City of St. George Active Transportation Plan JANUARY 2017 Table of Contents PROJECT STEERING COMMITTEES & CONSULTANT TEAM: Vision & Goals 1: Introduction . 1. About the Plan ..................................................................1 About St. George .............................................................1 ST. GEORGE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Why Walking & Bicycling Matters ................................2 Cimarron Chacon, Event Organizer 2: Existing Conditions & Needs Analysis . 7. Craig Shanklin, SUBA & Healthy Dixie Council Walking & Bicycling Trends ............................................7 Eric Martin, Business Owner Connectivity to Transit................................................. 11 Jordan Merrill, SW Utah Public Health Department Natural Obstacles to Bicycling and Walking .......... 12 Karen Bess, Washington Co. School Dist. Existing System Analysis ............................................. 13 Kye Nordfelt, SW Utah Public Health Department Crashes ............................................................................ 15 Kyle Wells, Dixie State University Needs, Gaps, Opportunities, & Constraints.......... 19 Launi Schmutz-Harden, Washington Co. School Dist. Existing Plans & Studies .............................................. 21 Mark McLaughlin, Owner of Bicycles Unlimited 3: Public Involvement . 27 Mitch Cloward, Dixie Regional Medical Center Field Investigation Bike Ride ...................................... 27 Rachel Cieslewicz, Business Owner Interactive Online Mapping Tool .............................. 27 Online Public Survey .................................................... 28 Dixie Transportation Expo ......................................... 29 CITY OF ST. GEORGE 4: Recommended Infrastructure Improvements . 31 Cameron Cutler, Public Works Director Introduction ................................................................... 31 Fred Davies, SunTran Transit Manager Development of Recommended Improvements ..... 31 Gary Esplin, City Manager Types of Recommended Improvements ................ 32 Jay Sandberg, City Engineer Recommendation Categories .................................... 32 Jeff Peay, Park Planning Manager Off-Street Recommendations ................................... 32 On-Street Bikeway Recommendations ................... 33 John Willis, Planning and Zoning Manager Spot Improvements ..................................................... 35 Jon Pike, Mayor Kent Perkins, Leisure Services Director 5: Recommended Programs, Policies, & Standards . 41. Marc Mortensen, Assistant City Manager Introduction ................................................................... 41 Millie Cockerill, Park Planning Landscape Architect Education Programs .................................................... 41 Monty Thurber, Project Manager & Engineering Associate Encouragement Programs ......................................... 42 Shawn Guzman, City Attorney Enforcement Programs ............................................... 45 Evaluation Programs .................................................... 45 Wes Jenkins, Public Works Assistant Director Policies & Standards .................................................... 51 Cross Sections .......................................................... 57 6: Prioritization, Implementation, & Evaluation . 69 ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN Introduction ................................................................... 69 David Foster, Project Manager & Design Associate Performance Measures............................................... 69 Tom Millar, Asst. Project Manager & Senior Planner Project Prioritization Criteria ..................................... 74 Joe Gilpin, Principal-in-Charge Shared-use Path Best Practices ............................... 78 Roadway Reconfigurations ......................................... 82 Pedestrian & Bicycle Crossing Type Selection Tool .......84 Bicycle Facility Type Selection Tool .......................... 85 Demonstration, Pop-up, Temporary, and The project team is especially grateful to the Low Cost Facility Implementation Strategies ........86 residents who participated by providing original ideas 7: Funding . 