Document Modesto_doc_cbe915b1ce

Non-Motorized Transportation Plan FINAL - AUGUST 2024 ---PAGE BREAK--- City Council Mayor Sue Zwahlen Vice Mayor Chris Ricci Councilmember Eric Alvarez Councilmember Nick Bavaro Councilmember Rosa Escutia-Braaton Councilmember Jenny Kenoyer Councilmember Jeremiah Williams Councilmember David Wright ACKNOWLEDGMENTS City Staff Michael Sacuskie, Assistant City Engineer Phillip Soares, Senior Civil Traffic Engineer Consultant Staff Alta Jeff Knowles, Principal Ben Frazier, Project Manager Prepared for: Prepared by: ---PAGE BREAK--- CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 Executive Summary 4 CHAPTER 2 Introduction, Vision, Goals, & Policies 14 CHAPTER 3 Existing Conditions & Needs Analysis 24 CHAPTER 4 Community Engagement 50 CHAPTER 5 Recommendations 56 CHAPTER 6 Implementation 109 APPENDIX A Funding Sources 149 APPENDIX B Bicycle Recommendation Table 155 ---PAGE BREAK--- CHAPTER 1 Executive Summary ---PAGE BREAK--- Goals This 2023 update to Modesto’s Non-Motorized Transportation Plan is the guiding document for city staff, officials, developers, and residents to create a safe, balanced, and comfortable transportation system for all roadway users, especially people walking, biking, and rolling. This Plan aims to promote and support walking, biking, and rolling through the development of safe, comfortable, and connected bicycle and pedestrian networks and the implementation of supportive policies and programs. This Plan seeks to: ▶Build connected bicycle and pedestrian networks that link residents to neighborhood destinations (such as schools, parks, libraries, and grocery stores) and citywide destinations (like public transit stations, shopping centers, and major employers). ▶Prioritize and implement safety improvements throughout Modesto that reduce and minimize collision and injury risks to people driving, walking, biking, or rolling. ▶Create bicycle and pedestrian networks that are accessible and comfortable for people of all ages and abilities. ▶Develop and maintain programs that provide educational tools and encouragement resources that support and help grow walking and biking as reasonable, practical means of transportation. ▶Incorporate high-quality design features, construction mitigation efforts, and practical, efficient maintenance standards that improve the quality of life of all residents. ▶Develop a list of prioritized, practical, and publicly supported infrastructure projects and programs that can be funded through many potential funding streams, including grants, repaving programs, and coordinating with other development projects or partner agencies. Connectivity Safety Accessibility Education and Encouragement Funding and Implementation Quality of Life 5 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- This Plan also provides an implementation strategy to build out the pedestrian and bicycle networks through prioritization and phasing. This process strives to create a fundable and implementable list of projects. Investing in the enhancement of citywide bicycle and pedestrian networks creates lasting impacts on residents and their communities. A safe, comfortable, and inviting built environment that supports active transportation can: ▶Increase the livability of and quality of life in Modesto. ▶Increase recreational opportunities through improved access to outdoor facilities and amenities. ▶Decrease the risk of bicycle- and pedestrian- involved collisions and injuries. ▶Provide affordable transportation options for low-income and disadvantaged residents. ▶Improve air quality through the reduction of vehicle emissions. Modesto is well-positioned to prioritize building infrastructure designed for people of all types, ages, and abilities to walk and bicycle comfortably to schools, parks, transit, and other local and regional destinations. There are many potential, proposed, and planned projects that will continue to shift and transform Modesto’s local and regional transportation environment. As both infrastructure and travel patterns change from new developments and changing office environments, there is potential to build infrastructure more supportive of neighborhood trips. The recommendations proposed in this Plan lay the foundation that will help build a more connected, accessible, healthy, and safe Modesto. Recommendations This 2023 update to the Non-Motorized Transportation Plan was developed with a robust community engagement process. During the Plan’s development, hundreds of comments were received from Modesto stakeholders. Community engagement combined with the existing conditions analysis led to the development of 109 pedestrian spot improvement recommendations and over 192 miles of recommended bicycle facilities. Recommended bicycle projects, broken down by bicycle class are shown in Table 1. The Plan also provides policy and program recommendations. Details on project recommendations are located in Chapter 5. 