intent of a sidewalk system is to provide off‐street facilities described in this section. movement of pedestrians from the school or municipal An intuitive and interconnected sidewalk system is center grounds, along significant connecting roadways, important to encourage non‐motorized transportation. terminating (or desirably continuing along) at minor This investment provides return in the form of: residential roadways that offer safe shared use of pedestrians and motorized vehicles. • Reduced vehicular congestion Recommendations • Increased roadway safety • Construct sidewalk along the major collector • Reduced noise and air pollution and arterial roadways to complete a fully connected system of primary sidewalks within

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 47 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

the City. Where sidewalk exists, determine if • Construct sidewalks along each roadway that is spot improvements to quality or accessibility adjacent to a school or municipal center are needed. Where sidewalk does not exist, property. Also construct sidewalks along other connect the endpoints of adjacent sidewalk roadways that provide critical connections to with newly constructed sidewalk. The residential neighborhoods within the school roadways that should have an adjacent fully district (Map 4). Roads that have been interconnected and accessible sidewalk system identified as priority school routes in need of include: pedestrian facilities include:

o 124th Street o 104th Street

o Beloit Road (CTH Y) o Cold Spring Road

o 116th Street o Barnard Avenue

o 108th Street (STH 100) o Edgerton Avenue

o 76th Street (CTH U) o Bottsford Avenue

o 68th Street o Loomis Road

o 60th Street o Layton Avenue

o 27th Street (USH 41) o Honey Creek Drive

o Edgerton Avenue o Grange Avenue

o Layton Avenue Improved Facilities Described previously are several signalized intersections o Cold Spring Road along Greenfield’s primary collector and arterial o Howard Avenue roadways that do not have full pedestrian signals and crosswalks. These intersections either have no Morgan Avenue o pedestrian signals or only partial pedestrian signals. o 84th Street Each of these intersection approaches should be analyzed for its desirable use as a pedestrian crossing. o Loomis Road (STH 36) Pedestrian crossings, including sidewalk, curb ramps, o Forest Home Avenue (STH 24) detectable warning fields, crosswalk pavement markings, and pedestrian signals should be installed at o 92nd Street signalized intersections in the following applications: o 51st Street • Where sidewalk exists on either side of the o 43rd Street intersection approach, effectively encouraging pedestrian crossing o 35th Street • Where no sidewalks exist but are ultimately o Grange Avenue planned adjacent to an intersection approach

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 48 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

• Where adjacent development (commonly warning fields, crosswalk pavement markings residential or school property) suggests the and pedestrian signals as appropriately defined likelihood of pedestrian crossing maneuvers. above. All signalized intersections along the major city collectors and arterials as defined Although signalized intersections are commonly used as previously should be improved with these pedestrian crossings, unsignalized roadway crossings pedestrian accommodations. are much more common throughout the City. Typically a pedestrian will cross at the closest location possible • At any new or existing pedestrian signal rather than diverting out of their way to a signalized installation, install new LED countdown timer crossing. pedestrian signal heads and handicapped accessible push buttons as appropriate. LED Midblock crossings and unsignalized intersections along signal heads are more easily recognizable for the City’s major collectors and arterials are numerous. sight impaired users based on their brightness Each of these locations, if encouraged by any pedestrian and clarity. facilities, should include the same safety features as a signalized intersection except for the signal heads. Curb • At the termination of any new or existing ramps, detectable warning fields, crosswalk pavement sidewalk at a roadway, where the geometry markings, advance pedestrian crossing warning signage implies use as a crossing location for are the typical minimum. pedestrians, study should be completed to determine applicability of curb ramps and Crossings of major roadways with medians often have a crossing safety devices. These devices may place in the median to harbor pedestrians so they can cross the divided roadway in

two stages. Comfortable pedestrian storage in a median typically requires 8 Street feet of median width at a minimum. st 51 Another feature of a desirable crossing at a median divided roadway is a straight aligned crosswalk across the entire roadway, without breaks or directional Layton Avenue changes in the median. Sight impaired users more easily recognize the correct walking path if it remains straight for the entire distance. Additionally, bikers are more likely to remain in the safe crosswalk path and not veer off towards conflicting traffic if the crosswalk remains straight (see Photo 3.8).

Recommendations

• Improve existing signalized intersections with adjacent Photo 3.8—Crosswalks that bend at medians are more difficult to maneuver for sidewalk, curb ramps, detectable sight impaired users and bicyclists.

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 49 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

include crosswalk markings, advance pedestrian Sight impaired users and bicyclists are most warning signs, improved lighting, pedestrian sensitive to this requirement. Photo 3.9 shows actuated signals, and grade separations. a curb ramp within the City that directs the pedestrian towards live conflicting traffic rather • At all median divided roadways with designated than in alignment with the safe crosswalk pedestrian crossings, reconstruct median noses location. This type of curb ramp should be and crosswalk pavement markings to allow a replaced throughout the city. straight and aligned crosswalk across the entire roadway. (Photo 8 is a bird’s eye view of a pedestrian crossing near Edgewood Elementary and Greenfield High school with an undesirable “bend” in the crosswalk alignment.)

• Reconstruct all existing curb ramps along major collector and arterial roadways that don’t currently align with the perceived, marked, or desirable crosswalk location. Desirable curb ramps should direct the pedestrian straight into the crosswalk path, and not require deflection.

Howard Avenue 92nd Street

Photo 3.9—Curb ramps unaligned with the crosswalk may guide sight impaired users and bicyclists into conflicting traffic. Also note the lack of detectable warning field.

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 50 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Goals, Objectives, and Policies P3.2 Require all new development along major collectors and arterial roadways to install The following goals, objectives, and policies are sidewalks. intended to provide a comprehensive approach for achieving the recommendations outlined in this plan. P3.3 Where feasible, construct sidewalks along The order in which these goals, objectives, and policies already developed portions of major collector are listed does not necessarily denote their priority. and arterial roadways to complete a fully connected system of sidewalks within the City. Goals P3.4 Evaluate the feasibility of installing sidewalks in Goals are broad, advisory statements that express areas adjacent to municipal buildings. general public priorities about how the City should P3.5 Actively pursue grant opportunities for funding approach bike and pedestrian issues. new pedestrian facilities, with a particular emphasis on creating safe routes to schools. G3.1 Enhance and promote walking as a viable form of transportation by providing multi‐use trails and P3.6 Ensure that sidewalks throughout the City are sidewalks throughout the city. accessible to everyone and are in compliance with ADA Accessibility Guidelines.

P3.7 Ensure that all new pedestrian facilities are safe Objectives and inviting by incorporating appropriate Objectives suggest future directions in a way that is amenities such as five‐foot wide sidewalks, more specific than goals. The accomplishments of an extensive street trees, and, (where objective contribute to the fulfillment of a goal. appropriate/practical) street lights, benches, and garbage receptacles. O3.1 Reduce the number of school children who are dependent on the bus system. P3.8 Wherever possible, align curb ramps with the direction of the crosswalk, which typically O3.2 Provide safe pedestrian access to all residential requires two ramps at each corner. neighborhoods, schools, community facilities, and commercial areas. P3.9 At median‐divided roadways with designated pedestrian crossings, reconstruct median noses

and crosswalk pavement markings to allow a Policies straight and aligned crosswalk across the entire Policies are rules, courses of action, or programs used to roadway where feasible. ensure Plan implementation and to accomplish the P3.10 Install pedestrian crossings, including curb goals and objectives. ramps, detectable warning fields, crosswalk P3.1 Work with the Whitnall and Greenfield School pavement markings, and pedestrian signals, at Districts, property owners, WisDOT, and appropriate signalized intersections. adjoining municipalities to install sidewalks along P3.11 When installing new pedestrian signals, use LED roads adjacent to public schools and along other countdown timer pedestrian signal heads and roadways that provide critical connections to handicapped accessible push buttons as residential neighborhoods within the school appropriate. district.

PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 51 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Multi‐Use Paths

Overview desirable standard depending upon activity levels, with a minimum width of eight feet. Maintenance vehicles A multi‐use path allows the pedestrian and bicyclist to driving on 8‐foot wide paths tend to damage the edges. avoid the risk of shared vehicle roadways and offers Therefore, 8‐foot wide paths should be avoided unless them a predictable and safe location for travel and physical limitations cannot accommodate a greater recreation. These path systems are often themselves width. Refer to Figure 4.1 for a graphic showing a considered parks, and can be designated as such, and typical desirable shared use path. are typically best situated in locations that connect bicycle and pedestrian friendly facilities across areas that are not bicycle and pedestrian friendly.

The City of Greenfield is strategically located to take advantage of several significant corridors with valuable multi‐use potential.

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss:

• Multi‐Use Path Design Guidelines

• Existing Multi‐Use Facilities

• Proposed Multi‐Use Facilities

Figure 4.1—Typical multi‐use path schematic

Multi­Use Path Design Guidelines Multi‐use paths should have an additional two feet of The purpose of this section is to define the most smoothly graded area on either side of the pavement. common type of multi‐use path, describe the basic In addition, there should be three feet of horizontal and design elements necessary to create a safe path, and 10 feet (8 feet minimum) of overhead clearance on illustrate common multi‐use path facility improvements. either side of the pavement. Bike paths should be A multi‐use path is an off‐road bikeway that is physically constructed of smooth, hard, all‐weather paving such as separated from roadways by open space or a barrier. It concrete or asphalt. Concrete paths are more expensive may be within the roadway right‐of‐way, a utility right‐ but require less maintenance than asphalt paths, which of‐way, or an independent right‐of‐way. These facilities can buckle, crack, and erode quickly. Good maintenance are sometimes referred to as bike trails or hike and bike is essential for bike paths to avoid hazardous trails. An excellent example of this type of facility is conditions. found in the Root River Parkway on the west side of Curb cuts and ramps for access to multi‐use paths Greenfield. should be provided at all roadway intersections. Slopes Multi‐use paths should be 10 to 12 feet wide, as a and grades should comply with ADA requirements. Curb

MULTI‐USE PATHS 52 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan cuts should be a minimum of eight feet wide. When a multi‐use path is used by significant numbers of users, each with varying degrees of technical skills or Good path locations should be used: as short cuts to speed preference, lane delineation pavement markings bridge obstacles (freeway, rivers etc.), to connect cul‐ along the path may be appropriate. Commonly de‐sacs and dead ends, as connections to land uses, installed are lane lines to simply designate the direction along protected corridors with links to street systems, of travel of each half of the path. A separate width of a and next to railroad lines. multi‐use path may also be designated with pavement Shared‐use paths should have the following markings for walking traffic, commonly used where characteristics for success: moderate to high speed cyclists constitute the majority of path traffic and where walking pedestrians may be • Separation from traffic somewhat unexpected.

• Complement on‐road bicycle facilities When a multi‐use path crosses a roadway, several elements may be considered to ensure a safe and • Scenic views and routes efficient crossing. If the roadway crossing takes place at traffic signals, pedestrian/cyclist push buttons or other • Connectivity to important land uses advanced pedestrian detection systems should be • Connectivity to the roadway system considered to help transfer the right of way to the pedestrian. Crosswalk pavement markings and • Shorter trips than on‐road travel pedestrian crossing advance warning signs should also be considered where appropriate. Refer to the Bicycle • Limited at‐grade street crossings Facilities section of this report for a more detailed • Illuminations and good sight lines discussion of the interaction between traffic signals and pedestrians and bicyclists. • Proper maintenance and construction

Most multi‐use facility improvements are those designed to create, improve, or advance one of the following:

• Wayfinding

• Cyclist/Pedestrian Lane Markings Roadway “pinched” at path crossing • Roadway Crossings Photo 4.1—Roadway pinched down at path crossing • Grade Separations slows and calms traffic

Wayfinding elements are important considerations in Traffic calming measures provide additional measures establishing a well‐used path system. Without to increase safety of the traveling public at the crossing wayfinding elements such as route signs and maps, or of multi‐use paths with roadways. Roadway roadway connection indicators, a path system may only pinchpoints or pedestrian bulbouts, used to narrow the be used by those aware of it. Wayfinding can easily and crossing distance of the cross road, are effective in relatively inexpensively raise the visibility and slowing the conflicting vehicular traffic and providing awareness of the path system in a community. more visibility for the pedestrian. Photo 4.1 shows a multi‐use path crossing an urban roadway with

MULTI‐USE PATHS 53 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan pedestrian bulbouts. • Konkel Park

Another calming measure provides median channelizing Root River Parkway islands to divert cross‐road traffic. This tends to slow The most significant system of off street, multi‐use traffic, increase pedestrian visibility, provide haven for paths in or near the City of Greenfield is the Root River pedestrians to cross only half the road at a time, and Parkway system. This designated natural area runs decrease the overall distance for the pedestrian to continuously from north to south through the western cross. Refer to Photo 4.2, showing a pedestrian crossing half of the City. Between Morgan Avenue and Layton an urban roadway with median channelizing islands to Avenue, several off‐street paths for bikes and calm traffic. Other significant traffic calming measures pedestrians exist in this corridor. These paths are high worthy of investigation include traffic calming circles, quality, paved, and generally 8‐10 feet wide. The paths chicanes, regulatory enforcement, speed humps, lighted offer direct connection to many bicycle friendly regional crossings, and colored and/or texture‐stamped crossing roadways and residential neighborhoods on the west pavements. side of Greenfield.

The path system directly connects to important bicycle friendly roadways including Morgan Avenue, Howard Avenue, and Cold Spring Road. North of Morgan Avenue and south of Layton Avenue, the off street path system terminates and the bicycle friendly network continues on a public street (Root River Parkway).

The primary Root River Parkway multi‐use path has grade separated crossings at the following locations, offering enhanced efficiency and safety for pedestrian and cycling traffic:

• Beloit Road (CTH T) (Underpass with river) Photo 4.2—Roadway narrowed with median divider • Root River (bridge over) One of the most significant path improvements, both in terms of benefits to the user and cost to the installer, is • USH 45/Interstate 43 (underpasses) grade separations. Grade separations are commonly bridges or underpasses of major roadways, railroads, • Layton Avenue (underpass) utility corridors, rivers, or drainage canals. When The path also crosses several major roadways at grade, multi‐use path routes are planned, existing grade most with pedestrian and cyclist crosswalks and separations may help guide the layout because of the advance warning signs along the crossroads. These expense of creating new bridges or underpasses. direct connections include:

Existing Multi­Use Facilities • Howard Avenue (crosswalks) The City of Greenfield has two multi‐use path systems. • 116th Street (minor connection) These two systems pass through: • Beloit Road (CTH T) (crosswalks) • The Root River Parkway

MULTI‐USE PATHS 54 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

• 108th Street (STH 100) (crosswalks) Proposed improvements to the multi‐use path network in the City of Greenfield include (each numbered th • 106 Street (minor connection) location as shown on Map 3):

• Cold Spring Road (crosswalks) 1. East‐West Utility Corridor

• Layton Avenue (crosswalks) 2. Central Utility Corridor

Konkel Park 3. North Utility Corridor Another multi‐use path system exists within Konkel 4. Cold Spring‐Beloit Road Safe Route Connection Park, south of Layton Avenue. This path system st generally connects 51 Street on the north and south 5. Honey Creek Connection sides of the park. The park contains boardwalks th suitable for pedestrians and unpaved and paved 6. Root River Path Crossing of 108 Street sections of paths (STH 100) suitable for bikes and 7. South Utility Corridor pedestrians. This path system offers an 8. General Improvements excellent connection between Edgerton East­West Utility Corridor (Map 3 #1) Avenue and Layton Beginning at USH 45/Interstate 894 (hereafter referred Avenue. to as “the freeway”) and extending continuously east to the eastern City of Greenfield limit is a major

undeveloped utility corridor. The corridor is generally Proposed Multi Use Facilities 100‐150 feet wide and contains, in addition to possible underground utilities, high tension overhead electrical Although the Root River Parkway system of Greenfield, an excellent multi‐use system running north and south within the City interconnection to the remainder of the City with multi‐use paths is deficient.

This section of the report describes potential new corridors for future multi‐use paths or improvements and connections to existing multi‐use paths.

Though the below‐described proposed corridors are relatively undeveloped and strategically appropriate locations for interconnection with the greater City of Greenfield’s bicycle and pedestrian facility network, Photo 4.3—Major utility corridor provides excellent ultimate feasibility and constructability analysis is opportunity for multi‐use path required for final determination. and communication lines.

The importance of this possible multi‐use corridor is evident in its simple interconnection with numerous north and south oriented roadways in the community.

MULTI‐USE PATHS 55 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

The corridor crosses the minor residential roadway of crossings should also include pedestrian crossing 94th Street, and several significant collector and arterial advance warnings and traffic calming features. roadways including 92nd Street, 84th Street, 76th Street (CTH U), Forest Home Avenue (STH 24), 68th Street, 60th Street, 55th Street, 51st Street, 43rd Street, Loomis Road (STH 36), and 35th Street.

Most of these crossing streets offer bicycle and pedestrian mobility options and thus illustrate the interconnectivity benefits of a potential multi‐use path along the corridor. Photo 4.3 shows this major utility corridor, looking east from 92nd Street.