89 and feedback during the public involvement process Strategies ........................................................................89 and Planning Commission and City Council public Sources ............................................................................89 hearings. Additional Information on Cover photo: Southern Utah Bicycle Alliance (SUBA) Programs and Campaigns . Appendix A Project Information . Appendix B This page left intentionally blank. D CITY OF ST. GEORGE, UTAH Executive Summary Chapter 1: Introduction Nearly 40%, or a little more than 30,000, of St. George’s location, natural resources, mild weather St. George’s 78,000 residents are under 16 during most of the year, and extensive existing network or over 70 years of age – people who are of paved and natural surface trails have made walking either unable to or who are less likely to and bicycling (or active transportation) popular forms drive an automobile. of transportation and recreation. The St. George Active Transportation Plan seeks to walking to school to an eighty-year-old wanting to visit improve upon the city’s and region’s reputations for friends or family, or buy groceries, is a successful city. healthy activity by proposing policies and standards, programs, and infrastructure that will create a The vision for this plan and for walking and bicycling more cohesive walking and bicycling network that is in the city in general is that “St. George will be a place comfortable enough for people of all ages and abilities where residents and visitors of all ages and abilities to walk or ride a bike to school or work, shop, visit can easily and confidently walk or ride a bicycle for friends, or exercise. transportation and recreation.” Seven goals with sub- objectives and actions accompany this vision: Walking and bicycling are not niche activities or sports, • Coordination & Planning but rather should be integral pieces of transportation and recreation systems and strategies, allowing St. • Education, Promotion, & Encouragement George residents and visitors to enjoy increased • Funding mobility and independence, increased property • Maintenance values, improved health, a safer walking and bicycling environment, and, in general, better quality of life. A • Network, Facilities, & Design city designed to safely and naturally allow everyone • Safety to experience these benefits, from an eight-year-old • Other A shared-use path gateway to the City ST. GEORGE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN ES-1 The plan will provide the City with consistent Currently, a combined estimated 6.8% of all and thoroughly-vetted recommendations, trips in St. George, regardless of purpose, tools, and direction to ensure that all future are done by people walking and bicycling. facilities are predictable and comfortable More than 40% of all trips in the city are design for all users. less than two miles long, trips more easily converted into walking and bicycling trips than longer, commute trips. The Active Transportation Plan is organized UTAH TRAVEL STUDY into several chapters that address different, yet interrelated, subjects that build on one another and form a comprehensive planning effort. Even though most of the off-street system of trails and paths is connected, the essential on-street network is disconnected by major roadway crossings, natural Chapter 2: Existing Conditions & topographic features like bluffs and washes, or is Needs Analysis located on roadways that are not comfortable for This section of the plan analyzed the makeup and people of all ages and abilities to use. Additionally, quality of the existing network of bike lanes, paths, many of the crashes since 2010 involving people and other facilities (which totals more than 150 bicycling or walking have occurred on or near major centerline miles), as well as their approximate usage arterial roadways and/or at intersections. Evidence in order to determine where needs existed and where has shown, however, that increasing the number of improvements were necessary. bicyclists on the road improves safety for everyone. 70 59.1 Cities with higher bicycling rates tend to have lower 60 55.1 overall crash rates and benefit from the “safety in 50 numbers” effect. 40 Miles 30 23.9 20 13.6 Even though 6.8% of all trips in St. George 10 are made by walking or bicycling, only 2.8% 0 of all reported crashes between 2010 and Shared-use Unpaved Bike Lanes Bike Routes 2016 involved people walking or bicycling. Paths Trails Facility Type Figure 2.9 Mileage of Existing Bikeways and Shared-use Facilities (Paths and Trails) in St. George. Improvements to nodes on Tabernacle and Main Streets have made it more enjoyable to walk to and shop at destinations downtown ES-2 CITY OF ST. GEORGE, UTAH and ride with project consultants to identify what St. George is doing well and what could be improved. 137 91 As part of the online survey, respondents indicated CRASES INVOLVING CRASES INVOLVING BICYCLISTS PEDESTRIANS the types of destinations to which they do or would ride or walk, what types of investments they would FATAL FATAL prioritize, and what obstacles exist to walking or riding 1 CRASH (0.7) 4 CRASHES (4.4) more often (see graphs). Suggestions made and discussions had during TOP CRAS OTSPOTS the public involvement process heavily influenced 1. Bluff St (17) 1. Sunset Blvd (10) recommendations