6 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1: Bicycle Facility Network by Bikeway Classification (Miles) Existing Bikeways Facilities Being Upgraded Recommended Facilities Full Network Build-Out Shared-use Path 17.1 0.0 26.1 43.2 Bicycle Lane 26.0 18.8 11.2 18.4 Buffered Bicycle Lane 17.3 13.0 6.4 10.6 Bicycle Route 39.8 26.5 0.3 13.6 Bicycle Boulevard 0.0 0.0 94.9 94.9 Separated Bikeway 4.4 0.0 53.3 57.7 Total 104.6 58.3 192.2 238.4 7 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- NEXT STEPS Infrastructure projects are prioritized for design and construction based on the following factors: ▶Safety ▶Connectivity ▶Accessibility ▶Equity ▶Feasibility Projects are then grouped into four implementation categories based on their prioritization score: SHORT-TERM PROJECTS ▶Bicycle projects: 30 projects ▶Pedestrian projects: 12 projects MEDIUM-TERM PROJECTS ▶Bicycle projects: 18 projects ▶Pedestrian projects: 66 projects OPPORTUNITY PROJECTS ▶Bicycle projects: 49 projects ▶Pedestrian projects: 14 projects LONG-TERM PROJECTS ▶Bicycle projects: 14 projects ▶Pedestrian projects: 17 projects In addition to those four prioritization buckets, the highest-ranked short-term projects are considered First Phase projects. These are projects that have that the highest community benefits with high project feasibility. First Phase projects should be pursued first by Modesto staff. The prioritization process and complete project rankings are provided in Chapter 6. Figure 1 shows the First Phase bicycle projects and pedestrian projects. Table 2 shows the First Phase bicycle projects and Table 3 shows the First Phase pedestrian projects. The full list of prioritized projects can be seen in Tables 9 and 10. 8 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2: First Phase Bicycle Projects Bike Projects Street To Street From Street Bike Class Miles Points Category H St 1st St Downey Ave Class IV 1.34 10.5 Short- Term Crows Landing Rd City Limit E Hatch Rd Class IV 0.85 9.5 Short- Term El Vista Ave Yosemite Blvd Oakdale Rd Class IV 0.98 9.5 Short- Term Parker Rd Claus Rd, E Briggsmore Ave East city limit Class IV 0.98 9.5 Short- Term La Loma/ Encina/ Miller Bike Boulevard Group La Loma Ave Encina Ave, N Santa Rosa Ave Class IIIB 8.50 9.0 Short- Term Sutter/ Emerald Bike Boulevard Group Kirschen Dr Yellow Pine Dr Class IIIB 5.09 9.0 Short- Term W Orangeburg Ave Carver Rd Evergreen Ave Class II 0.59 9.0 Short- Term Claus Rd Yosemite Blvd Creekwood Dr Class IV 0.84 8.5 Short- Term Paradise Ave Beverly Dr, Harris Ave, Wade Ave South city limit Class IV 0.45 8.5 Short- Term Floyd/ Sunrise Bike Boulevard Group W Orangeburg Ave W Granger Ave Class IIIB 11.02 8.0 Short- Term Carver Bike Boulevard Group McHenry Ave Tully Rd Class IIIB 8.68 8.0 Short- Term I St Washington St 17th St Class I 1.13 8.0 Medium- Term Scenic Dr (WB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class I 0.89 6.5 Short- Term Scenic Dr (WB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class IV 0.77 6.5 Short- Term Scenic Dr (EB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class II 0.75 6.0 Short- Term Lakewood Ave Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class IV 0.81 4.5 Medium- Term Lakewood Ave Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class I 0.81 4.0 Medium- Term Lakewood-Lincoln Ave Trail Bridge Scenic Dr Dry Creek Trail Connector/ Bridge Class I 0.19 4.0 Medium- Term 9 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3: First Phase Pedestrian Projects ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Points Category Pedestrian Projects 13 Santa Barbara Ave La Loma Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks with advanced stop bars across both crossing at Santa Barbara Avenue and restripe the high- visibility crosswalk across La Loma Ave with advanced yield markings. Install an RRFB for the La Loma crossing. 9 Short Term Yes 18 Crows Landing Rd School Ave Refresh all four high- visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 8.5 Short Term Yes 19 Crows Landing Rd E Hatch Rd Refresh all four high- visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 8.5 Short Term Yes 24 Paradise Rd Pine Tree Ln Refresh the high- visibility crosswalk across Paradise Road with advance yield markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon for this crossing. 8.5 Short Term Yes 10 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Points Category Pedestrian Projects 44 Lucern Ave Coffee Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advanced stop marking, and leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. Study free-right turn lane removal on the southeast corner. 8.5 Short Term Yes 64 W Rumble Rd Tully Rd Upgrade the existing eastern and western crosswalks to high- visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 8.5 Short Term Yes 74 Carver Rd Orangeburg Ave Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 8 Short Term Yes 39 E Briggsmore Ave Coffee Rd Short term: Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility. Long Term: Conduct traffic study to consider removing both free- right turn lanes and other intersection design/geometry improvements. 7.5 Short Term Yes 11 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Points Category Pedestrian Projects 45 Scenic Dr Coffee Rd Upgrade all existing crosswalks to high- visibility and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. Study free-right turn lane removal. 7.5 Short Term Yes 67 W Granger Ave Tully Rd Construct curb extensions at the two eastern corners and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 7.5 Short Term Yes 97 H St 7th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 7.5 Short Term Yes 108 10th St Morton Blvd In coordination with other pedestrian improvements between B Street and Morton Boulevard, install a high-visibility crosswalk with RRFB for a crossing of Morton Boulevard. 