Recommendation

Study the utility corridor east of the freeway (multi‐use path proposed segment #1 as shown on Map 3) for Photo 4.4—Application of channelizing island and feasibility, constructability, and acceptability of placing elevated pedestrian crossing (combined with speed a multi‐use path system within. h)

Roadways intersecting this corridor as described previously should be analyzed for future compatibility of crossing maneuvers for a major multi‐use path system. Where appropriate, roadway crossing safety improvements, including curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian advance warning signage, colored or stamped pavement at the crossing, pedestrian‐actuated traffic signals, traffic calming features, or grade separations of the path or crossing roadways should be considered. Crossing facilities at these intersecting roadways should be handled in a consistent manner along the entire corridor to ensure the most recognizable and safest operations. Photo 4.5—Side view of elevated pedestrian crossing. Note how the roadway “ramps” to meet the crosswalk. The character and nature of the roadways the corridor crosses varies considerably. Primary crossings, those Secondary crossings include 84th Street, 76th Street (CTH with the highest potential level of vehicular and U), 60th Street, and 43rd Street. Although not as pedestrian conflict, include Forest Home Avenue (STH significant as the primary crossings, these crossings still th 24), Loomis Road (STH 36) and 27 Street (USH 241). exhibit considerable conflict potential between Multi‐use path crossings at these roads should be pedestrians and vehicles based on the roadways studied and designed carefully based on the high regional nature and direct connections to Interstate probability of pedestrian and vehicle conflicts. These 894. Although pedestrian crossing signals and grade crossings should be considered for the highest level of separations are possible solutions to crossing these crossing facilities. Pedestrian crossing signals and grade roadways, non‐signalized surface crossing techniques separations may provide the most safety. These

MULTI‐USE PATHS 56 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan are likely to provide the appropriate level of safety and Central Utility Corridor (Map 3 #2) operations. Curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian The utility corridor described above also extends in the advance warning signage, and colored or stamped south direction from the location where the east and pavement at the crossing are the most likely crossing west corridor “intersects” the freeway. From that solution. High level traffic calming techniques such as approximate location continuing south, the utility runs elevated crosswalks with speed humps and median adjacent to the freeway. The utility corridor wraps dividing islands should be considered. Photos 4.4 and around adjacent to the westbound‐to‐northbound 4.5 illustrate a sample application of the elevated interchange ramp within the USH 45 and Interstate 894 pedestrian crossing technique. The raised crosswalk interchange. This section of utility corridor crosses Cold makes the pedestrian more visible, and also provides a Spring Road just east of its freeway overpass then speed hump effect to slow vehicular traffic. continues east and connects to 92nd Street just north of its freeway overpass. A spur line would connect to the Tertiary crossings include 92nd Street, 68th Street, 51st main path and travel north connecting to Cold Spring Street, and 35th Street. These roadways do not connect Road at about 96th Street. directly to Interstate 894 and offer limited regional connectivity and thus are not as likely to have significant pedestrian and vehicle conflicts. Curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian advance warning signage, and colored or stamped pavement at the crossing are the most likely crossing solutions. High level traffic calming techniques such as elevated crosswalks and median dividing islands may also be considered.

Minor crossings include 94th Street and 55th Street. These crossings would have the least likelihood of pedestrian and vehicle conflict based on their very low‐ volume residential nature. At these crossings, a case could be made to allow the multi‐use path to have the permanent right of way, with the crossing street posted Photo 4.6—Utility corridor adjacent to Interstate 894 with a stop or yield sign for the occasional vehicle. As provides good northern connection potential with the other more significant crossings, curb ramps, The potential importance of this segment of multi‐use crosswalks, pedestrian advance warning signage, and path lies in its interconnection between 92nd Street and colored or stamped pavement at the crossing would be Cold Spring Road. Since both of these roadways offer appropriate. High level traffic calming techniques such safe grade‐separated crossings of the Interstate system, as elevated crosswalks and median dividing islands may this connection allows efficient and relatively seamless also be considered but are typically not necessary on flow in the region despite the major Interstate corridor low‐volume roadways like these. barrier.

Development of this multi‐use path along this utility Recommendation corridor is likely to require easement agreements. WE Energies and American Transmission Company (ATC) Study the utility corridor following adjacent to the have expressed a willingness to work with the City on westbound to northbound freeway interchange ramp in securing an easement for this trail (see Appendix B). the Interstate 894 and USH 45 interchange (multi‐use path proposed segment #2 as shown on Map 3) for

MULTI‐USE PATHS 57 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan feasibility, constructability, and acceptability of placing Development of this multi‐use path along this utility a multi‐use path system within. Crossing safety corridor is likely to require easement agreements. WE improvements at Cold Spring Road should be Energies and American Transmission Company (ATC) considered. These may include, among other options, have expressed a willingness to work with the City on curb ramps, crosswalks, pedestrian advance warning securing an easement for this trail. signage, and colored or stamped pavement at the crossing. Cold Spring­Beloit Road Safe Route Connection (Map 3 #4) Development of this multi‐use path along this utility The intersection of Beloit Road (CTH T) and Cold Spring corridor is likely to require easement agreements. WE Road is formed at an acute angle. This intersection is Energies and American Transmission Company (ATC) perceived as dangerous for pedestrians and bicyclists by have expressed a willingness to work with the City on the general public, and by the Whitnall School District. securing an easement for this trail. This intersection is a critical link between North Utility Corridor (Map 3 #3) neighborhoods to the north and the nearby Whitnall The utility corridor described above also extends in the School campus, which combines elementary, middle, north direction from the location where the east and and high school buildings. Given the concerns regarding west utility corridor intersects the freeway. From that safety, bus service is currently provided to students who approximate location continuing north, the utility must cross Beloit Road to get to school. follows adjacent to the freeway to the north City limits A corridor exists about 1,200 feet east of this of Greenfield. This segment crosses Howard Avenue intersection along Cold Spring Road for creation of a before continuing into the City of Milwaukee. multi‐use path. As of February 2009, construction was This proposed corridor provides the essential underway on a multiuse path in this corridor. This path connection between the proposed east‐west utility will provide a connection between Cold Spring Road and corridor multi‐use paths with the City of West Allis. Beloit Road (CTH T), about 1,200 feet east of the Photo 4.6 shows this major utility corridor, looking perceived hazardous intersection of Beloit Road and north from Cold Spring Road. Note the bordering Cold Spring Road. The intention of the current Interstate 894 on the extreme left of the photo. construction project is to provide a path through the currently undeveloped property about 1,200 feet east Recommendation of the Cold Spring Road and Beloit Road intersection. Study the utility corridor following adjacent to the Ultimately this segment would be connected via a path freeway north of the proposed east west utility corridor to the Root River Bridge at Beloit Road on the south described above, (multi‐use path proposed segment #3 side of Beloit Road, enabling a seamless path north and as shown on Map 3) for feasibility, constructability, and south of Beloit Road crossing safely beneath Beloit Road acceptability of placing a multi‐use path system within. at the Root River Bridge. Crossing safety improvements at Howard Avenue The portion yet to be developed for this connection is should be considered. These may include curb ramps, the portion from the Root River Bridge westward along crosswalks, pedestrian advance warning signage, Beloit Road to the terminus of this currently active path colored or stamped pavement at the crossing, construction project. pedestrian‐actuated traffic signals, or grade separation of the path. Another element to this current construction activity that is a desirable addition would be a safe, visible, and

MULTI‐USE PATHS 58 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan exclusive pedestrian and bicyclist crossing of Beloit Honey Creek Safe Route Connection (Map 3 #5) st th Road (CTH T) roughly between 121 Street and 117 Honey Creek Drive intersects Edgerton Avenue on the Street. This crossing of Beloit Road (CTH T) would be City’s southeast side. At this location, it may be roughly 1,500 feet north along Beloit Road from the desirable to investigate a multi‐use path that continues intersection at Cold Spring Road. This crossing location north from this intersection, follows the Honey Creek is more attractive to pedestrians than the intersection drainage basin, continues across Loomis Road (STH 36), of Beloit Road and Cold Spring Road, would likely draw and terminates in Konkel Park, where another multi‐use a larger amount of neighborhood pedestrian and path system exists. bicyclist traffic, and provides an “at‐grade” alternative to pedestrians who are unlikely to travel out of their Loomis Road (STH 36) is a high traffic volume roadway intended way eastward to the Root River Bridge. that intersects roadways at acute angles based on its diagonal orientation in the City. The width and high Recommendation traffic volume of this road is a possible deterrence for bicyclist and pedestrian travel from south‐east Review the current path construction project on the Greenfield to other western locations in the City. This is undeveloped land corridor that exists between Beloit a barrier road and is generally perceived as a difficult Road (CTH T) and Cold Spring Road, approximately roadway to cross for bicyclists and pedestrians. A 1,400 feet east of the intersection of Beloit Road proposed multi‐use path that follows the Honey Creek (CTH T) and Cold Spring Road, (multi‐use path proposed basin, crossing at Loomis Road (STH 36) with a grade segment #4 as shown on Map 3 for acceptability as a separation, may draw significant pedestrian and safe route for pedestrians in the Whitnall School bicyclist traffic for recreation and commuting purposes. District. As shown on Map 3 and marked as proposed segment Construct a multi‐use path segment connecting the #5, this path would generally connect the intersection northern terminus of this active path construction of Edgerton Avenue and Honey Creek Drive to project to the Root River Bridge along the south side of Creekwood Park, then follow adjacent to the Honey Beloit Road. This segment will provide a means to Creek drainage basin, cross Loomis Road (STH 36), and connect the multi‐use paths north and south of Beloit continue along the drainage basin to Konkel Park where Road via the river bridge underpass for increased safety. it would interconnect with the multi‐use path system Determine exact location and construct safe roadway within. crossings at Beloit Road (CTH T) (one crossing between Recommendation 121st and 117th Street) and Cold Spring Road (west of th 118 Street). These “at‐grade” crossings should be Study the Honey Creek drainage canal corridor between considered for direct access to the path system. Edgerton Avenue and Konkel Park, (multi‐use path Considerations for these crossings include curb ramps, proposed segment #5 as shown on Map 3) for crosswalks, pedestrian advance warning signage, feasibility, constructability, and acceptability of placing colored or stamped pavement at the crossing, a multi‐use path system within. Crossing safety pedestrian‐actuated traffic signals, or grade separations improvements at Edgerton Avenue and Loomis Road of the path or crossing roadways. (STH 36) should be considered. These may include curb ramps, crosswalks, advanced pedestrian warning Development of this multi‐use path connection may signage, colored or stamped pavement at the crossing, require purchase of right of way or easement pedestrian‐actuated traffic signals, or grade separations agreements. of the path or crossing roadways, particularly at Loomis

MULTI‐USE PATHS 59 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Road (STH 36). Currently Loomis Road (STH 36) passes Recommendations over the Honey Creek drainage canal on a bridge. This bridge should be studied for determination if a Study the roadway crossing of the Root River multi‐use multi‐use path could be placed alongside the creek, path at 108th Street (STH 100) for safety improvements under the bridge. of the crossing. Improvements at this location may include, among other options, a grade separation, pedestrian‐actuated traffic signals, and colored or

stamped pavement at the crossing.

Street

100) South Utility Safe Route Corridor (Map 3 #7) Beginning at the Root River Parkway, just south of 108th (STH Layton Avenue in the southwest corner of the City, is a major undeveloped utility corridor that runs southwest. It runs continuously from the Root River Parkway to the south, crossing 104th Street and Edgerton Avenue, before terminating at 108th Street (STH 100) near Abbott Avenue. The corridor is generally 40‐150 feet Photo 4.7—108th Street (STH 100) pedestrian crossing of wide and contains, among other possible underground multi‐use path utilities, high tension overhead electrical and communication lines. Development of this multi‐use path along this drainage The importance of this potential multi‐use corridor is its canal is likely to require purchase of right of way or connection between the Whitnall School campus on easement agreements. th 116 Street and a large residential neighborhood along east of 108th Street (STH 100) along the Root River Root River Path Safe Route Crossing at 108th Street (STH 100) (Map 3 #6) Parkway. The Root River multi‐use path crosses 108th Street Recommendations (STH 100) at a crosswalk location with pedestrian warning signs. This crossing may be perceived as Study the utility corridor that runs continuously from th dangerous or difficult by pedestrians and bicyclists the Root River Parkway to the south, crossing 104 because of the high traffic volumes along 108th Street Street and Edgerton Avenue, before terminating at th (STH 100) and their relatively high operating speed. 108 Street (STH 100) (multi‐use path proposed Refer to Map 3 for the location of multi‐use path segment #7 as shown on Map 3) for feasibility, proposed improvement #6, and Photo 4.7 for an aerial constructability, and acceptability of placing a multi‐use view of this path crossing. path system within. Crossing safety improvements at Edgerton Avenue and 108th Street (STH 100) should be The location of this path crossing is acceptable, but considered. These may include curb ramps, crosswalks, improvements to the style and safety of the crossing advanced pedestrian warning signage, colored or should be considered as this is a potential significant stamped pavement at the crossing, pedestrian‐actuated school‐related crossing. traffic signals, or grade separations of the path or crossing roadways.

MULTI‐USE PATHS 60 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Development of this multi‐use path along this utility • Installation of secondary pedestrian facilities. corridor is likely to require purchase of right of way or This may include garbage cans, benches, easement agreements. drinking fountains, etc.

Whitnall Nature Trail (Map 3 #8) • Regular maintenance of path pavement, Located at the western edge of the Whitnall School shoulders, and landscaping, to ensure the path District Campus, this potential multi‐use trail segment is is relatively smooth and intact and planted in a currently an unofficial dirt path used by students to manner that doesn’t interrupt critical sight walk to school. Establishing this as an official trail and distance. improving the path would establish an important • Periodic bicycle storage at junctions of trails connection between the residential area to the west with major roadways. These may be used for and the school campus. commuting purposes involving connections to Recommendations multi‐modal use.

Work with the Whitnall School District to secure funding • Consideration of transit stops near major for improving this path. roadway junctions with multi‐use paths.

General Improvements Part of a well developed multi‐use path system in any Goals, Objectives, and Policies community is a program of incremental improvements as investment dollars are available. The following list The following goals, objectives, and policies are illustrates improvements that should be considered to intended to provide a comprehensive approach for improve existing or proposed facilities. achieving the recommendations outlined in this plan. The order in which these goals, objectives, and policies • Path lighting at roadway crossings and path are listed does not necessarily denote their priority. junctions. Goals • Curb ramps and Americans with Disabilities Act Goals are broad, advisory statements that express improvements at all roadway and path general public priorities about how the City should junctions. approach bike and pedestrian issues.

• Pathway pavement markings if determined G2.1 Enhance and promote the use of bicycles and useful or necessary. This may include walking as viable forms of transportation and designated areas for walkers separate from enjoyable forms of recreation by providing multi‐ bicyclists, or lane lines for directional use trails throughout the city. separation.

• Improved/increased wayfinding along the paths Objectives and at crossing roadways. This may include maps of the path network, and signs indicating Objectives suggest future directions in a way that is junctions with major roadways and civic more specific than goals. The accomplishments of an destinations (post offices, libraries, objective contribute to the fulfillment of a goal. “downtown”, etc.) O2.1 Establish key multi‐use trail segments as identified in this plan, including a multi‐use trail

MULTI‐USE PATHS 61 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

along the WE Energies/American Transmission P2.4 Conduct periodic maintenance of multi‐use Company utility corridor through town. paths to create safe walking and bicycling O2.2 Connect the proposed multi‐use trail along the conditions. utility corridor with multi‐use trails in adjacent P2.5 Install wayfinding elements such as route signs municipalities. and maps or roadway connection indicators O2.3 Create and maintain safe and enjoyable multi‐ along existing and proposed multi‐use paths. use trails throughout the city. P2.6 Provide safe and convenient road crossings along multi‐use trail corridors, and give right‐of‐way to bicycles and pedestrians at all minor road Policies crossings as discussed in this Plan. Policies are rules, courses of action, or programs used to ensure Plan implementation and to accomplish the goals and objectives. References: P2.1 Work with WE Energies, American Transmission • American Association of State Highway and Company, and adjacent municipalities to Transportation Officials, Guide for the implement the study, design, and construct the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 1999 proposed multi‐use trail along the utility corridor. • Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Wisconsin Bicycle Facility Design Handbook, P2.2 Actively pursue funding opportunities for 2004 proposed multi‐use trails identified in this plan. When possible, submit joint funding applications • Wisconsin Department of Transportation, with adjoining communities. Facilities Development Manual, Current Update P2.3 Where feasible, design and construct multi‐use paths so that they are 10 to 12 feet wide, with an • Federal Highway Administration, Manual on additional two feet of smoothly graded area on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and either side of the pavement. Highways, 2003 Edition

MULTI‐USE PATHS 62 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Implementation

Implementation Framework the City. The recommendations of this plan build upon This Bike and Pedestrian Plan identifies six priority more general concepts and ideas outlined in the City’s actions to be initiated within the next five years. Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Outdoor Specific dates for implementation are also provided, Recreation Plan. The Bike and Pedestrian Plan is although these should be considered as a guide rather intended to supplement, rather than replace, the goals, than an absolute. The order in which items are listed objectives, and policies outlined in these previous does not necessarily denote their priority for planning efforts. In some instances, the implementation. recommendations of this plan address land use regulations. These recommendations should be To ensure consistency across the plan, and to facilitate incorporated into the City’s Comprehensive Plan. straightforward implementation, programs and actions outlined below provide a comprehensive approach to addressing the goals, policies, and objectives of the various chapters of this Plan. The specific Plan policies Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan addressed under each program or action are listed, to The Parks and Recreation Department will report assist with cross referencing the appropriate chapters. annually to the Parks Board and Common Council on progress in implementing the Plan. This will include The City Parks and Recreation Department will take the identification of action items that have been initiated lead on implementing most of the actions identified and the results of those actions. The Parks and below. Very few actions, however, can be undertaken Recreation Department report will also include a and completed exclusively by the Parks and Recreation discussion of any barriers to implementation that have Department. Successful implementation will require been encountered. public‐private partnerships, inter‐municipal efforts, and/or inter‐department coordination and cooperation. Within five years following adoption of the Plan, the A cooperative, collaborative approach is essential for Parks and Recreation Department will review and the Plan to be successful. evaluate the success of implementing the plan. This evaluation will include not only tracking what actions have been initiated, but also assessing whether these actions have been effective in furthering the goals and Preliminary Cost Estimates objectives of the Plan. It is expected that this evaluation Preliminary cost estimates are provided for some of the will result in some actions and/or policies being priority actions identified below. These are based on dropped or others added as necessary. average costs, and should be further refined based on design and construction plans. The Plan’s time horizon is intended to be twenty years; however, after ten years the plan should be completely reviewed and updated.