7.5 Short Term Yes 12 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 1: Top Prioritized Projects 108 132 219 99 8th St W Granger Ave Kearney Ave H St Stoddard Ave Norwegian Ave Kansas Ave 9th St College Ave Tully Rd Woodland Ave I St la Lo m a Ave S t u d e nt C e n t e r D r Tully Rd A irport Wa y Late ral Nu m b er 4 Coffee Rd Mable Ave N Carpenter Rd N 9th St Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Needham St Roselle Ave Paradise Av e Sta n d iford Ave Clar e m o n t Ave Haddon Ave Sylvan Ave Lakewood Ave Virginia Ave Claus Rd S ylvan M ea do w s Dr Yosemite Blvd E Bri ggs m ore Ave G St Dale Rd Ne e c e D r Colfax Ave Lar a mie Dr Crows Landing Rd Brig h t o n Ave H a s h e m Dr 6th St D ra go o Park Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Lincoln A v e Parker Rd 11th St Carpenter Rd Claratina Ave Celeste Dr Morse Rd E Morris Ave Lucern Ave Sutter Ave Miller Ave Claratina Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Tuolumne Blv d C h eyen ne W a y 7th St California Ave M il l brook Ave C r e e k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave She rwo o d Ave W Hatch R d Bangs Ave W Rumble Rd W Whitmore Ave Kodiak Dr Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Late ra l W Briggsmore Ave Lateral Number 6 Sisk R d Carver Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave P eland ale Ave S c en ic Dr E Orangeburg Ave Great Valley Academy Stanislaus County West Campus Petersen Alternative Center for Education M. Robert Adkison Elementary Virginia Parks Elementary Norman N. Glick Middle Capistrano Elementary Christine Sipherd Elementary Bernard L. Hughes Elementary Alice N. Stroud Elementary Elihu Beard Elementary Bret Harte Elementary Burbank Elementary El Vista Elementary Enslen Elementary Catherine Everett Elementary Franklin Elementary John Fremont Elementary William Garrison Elementary John Muir Elementary La Loma Junior High Mark Twain Junior High James Marshall Elementary Orville Wright Elementary Robertson Road Elementary Roosevelt Junior High Rose Avenue Elementary Shackelford Elementary Wilson Elementary Sonoma Elementary Lakewood Elementary Harriette Kirschen Elementary Alberta Martone Elementary Evelyn Hanshaw Middle James C. Enochs High Fred C. Beyer High Peter Johansen High Grace M. Davis High Thomas Downey High Elliott Adult Education Center Modesto High Robert Elliott Alternative Education Center Independence Charter Mildred Perkins Elementary Mary Lou Dieterich Elementary Josephine Elementary Prescott Junior High George Eisenhut Elementary Agnes M. Baptist Elementary Daniel J. Savage Middle Mary Ann Sanders Elementary Sherwood Elementary Somerset Middle Standiford Elementary Sylvan Elementary Woodrow Elementary Coleman F. Brown Elementary Stockard Coffee Elementary Orchard Elementary Elizabeth Ustach Middle Freedom Elementary Yosemite ROP Caswell Elementary Carroll Fowler Elementary Mae Hensley Junior High Ceres High School Walter White Elementary Amtrak Station 13 18 19 24 30 39 44 45 54 64 67 74 97 108 0 0.5 1 MILE FIRST PHASE PROJECTS MODESTO CA NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Modesto City Boundary Shopping Center Park K St H St 7th St I St 12th St B St 11th St 10th St B e a rd S t I St 97 108 Downtown Pedestrian Recommendations First Phase Ped Projects First Phase Bicycle Projects EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 13 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- CHAPTER 2 Introduction, Vision, Goals, & Policies ---PAGE BREAK--- INTRODUCTION The 2023 Update to the Non-Motorized Transportation Plan works toward building a balanced transportation system that is safe, comfortable, and accessible for people walking, biking, and rolling on wheelchairs, skateboards, and scooters. The Plan lays out a strategy to develop comprehensive bicycling and walking networks that provide access to transit, schools, parks, trails, and downtown. The Plan also includes information on support and end-of-trip facilities like bicycle parking, benches, and other amenities. These infrastructure improvements are paired with programs to educate, encourage, and support walking, rolling, and bicycling. Project and program recommendations were developed based on a thorough needs analysis and community engagement process. This document provides a plan to design and construct new infrastructure recommendations through prioritization and phasing to ensure implementation is manageable and fundable. This Plan represents a long-term vision for walking, rolling, and biking in Modesto, recognizing that funding and resources will require phased implementation over time. 15 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- Connectivity Build connected bicycle and pedestrian networks that link residents to local destinations (schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores, etc.) and citywide destinations (public transit, shopping centers, employment centers, etc.). Safety Prioritize and implement safety improvements throughout Modesto that reduce modal conflicts and minimize collision and injury risks. Accessibility Create bicycle and pedestrian networks that are accessible and comfortable for people of all ages and abilities. Education and Encouragement Develop and maintain programs that provide educational tools and encouragement resources that support and help grow walking and biking as reasonable, practical means of transportation. Quality of Life Incorporate high-quality design features, construction mitigation efforts, and practical, efficient maintenance standards that work toward improving the quality of life of all residents. Funding and Implementation Develop a list of prioritized, practical, and publicly supported infrastructure projects and programs that can be funded through many potential funding streams, including grants, repaving programs, and coordinating with other development projects or partner agencies. GOALS VISION STATEMENT The City of Modesto envisions creating a comprehensive network of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, amenities, and programs that foster safe and comfortable walking, rolling, and biking trips to schools, jobs, and community destinations. Supporting walking and bicycling provides residents with healthy, low-cost transportation options for people of all ages and abilities for many trip purposes. 