Plan Consistency and Use The intent is for this Plan to serve as a guide for future bike and pedestrian infrastructure improvements across

IMPLEMENTATION 63 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Plan Amendment Procedures Any amendments to the Plan must undergo a formal review process and be adopted by the City in the same manner as the original plan.

IMPLEMENTATION 64 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Priority Actions for Plan Implementation

A1. Modify the City’s Site Development Standards racks be installed for new commercial development and and/or Streets and Sidewalks Code to require all new that connections to bike paths/routes be incorporated non‐residential development to provide on‐site bike where possible. racks and connections to bike paths/routes.

Timing: 2009 A2. Modify the City’s Site Development Standards and/or Streets and Sidewalks Code to specify sidewalk Associated Policies: design standards. P1.1 Encourage or require all new non‐residential Timing: 2009 development to provide on‐site bike racks and connections to bike paths/routes. Associated Policies:

Detailed Recommendations: P1.8 Bicycle and pedestrian ways shall be given full consideration in the planning and development The City recently established Site Development of transportation facilities, including the Standards for new development. These standards are to incorporation of such ways into local be used as guidelines by applicants for Planning transportation plans and programs. Commission review, by the City of Greenfield Staff, and by the Planning Commission to achieve compatible and P3.2 Require all new development along major unified site development. The Standards currently do collectors and arterial roadways to install not address bike facilities. Bike facilities should be sidewalks. required/encouraged for all new commercial P3.6 Ensure that sidewalks throughout the City are development based on the design recommendations accessible to everyone and are in compliance outlined in the Bicycle Facilities Chapter of this plan, with ADA Accessibility Guidelines. which include: P3.7 Ensure that all new pedestrian facilities are safe • Bike racks should be located within 50 feet, but and inviting by incorporating appropriate no more than 120 feet, from the entrance amenities such as five‐foot‐wide sidewalks, bicyclist’s use. extensive street‐trees, and, (where • Racks should be as close ‐ if not closer ‐ than appropriate/practical) street lights, benches, and the nearest car parking space to the buildings. garbage receptacles. P3.8 Wherever possible, align curb ramps with the • Whenever possible, racks should be in a direction of the crosswalk, which typically covered area protected from the elements. requires two ramps at each corner. Outdoor parking should be located under P3.10 Install pedestrian crossings, including curb awnings or overhangs. ramps, detectable warning fields, crosswalk • Racks should be located in a clearly visible area pavement markings, and pedestrian signals, at with high pedestrian activity and lighting to appropriate signalized intersections. deter vandalism. P3.11 When installing new pedestrian signals, use LED countdown timer pedestrian signal heads and In addition, the City should update Streets and handicapped accessible push buttons as Sidewalks portion of the City Code to require that bike appropriate.

IMPLEMENTATION 65 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Detailed Recommendations: paths to create safe walking and bicycling New sidewalks should follow the design conditions. recommendations outlined in the Pedestrian Chapter of P3.3 Where feasible, construct sidewalks along this Plan, which include: already development portions of major collector • Meet all ADA guidelines. and arterial roadways to complete a fully connected system of sidewalks within the City. • Sidewalks should be a minimum of five feet wide. P3.4 Evaluate the feasibility of installing sidewalks in areas adjacent to municipal buildings. • Include pedestrian amenities such as extensive street‐trees, street lights, benches, and garbage P3.9 At median divided roadways with designated receptacles. pedestrian crossings, reconstruct median noses and crosswalk pavement markings to allow a • Align curb ramps with the direction of the straight and aligned crosswalk across the entire crosswalk. roadway where feasible. • Include adequate pedestrian amenities at road crossings, including curb ramps, detectable Detailed Recommendations: warning fields, crosswalk pavement markings, A Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is one way to help LED countdown timer pedestrian signal heads, organize, budget, and plan for future capital and handicap accessible push buttons. improvements. The specific timing and budget for bike facility improvements proposed in this plan should be A3. Update Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to evaluated as part of the city’s CIP. This provides for an include recommended bicycle and pedestrian facility opportunity to plan for these improvements in improvements. conjunction with other City infrastructure needs and priorities. Wherever possible, bicycle and pedestrian Timing: 2009 infrastructure improvements should be included as a Associated Policies: component of planned road improvement projects. For P1.2 Establish official bike routes in the City, and example, when a road that has been identified as a potential bike route is repaved the shoulder should be install bike lanes and bike signs where appropriate and feasible. paved and striped at the same time to create a bike lane. P1.4 Pave existing gravel shoulder and/or provide Specific bicycle facility improvement recommendations pavement marking for exclusive bike lanes along potential bike routes identified in this plan. are outlined in the Bicycle Facilities Chapter of this Plan, and include: P1.5 Install LED pedestrian signal heads with countdown timers and bicycle‐friendly vehicle • Paving gravel shoulders detection at key intersections along the potential • Installing bike lane pavement markings bike routes identified in this plan. • Installing LED pedestrian signal heads P1.6 Repair and repave poor quality sections of • Repairing and repaving poor quality sections of pavement along the roadway designated at bike pavement along roads identified as future bike routes within the City of Greenfield. routes in this Plan. P1.7 Actively pursue funding opportunities for Costs for on‐street bike facilities vary widely depending proposed bike facility improvements identified in on specifications, materials, scheduled completions, etc. this plan. Using unit costs and rough lengths and numbers of P2.4 Conduct periodic maintenance of multi‐use recommended facilities, the following values IMPLEMENTATION 66 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan approximate a present value construction and implement the study, design, and construct the engineering cost for each improvement (total for all proposed multi‐use trail along the utility improvements City‐wide as outlined in this plan): corridor. • Paved shoulders and newly constructed bike P2.2 Actively pursue funding opportunities for lanes—$1,250,000 proposed multi‐use trails identified in this plan. • Pavement marking for bike lanes—$250,000 When possible, submit joint funding applications with adjoining communities. • Signal improvements for LED pedestrian heads with countdown timers and bicycle friendly Detailed Recommendations: detection—$290,000 Task force members should include:

• City representatives (e.g. Common Council Specific pedestrian improvement recommendations are members, Plan Commission members, Parks outlined in the Pedestrian Facilities Chapter of this Plan, and Recreation Board members, and/or Parks and include: and Recreation Director) • Constructing sidewalk along already developed • Representatives from adjacent municipalities portions of major collector and arterial • Representatives from Milwaukee County roadways. • WE Energies and American Transmission • Constructing sidewalks in areas adjacent to Company municipal buildings. The Task force should be charged with overseeing a • Reconstructing median noses and crosswalk detailed design study for the trail (see Action 4 below), pavement markings to allow a straight and coordinating with WE Energies and American aligned crosswalk across the entire roadway Transmission Company, applying for grant funding, and where feasible. overseeing trail construction. To construct sidewalks in all recommended areas, about

150,000 feet of sidewalk is required. Present value of A4. Conduct a detailed study of the utility corridor to construction and engineering for this (disregarding assess feasibility and to establish design and multiple mobilizations for many smaller projects) is construction plans. estimated between $4,500,000 and $6,000,000. It’s important to remember that a CIP is not static and Timing: 2009 does not lock the City into allocating funding for a project. Whenever possible, grant funds should be Associated Policies: identified and pursued to implement bike infrastructure P2.1 Work with WE Energies, American Transmission improvements. For specific funding opportunities, see Company, and adjacent municipalities to Appendix D. implement the study, design, and construct the proposed multi‐use trail along the utility corridor. A4. Establish a utility corridor multi‐use trail task force. P2.3 Where feasible, design and construct multi‐use Timing: 2009 paths so that they are 10 to 12 feet wide, with an Associated Policies: additional two feet of smoothly graded area on either side of the pavement. P2.1 Work with WE Energies, American Transmission P2.5 Install wayfinding elements such as route signs Company, and adjacent municipalities to and maps, or roadway connection indicators

IMPLEMENTATION 67 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

along existing and proposed multi‐use paths. P3.5 Actively pursue grant opportunities for funding P2.6 Provide safe and convenient road crossings along new pedestrian facilities, with a particular multi‐use trail corridors, and give right‐of‐way to emphasis on creating safe routes to schools. bicycles and pedestrians at all minor road Detailed Recommendations: crossings as discussed in this Plan. The next Safe Routes to School Grant cycle is in 2010, Detailed Recommendations: however, the city and school districts should begin The trail design should follow the recommendations prioritizing projects and putting together the outlined in the Multi‐Use Trail Chapter of this Plan, application in 2009. including: • Safe and convenient road crossings that give Eligible projects include pedestrian enhancements right‐of‐way to trail users at minor road within two miles of a grade or middle school crossings. (kindergarten through eighth grade). Projects can also include education, encouragement, enforcement, and • A 10‐ to 12‐foot wide path. engineering efforts. • Construction using smooth, hard, all‐weather paving such as concrete or asphalt. Projects are 100 percent fundable to the limit of the project award. Communities are required to complete • Incorporation of way‐finding elements and the project and then request reimbursement from other amenities designed to enhance the user WisDOT. experience. The cost of this project will depend on the specific To construct sidewalk in all recommended school‐ design selected for the multi‐use trail, but assuming a priority areas, about 175,000 feet of sidewalk is 10 foot wide asphalt trail with possible grade required. Present value of construction and separations of Forest Home Avenue and Loomis Road, engineering for this (disregarding multiple mobilizations the path is estimated at $3,626,000. for many smaller projects) is estimated between $5,800,000 and $7,000,000. A5. Pursue Safe Routes to Schools grant funding for sidewalks adjacent to public schools and along other A6. Create and publish an official bike route map for roadways identified as priority school routes in this the city. plan (see Map 4). Timing: 2014

Timing: 2009‐2010 Associated Policies: Associated Policies: P1.3 Create and periodically update an official map of bike routes in the city. P3.1 Work with the Whitnall and Greenfield School Districts, property owners, WisDOT, and Detailed Recommendations adjoining municipalities to install sidewalks along An official bike route map should be created and roads adjacent to public schools and along other published once a significant portion of the city’s bike roadways that provide critical connections to infrastructure improvements are completed. This map residential neighborhoods within the school should be made available in hard copy form at City Hall district. and on the City’s website. Map creation and distribution could be rolled out as part of a broader publicity campaign. For example, the IMPLEMENTATION 68 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan map could be created following the completion of a The map should be periodically updated to ensure that major section of the proposed utility corridor multi‐use it incorporates recent facility improvements. trail. Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities Funding Source Type of Aid Description

Towns, villages, cities, counties, tribal governing bodies, school districts and other incorporated Recreation Trails Program Reimbursed for up to organizations are eligible to receive (RTP) 50% of the total project. reimbursements for development and maintenance of recreational trails and trail‐ related facilities for both motorized and non‐ motorized recreational trail uses.

ADLP helps to buy land or easements and Aids for the Acquisition Up to 50% funding develop or renovate local park and recreation and Development of Local assistance area facilities (e.g. trails, fishing access, and park Parks (ADLP) support facilities). Applicants compete for funds on a regional basis.

UGS helps to buy land or easements in urban or urbanizing areas to preserve the scenic and Urban Green Space Up to 50% funding ecological values of natural open spaces for Grants (UGS) assistance outdoor recreation, including non‐commercial gardening. Applicants compete for funds on a statewide basis.

RTA provided assistance for the development Recreational Trails Act Up to 50% funding and maintenance of recreational trails and trail (RTA) assistance related facilities for both motorized and non‐ motorized trail uses. Applicants compete for funds on a statewide basis. Funds may be used to construct bicycle Up to 100% federally transportation facilities and pedestrian National Highway System funded walkways on land adjacent to any highway on the National System, including Interstate highways. Funds may be used for either the construction of bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways, or nonconstruction projects (such as maps, brochures, and public Surface Transportation 80% funded with a 20% service announcements) related to safe bicycle Program (STP) state or local match use and walking.TES‐21 added "the modification of public sidewalks to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act" as an activity that is specifically eligible for the use of these funds.

IMPLEMENTATION 69 [Draft 4/10/2009] City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Funds may be used for either the construction of bicycle transportation facilities and Congestion Mitigation 80% funded with a 20% pedestrian walkways, or nonconstruction and Air Quality state or local match projects (such as maps, brochures and public Improvement Program service announcements) related to safe bicycle use. (every other year) Funding designated for, among other things, Transit Enhancement Up to 95% federally pedestrian access and walkways, and bicycle Activity Program funded access, including bicycle storage facilities and installing equipment for transporting bicycles on mass transportation vehicles. (every other year)

Funding for bicycle and pedestrian Safe Routes to School 100% federally funded infrastructure, planning and promotional (SRTS) Program projects. Projects must be within two miles of a kindergarten to 8th grade school.

Hazard Elimination Funds projects intended for locations that

Program should have a documented history of previous crashes. The Bikes Belong Grants Program strives to put more people on bicycles more often by funding important and influential projects that leverage federal funding and build momentum for Bikes Belong, Ltd. Up to $10,000 bicycling in communities across the U.S. These projects include bike paths, lanes, and routes, as well as bike parks, mountain bike trails, BMX facilities, and large‐scale bicycle advocacy initiatives. http://www.bikesbelong.org/grants The goal of the State Trails Program is to establish a balanced system of state trails for use by hikers, equestrians, bicyclists, and cross‐ Knowles‐Nelson $2,500 ‐ $20,000 country skiers. Trails that qualify as state trails Stewardship‐The State (Conservation Orgs.) are: near urban areas or near or within scenic, Trails Program historic, or culturally significant areas; likely to receive significant use; and of more than local significance. RTCA staff provides technical assistance to community groups and nonprofit organizations, tribes or tribal governments, and local, State, or River, Trails and federal government agencies so they can Conservation Assistance conserve rivers, preserve open space, and Contact Agency (RTCA) Program‐National develop trails and greenways. The RTCA Park Service program implements the natural resource conservation and outdoor recreation mission of the National Park Service in communities across America.

IMPLEMENTATION 70 APPENDIX A.

City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Focus Group Interviews – Summary

CRISPELL‐SNYDER conducted a series of seven focus group groups with 15 key community, regional, and state individuals as identified by the Plan Commission. The focus groups include: 1) Schools; 2) Local Organizations; 3) Parks; 4) Bicycle Organization; 5) Utilities; 6) Disabled Persons; and 7) County, Regional and State Government Agencies. These interviews were used to solicit additional input on issues and opportunities. Individuals were interviewed as part of these focus groups provided a wealth of useful information. This information is summarized below.

Schools Focus Group The Greenfield School District and the Whitnall School were interviewed and addressed major concerns and opportunities for bicycle and pedestrian oriented transportation. If middle and high school students live more than 2 miles away, they are bused in but are encouraged to bike/walk/skateboard to school. The schools provide bike racks and students can leave their skateboard in the principles office—approximately 50 students bike or skateboard to school as well as many walkers. A Safe Routes to School Program has been discussed in the past and is currently one of the school’s top priorities, which could also reduce busing costs.

There is serious concern about safety at major and nearby intersections, which were specifically identified, since the school district does not a crossing guard program. Other concerns where the poor quality of streets making it difficult to bike on; parents would prefer to have off street paths or sidewalks. Also, the existing trails connect parkway to pathway but this doesn’t really meet the needs of students traveling to school and back. Recommendations were provided for a more connected trail and path system along with more friendly bicycle and pedestrian oriented school facilities, such as charging students for parking permits and plowing sidewalks to the schools.

Parks Focus Group A County DOT and County Park’s representative were interviewed for this focus group. Major intersections and poor streets were identified by the interviewees. Also discussed was the county’s role in trail coordination, cooperation with the utility companies (WE Energies and ATC) for use of their property and major considerations for trail and path extensions. The interviewees were also provided additional contacts for regional and state governmental representatives.