16 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS PLANNING POLICIES Policy 1: Integrate bicycle and pedestrian network and facility needs into all City planning documents and capital improvement projects. Actions: ▶1.1: Review the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list annually to ensure that recommended projects from this Plan are incorporated for new facilities and the maintenance of existing facilities. ▶1.2: Follow a multi-disciplinary project scoping process that incorporates the needs of all modes and stakeholders, both internal and external. The design process should include the City divisions, departments, and staff responsible for emergency response, parking, law enforcement, maintenance, and other affected areas. ▶1.3: Evaluate all streets during pavement resurfacing to determine if bicycle facilities can be provided when the striping is reapplied. ▶1.4: Conduct regular pedestrian and bicycle counts according to regional methodology before and after project implementation. ▶1.5: Ensure that all traffic impact studies, analyses of proposed street changes, and development projects address impacts on bicycling and walking facilities. Policy 2: Coordinate with other agencies and stakeholders to incorporate and implement Plan policies and recommendations. Actions: ▶2.1: Work with adjacent government entities, public service companies, partner agencies, transit agencies, and school districts to ensure that Plan recommendations are incorporated into their planning and areas of responsibility, and vice versa. ▶2.2: Work with transit providers to improve bicycle and pedestrian access to transit stations/stops and improve the comfort of amenities at stops/stations (including providing secure bicycle parking, covered waiting areas, benches, etc.). 17 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- DESIGN POLICIES Policy 3: Design a low-stress bikeway network to serve people of all ages and abilities. Actions: ▶3.1: Design a network of continuous low-stress bikeways as identified in this Plan. ▶3.2: Utilize North American City Transportation Officials and the most recent State and Federal design standards and guidelines to develop plans for on-street bicycle facilities along corridors and at intersections. ▶3.3: Follow a multi-disciplinary design process that incorporates and balances the needs of all modes and stakeholders, both internal and external; the design process should include the City divisions, departments, and staff responsible for emergency response, parking, law enforcement, maintenance, and other affected areas. Policy 4: Design a connected, convenient, and comfortable pedestrian network to serve people of all ages and abilities. Actions: ▶4.1: Include sidewalks on all new or retrofitted roadways. ▶4.2: Identify and construct sidewalks in areas where they are incomplete. ▶4.3: Install leading pedestrian interval phases in traffic signal timing, as warranted, to encourage walking and facilitate crossing busy streets with high volumes of turning movements. ▶4.4: Review signal locations on an annual basis to identify and adjust for increased pedestrian clearance time where needed. ▶4.5: Routinely evaluate locations for enhancing crosswalks. ▶4.6: Plan and develop well-connected streets, sidewalks, and pathways that provide the most direct paths of travel for pedestrians. Provide connections between or through cul-de-sacs and remove barriers to walking where feasible. Policy 5: Develop an easy-to-read, unified, and comprehensive wayfinding system for people walking and biking. Actions: ▶5.1: Develop a consistent citywide wayfinding program focused on signage for active transportation users. 18 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- PROJECT FUNDING & IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES Policy 6: Leverage existing funding to maximize project delivery. Actions: ▶6.1: Utilizing available funds as a local match, aggressively pursue funding from available grant sources. A list of possible funding opportunities is presented in Appendix A. ▶6.2: Actively develop projects from this Plan to position Modesto to compete for grant funding. ▶6.3: Seek to submit grant applications for projects that most competitively match with funding agency criteria. ▶6.4: Use the Plan’s project prioritization list as a guide when determining which projects to proceed with next. Policy 7: Continue and expand Modesto’s annual allocation of bicycle and pedestrian projects and program implementation funds. Actions: ▶7.1: Through the CIP process, assess, and prepare for upcoming staffing, consultant, and capital funding needs as projects arise. ▶7.2: Allocate funds to maintain and support walking, biking, accessibility, safe routes to schools, and safe routes to transit programs. Policy 8: Construct projects from this Plan utilizing all available internal and external resources. Actions: ▶8.1: If additional internal support is required, establish a full-time pedestrian and bicycle coordinator position and/or a safe routes to school coordinator position to assist with planning and implementing bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs. ▶8.2: Consistent with the policies and procedures of the Modesto City Council, create a Citizen Advisory Group to research, study, and discuss bicycle, pedestrian, safe routes to schools, and safe routes to transit issues. This group should continue and supplement the City’s coordination with Stanislaus Council of Governments’ (StanCOG’s) Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC). The Citizen Advisory Group’s membership should be constructed with the following principles in mind: ▶Equitable representation: Members should represent all geographic areas of the City. Membership should accurately reflect the ethnic and socioeconomic makeup of Modesto as much as possible. Membership should also represent each mode, having members who actively walk, bike, and use mobility devices around the City. ▶Equitable outreach: The Advisory Group should make extra efforts to reach out to all segments of Modesto’s population, conducting engagement in multiple languages through different mediums whenever possible. ▶The Advisory Group should be consulted for feedback on planning projects, development projects, policies, climate change, and other issues that relate to transportation. Policy 9: Ensure that bicyclists and pedestrians have accommodation in construction zones. Actions: ▶9.1: Incorporate routine accommodation for pedestrian and bicycle facilities when roadway or other construction work disrupts typical uses of sidewalks, trails, and on-street bicycle facilities. 19 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- MAINTENANCE POLICIES Policy 10: Maintain designated facilities to be comfortable and free of hazards to people walking and bicycling. Actions: ▶10.1: Sweep streets regularly, with priority given to those with higher pedestrian and bicycle traffic. ▶10.2: Trim overhanging and encroaching vegetation to maintain a clear travel path along pedestrian and bicycle facilities. ▶10.3: Develop and implement an appropriate minimum paving surface standard for bicycle boulevards and other low-stress bikeways. ▶10.4: Update repaving project selection methodology to prioritize bicycle boulevards and other low-stress bikeways to ensure that the minimum paving surface standard is maintained. ▶10.5: Incorporate maintenance needs into the design of separated bikeways and trails to ensure proper maintenance after construction. PROGRAM POLICIES Policy 11: Educate people walking, bicycling, and driving, and the general public about roadway safety and the benefits of bicycling and walking. Actions: ▶11.1: Work with local partners (bike shops, bicycle/walking groups, and advocacy/ non-profit organizations) to coordinate and support bicycle and pedestrian educational programs and campaigns. Policy 12: Coordinate and collaborate with all local school districts to create a citywide Safe Routes to School Program. Encourage Modesto public schools to participate in the Safe Routes to School Program. Actions: ▶12.1: Support school travel safety assessments at Modesto public schools and utilize improvement plans to pursue grant funding for implementation. ▶12.2: Participate and support Safe Routes to School meetings and other encouragement events/activities. 20 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- Policy 13: Increase bicycling and walking through targeted marketing and promotion. Actions: ▶13.1: Provide current and easily accessible information about the Modesto bicycle network, bicycle programs, and bicycle parking. This includes distributing online and print bicycle maps, maintaining up-to- date City web pages, and providing ongoing public engagement opportunities. ▶13.2: Encourage major employers to continue, develop, or expand bicycle promotion programs for their employees. Recognize companies designated as a Bicycle Friendly Business by the League of American Bicyclists ▶13.3: Encourage the use of bicycles for City employee commute and work travel purposes to see the City as a model employer. ▶13.4: Continue to sponsor Bicycle to Work Day in May to receive input on the pedestrian and bicycle program and educate the public about the benefits of walking and bicycling. ▶ 13.5: Work with major employers to set up and maintain Transportation Demand Management programs. EVALUATION POLICIES Policy 14: Measure bicycling and walking activity through an annual count program. Actions: ▶14.1: Establish an annual count program at critical locations around the city. Ensure methodology is consistent with other metrics collected locally and regionally. ▶14. 2: Make the data publicly available on an ongoing or at least annual basis. Policy 15: Report annually on the implementation of this Plan. Actions: ▶15.1: Prepare and present a report to the StanCOG BPAC, Citizens Advisory Group (if created), and City Council. 