Utilities Focus Group A real estate manager from both WE Energies and American Transmission Company (ATC) were interviewed. These interviews provided detailed information on the process of utilizing these companies’ properties for use as trails of paths. Both companies are more than willing to cooperate and have worked with both the City and many other communities in the past offering their land, or their leased land, to be incorporated into a trail system. Specific recommendations were also given in respect to setbacks from their structures,

APPENDIX A the types of facilities allowed and were and types of materials for trails/paths. It was also pointed out that some of the utility land is only used under easements of individual land holders and it is imperative that the City work with these land owners when appropriate.

Disabled Persons Focus Group The Milwaukee Office of Disabilities and Easter Seals were interviewed for this group. Easter Seals is an organization that provides services, education, outreach and advocacy so that people living with disabilities can live, learn, work and play in their communities. These interviews provided very useful and detailed recommendations for creating a bicycle and pedestrian friendly network for peoples with disabilities, recommendations for path widths, path/trail materials best suited for wheelchairs, key intersections of concerns, user‐friendly facilities and signage—all ADA standards. A minimum of 5 feet wide for mulit‐use paths is recommended, as well as discouraging decorative brick to be used, handicapped accessible water fountain and bathrooms, and large crosswalk medians. A major concern is allowing the trail/path facilities to be accessible in time of bad weather, especially throughout the winter.

Government Agencies Focus Group The County Supervisor and a bike/pedestrian coordinator representative from the City of Milwaukee, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (SEWRPC) and the State DOT were interviewed. Existing county and state plans were reviewed and appropriate aspects were emphasized, such as existing and proposed trails and facilities, policies, and surrounding community’s bicycle and pedestrian plans. Specific improvements were given in order to better accommodate bikes and pedestrians in Greenfield depending on existing land use and conflicts. Many issues and problem areas were identified as well as opportunities to incorporate the City of Greenfield into the larger regional bicycle system connecting to various destinations. Detailed regulations and additional recommendations were provided in order for trails and paths to be user friendly, meet government requirements and other safety concepts. Additional resources were recommended to help guide the bicycle and pedestrian planning process.

APPENDIX A City of Greenfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Focus Group Interviews – Detailed Notes

CRISPELL‐SNYDER conducted a series of seven focus group groups with 15 key community, regional, and state individuals as identified by the Plan Commission. The focus groups include: 1) Schools; 2) Local Organizations; 3) Parks; 4) Bicycle Organization; 5) Utilities; 6) Disabled Persons; and 7) County, Regional and State Government Agencies. These interviews were used to solicit additional input on issues and opportunities. Individuals were interviewed as part of these focus groups provided a wealth of useful information. This information is summarized below.

SCHOOLS FOCUS GROUP The County Supervisor, a Whitnall School PTA member and a Greenfield School District representative were interviewed.

County Supervisor • Middle school and high school bus kids that are more than 2 miles away or across a major thoroughfare • Concerned about major intersections • Encourage kids to bike/walk/skateboard • Provide bike racks and kids can leave their skateboards in the principles office • ~50 kids will ride bike or skateboard, plus a lot of walkers • Biggest concern is safety ‐don’t have a crossing guard program • Streets aren’t the easiest streets to bike on o Pot holes, etc… o Concrete is hard because of seems • Existing trails connect parkway to pathway‐‐This doesn’t really meet the needs of kids getting to school. • Parents would prefer to have off street paths or sidewalk

Whitnall School • No bussing within 2 miles; or major intersections/roadways STH 100 • Children encourage to bike/walk/etc… • Have storage areas for skateboards, etc… • No crossing guard program • Streets are in bad shape • Difficult to ride on • Role on Cold Spring Road • Trails • Dangerous Intersections: o Highway 100 & Edgerton o Nature Pod Path • Safe routes to school‐‐discussed 2 years ago • District plows 116th street in winter • Parking permits for high school kids

APPENDIX A

Greenfield School District • High School‐‐1 mile walking zones; 2 miles would be ideal • MS/ES:walk zones, have hazardous roads, State law dictating • City employs crossing guard’s: Maple Grove, Edgewood, Morgan, 76th St, Layton and Loomis • Sidewalks would be tremendous help • Too many cars; conflicting • Safe routes could reduce busing cost • Traffic a significant issue • 7th grade kids will walk; depends on siblings • High school has issue with o Police directs traffic • Some kids use MCTS • Boulevard bike path needed • District wellness initiative for staff • Physical education program; no bike activities • Bike Rodeo in May • Child hit at 35th & Layton

PARKS FOCUS GROUP A County Parks Board and Trail Council member were interviewed.

County Parks and Trails Member • Parks Director o Trails are her priority o Trails coordinator; insight on who else to meet with o Chair of Trail Councils o County can possibly leveraged • WE Energies Row o WE Energies continually need county’s help o WE Energies VP o Cooperation shouldn’t be a problem • Crossings o Need to improve of busy roads • General o Some trails experience significant use o Conflicts between walkers (Seniors) & bicyclist o Segregated Trails ? o Need greater consideration • CO DPW o Has reduced staff; working diligently

APPENDIX A UTILITIES FOCUS GROUP A real estate manager from WE Energies and American Transmission Company (ATC) were interviewed.

WE Energies Representative • Do a license agreement for any use of their property/right‐of‐way • Plan is recommended to be sent along to them so they can review it for any conflict and the process needed. • Letter of permission are used to check with previous agreements with other neighbors. • They have a legal responsibility to be notified when construction begins and any new findings that occur throughout the process (like if something is hit when digging and it wasn’t expected or causes problems). • Have been doing recreational licensing since the 1960’s and a lot has changed in regards to environmental issues and regulation—these are very important to consider. • Requests to be notified of trail width and material used. • Recommends calling Diggers Hotline before any construction begins—it is the cities responsibility so that issues do not arise in the future.

ATC Representative • Is sending the encroachment request explaining the process for utilizing their property along the transmission lines. • They work with many communities stabling trails and paths along their lines. • David would be willing to provide feedback on the plan, requests that anything specifically along their line be identified on a map along with any of their structures. • Recommends that trails/paths stay 20 feet away from any of ATC structures, if that is not possible due to topography or other valid reason then accommodations can be made. • ATC does not prefer any grade changes be made along their transmission line routes because of certain clearances they need. • Do not approve any lighting along the trails running along the transmission lines. • Will permit both gravel and asphalt as trail material but prefer gravel because their maintenance trucks tend to break up the asphalt, which they are not held accountable/not their fault if that does occur. • Pedestrian or bike shelter are permissible on a case‐by‐case basis but not on center of corridors, must be kept along the edge. o ATC needs to review each facility before implementation. • Will not permit anything that will interfere with their access to the corridor, such as fences‐they will be removed. • Their corridors consist of quite a few easements with individual property owners so they can only approve what is within their easement jurisdictions, otherwise, the individual property owner will need to be contacted and worked with directly.

DISABLED PERSONS FOCUS GROUP A representative from Easter Seals and the transportation coordinator from Milwaukee County Office of Disability were interviewed.

APPENDIX A Easter Seals • Would recommend looking into to Livable Communities organization and their recommendations for bike/ped accessibility for elderly and disabled. o The AARP has backed this organization and highly recommends their policies. • We definitely need to follow the ADA standards in anything we plan for. • One big question that needs to be addressed in how do the facilities function in not so great weather, such as snow. • Bob is willing to help review any material for us, attend meetings or review plans. • Would recommend contacting Independence First o They receive state money to support similar efforts, more of an advocacy group. • Recommends the use of paths that are almost wide enough for golf carts to travel down for the aging population who would rather not drive but has a difficult time walking. • There are the issues of sidewalk café’s and displays inhibiting accessibility for people in wheelchairs and the aging population. • Another issue that should be considered is that of decorative bricks used for sidewalks and cross walks, over time they become settled and uneven causing a hindrance for people in wheelchairs and the aging population. • Recognizes that 76th street will be a very difficult road to make pedestrian friendly without crossing and almost killing oneself.

Milwaukee County Office of Disability • Would recommend nothing less than 5 feet wide for multi use trails o This can accommodate for two persons in wheelchairs to be traveling both ways. • Recommend the rest stations‐benches, drinking fountains, kiosk etc—have a paved path towards and around for that person in wheelchairs do not need to travel over grass or gravel to use the facility. • Roadway crossings should have indication and signage that crossing is present. o Consider end of curb cuts to change surface material, strip across path before and off of the road for the vision impaired. • Should path go into a park, the buildings with facilities should have full accessibility, such as bathrooms and drinking fountain (high and low ones). • The rise and run throughout the City does not seem to be to significant, which is good because it can keep everybody on the same path at all times, no need to create separate paths trails to make it accessible for the disabled (with railings etc.) • If paths cross Layton‐then there’s a major problem with width of road and speed of traffic. o Recommends at minimum, if not 50% more time, for lights to slow traffic down and let people cross roads. • Is willing to review both conceptual plans and very detailed plans.

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES The County Supervisor, City of Milwaukee Bicycle Coordinator, SEWRPC Transportation Planner, and State DOT SE Region Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator were interviewed.

County Supervisor

APPENDIX A • Parks Director has indicated that trails are her #1 priority o Brought on Guy • County Trails Council ‐ Marty Weigal o Meets every couple months • Despite budget cuts, the County is emphasizing trails • Example of recent success o Oak Leaf Trails in Franklin - Group raised $100.000 - They are also local champions in Greenfield Æ County leveraged this money to build this piece of trail • WE Energies Trail o Milwaukee County frequently works with WE Energies on easements… etc Æ County has a very good relationship with WE Energies Æ Thinks it would be fairly easy to get the WE Energies trail initiated • Challenges o When we encounter busy road between & toward and cold spring @151 Æ have received calls about the traffic ƒ Trail now goes underneath Beloit Road • Different types of users & conflicts between these o Speed of bike/wheel traffic o Gets calls from seniors about this ƒ State of Minnesota has the segregated trails, which work well. Perhaps this is something we should look at long term. o Can’t put sign up o Can’t really patrol o Dogs on trail ƒ Permitted on 6 foot leash ƒ Still seems to be a problem with people controlling their dogs • Milwaukee county bikes trails map is often requested and well‐used. • There can’t be enough Æ seems to be strong demand for bike trails • County DPW: Down in staff numbers • Relationship between County & Municipalities could be a lot better • Greenfield has done a great Job with parks. • Bike path & Parks can be people’s local escape Æ economy will keep people closer to home

City of Milwaukee Bike Coordinator • The Existing Bike Plan for the City is currently being updated now o Main infrastructure of Plan relies on on‐street bike routes and lanes o The existing bikeway plan, through GIS, has identified all streets where bike lanes would fit. • The off‐street bikeway study for future open corridor for trials identifies, in relation to Greenfield: o The power line, St. Francis to Freeway for future paved off‐street trail • On‐street bike routes identified by the Plan connecting Milwaukee to Greenfield: o Forest Holmes, on‐street bike route o Potential future on‐street bike routes/facilities:

APPENDIX A ƒ North and south streets such as Morgan and Howard ƒ East and west streets, such as 68th, 76th, 84th, and 92nd • The City looks at for example, 92nd borders with Milwaukee at 48ft wide with 2 travel lanes, cross section for 5, 8, or 11 ft bike/par/travel lane o Some get narrower or wider (76th St) o Stripped 7ft parking lane with lower percentage on‐street parking (due to door incidents) or turn over—DOT will usually go along with this ƒ Will go narrower for bike lane with lower turn over. • Grange Road—looking at trying to make better connection to airport using Grange. o Service road goes towards international terminal which leads to large pedestrian crosswalk which leads to the bike facilities ƒ and Grange is what lead to all this. • Suggest with little detail in Plan: o Use of shared lane pavement marking, bike‐chevron marking o Concept for where we can’t fit a bike lane or for the users who don’t feel comfortable with on‐street lanes: ƒ The bicycle boulevard concept—traffic calmed road with a series of TCD (traffic calming devices) working for a route where vehicles still have access, slower speeds, and less cross streets.

SEWRPC • SEWRPC does have Regional Bike/Ped Plan • Encourages consideration to be given when re‐building a road to add bike/ped facilities o Understand that it can be hard or impossible due to limited right‐or‐way and space for additional facilities. • Recommendations are more for utilitarian purposes not recreational—a mode shift from vehicles to bicycle. • Chapter 9 in the Regional Transportation Plan • If roads are below an Arterial level, speed and traffic can be accommodated for bicycle activity, if a road is arterial or higher, it is much more difficult and less safe but still possible. o Chapter 7 in the Regional Transportation Plan identifies a test if a bike route/lane can be accommodated for if arterial or higher. • Appendix B in the Regional Transportation Plan offers Bike/Ped standards • Bike/Ped Grant Programs and Funding Sources: CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality) provides funding for bike facilities (not pedestrian push buttons, signs etc.); Transportation Enhancements (WisDOT), tend not to fare well compared with other requests; Safe Routes to School funding for how children get to school, more focused and specific criteria based; Bike/Ped Facilities Program (WisDOT). WisDOT website has list of sources, criteria and deadlines.

State DOT • 6‐year DOT program o Highway 36 design – Fairdale to 51st Street. Resurfacing. Opportunities to fill in sidewalks. o 27th Street resurfacing

APPENDIX A • Priorities routes good, but would also like to see general approach where other streets also accommodate bikes and peds. Doesn’t need to just be low volume roads. Wider curb lanes on roads as they’re resurfaced. Communities who do bike/ped plans often focus on priority routes, without looking at all the other streets. • Still good to identify priority routes, because you might implement additional things on these items (e.g. signing). • May want to add language like: “Opportunities when streets are resurfaced . . . Arterials and Highways are resurfaced bike and pedestrian facilities should be considered.” Rather than just priority routes. Could use SWRPC language. • Look at connections to WEE Energies Trails. • SWRPC policy talks about when roads are resurfaced need to accommodate bike accommodations. Signed and marked biked lane, marked bike route, paved shoulders. Getting bike facilities doesn’t have to be that expensive. • DOT will put in bike lines as part of resurfacing project, just need a maintenance agreement. • Sidewalks or shared use paths – if new there’s an 80(state/fed)/20 (local) cost share. As part of road project. Also requires a maintenance agreement. • Need broader input for State resurfacing plan reviews, not just Engineers. Most projects solicit public input. • Greenfield goes between other communities. Intergovernmental issues are important in this area. How can we compliment other community effort (Milwaukee City updating their bike/ped plan). • May want to include info on air quality, etc to prep for grant relating to air quality. • Not aware of Greenfield getting any transportation enhancement funds. Could ask community about this. CMACK (sp?) funds this year (11 counties in southeast Wisconsin – focus on air quality improvement.) Next year is Transportation Enhancement and Bike Facility Improvement Programs. Safe Routes to Schools every year. Applications are pretty straightforward. Good maps are helpful. • Bicycle facility Handbook – on‐line. Working on coming up with a pedestrian guidebook.

APPENDIX A APPENDIX B.

Wisconsin Electric Power Company License Agreement

TEMPLATE

THIS LICENSE, Made and entered into this day of , 2008, by and between Wisconsin Electric Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation, doing business as We Energies, hereinafter referred to as “Licensor”, and ______, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as “Licensee”; (Individually sometimes referred to as “Party”, collectively as “Parties”).

W I T N E S S E T H :

Licensor, for and in consideration of the covenants, conditions, and agreements hereinafter contained, hereby grants license and permission unto Licensee, to develop and use a part of Licensor's right of way lands (hereinafter “Lands”) as a recreation trail (hereinafter “Premises”) and to place thereon a trail for hiking, biking, and cross‐‐ country skiing and other similar non‐motorized recreational uses (hereinafter “Trail”) for use by the general public and for no other purpose or purposes whatsoever (except those purposes as may be determined by Licensor for its own use), which Premises is located ______, being a part of the ______¼ of Section ____, Township ____ North, Range ____ East, ______of ______in ______County, Wisconsin., The general location of said Lands and Premises is shown highlighted on the maps marked Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof.

The License and permission herein granted is subject to the following conditions:

1. Term: The term of this License Agreement (hereinafter “License”) shall be for a period of five (5) years (hereinafter “Initial Term”) and continue thereafter on a year to year basis subject to termination as hereinafter provided. This License shall commence on the above date which is the date the last of the Parties hereto executed this License (hereinafter “Commencement Date”)

2. Termination: Upon expiration of the Initial Term, this License may be terminated at any time by either Party hereto by providing at least 90 days prior written notice to the other Party of such termination. Notwithstanding any of the terms and conditions contained herein, should Licensor require exclusive use of any part of its Lands, including the Premises, for its purposes, then Licensor may, at any time, including during the Initial Term, terminate the License in whole or in part on such part or parts of the Lands or Premises it requires, and Licensee shall, not later than 90 days after receiving notice of such termination, at its sole cost and expense, relocate, remove or re‐route the Trail from such part or parts of the Lands.

3. Non Use: Licensee shall have one (1) full year, beginning at the Commencement Date of this License, to begin construction of the Trail and one (1) full year after the start of construction to complete construction, as permitted herein. If Licensee fails to begin construction of the Trail within one (1) year of the Commencement Date or complete construction of the Trail within one (1) year, this License shall terminate immediately without notice from Licensor.