21 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- Public Health Walking, bicycling, and other forms of active transportation (rolling, scooting, etc.) provide many benefits to individuals and communities. Active transportation is closely linked to health outcomes. The Stanislaus County Community Health Assessment 2020 (CHA 2020) discusses multiple health, safety, and “thriving” factors that impact individual and overall community health. All three of these areas have connections to active transportation. The report stated the lack of physical activity is one of the four leading risk factors for chronic disease. The leading cause of death within Stanislaus County is heart disease; obesity and physical inactivity are among the risk factors for heart disease. Further, obesity rates within the County have risen by 45% between 2012 and 2017. Asthma is also a public health issue; Stanislaus County has a higher rate of emergency room visits for Asthma-related problems than the state average. Many factors can contribute to asthma, including air pollutants and overall air quality. Roadway safety also contributes to health outcomes. While the CHA 2020 focuses on deaths related to vehicle collisions, pedestrian- and bicycle-involved collisions also impact health outcomes. The Needs Analysis in Chapter 3 will detail the locations of pedestrian- and bicycle-involved collisions throughout Modesto. BENEFITS OF WALKING AND BIKING Transportation is one of the four “thriving” factors that also affect health outcomes. The availability of reliable, safe transportation is critical for residents to access jobs, healthcare, schools, food, and many other destinations and services. Besides providing safe, low-stress facilities for people walking and biking, improving access to transit stops and stations is also essential to promoting active and shared transportation modes. Walking and bicycling can increase physical fitness and health, create low- or no-cost transportation options, provide access to community-serving destinations like parks, schools, health care, and shopping, using an environmentally-friendly transportation option. Economics Active transportation can also provide economic benefits to communities. Increasing walking and bicycling can reduce congestion and parking costs, increase individual mobility, create vibrant and welcoming streetscapes, and improve local businesses' accessibility and visibility.1 The walking and bicycling environment must be designed to create safe, comfortable, and inviting places to walk and bike around Modesto to foster additional active trips. This Plan's goals and outcomes lay the foundation for Modesto to make infrastructure, policy, and program decisions that build and support active transportation. 1 Cullen McCormick, “York Blvd: The Economics of a Road Diet,” (2012) 22 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- Walking and bicycling can increase physical fitness and health using an environmentally-friendly transportation option. 23 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION, VISION, GOALS, & POLICIES ---PAGE BREAK--- CHAPTER 3 Existing Conditions & Needs Analysis ---PAGE BREAK--- Transportation Plan Review This Non-Motorized Transportation Plan seeks to build on prior planning efforts to create a comprehensive and cohesive vision for walking, biking, and rolling in Modesto. The following documents were reviewed: ▶Modesto Urban Area General Plan ▶Modesto Redevelopment Master Plan ▶Non-Motorized Transportation Plan (2006) ▶Complete Streets Safety Assessment ▶Airport Neighborhood Safe Routes to School Action Plan ▶Stanislaus County General Plan ▶StanCOG Non-Motorized Transportation Plan Additional references, including corridor studies, future transportation projects, specific plans, and other relevant documents, were also reviewed. 25 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- EXISTING CONDITIONS Community and Geographic Context Modesto, located in north-central Stanislaus County, has over 215,000 residents (US Census, American Community Survey 2019). Modesto’s arterial and collector streets form a grid network that connects most areas of the city. However, many residential streets deviate from the grid and follow a more suburban development pattern. Modesto is a relatively flat city with a temperate climate, increasing the attractiveness of walking, rolling, and biking. As a large, expansive city, Modesto has both neighborhood-serving destinations like parks and schools in addition to citywide and regional destinations including Modesto Junior College, retail areas, and employment centers. Many neighborhood-serving destinations are located within or near residential areas, making these relatively short trips good candidates for active transportation instead of driving. Citywide and regional serving destinations likely require travel on or across an arterial or collector road. Infrastructure limitations and barriers can negatively affect an individual’s propensity to walk or bike. High-volume roadways, high- speed roadways, railroad tracks, highways, and similar barriers create uncomfortable and stressful walking and bicycling conditions. NEEDS ANALYSIS The following sections will briefly summarize the Needs Analysis's six components: demand, connectivity, comfort, safety, accessibility, and barriers. Demand In terms of commute travel demand, about one-third of Modesto residents live and work within the City. Ceres and Turlock are the following two most popular cities for Modesto residents to commute into and for those residents to commute into Modesto. Table 4 displays the top 10 cities residents commute out to, and cities workers commute in from, 2018 data. Private automobiles are the primary means of transportation for most Modesto workers. About 95% of work trips are completed by car; 85% of trips are done by people driving alone. Public transit and bicycling account for under 1% each of work trips. Just over 1% of commuters walk to work and 3% work from home (American Community Survey, 2019). 