4. Base Rent: During the Initial Term and extensions thereto, no Base Rent shall be due.

5. Assignment: Licensee shall not assign this License nor permit any transfer by operation of law or otherwise of the interest in the herein‐described Premises acquired through this License unless otherwise approved by Licensor in writing.

APPENDIX B 6. Acceptance of Premises: Licensor offers and Licensee agrees to take the Premises in an “as is” condition and Licensor makes no warranty or representation of any kind as to the condition, quality or suitability of the soil, subsoil or surfacing of the Premises and Lands or anything thereon or therein, unless the same is specifically set forth in this License, for the purposes to which Licensee will utilize the Premises. Licensee has examined the Premises described hereinabove and knows the condition thereof and no representations as to the condition and repair thereof and no agreements to make any alterations, repairs or improvements in or about the licensed Lands and Trail have been made by Licensor. Licensee’s taking possession of the Premises shall be conclusive evidence as against Licensee that the Premises were in good order and satisfactory condition for use as a Trail and other permitted ancillary uses. Licensor shall not be liable for any damages arising from acts or neglect of Licensee or its invitees or users of the Premises, whether authorized to use the Lands and Premises or not.

7. Permitted and Prohibited Uses: The Premises shall be used for the purpose of constructing, installing, operating, maintaining, using, repairing, and removing a recreation trail and permitted appurtenances thereto for hiking, biking, and cross‐country skiing and other similar non‐motorized recreational uses and for no other reason whatsoever. No vehicles, trucks, cars or equipment are to be parked or materials stored on said Lands or Premises at any time without specific written approval of Licensor. Furthermore, the Licensee agrees that no motorized vehicles, including but not limited to cars, trucks, snowmobiles, motor bikes, mini‐bikes, motorcycles, mopeds, go‐carts and all‐terrain vehicles will be used, operated or permitted on the Lands or Premises. However, Licensee shall be permitted to use motorized vehicles for the patrol, maintenance and other permitted uses of the Lands and Premises. The Licensee also agrees that no horses will be used or permitted on the Lands and Premises. Licensee agrees that no kites, model airplanes or similar or dissimilar objects that may come in contact with or in close proximity to the facilities of Licensor or the American Transmission Company LLC (hereinafter “ATC”) and its successors and assigns, will be used, operated or permitted on the Lands and Premises.

8. Signage: Licensee shall not place or maintain or allow to be placed or maintained by any person or persons, any signs or advertising billboards upon the Lands or Premises at any time, except as required or permitted by this Section. Licensee shall install and maintain signs that are necessary to identify Licensee's Trail and occupancy of the Lands and Premises at every road crossing and at least every 2,600 feet along the Trail or more frequently as desired by Licensor. Such identification signs shall include the We Energies approved corporate logo and shall state “In cooperation with We Energies” or such other signs as Licensor may reasonably require. Licensee further agrees to post, maintain at all times, and if necessary, replace signs that expressly state the uses that are permitted and prohibited under Section hereof. In addition, Licensee hereby agrees to post safety and traffic signs along the Trail and at road crossings, railroad crossings, driveways, farm crossings and any other vehicular crossings along the Trail. All signs must be approved by Licensor prior to erection or installation on the Lands or Premises.

9. Zoning and Permits: Licensee hereby agrees that Licensor has made no representations that the Premises are properly zoned for the proposed use by Licensee, and it is expressly understood that Licensee hereby assumes any and all obligations and responsibilities with respect to compliance with all applicable zoning laws and ordin‐ ances of any regulatory bodies which may have jurisdiction. Any change in zoning must be approved by Licensor. This License is conditioned on Licensee's obtaining all necessary permits and authority for the proposed use. All permits required hereunder shall be acquired by Licensee at its sole cost and expense. If permits are required, a copy of the final permits must be provided to the Licensor prior to the commencement of any work on the Lands or Premises by Licensee and upon reasonable time for Licensor to review the permits.

10. Governmental Jurisdiction: Licensee shall, in the use and occupancy of the Premises, comply with all laws, ordinances, rules and regulations of ______, ______County, State of Wisconsin and all other governmental bodies having jurisdiction, over the operation of Licensee’s or Licensor’s business or occupation of the Lands and Premises.

11. Construction and Other Liens: Licensee shall have no authority, express or implied, to create or place any lien or encumbrance of any kind or nature whatsoever upon, or in any manner to bind, the interest of Licensor in the Premises or Lands or to charge the Base Rent payable hereunder, if any, for any claim in favor of any person

APPENDIX B dealing with Licensee, including those who may furnish materials or perform labor for any construction or repairs. Licensee covenants and agrees that it will pay or cause to be paid all sums legally due and payable by it on account of any labor performed, materials, services or supplies furnished in connection with any work performed on the Premises and Lands by or at Licensee's direction on which any lien is or can be validly and legally asserted against its interest in the Premises or the improvements thereon and that it will save and hold Licensor harmless from any and all loss, liability, cost or expense, including costs of suit and reasonable attorney’s fees, based on or arising out of asserted claims or liens against the Leasehold estate or against the right, title and interest of the Licensor in the Premises and Lands or under the terms of this License. Licensee will not permit any construction lien or any other liens which may be imposed by law affecting Licensor's or its mortgagees' interest in the Premises and Lands to be placed upon the Premises or Lands arising out of any action or claimed action by Licensee, and in case of the filing of any such lien Licensee will promptly pay same. Licensee shall provide Licensor with Lien Waivers from all contractors and subcontractors for all work performed and material and services supplied by or on its behalf at the Premises or Lands. If any such lien shall remain in force and effect for ten (10) days after written notice thereof from Licensor to Licensee and Licensee has not posted with Licensor a bond in the amount of at least 125% thereof, Licensor shall have the right and privilege of paying and discharging the same or any portion thereof without inquiry as to the validity thereof, and any amounts so paid, including expenses and interest, shall be so much Additional Rent hereunder due from Licensee to Licensor and shall be paid to Licensor immediately on presentation of a bill therefor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Licensee shall have the right to contest any such lien in good faith and with all due diligence so long as any such contest, or action taken in connection therewith, protects the interest of Licensor and Licensor's mortgagee in the Lands, and Licensor and any such mortgagee are, by the expiration of said ten (10) day period, furnished such protection, and indemnification against any loss, liability, cost or expense related to any such lien and the contest thereof as are satisfactory to Licensor and any such mortgagee. If Licensee has posted a bond with Licensor in the amount of 125% of the liens, such liens can and will be cleared within 180 days of filing. However, Licensor reserves the right at any time prior to the expiration of said 180 day period to make a demand on said bond to clear its title in the event such liens would prevent Licensor’s lawful use or transfer of its property in any way or to prevent any loss of Licensor's fee simple ownership rights. Licensor reserves the right to make demand on any such bond immediately upon expiration of said 180 day period. Licensor agrees to notify Licensee of its intent to secure the release of any such liens from the posted bond. No temporary or permanent construction may occur in wetlands. If any work is proposed within wetlands, the Licensee must obtain the appropriate permits from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (“WDNR”) and the Army Corps of Engineers (“ACOE”). The Licensee must provide a copy of the application and final permits to Licensor prior to working within the wetland and provided Licensor has reasonable time to review said permits.

12. Diggers Hotline: Licensee shall contact Diggers Hotline at (800) 242‐8511 to locate any underground facilities at least five (5) days prior to any work, excavation or construction on the Lands and Premises in order to determine the location of electric, telephone, water, communication and natural gas facilities within the Lands, Premises and surrounding lands in the vicinity of the contemplated work and the applicable clearance requirements for work performed in the proximity of such facilities.

13. Plan Review and Approval: Licensee shall submit to Licensor for its review and written approval, detailed site plans and construction drawings (hereinafter “Plans”) showing the proposed location of the Trail with respect to the Lands, which Plans shall also include proposed grade changes, Trail cross sections, signs and other improvements to the Premises which Licensee desires to construct or install. If Licensee intends to use any fill on Licensor’s Lands, Licensee shall include the type and source of any fill material on the Plans and any fill material used shall be subject to inspection and analysis by Licensor for the presence of Hazardous Material as defined in Section hereinafter. Licensee will not install or construct or permit to be installed or constructed, any improvements upon, or make any alterations or substantive changes to the approved plans for the Premises without first submitting plans and specifications to Licensor and receiving Licensor's approval thereof.

14. Height Restrictions: Licensee hereby agrees that no vehicles or equipment will be used, stored operated or permitted on the Lands or Premises having a height in excess of 12 feet above original ground grade level, unless otherwise approved in writing by Licensor and/or ATC as their respective interests lie.

APPENDIX B

15. Runoff Control: Licensee and its contractors shall follow those best management practices to prevent or control site runoff and erosion in accordance with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (hereinafter “WDNR”) publication “Wisconsin Construction Site Best Management Practice Handbook.” It shall also be the responsibility of the contractor to determine if and when a permit to discharge storm water associated with a construction activity as per Wisconsin NR 216, or subsequent statute, law, ordinance, act, rule or regulation, is required. Following the completion of Licensee’s work, all adjoining areas shall be restored.

16. Drainage and Grade Changes: Licensee shall be permitted, at its sole cost and expense, to grade, level, and apply crushed stone and/or asphalt paving and plant grass on the Trail and Premises as may be permitted by Licensor except that the Licensee shall not in any manner alter or change the original ground grade level of the Premises, or alter in any manner the drainage on the Lands or Premises without obtaining written permission from Licensor. Licensor, at its sole discretion, may require Licensee to install such drainage facilities as Licensor may deem necessary to adequately drain the Lands and Premises, which facilities are made necessary due to or arising out of any filling, grading, leveling, paving or use by the Licensee hereunder. All such drainage facilities (including culverts, storm sewers, ditches, etc.) shall be installed by and at the expense of the Licensee and to the complete satisfaction of Licensor. Any existing culverts that run beneath Licensor’s lands must be maintained or enhanced; they can not be removed, filled or otherwise blocked.

17. Maintenance and Landscaping: Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep the Licensed Lands and Premises routinely mowed and free of weeds to the satisfaction of the local Weed Commissioner and Licensor. Licensor reserves the right to trim and/or cut down any trees and shrubs on the Lands and Premises. Licensee further agrees that it shall maintain the entire Premises as a Trail as described hereinabove, and perform such other landscaping maintenance necessary to maintain an appearance suitable to such use as a Trail for biking, hiking and cross‐country skiing and other similar non‐motorized recreational uses. Licensee shall not plant any trees or shrubs on the Lands or Premises without the express written permission of the Licensor. Licensee agrees to keep the Lands and Premises clean and free from all debris, rubbish, litter and trash. Licensee shall be permitted or upon request of Licensor, to place trash containers at convenient locations on the Premises. Such containers shall be emptied on a regular basis, prior to overflowing or creating a nuisance, by Licensee.

18. Work Standards: During construction, use of and repairs or maintenance to the Lands or Premises pursuant to this License, while in proximity to electrical conductors or gas facilities presently existing or to be installed at some future date, Licensee hereby agrees to conform to all laws, rules, ordinances, acts and regulations such as O.S.H.A. Safety and Health Regulations for Construction dealing with safe work practices and the operation of equipment near electrical lines and equipment and the provisions and requirements of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, Rules of the Department of Commerce and any amendments thereto. Licensee shall, at all times, comply with the provisions of the Wisconsin State Electric Code, compiled by the Department of Commerce and the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, and all amendments thereto. Any work done by Licensee on the Lands or Premises shall be performed in such a manner as not to interfere with the use of Licensor’s Lands for electric lines, gas lines, communication lines and related or unrelated facilities, both overhead and underground, which presently exist or might be installed at a later date.

19. Damage to Facilities: Licensee hereby agrees to effectively prevent damage to electrical facilities, communication facilities or related facilities due to or arising out of the construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repairs, removals and use of the Lands and Premises by Licensee, its employees, agents, contractors, customers or invitees. In the event the Lands, Premises or adjoining lands or existing electrical and communication facilities or related or unrelated facilities thereon are damaged as a result of activities conducted on or in any way connected with Licensee’s construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repairs, removals or use of the Lands or Premises by Licensee, its employees, agents, contractors, customers or invitees, repairs shall be completed by or at the direction of Licensor and paid for by Licensee upon presentation of a bill therefor.

APPENDIX B 20. Movement of Licensor Facilities: In the event it is necessary for Licensor, ATC or existing tenants, permittees or licensees to reconstruct, protect, modify, adjust, replace or relocate its facilities due to the aforementioned use of Licensor’s Lands and/or the construction, operation, maintenance or existence of Licensee’s facilities, Licensee agrees to promptly reimburse Licensor, ATC or such affected tenants, permittees or licensees upon presentation of a bill for the costs and expenses incurred by Licensor as a result thereof but Licensee shall be given the option of moving or relocating its material and equipment to reduce or eliminate costs associated herewith.

21. Proximity to Gas Lines/Facilities: During construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repairs, removals and use of the Lands and Premises pursuant to this License, while in proximity to gas lines and gas facilities presently existing or to be installed at some future date, Licensee hereby agrees to exercise due caution, comply with all applicable safety laws and regulations and take or suffer no action which results in the gas lines or gas facilities being placed in violation of any applicable law or regulation. In the event the Lands, Premises, adjoining lands or existing gas facilities or related facilities thereon are damaged as a result of activities conducted on or in any way connected with Licensee's construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repairs, removals or use of the Lands or Premises by Licensee, its employees, agents, contractors, customers or invitees, repairs shall be completed by or at the direction of Licensor and paid for by Licensee upon presentation of a bill therefor.

22. Solid Waste: Licensee shall not cause or permit any solid wastes to accumulate or be stored in or about the Lands or Premises. All solid wastes shall be properly stored, handled and routinely disposed of off the Lands and Premises in a manner that complies with applicable federal, state and local laws, codes and/or regulations. Licensee shall not store, handle or dispose of solid wastes in a manner that will pollute or contaminate the atmosphere, ground or water or which may adversely affect the health, welfare or safety of persons whether located on the Lands, Premises or elsewhere.

23. Hazardous Materials: Licensee its agents, employees, contractors, and invitees shall not cause or permit any Hazardous Material to be brought upon, kept, or used in or about the Lands or Premises or Licensor’s adjoining lands .The use and/or storage of Hazardous Material by or for any assignee is prohibited. Licensee shall not discharge, leak, or emit, or permit to be discharged, leaked, or emitted, any material into the atmosphere, ground, storm water or sanitary sewer system, or any body of water, if such material (as determined by the Licensor or any governmental authority) does or may pollute or contaminate the same, or may adversely affect (a) the health, welfare, or safety of persons, whether located on the Lands, Premises or elsewhere; or (b) the condition, use, or enjoyment of any other real or personal property.

As used herein, the term "Hazardous Material" means:

a. Any "hazardous waste" as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended from time to time, and regulations promulgated thereunder;

b. Any "hazardous substance" as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as amended from time to time, and regulations promulgated thereunder;

c. Any oil, petroleum products, and their byproducts; and

d. Any substance which is or becomes regulated by any federal, state, or local governmental authority.

Licensee agrees that it shall be fully liable for all costs and expenses related to the use, storage, and disposal of Hazardous Material kept on the Premises or Lands by the Licensee and the Licensee shall give immediate notice to the Licensor of any violation or potential violation of the provisions of this Section . Licensee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless Licensor and its agents from and against any claims, demands, penalties, fines,

APPENDIX B liabilities, settlements, damages, costs, or expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys' and consultant fees, court costs, and litigation expenses) of whatever kind or nature, known or unknown, contingent or otherwise, arising out of or in any way related to:

aa. The presence, disposal, release, or threatened release of any such Hazardous Material which is on, from, or affects soil, water, vegetation, buildings, personal property, persons, animals, or otherwise;

bb. Any personal injury (including wrongful death) or property damage (real or personal) arising out of or related to such Hazardous Material;

cc. Any lawsuit brought or threatened, settlement reached, or government order relating to such Hazardous Material; or

dd. Any violation of any laws applicable thereto. The provisions of this Section shall be in addition to any other obligations and liabilities Licensee may have to Licensor at law or equity and shall survive the transactions contemplated herein and shall survive the termination of this License.

Provided Licensee is not in violation of any federal, state or local laws, rules, ordinances or orders existing at the signing hereof or at some future date pertaining to vehicular discharge, leak, release or emission of any antifreeze, oil, petroleum products and their byproducts from Licensee's vehicles or those of its employees, contractors, visitors and invitees affecting the Premises and Lands and provided any such discharge, release or emission is in the typically small amounts associated with parking lot and driveway usage, Licensee shall not be considered to be in violation of this Section. Any larger discharge, leak, release or emission of antifreeze, oil, petroleum products and their byproducts resulting in pooling or runoff of the products must be quickly and thoroughly cleaned up by Licensee and properly disposed of off Licensor’s lands or Licensee will be considered in violation of this Section.

Licensee shall not be considered in violation of this Section due to the presence of fuel in the fuel tanks of its vehicles or the vehicles of its employees, agents, contractors and invitees.

Nothing contained herein shall be construed to preclude Licensee from using Hazardous Materials in the routine maintenance of the Lands or Premises without the prior consent of Licensor so long as such materials are readily available to the general public or are applied by a contractor licensed for such application and are used in compliance with federal, state or local laws and regulations for its intended purpose and is applied in the manner and quantities recommended by the product manufacturer and the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.

24. Job Inspector Notification: Licensee agrees to contact Rollie Simatic 414‐944‐5955 or such other person or phone number as Licensor may from time to time designate, within the specified time limits to inform him about the following occurrences:

a) At least seven (7) days prior to the commencement of the project herein permitted.

b) Within seven (7) calendar days after the termination of the License herein permitted with a plan for restoration.

c) Within seven (7) calendar days after the restoration has been completed.

d) Within seven (7) calendar days after a lapse of six (6) months since Licensee accepted this License if the project herein permitted has not been undertaken by such date; within seven (7) calendar days after each six (6) month interval thereafter until the project herein permitted is undertaken.

APPENDIX B It is not Licensor’s intent to serve as or in lieu of a building inspector, but to serve and protect Licensor’s interest in the Lands and Premises and other improvements and its communication, electrical, gas and other facilities. In the event Licensor’s inspector(s) reasonably determines that communication, electric, gas or other facilities of Licensor are in danger of being damaged or certain construction activity poses a threat to human life, Licensee hereby agrees that Licensor’s inspector(s) is empowered to immediately shut down and stop all threatening activity and the work shall not restart until Licensor’s inspector is satisfied that the dangerous situation has been resolved to his or her satisfaction. The cost of Licensor’s reasonable supervision shall be itemized and billed separately to Licensee and Licensee agrees to promptly reimburse Licensor for its reasonable cost.

25. Indemnification/Insurance: Licensee hereby agrees to indemnify, save and hold harmless Licensor, its affiliated corporations and their respective directors, officers and employees against any and all loss, cost, liability, damage and expense, including attorney's fees incurred by Licensor on account of any injury to or death of any person or persons whomsoever or on account of damage to property sustained by any person or persons whomsoever caused by, connected with or arising directly or indirectly, wholly or in part, from any use, permitted or not, or operation of the Lands and Premises resulting in any manner from the privileges herein given and whether authorized for such use or not, or the failure of Licensee to observe the covenants of this License; excepting, however, any claims or actions arising out of the sole negligence or willful acts of Licensor. INSURANCE WILL BE REQUESTED ( I WILL FORWARD THIS TO YOU SHORTLY)

26. Safety and Protection: The Licensee hereby agrees, at its sole cost and expense, to erect and maintain any barricades, guard rails, fencing, and/or safety devices for protection as they relate to the protection of the Licensor's and ATC’s electric facilities, gas facilities and related construction and operational procedures. The Licensee agrees to maintain the same in good condition, repair and appearance at all times. Licensee will submit to Licensor any and all plans and specifications for the installation of barricades, guard rails, fencing and/or safety devices or protection which may be installed on the Lands and Premises and such installations shall not be made without the consent and prior written approval of Licensor. No fencing, barricades or other improvements shall be installed or erected for any purpose which will obstruct, interfere with or impede the free access of Licensor or ATC to the Lands, Premises or facilities.

27. Galvanic/Stray Current: Licensee agrees to release Licensor from any responsibility for damage or personal injury resulting from electromagnetic fields electrolysis due to local galvanic or stray current conditions on or along said Lands. Further, Licensee agrees to assume all costs for electrolysis protection.

28. Removal of Improvements: Licensee hereby agrees, upon the expiration or early termination of this License by forfeiture, lapse of time or otherwise, if so requested in writing by Licensor, to remove promptly, at its sole cost and expense, all or part of its improvements including Trail surfaces and drainage structures from the Lands or Premises. In the event Licensee cannot or is unable or unwilling to remove said improvements and related facilities as directed by Licensor, Licensee hereby authorizes Licensor to do so, and Licensee hereby agrees to reimburse Licensor for any and all expenses incurred in connection therewith, including restoration as hereinafter required, upon presentation of a bill therefor, and Licensee hereby agrees to indemnify and save harmless Licensor from all liability of any kind whatsoever that Licensor may have incurred by such removal.

29. Restoration: Licensee agrees to restore or cause to restore the Lands and Premises of Licensor to the condition existing prior to any disturbance to such Lands and Premises. Licensee further agrees that upon the earlier termination or expiration of this License by either Party, the Lands, including the Premises shall be restored to the condition existing prior to any disturbance or improvement from the aforementioned use of Lands and Premises. Included, but not limited to, in such restoration, after construction and subsequent to termination of this License, shall be the spreading of topsoil and sowing perennial type grass seed on any disturbed areas, replacement of crushed stone and/or paved surfacing, replanting of shrubs and other ground cover and repair of fences and gates or other damages incurred due to or arising out of the permission herein given.

APPENDIX B

30. Snow Plowing: Licensee shall be permitted to plow, but not pile, the snow on the Premises in the event it desires to do so.

31. Taxes: During the License Term, Licensee shall be responsible for all taxes on the Licensed Space, such taxes being defined as any and all federal, state and local governmental, quasi‐governmental or public authority taxes, assessments and charges of any kind or nature, whether general, special, ordinary or extraordinary (but not including income or franchise taxes or any other taxes imposed upon or measured by Licensor's income or profits, except as provided below), or payments to governmental authorities in lieu thereof, whether or not in contemplation of the parties to this License, which Licensor shall pay or become obligated to pay because of or in connection with the ownership, renting, or operation of the Licensed Space (including but not limited to charges for the installation, maintenance, repair and replacement of sewer/water, curb, gutter and roadway) and of the personal property, fixtures, machinery, equipment, systems and apparatus located thereon or used in connection therewith. Taxes shall include, without limitation, all real and personal property taxes (attributable to the year in which paid), sales taxes, assessments (special or otherwise), fire inspections, transit taxes and ad valorem taxes but shall not include penalties or late fees thereon unless the penalty and/or late fees are directly attributable to Licensee. Taxes shall also include all fees, costs and expenses (including, legal fees and court costs) paid by Licensor in connection with protesting or contesting or seeking a refund or reduction of and/or negotiating with public authorities with respect to any of the aforesaid taxes, regardless of whether Licensor is ultimately successful. If at any time during the term hereof, a tax or excise on rents or other tax however described, other than an income tax, is levied or assessed by the United States or the State of Wisconsin, or any political subdivision thereof, on account of the rents hereunder or the interest of Licensor under this License, such tax shall constitute and be included in taxes. Any taxes paid by Licensor hereunder shall be reimbursable to Licensor by Licensee as Additional Rent

32. Breach of License: In the event Licensee shall breach or violate any of the terms, conditions or provisions of this License, or if any governmental agency having jurisdiction shall serve any demand, order or notice, including violations relating to zoning or municipal ordinances, upon Licensor or Licensee, the Licensee shall, at its sole cost and expense, correct said breach or violation and comply with said demand, order or notice within 30 days of its receipt of such written notice or as stated within said demand, order or notice. In the further event that Licensee does not correct said breach or violation or comply with said demand, order or notice within the required time period, it shall be lawful for Licensor, without liability to Licensee, without notice or demand, to declare said License terminated and to re‐enter the Premises either with or without process of law and to expel, remove and put out Licensee or any person or persons occupying the Premises, using such force as may be necessary so to do and to repossess and enjoy the Lands and Premises again as before this grant of License without prejudice to any remedies which might otherwise be used for the preceding breach of covenants; Licensee hereby expressly waiving all right to any notice or demand under any statute relating to forcible entry and detainer. The decision of Licensor shall be final and binding upon Licensee concerning any breach or default in the covenants and agreements contained in this License. Licensee shall be liable to Licensor for any and all costs incurred, including reasonable attorneys' fees owing to or arising out of any action taken pursuant to this provision in which Licensor prevails.

33. Licensor Right to Enter: The Licensor reserves unto itself and ATC and for their employees, agents and contractors the right, at any time, to enter upon the Lands and Premises by any means necessary i) for performing studies, gathering of air, water, soil and other material samples, ii) for inspection of the Premises in order verify Licensee’s compliance with the Lease terms, iii) for access to Licensor’s Lands including the Premises, iv) to inspect, patrol, construct, install, operate, maintain, replace and repair electric lines, gas lines, communication equipment and related and unrelated facilities and equipment, both overhead and underground, upon, over, across, in and beneath the Premises and the Lands without liability to Licensee, the same as though this License had not been entered into. Licensor or ATC through Licensor may, without liability to Licensee, require Licensee to immediately vacate all or part of the Premises upon notice to do so in the event Licensor deems it necessary to make emergency repairs to its facilities. In the event it becomes necessary for Licensor or ATC to install or erect additional electric lines, natural gas lines, communication lines and/or related

APPENDIX B facilities at some future date, Licensee hereby agrees to vacate as much of the Premises as Licensor and/or ATC deems necessary and for such periods of times as may be necessary to install, modify, reconstruct or erect such facilities upon receipt of notice from Licensor to do so. Licensor and/or ATC shall perform and complete all work under this Section as quickly as is reasonable possible to minimize the inconvenience to Licensee.

Licensee further agrees that it shall immediately vacate the Premises and close down the Trail upon notification by Licensor that weather conditions exist or may develop which could cause dangerous conditions such as icing on trees and wires.

34. Paramount Rights: The rights of the Licensor and ATC to utilize the Lands and Premises in their utility business will at all times be and remain paramount to the rights herein granted to Licensee and nothing stated herein is to be construed as restricting Licensor from granting rights to other Parties or persons in, upon or under the Lands and/or Premises for but not limited to driveways, streets, sidewalks, sewers, water pipes and mains, drainage tiles and pipes, gas mains and pipelines, communication circuits and other allied uses. It is understood and agreed that this License is subject to all existing easements, grants and licenses.

35. Fees and Charges: As a condition of the agreement, Licensee shall not charge at any time fee for the use of the Trail except that Licensee may be permitted to charge a fee for group activities or special events upon written consent of Licensor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.

36. Alcoholic Beverages Prohibited: Licensee covenants and agrees that alcoholic liquors or beverages are not permitted on the Lands and Premises.

37. Police Protection: Licensee shall be permitted to provide or arrange for the provision of all law enforcement and shall be permitted to reasonably require such law enforcement personnel to patrol the Premises as it deems reasonable under this License.

38. Notices: All notices to Licensor shall be sent by a reputable overnight delivery service, registered or certified mail, addressed to Wisconsin Electric Power Company, Property Management, Room A252, 231 West Michigan Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201, or at such other address or place as Licensor may from time to time designate in writing. Personal delivery with a signature acknowledgement of receipt by Licensor is always an acceptable means of delivery.

All notices to Licensee shall be sent by a reputable overnight delivery service, registered or certified mail addressed to______or at such other place as Licensee may from time to time designate in writing. Personal delivery with a signature acknowledgement of receipt by Licensee is always an acceptable means of delivery.

39. Waiver of Terms and Conditions: Failure of Licensor or Licensee to enforce or insist upon compliance with any of the terms or conditions of this License shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment of any such terms or conditions, but the same shall be and remain at all times in full force and effect.

40. Costs and Attorney Fees: Licensee shall pay and discharge all reasonable costs, expenses and attorney fees that may be incurred or paid by Licensor in enforcing the covenants and agreements of this License where litigation is not commenced. In the event litigation is commenced by Licensor or Licensee to enforce any provision of this License, the prevailing Party (as determined by a judgment in favor of one Party or the other) shall be entitled to recover from the other, as additional costs, its reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred in connection with such action.

41. No Joint Venture: The agreements contained herein are not intended, nor shall the same be deemed or construed, to create a partnership between Licensor and Licensee, to make them joint ventures, nor to make Licensor in any way responsible for the debts or losses of Licensee.

APPENDIX B 42. Obligations Survive: All obligations of Licensee hereunder not fully performed as of the expiration or earlier termination of the term of this License shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of the term hereof, including without limitation, all payment obligations with respect to taxes and all obligations concerning the condition of the Lands.

43. Binding Effect: The covenants and agreements herein contained shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, except as otherwise provided in Section hereof.

44. Captions: The captions in this License are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference and in no way define, limit, construe or describe the scope or intent of such sections or paragraphs of this License nor in any way affect this License.

45. Severability of Provisions: If any term, covenant or condition of the License or the application thereof to any person or Party or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable at any time, the remainder of the License, or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons, Parties, or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and each term, covenant or condition of this License shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law.

46. Interpretation: The laws of the State of Wisconsin shall govern the validity, performance and enforcement of this License. Whenever the singular number is used, the same shall include the plural, and the masculine gender shall include the feminine and neuter genders.

47. Acceptance: Licensee hereby accepts this License upon the terms, conditions, restrictions hereinbefore set forth, and do covenant to keep and perform each and every one of said terms conditions and restrictions.

APPENDIX B The covenants herein contained shall bind the Parties mutually and their respective successors and assigns.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY has caused these presents to be signed by James T. Raabe, its Manager of Property Management on the day of , 2008, and the said , has caused these presents to be signed by its and its and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed this day of , 2008.

In Presence Of: WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY (Licensor)

By James T. Raabe, Manager of Property Management

(FILL IN NAME OF LICENSEE HERE) (Licensee)

By: Name: ______Title: ______

ATTEST:

By

R:\Data\as\Real Estate\Recreation Trails\Recreation Trails\MASTER REC TRAIL LICENSE TEMPLATE 2008.doc

This document was drafted by Julie Simmons on behalf of We Energies, P. O. Box 2046, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201.

APPENDIX B Request To Use American Transmission Company Property or Easement Area

This letter responds to your recent inquiry regarding use of a portion of ATC lands or easement area. To help us evaluate your request, we ask you to please:

1) Complete the attached form. If you require additional space, please continue on the reverse side of the form.

2) Include a map, survey, plat and/or sketch which identifies the ATC property or easement area and the exact location of the proposed use.

Please mail or fax these items to:

David Hollenberger American Transmission Company PO Box 47 Waukesha, WI 53187‐0047 Phone: 262‐506‐6775 Fax: 262‐506‐6939

We will review your written request and associated materials and proceed with the necessary internal reviews. Please expect a response about 20 working days after we receive your request.

When the necessary internal reviews are complete, we will provide you our response. If the proposed use is approved, we will send the appropriate document along with an explanation of what will happen prior to the permission taking effect.

APPENDIX B ATC ENCROACHMENT REQUEST FORM To expedite the processing of your request to use American Transmission Company LLC (ATC) property or easement area, please provide the following information:

REQUESTOR INFORMATION

NAME:

AGENCY:

ADDRESS: street city state zip code TELEPHONE NO. (work) (home) FAX NO.

PROPERTY INFORMATION

LOCATION: PROPERTY ADDRESS AND/OR NEAREST CROSS STREET(S)

MUNICIPALITY: ______COUNTY: ______STATE: ______

______1/4, SECTION ______, TOWNSHIP ______NORTH, RANGE ______EAST/WEST

ATC IS USING PROPERTY FOR: Overhead Electric Line Underground Substation

ATC FACILITIES LOCATED ON PROPERTY: (Please include structure/pole identification number and photographs of site, including ATC structures, if available)

PROPOSED/REQUESTED USE OF PROPERTY

(Please provide pertinent easement recording information, if available)

REQUESTED USE:

(please be very specific...type of use; size of area needed; if installation, size of installation; if underground, depth; attach map or survey showing area needed)

PROPOSED START DATE OF USE:

PROPOSED END DATE OF USE (TERM):

COMMENTS:

APPENDIX B SIGNATURE: DATE:

2 copies of the completed form, map(s) and other information should be mailed or faxed to:

American Transmission Company ATTN: David Hollenberger PO Box 47 Waukesha, WI 53187‐0047 FAX: 262/506‐6939

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C.

State and School District Bus Policies

Wisconsin State Unusually Hazardous Transportation

According to Wisconsin law, a pupil attending a public elementary or secondary school, including kindergarten, is entitled to transportation by the public school district in which the pupil resides if the pupil resides two or more miles from the nearest public school the pupil is entitled to attend. A pupil who attends a private school and meets certain other eligibility requirements is also entitled to transportation if the private school is located two or more miles from the pupil's residence. Generally, pupils who live within two miles of the public or private school they attend are not automatically entitled to transportation under state law. However, due to unusually hazardous conditions in certain areas, a school district may deem it necessary to provide transportation to some children residing less than two miles from their school. An "unusual hazard" is an existing transportation condition that constitutes more than an ordinary hazard and seriously jeopardizes the safety of pupils traveling to and from school. It is understood that all traffic situations through which pupils must travel present some degree of hazard, which is often dependent on the age of the pupils involved. When such hazards reach a level of danger which is unacceptable to the community in which they exist and which cannot be corrected by other local units of government, a school board may develop a plan to designate such an area as unusually hazardous. S. 121.54 (9)(a), Wis. Stats., establishes the procedures to be followed in the development of an unusually hazardous transportation (UHT) plan. Sections 121.54(9)(am) and (b), Wis. Stats., specify the procedures to be followed by an individual who is aggrieved by a school board's UHT plan or the lack of a plan.