26 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 4: Commute Origins and Destinations - 2018 Data (US Census) Top 10 Commute Destinations for Residents of residents) Top 10 Origin Cities for Modesto Workers of workers) Modesto 34% Modesto 32% Turlock 5% Ceres 4% Ceres 5% Stockton 3% Riverbank 3% Turlock 3% Manteca 2% San Jose 2% Stockton 2% Tracy 2% Oakdale 2% Salida 2% Salida 2% Manteca 2% San Jose 1% San Francisco 1% Tracy 1% Sacramento 1% COVID-19 has shifted travel patterns and the necessity of office work for some professions. These shifts may have medium- to long-term effects on commute-related transportation. Residents walk and bike to many destinations across the City. Many of these destinations are neighborhood-serving, including schools, parks, libraries, local stores, and workplaces. Figure 2 shows many of the major destinations across Modesto. 27 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 219 99 Maze Blvd H St Kansas Ave College Ave Tully Rd Coffee Rd Mable Ave N Ca rpent er Rd Oakdale Rd Prescott Rd Roselle Ave Standiford Ave Sylvan Ave Mo unt Vernon Dr Yosemite Blvd E Brigg smore Ave Dale Rd Modesto Virginia Corridor Sherwo o d A ve W Hatch Rd Sunrise Ave Ba ngs Ave W Roseburg Ave W Whitmore Ave E Rumble Rd Kodiak Dr N 9th St Encina Ave Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root L at er al W O rangeburg Ave W Briggsm ore Ave Lateral N umbe r 6 W Ru m bl e Rd S i s k Rd Carver Rd Claus Rd Floyd Ave State Hwy 99 Pelandale Ave Scenic Dr E Orangeburg Ave State Hwy 132 Amtrak Station 0 0.55 1.1 MILES MAJOR DESTINATIONS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced March 2019. Destinations + Boundaries Transit Hub Shopping Center School Major Employer College Hospital Library Downtown Zone City Boundary Park Existing Bikeways Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IV Separated Bikeway 108 132 99 H St S Jefferson St Needham St 9th St 14th St G St F St S Madison St 4th St J St 10th St 15th St 5th St 13th St K St 6th St 1 2 t h St 11th St 8th St 7th St I St State Hwy 99 State Hwy 132 S Morton B l v d Downtown Zone Figure 2: Major Destinations ---PAGE BREAK--- SCHOOLS Within Modesto, there are 68 public schools across five school districts. While schools are reasonably distributed across the city, individual school enrollment boundaries, where present, can create unequal travel distances for each school’s families. The further a family lives away from their school campus, the less likely they are to choose an active mode to get there. Schools are not always centered within these enrollment areas, making inequitable travel distances for the student body. Despite that, walking and biking can still be practical for many families in terms of travel distance and time. However, many of the existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities are not comfortable enough for children and families. Figure 3 shows the location of school districts throughout the City. Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6 show enrollment boundaries, where present, for elementary, middle, and high schools. Many of the existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities are not comfortable enough for children and families. 29 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 3: School Districts 108 132 219 99 Amtrak Station 0 0.5 1 MILES MODESTO AREA SCHOOL DISTRICTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Existing Bikeways School District Ceres Unified Empire Union Salida Union Stanislaus Union Sylvan Union Modesto Districts School ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 4: Elementary School Enrollment Areas 0 0.5 1 MILES MODESTO AREA ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Elementary School Enrollment Areas School Enrollment Areas City Boundary ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 5: Middle School Enrollment Areas ---PAGE BREAK--- James C. Enochs High Fred C. Beyer High Peter Johansen High Grace M. Davis High Thomas Downey High Joseph A. Gregori High Modesto High 0 0.5 1 MILES MODESTO AREA HIGH SCHOOLS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. High School Boundaries by District School High School Enrollment City Boundary Figure 6: High School Enrollment Areas ---PAGE BREAK--- PARKS There are 76 city-operated parks, including splash playgrounds, a wading pool, tennis courts, athletic fields, and picnic areas, within Modesto. Modesto currently has over 17 miles of trails, including the Virginia Corridor facility. Figure 7 shows the locations of parks and trails across Modesto. TRIP DEMAND StanCOG’s Travel Demand Model strives to predict where increases in walking, biking, and driving trips will occur based on population growth, planned developments, and infrastructure projects, current travel patterns, and other conditions. Figure 8 maps the density of current trips and shows areas (crosshatched) where trips are predicted to increase. These future trips can be good candidates for active transportation, especially for local trips to schools, parks, and other neighborhood destinations. Much of Modesto’s trip growth is expected to occur in the northwest and northeast areas, downtown, and south of Yosemite Boulevard. 