UNUSUALLY HAZARDOUS TRANSPORTATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT Development of an unusually hazardous transportation plan requires a school district to include a map and explanation of the area to be designated. In addition, a district shall also propose a plan of transportation, which provides proper safeguards for pupils residing in that area, if necessary. Upon approval of the plan, the district shall file it with the sheriff of the county in which the main office of the district is located. The local county sheriff is required to review the district's plan (and may suggest revisions), investigate the designated area and make a determination as to whether unusual hazards exist which cannot be corrected by local government. Upon completion of this review, the sheriff shall report the findings in writing to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction and the school board concerned. State law requires that within 60, but not less than 30, days from the day on which the State Superintendent receives the plan, the State Superintendent is required to review the plan to determine whether unusual hazards to pupil travel exist and whether it provides proper safeguards for such pupils. If the State Superintendent approves the district's plan, the district shall put the plan into effect and be eligible for state aid for any transportation of pupils (up to $15 per pupil per year) in the affected area.

SUGGESTED CRITERIA TO USE IN IDENTIFYING UNUSALLY HAZARDOUS TRANSPORTATION AREAS The law does not dictate the specific conditions that constitute an unusual hazard. Rather, the above procedure requires the original consideration and development of UHT plans to be conducted by the local government because each community and school district has unique characteristics that contribute to unusual transportation hazards. Since characteristics vary widely

APPENDIX C

from one district to another, local officials are typically in the best position to determine what constitutes an unusual hazard in their own community. Some, or all, of the following suggested criteria/conditions may be used to assist local governments in determining whether an unusual hazard exists. Age of pupils Lack of sidewalks Lack of crossing guards Lack of local law enforcement Railroad crossings Width of shoulder of road/highway Traffic counts Temporary hazards such as construction projects or street repairs Other conditions identified by local units of government

UNUSALLY HAZARDOUS TRANSPORTATION APPEAL PROCESS Section 121.54(9)(am), Wis. Stats., provides that any local citizen aggrieved by the failure of a school district to file an unusually hazardous transportation plan may notify the district in writing that they believe an area of unusual hazard exists within the district. A school district is required to reply in writing within 30 days of receipt of such notice and send a copy of its response to the county sheriff and to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Typically, school districts receiving such complaints request the sheriff to review and investigate the area in question and report back to the district on his or her determination as to whether or not the area is unusually hazardous. The sheriff's response is also usually sent to the aggrieved individual. Upon receipt of the school board's response, the aggrieved individual may request a hearing before the State Superintendent to review the area in question to determine whether an area of unusual hazard exists. If the State Superintendent determines such an area exists, he or she has the authority to require a school district to transport pupils to and from school immediately, in addition to requiring the district to proceed as indicated in the development and revision of an unusually hazardous transportation plan, as indicated above. Section 121.54(9)(b), Wis. Stats., permits an individual who is aggrieved by any aspect of a school district's UHT plan, or by the determination of the sheriff as to whether unusual hazards exist, may request a hearing before the State Superintendent. The request for a hearing must be made within 30 days after the sheriff's report is received by the State Superintendent. For more information, contact Merry Larsen, Consultant, School Management Services Team, Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, P.O. Box 7841, Madison, WI 53707‐7841, (608) 266‐ 2146.

For questions about this information, contact Merry M. Larsen (608) 266‐2146 Last updated on 2/26/2008 2:37:33 PM

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Elizabeth Burmaster Department of Public Instruction, 125 S. Webster Street, P.O. Box 7841, Madison, WI 53707‐7841 (800) 441‐4563 Contact Us About Us Copyright Privacy Non Discrimination Accessibility DPI Home

APPENDIX C

Unusual Hazards Greenfield School District City of Greenfield Police Department

Greenfield Middle School 3200 W Barnard Avenue

This school is surrounded by 3 busy streets, all without sidewalks for pedestrian traffic. South 35th Street is a posted 25 mph 2 lane roadway with a narrow gravel shoulder and no sidewalks. West Layton Avenue (CTH Y) is a posted 35 mph 4 lane highway with a gravel shoulder and no sidewalks. West Edgerton Avenue is a posted 25 mph 2 lane roadway with a narrow shoulder and no sidewalks. I recommended this school area be established as an unusual hazard under Wisconsin Statute 121.54(9).

Elm Dale Elementary School 5300 South Honey Creek Drive

The 3 major roadways surrounding this school area all without sidewalks for pedestrian traffic. South Honey Creek Drive is a posted 25 mph 2 lane curbed roadway with no sidewalks. West Edgerton Avenue is a posted 25 mph 2 lane roadway with a narrow gravel shoulder and no sidewalks. West Grange Avenue is a posted 25 mph 4 lane curbed roadway with no sidewalks. I recommended this school area be established as an unusual hazard under Wisconsin Statute 121.54(9)

Glenwood Elementary School 3500 South 51st Street

This school is positioned along with 2 busy roadways, both without sidewalks for pedestrian traffic. South 51st Street is a posted 25 mph 2 lane roadway with steep ditches, a narrow gravel shoulder, and with no sidewalks. West Morgan Avenue is a posted 25 mph 2 lane roadway with no sidewalks. In addition, West Forest Home Ave (STH 24), a 6 lane wide highway with a posted limit of 35mph is located one block north of the school. I recommend this school area be established as an unusual hazard under Wisconsin Statute 121.54(9)

Edgewood Elementary School 4711 South 47th Street

This school is located on West Layton Avenue (CTH Y) a 6 lane wide heavily traveled highway with a speed zone of 35 mph. The intersection of South 47th Street and West Layton Avenue is a stop light controlled intersection with a cross walk and sidewalks. The sidewalks on the West Layton Avenue end at West Loomis Road (STH 36), a posted 40 mph 6 lane wide heavily traveled highway. West Loomis Road does not have a completed sidewalk for pedestrian traffic. South 51st Street is also a nearby 25 mph 2 lane road with gravel shoulder and no sidewalk. I recommend this school area be established as an unusual hazard under Wisconsin Statute 121.54(9).

Greenfield High School 4800 S 60th Street

APPENDIX C

This school is at the intersection of two heavily traveled streets with sidewalks. West Layton Avenue (CTH Y) is a posted 35 mph 6 lane wide heavily traveled highway. South 60th Street is a posted 30 mph heavily traveled roadway whish is 4 lanes wide south of West Layton Avenue, and 6 lanes wide north of West Layton Avenue. On ramps and off ramps for interstate 894 are located on South 60th Street, approximately ¼ mile north of West Layton Avenue. Also nearby is West Loomis Road (STH 36), which is posted 40 mph 6 lane heavily traveled highway. West Loomis Road does not have a completed sidewalk for pedestrian traffic. West Coldspring Road is a posted 25 mph 4 lane wide curbed roadway without a sidewalk system between South 68th Street east to the city limits. I recommend this school area be established as an unusual under Wisconsin Statute 121.54(9)

St. John the Evangelist Catholic School 3500 West Coldspring Road

There are two busy roadways adjacent to this school. West Coldspring Road is a 25 mph 4 lane wide curbed roadway with no sidewalk from South 84th Street west to the city limits. South 84th Street is a posted 30 mph 4 lane wide roadway with sidewalks. Interstate 894 westbound on ramp and east bound off ramp are approximately ¼ mile south of the school on South 84th Street, Also nearby area South 92nd Street, a posted 30 mph 2 lane roadway with gravel shoulder and no sidewalks, as well as South 76th Street (CTH U), a posted 35 mph heavily traveled 6 lane wide highway with sidewalks. I recommend this school area be established as an unusual hazard under Wisconsin Statute 121.54(9).

Summary All of the above schools were checked upon the school districts request. In conjunction with a lack of sidewalks for safe pedestrian travel, many heavily traveled state and county highways, as well as Interstate 894, pass through the district. These busy highways also create dangerous crossing conditions for pedestrians.

APPENDIX C

August, 2008

Dear Parent/Guardian:

Rising student transportation costs have resulted in the School District of Greenfield taking steps to maximize busing efficiencies. Beginning with the 2008 – 09 school year, many students will be returning to their “home” or neighborhood schools and mid‐block and home stops will rarely be used. These efforts will eliminate nine bus routes, generating about $20,000 in savings. In addition, parents will continue to be surveyed to determine their children’s transportation needs, which will help determine the appropriate amount of busing needed for students and their families.

A summary of key aspects of the policies and procedures is provided below:

• Pick‐up and drop‐off stops for regular riders are established on designated corner stops. Stops in front of a rider’s home will not be established, unless deemed necessary by the District. Parents/Guardians are responsible for their children up to the time they board the bus and again upon departure.

• Students may be required to walk the following distances to school or a bus stop:

4K – Grade 5 0.3 miles Middle School 0.4 miles High School 0.5 miles

• Bus stops are generally placed at intersections to minimize the disruption of traffic and enhance student safety. Bus service is provided solely for transporting eligible School District of Greenfield students to and from school. Unless stated in an Individualized Education Plan, the District will not transport a student to work or other non‐school activity.

• Five‐Year‐Old Kindergarten (5K) students will be picked up and dropped off with other elementary students at a designated stop. Morning Four‐Year‐Old Kindergarten (4K) students will be picked up with other elementary students in the morning and dropped off mid‐day at a designated stop. Afternoon 4K students will be picked up at a designated stop and dropped off with other elementary students in the afternoon. An adult must assume responsibility for the child at the stop when dropped off and picked up by the bus.

Bus stop information will be provided in August. If you have any questions, please contact the building principal or secretary.

Sincerely,

Kristin Kollath Director of Business Services

APPENDIX C

Whitnall School District Bus Policy and Transportation Area of Unusual Hazards

751R STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES: PROCEDURES Bus stops are established in a manner that provides the most efficient service. Stops are designated to serve the maximum number of riders with the minimum number of stops. Bus stops are generally placed at intersections to minimize the disruption of traffic except in designated areas of hazard or safety.

Routes are established in early August and will be distributed at each school's Registration Day. Thereafter, the routes will be available in the school offices. After registration, only minor adjustments may be made to the route. Requests for a change in bus stop location must be submitted in writing to the following: Transportation Supervisor Whitnall School District 5000 South 116th Street Greenfield WI 53228

Unwritten requests will not be considered. Requestors will be notified of the District's decision. If approved, the rider's school will be notified of the change with an effective date.

Pick‐up and drop‐off stops for regular riders are established on designated corner stops. If the carrier and District determines that the distance between corners is excessive or hazardous, an appropriate stop between corners may be determined. Stops in front of a rider's home will not be established unless deemed necessary by the District and carrier. Stops located in a cul de sac that is two blocks or less in length (approximately 0.2 mile) will not be established. A rider is the responsibility of the parent/guardian until s/he boards the bus before school and after the rider is delivered to the designated drop‐off location at the end of the day.

Buses will not enter private property or apartment complexes unless required by the District. Changes shall be reviewed and implemented based on transportation company recommendations, medical recommendation and/or student IEP recommendation.

Bus service is provided for the sole intent of transporting Whitnall School District students to/from school. Unless stated in a student's IEP, the District will not transport a student to work or other non‐school activity.

Riders are required to be at their designated stop prior to the scheduled pick‐up time established by the District. Students are advised to arrive at least five (5) minutes prior to the scheduled pick‐ up time.

The District does not permit riders to alternate bus routes home or getting dropped off at another rider's home, (i.e. birthday parties, sleepovers, cub scouts, girl scouts, etc.). Special accommodations outside of the elementary school attendance areas (daycare/sitter) will result in a prepaid quarterly charge to the parent.

All school rules apply to riders on the bus. Those regulations apply to after school, field trips,

APPENDIX C

interscholastic athletics transportation as well as regular routes to and from school. Since safety is the primary concern of the parents/guardians, the school, and the carrier, all students shall obey the driver. Students who fail to follow bus safety rules and/or do not obey the driver may be suspended from bus riding privileges. The parent/guardian shall be notified of student misconduct on the bus. Continued behavior violating bus safety rules may result in the loss of bus riding privileges.

1. Transportation to Private Schools: Each private school shall notify the School Board of the names, grade levels and locations of all students eligible to have District transportation and planning on attending during the next school term no later than May 15. The District may extend the notification deadline if appropriate.

2. Transportation in Areas of Unusual Hazard: An unusual hazard is an existing condition which constitutes more than ordinary hazard and which seriously jeopardizes the safety of students in their travel to and from school. The District shall provide transportation to the following students who are not otherwise eligible for free transportation. a. Highway 100: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight who must cross or walk along Highway 100 to attend their school. b. Beloit Road: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight who must cross, not walk along Beloit Road to attend their school. c. Highway 00 (Forest Home Avenue): Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight who must cross or walk along the highway south of a point 100 feet south of the junction of Carroll Circle and Highway 00 and the southern boundary of the District to attend their school. d. West Layton Avenue between Rock Freeway and Highway 100: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight who must cross West Layton Avenue between the Rock Freeway and Highway 100 in either direction to attend school. Students in kindergarten through grade five who must walk along West Layton Avenue between the Rock Freeway and Highway 100 in either direction to attend school. e. West Edgerton Avenue between 108th Street and 124th Street: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade five who must walk along West Edgerton Avenue between South 108 th Street and South 124th Street to attend school. f. West Forest Home Avenue: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight who has no other option but to cross or walk along West Forest Home Avenue in either direction from South 108 th Street to South 84th Street to attend their school. g. Coldspring Road: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight who must walk along Coldspring Road in either direction from 124th Street to 92nd Street to attend their school. h. West Grange Avenue: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight, for houses whose driveway entrance is located on Grange Avenue, and must walk along in either direction from 111 th Street to 116th Street only. i. West Janesville Road: Any student enrolled in any grade from kindergarten through eighth grade that must walk along only in either direction from South 116th Street to South 124th Street on the north side of the street, and South 111th Street to South 114th Street and South 118th Street to South 124th Street on the south side of the street. j. South 124th Street: Any student enrolled in kindergarten through grade eight who must walk along the east side of South 124th Street between West Layton Avenue and West Grange Avenue to attend school.

APPENDIX C

3. Parent Paid Transportation: Provided there is room on any Whitnall school bus, resident students not required to be transported by the District may buy a pass through the District Office on a first come/first‐served basis at a rate set by the School Board or its designee. a. No passes shall be sold that exceed the bus capacity set by the District or significantly extend the lengthof the route. b. Passes will be billed each semester and must be prepaid for ridership. Should the bill not be paid, transportation privileges may be suspended for a specified amount of time solely determined by the District. c. Consistent with State Statutes, open enrollment students shall be responsible for their own transportation. d. Meadowlark Subdivision K5, will receive free transportation.

4. Transportation Fee Schedule High School Middle School Elementary Yearly Charge $300.00 $300.00 $300.00

Semester Charge $150.00 $150.00 $150.00

AM/PM Only/Per Semester $75.00 $75.00 $75.00

5. Fee Exceptions Any student that is eligible for free or reduced lunch will be considered for reduced bus transportation fees at one‐half the cost of the current busing fees.

6. Fee Refunds Refunds of transportation fees may be made upon request in the same manner as basic school fees.

7. Fee Disclaimer Fees are subject to change depending on ridership, maintenance, and changing fuel costs.

REVISED: February 10, 2003, September 6, 2005

APPENDIX C APPENDIX D.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities Funding Source Type of Aid Description

Towns, Villages, cities, counties, tribal governing bodies, school districts and other incorporated Recreation Trails Program Reimbursed for up to 50% of organizations are eligible to receive (RTP) the total project. reimbursements for development and maintenance of recreational trails and trail‐ related facilities for both motorized and non‐ motorized recreational trail uses.

ADLP helps to buy land or easements and Aids for the Acquisition and develop or renovate local park and recreation Development of Local Parks Up to 50% funding assistance area facilities (e.g. trails, fishing access, and park (ADLP) support facilities). Applicants compete for funds on a regional basis.

UGS helps to buy land or easements in urban or urbanizing areas to preserve the scenic and Urban Green Space Grants Up to 50% funding assistance ecological values of natural open spaces for (UGS) outdoor recreation, including non‐commercial gardening. Applicants compete for funds on a statewide basis.

RTA provided assistance for the development and maintenance of recreational trails and trail Recreational Trails Act (RTA) Up to 50% funding assistance related facilities for both motorized and non‐ motorized trail uses. Applicants compete for funds on a statewide basis Funds may be used to construct bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian National Highway System Up 10 100% Federally funded walkways on land adjacent to any highway on the National System, including Interstate highways.

APPENDIX D Funds may be used for either the construction of bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways, or nonconstruction projects (such as Surface Transportation 80% funded with a 20% State maps, brochures, and public service Program (STP) or local match announcements) related to safe bicycle use and walking.TES‐21 added "the modification of public sidewalks to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act" as an activity that is specifically eligible for the use of these funds.

Funds may be use for either the construction of Congestion Mitigation and Air 80% funded with a 20% State bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian Quality Improvement Program or local match walkways, or nonconstruction projects (such as maps, brochures and public service announcements) related to safe bicycle use.

Funding designated for, among other things, Transit Enhancement Activity pedestrian access and walkways, and bicycle Up to 95% Federally funded Program access, including bicycle storage facilities and installing equipment for transporting bicycles on mass transportation vehicles.

Funding for bicycle and pedestrian Safe Routes to School (SRTS) 100% Federally funded infrastructure, planning and promotional Program projects. Projects must be within two miles of a kindergarten to 8th grade school. Funds projects intended for locations that Hazard Elimination Program should have a documented history of previous crashes.

The Bikes Belong Grants Program strives to put more people on bicycles more often by funding important and influential projects that leverage Bikes Belong, Ltd. Up to $10,000 federal funding and build momentum for bicycling in communities across the U.S. These projects include bike paths, lanes, and routes, as well as bike parks, mountain bike trails, BMX facilities, and large‐scale bicycle advocacy initiatives.

APPENDIX D The goal of the State Trails Program is to establish a balanced system of state trails for use by hikers, equestrians, bicyclists, and cross‐ Knowles‐Nelson Stewardship‐ $2,500 ‐ $20,000 country skiers. Trails that qualify as State trails The State Trails Program (Conservation Orgs.) are: near urban areas or near or within scenic, historic, or culturally significant areas; likely to receive significant use; and of more than local significance.

RTCA staff provide technical assistance to community groups and nonprofit organizations, community groups, tribes or tribal governments, River, Trails and Conservation and local, State, or federal government agencies Assistance (RTCA) Program‐ Contact Agency so they can conserve rivers, preserve open National Park Service space, and develop trails and greenways. The RTCA program implements the natural resource conservation and outdoor recreation mission of the National Park Service in communities across America.

APPENDIX D Forest HolmeHome AveAve

«¬4

MORGAN AVE W «¬22

TS36 ¬ HOWARD AVE W «3 «¬8 10 6TH ST S «¬10

¨¦§894 T

24 S

TS

H

T

T

T T T T ¬

T «

S 5

S

S

5 S

S

S 3

«¬2 H

H

T

H

T

H

T

S

T T

6 8

ND

1

0 4

7 6 2

45 5

¤£ 6 8 9 «¬1 «¬23 «¬14

COLD SPRING RD W 124 TH ST TH 124 «¬9 «¬13

894 43 ¨¦§ ¨¦§894 ¨¦§43 ¨¦§

TS100

¤£41

T

S

H

T «¬18

6

1 1 «¬21 LAYTON AVE «¬7 «¬11 «¬17 «¬16

¨¦§43 «¬12

«¬19 «¬ TS36 15 «¬6 TS24 EDGERTON AVE W

¤£45 HONEY

CREEK DR S «¬20

Grange Ave

RAMSEY AVE W Map 1. C o m m unity Regional and Multi-Community Parks Community Parks School Parkland Mini Parks Existing Facilities Planned Facilities 1. Root River Parkway 7. Konkel Park 16. Greenfield Middle School 13. Honey Bear Park ;Í Post Office Identified in City Comprehensive Plan: Facilities & Destinations 8. Zablocki Park 17. Greenfield High School 14. Haker Park Í Library Special Open Space Areas k Community Park City of Greenfield, Milwaukee Co 2. Wildcat Creek Nature Corridor 9. Kulwicki Park 18. Greenfield School Administration 15. Creekwood Park ¹9 City Hall 3. Towering Woods Nature Area Neighborhood Parks 19. Whitnall Middle High School k Mini Park ±  School 4. Holt Park 10. Amour Park 20. Elmdale Elementary School Parks 0 500 1,000 2,000 5. Pond View Park 11. Barnard Park 21. Edgewood Elementary k Neighborhood Park Feet City Parks 6. Brookside Meadow Drive Park Site 12. Dan Jansen Park 22. Glenwood Elementary CountyParks Civic Center 23. Maple Grove Elementary Parcels Transit Oriented Development (TOD) 9/30/2008 - R:\Greenfield_City\Projects\R08-0119-100_Bike_Ped_Path\GIS\Community_Facilities_Destinations.mxd 6400 21600 14600 2900 OKLAHOMA AVE 21300 19300 5700 15900 20400 21300 22700 15700 9400 7300 17100 9900 126000 11100 28300 8800

4500 29900 7800 3400 17700 8400 12200 6600 5900 8300 6600 MORGAN AVE 30200 5400 9500 2200 6300 810 2400 5000 MORGAN AVE 4000 11100 12400 5900 27000 18800

S 112TH STS 112TH 34000 15200 34000 S 68THST 12500 3100 11000 18800 7700 8100 36 1700 7300 6700 6000 7200 TS 6200 7000 7700 HOWARD AVE 36700 7700 3600 HOWARD AVE 5200 6300 5300 4000 4500 7000 BELOIT RD 8500 16900 4600 14900

32600 ¨¦§894 S 51ST ST 1800 11300 S 60THST 1600 TS24 S 43RD ST

S S 84TH ST 29700

¤£45 76TH ST 14800 BOLIVAR AVE 2900 3500 3700 3200 6800 4600 7200 7100 4700 5000 16600 COLDSPRING RD 5500 8400 14000 1700 2000 3000 16300 31000 20800 7200 2700 1500 5700 7300 92NDST 43 480 4700 ¨¦§ 894 2500 ¨¦§ 100 7700 5800 128000 43 TS 18800 134000 894 4900 ¨¦§ 6100 £41 134000 1600 ¨¦§ 5900 ¤ 9300 113000 2500 1800 3300 18800 3300 26400 5900 LAYTON AVE 17900 18400 6300 27300 16000 2200 18300 16900 740 31000 19900 29600 16900 LAYTON AVE 12000 2700 7400 1600 4700 9800 10500 11800 11200 11400 28600 ¨¦§43 46300

13700 5600 TS36 11100 4200 4500 24 31600 4600 4300 TS 5900 6700 2800 9800 17700 1700 EDGERTON AVE 3800 ¤£45 4400 4200 2500 EDGERTON AVE 3300 16500 41200

13700 7400 GRANGE AVE 2600 19600 6900 16700 1800 2600 10300 6600 3000 10300 9100 15900 2400 2100 GRANGE AVE 9400 11700 12700 6200 8800 8300 7700 3600 4000 8200 7500 1900 16500 6700 6300 1800 16700 43RDST 1500

4900 Map 2.Traffic Counts and 780 1800 2200 2700 35500 2800 RAMSEY AVE Functional Classifications3100 8200 4600 City of Greenfield, 14900Milwaukee Co 16900 32300 6800 ± 5800 Legend 0 500 1,000 2,000 Average Annual Daily 15300 Traffic Count (2005) Feet Principal Arterial 460 Minor Arterial 1900 6500 Collector 990 8/7/2008 - R:\Greenfield_City\Projects\R08-0119-100_Bike_Ped_Path\GIS\Traffic_Counts_Functional_11x17.mxd 2000 12000 èíì èíì Forest Home Avenue - Easier reachable pedestrian push buttons or detectors at signalized intersections. - Larger LED pedestrian heads with countdown timers. - Pavement markings for bike lanes where possible. Forest HolmeHome AveAve

- Restrict bike route between 84th and Coldspring, determine permanent detour for this segment.

Morgan Avenue «¬4 - On street bike lanes where appropriate èíì èíì í

MORGAN AVE W èíì í 3. North Utility Corridor «¬22 èíì - Provides good northern connection í potential.

51st Street CRA WFORD AVE W

92nd Street - Improve Layton median haven, lighting, and pavement markings.

H

T

T

E

T

S 8

- Pave shoulder for bike lane. E

F

3

E E

- Pave gravel shoulder under IH 894 and consider ligO hting.

R

S

T

E R

S

H

T

S

Y E L L

E

E

F

T

F O E

S

A E

- Pavement marking for bike lane. Y

9

T S

O

T S

R

3

E

H

Y E

T S

- Pave shoulder lane for bike lane where possible. H

T

L

T

L

T

H

S

S

L

0

8

L

T

4

A 3

- Easier rechable pedestrian push buttons/detectors 9

A

0 3 - Pavement markings for bike lanes where possible.0 èíì 102ND ST S íì at signal. ARD AVE W (S 1/2) è íì - On street bikesHOW where appropriate for low volume. TS3èíì6 è - Larger LED ped heads with countdown timers. í í í í èíì - í HOWARD AVE W «¬3 «¬8 10 6TH ST S Howard Avenue èíì ¨¦§894 «¬10 - On street bike lanes where appropriate í èíì í èíì 24

TS )

2 /

1 í

W

(

S D (CTH T) Honey Creek Drive «¬5

ST R 6. Root River Path Crossing 108th St S100 H «¬2 T T - OnT street bike lanes where appropriate I 0

- Improvements to the existing path crossin g need 6

0

O T O T LEROY LEROY AVE W (S 1/2)

L ¤£45 079TH ST S k

AVE W

T T S E 4. Cold Spring-Beloit Rd to be made for style and safety at the crossing. S 1. East-West Utility Corridor

B

S S

T T S

RED OAKS

- A simple with numerous north and south

D

D T

- Complete existing trail connection from T

H T 8 T

PLAINFIELD CT W S S

E W S

H

H 9

V 0

S A S N

N oriented roadways in the community.

T T

T 116th Street to Root River Path. T

2

2

H H

èíì 124 TH ST TH 124

5 5

S S 9

9 T

- Generally 100-150 feet wide. èíì èíì T 3 3 1

«¬1 í 1 8

8 5

5 «¬14 6

í í 6 T

«¬23 T

S

T

T S

COLD SPRING RD W COLD SPRING RD W

íì S

è S

H

H

H

í H

T

T

T

T

4

0 4

0 èíì

8

6 8 «¬9 k 2. Central Utility Corridor èíì 6 «¬13 í Cold Spring Road - Could interconnect 92nd St and í èíì

S 894

T Cold Springs Rd. 43 ¨¦§

VE W S íì § A è ¨¦ - Pavement marking for bikes lanes where possible. 894 43 í FOXWOOD BLITAKER H H § § W ¨¦ ¨¦

VAN T èíì 2 1 í AN NORMAN 1 V 1

- Easier reachable pedestrian push buttons pr 14THde ST S tectrors at NORMAN AVE W í CT W signalized intersections. èíì S £41 VD S ¤ 1

SUNSET LANE W S íì 17TH ST S è

T T

S S

í íì - Larger LEDT pedestrian heads with countdown timers. è

S í

H T

1 3

2 1

1

1 í «¬ èíì 18 èíì èíì í èíì èíì èíì èíì í í LAYTOONN AVE í «¬ èíì èíì í í «¬7 21 «¬

èíì í «¬17 11 «¬ T

íT í 16 S

S èíì

H H

43 í T

T ¨¦§ ¬ 6

6 «12

1 1

1 1

5. Honey Creek Connection BARTEL

S 68th Street T DR S S 096TH - Would connect intersection of Edgerton Ave ST S H

- PavemeT nt marking for bike lane where possible.

8

7 - Easier rechable0 ped push buttons/detectors at signal. and Honey Creek Dr to Creekwood Park, and «¬ 055TH ST S 36 19 and continue along to KonkelTS Park. «¬15 - Larger LED ped heads with countdown timer AVE Ws. 8. Whitnall Nature Trail VOGEL èíì «¬6 TON AVE W í TS24 EDGERT èíì residential area to Whitnall School to the east. èíì èíì èíì í 35th Street í - Improve guide signing and possible warning signing for í í ABBOTT èíì HONEY crossing Loomis. AVE W ¤£4í5 7. South Utility Corridor Edgerton Avenue - Pave shoulder lane for bikes. - Pave shoulder lane for bikes.

- Corridor could connect Whitnall School Y - Pavement marking for bike lane where possible. S

CREEK DR S

- Pavement marking for bike lane where possible. T S

campus with residential area along 108th St - On street bikes where appropr iate for low volume.

UPHAM AVE W

T S - Easier rechable ped push buttons/detectors at signal. 1

and along the Root River Parkway. - Install full pedestrian crossing facilities3 at Layton intersection. 0 - Larger LED ped heads with countdown timers. - On street bikes where appropriate for volume. «¬ - 20 èíì Grange Ave í

RAMSEYY A VEAVE W W èíì Map 3. Existing and Proposed RRegeigoinonala al nadnd M Muultlit-iCo-Commmmuunnitiyty Pa Parkrkss CoCommmmuunnitiyty Pa Parrkkss SScchohoooll PPaarrkkllaanndd Mini PPaarks Existing Facilities 1.1 R. Roooot Rt Rivivere rPa Prakrwkwaayy 77. .K Koonnkkeel lPa Parkrk 1166.. GGrreeeennffiieelldd MiMiddddllee Scchohoooll 1133. Honeoney Beaear PPaarrk Í; Post Office Planned Facilities Bicycle Facilities Special Open Space Areas 8. Zablocki Park 17. Greenfield High School 14. Haker Park Í Library Special Open Space Areas 8. Zablocki Park 17. Greenfield High School 14. Haker Park Comprehensive Plan: County Preferred City of Greenfield, Milwaukee Co 9 City Hall Streets 2.2 W. Wildilcdacta Crt Cereeek kN Natautruere Co Corrrrididoor r 99. .Ku Kulwlwicickki iPa Parrkk 1188.. GGrreeeennffiieelldd SScchohoooll AdAdmmiinniissttrrattiion 1155. CrCreeeekwoodood PPaarrk ¹ k Community Park State Bike Facility 3.3 T. oTwowereinrigng W Woooodds sN Naatuturere A Arereaa NNeeighbighboorhoorhoodd P Paarrkkss 1199.. WWhhititnneallll MiMiddddllee HiHigghh Scchohoooll  School k k Mini Park City Proposed ± 4.4 H. Holot lPat Prakrk 1100. .A Ammoouur rPa Parrkk 2200.. EEllmmddaallee EElleemmeennttaarryy School Parks Multi-Use Trail 0 500 1,000 2,000 5.5 P. Ponondd V Vieiwew Pa Parkrk 1111. .Ba Barnrnaardrd Pa Parrkk 2211.. EEdgdgeewwoooodd EElleemmeennttarry City Parks k Neighborhood Park City Proposed Bike Route Feet 6.6 B. Broroookskisdiede M Meadeadooww Dr Dirvieve Pa Parkrk S Siteite 1122. .D Daann J Jaannsseenn Pa Parrkk 2222.. GGlleennwwoooodd EElleemeennttarry County Parks Civic Center èíì 2233.. MMaappllee GGrroovvee Elleemeennttarry í Traffic Lights Transit Oriented èíì 9/30/2008 - R:\Greenfield_City\Projects\R08-0119-100_Bike_Ped_Path\GIS\Community_Facilities_Destinations.mxd Multi-Use Trail Development (TOD) í èíì èíì

èíì èíì í «¬4 èíì MORGAN AVE W í èíì Forest HolmeHome AveAve

í

«¬21

èíì èíì èíì èíì /2) èíì í í í HOWARD AVE W (S 1 í

HOWARD AVE W 10 6TH ST íì «¬3 èí èíì «¬8 í «¬10 íì 894 è D (CTH T) ¨¦§ R í T

I T O L S E

B H T

«¬5 «¬2 6 èíì 7 íì èíì í Cold Spring Rd è íì

èíì èíì í è T

T S

í í í ¤£41

¬ S

«22 T

H

T

S ¬ T

èíì «1 D

èíì S ¬

«14

R

5

T

H

T

í

í 3 T

S

S 3

íì

0 è

T

T

1

4

H

6

S 5

S èíì í

T

H

T D í 8 íì

4 è

N 6

T ¬

« ¬

9 8 èíì «13

S 2 í

9 èíì H í 894

T 43 ¨¦§ í T

6 894 43 ¨¦§ 1

108 TH ST TH 108 íì ¨¦§ ¨¦§ S è

1 èíì

í í èíì 124 TH ST TH 124 í èíì èíì èíì èíì èíì í èíì èíì í í «¬16 LAYTON AVE èíì í í «¬11 èíì èíì í «¬20 í «¬ èíì í èíì «¬17 7 í í Barnard Ave ¨¦§43 «¬12

«¬18 «¬15 èíì «¬6 EDGERTON AVE W èíì èíì TS24 èíì èíì í í èíì HONEY ¤£45 Loomis Rd CREEK DR S «19

Grange Ave èíì Whitnall School District í

RAMSEY AVE W èíì Map 4. Existing and Proposed Regional and Multi-Community Parks Community Parks School Parkland Mini Parks Existing Facilities Planned Facilities 1. Root River Parkway 7. Konkel Park 16. Greenfield Middle School 13. Honey Bear Park ;Í Post Office èíì Traffic Signals Sidewalk Facilities í Comprehensive Plan: Sidewalks: Special Open Space Areas 8. Zablocki Park 17. Greenfield High School 14. Haker Park Í Library Sidewalks Primary Roadways k Community Park Priority School Routes City of Greenfield, Milwaukee Co 2. Wildcat Creek Nature Corridor 9. Kulwicki Park 18. Whitnall Middle High School 15. Creekwood Park ¹9 City Hall Intersections Lacking Pedestrian Signals 3. Towering Woods Nature Area Neighborhood Parks 19. Elmdale Elementary k Mini Park ±  School k 4. Holt Park 10. Amour Park 20. Edgewood Elementary 0 500 1,000 2,000 School Parks Glen k Neighborhood Park Feet 5. Pond View Park 11. Barnard Park 21. wood Elementary City Parks 6. Brookside Meadow Drive Park Site 12. Dan Jansen Park 22. Maple Grove Elementary CountyParks Civic Center School District Boundary Transit Oriented Development (TOD) èíì 9/30/2008 - R:\Greenfield_City\Projects\R08-0119-100_Bike_Ped_Path\GIS\Community_Facilities_Destinations.mxd í