34 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 7: Parks and Trails ---PAGE BREAK--- Ã 108 Ã 132 Ã 219 Ã 99 MAZE BLVD KANSAS AVE 9TH ST E BRIGG S MOR E AV E COLDWELL AVE SY L V A N M E AD O WS DR CONANT AVE WOODLAND AVE MABLE AVE CALIFORNIA AVE MILL B ROO K A VE BLUE GUM AVE BOWEN AVE I ST G ST CR E EK WO OD D R ENSLEN AVE SH ER W OOD AVE W HATCH RD H ST SUNRISE AVE BANGS AVE M O U NT VER NO N DR W WHITMORE AVE E RUMBLE RD KODIAK DR COLLEGE AVE N 9TH ST ENCINA AVE N CARPENT E R R D DALE RD ROSE AVE SNYDER AVE MERLE AVE TULLY RD ROSELLE AVE W ORANGEBURG AVE W B RIGGSMORE AVE PRESCOTT RD W RUMBLE RD SIS K RD MODESTO VIRGINIA CORRIDOR OAKDALE RD CARVER RD STA NDIFORD AVE CLAUS RD MCHENRY AVE COFFEE RD FLOYD AVE YOSEMITE BLVD PELA NDALE AVE SCENI C DR SYLVAN AVE STATE HWY 108 E ORANGEBURG AVE STATE HWY 132 Amtrak Station 0 0.5 1 MILES I TRIP DEMAND MODESTO CA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced April 2019. Source: STANCOG Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station City Boundary Projected increase in trips in 2042 Trip Density per TAZ (2015) No Trips Low Density High Density Medium Density Figure 8: Trip Demand Projection ---PAGE BREAK--- Connectivity BICYCLE NETWORK Modesto’s existing bicycle network has just over 100 miles of facilities. It consists of off-street trails and various on-street facilities. Around 80% of the city’s facilities are on-street bikeways, mostly bicycle routes. The Virginia Corridor, canal trails, and river/creek trails make up most of Modesto’s off-street trail system. Figure 9 shows Modesto’s existing bikeways, and Table 5 provides mileage statistics by facility type. Definitions of each facility are provided in the next section. Many of the city’s arterial and collector streets have bicycle facilities, providing some connectivity across the city. Few dedicated routes within and through residential neighborhoods limit comfortable access to the formalized network. Table 5: Existing Bikeways (Miles) Path Type Miles Shared-use Path 17 Bicycle Lane 26 Buffered Bicycle Lane 17 Bicycle Route 40 Bicycle Boulevard 0 Separated Bikeway 4 TOTAL 104 37 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- BICYCLE FACILITY TYPES Shared-use Path (Trail) Dedicated paths for walking and bicycling separated from the roadway. Bicycle Lane Striped lanes for bicyclists. Buffered Bicycle Lane Bicycle lanes that include a striped buffer area either between the bicycle lane and the travel lane or between the bicycle lane and parked cars (sometimes in both places). Bicycle Route Signed routes for people biking on low-speed, low-volume streets where roadway space is shared with people driving. Bicycle Boulevard Bicycle routes that are enhanced with traffic calming features or other treatments that prioritize bicyclist comfort. A toolkit of bicycle boulevard treatments is available later in this chapter. Treatments will be specific to each corridor and determined based on community input and planning/engineering judgment. Separated Bikeway On-street bicycle facilities with physical separation between modes. Types of separation can include bollards, planter boxes, vehicle parking, curbs, or raised facilities. 38 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 9: Existing Bikeways 108 132 219 99 H St Kansas Ave Tully Rd Coffee Rd Mable Ave N Carpenter Rd Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Roselle Ave St a n d i f o r d A v e Sylvan Ave Yosemite Blvd E Briggsmore Ave G St Sylvan M ea do w s Dr Dale Rd Modesto Virginia Corridor Woodland Ave California Ave M il lb roo k A v e I St Cr e e k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave Sh e rw o od Ave W Hatch R d S u nrise Ave Bangs Ave W Roseburg Ave W Whitmore Ave Kodiak Dr N 9th St E n cina Ave Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave W Briggsm ore Ave Lateral Number 6 W Rumble Rd S isk Rd Carver Rd C l a u s Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave State Hwy 99 Pela ndale Ave State Hwy 132 Vintage Faire Mall Central Valley Plaza Coffee Plaza Wood Colony Plaza McHenry Village The Lakes Center Caruso Shopping Center Marshall's Plaza Briggsmore Square Century Center Tully Manor Shopping Center Amtrak Station 0 0.5 1 MILES EXISTING BIKEWAYS NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced July 2023. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School City Boundary Shopping Center Park Existing Bikeways Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IV Separated Bikeway 108 132 99 H St L St S Jefferson St Needham St 9th St 14th St G St F St S Madison St 4th St J St 10th St 15th St 5th St 13th St K St 6th St 1 2 t h St 11th St 8th St 7th St I St State Hwy 99 State Hwy 132 S Morton B l vd Downtown Zone ---PAGE BREAK--- Comfort The City has about 101 miles of existing bicycle facilities. While people biking will have different tolerances for comfort and stress, typically speaking, separated bikeways, bicycle boulevards, and shared-use paths/trails are considered low-stress facilities. Only about one-third of Modesto’s existing facilities fall within those categories. Sidewalk conditions, separation from vehicle lanes, lighting, shade, among other factors, can influence the comfort of people walking. The Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) analysis measures how bikeable or walkable a street is based on some of the above factors. Roads are categorized as LTS 1, 2, 3, or 4; lower numbers indicate increased comfort for more people biking or walking. Within Modesto, LTS 1 corridors include most small residential streets and all trails. LTS 2 and 3 corridors include most non-residential roads with a bicycle facility. The most stressful LTS 4 facilities include high-speed arterials with minimal or no bicycle facilities like McHenry Avenue or Yosemite Boulevard. Figure 10 shows the results of the LTS analysis. 40 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Ã 108 Ã 132 Ã 219 Ã 99 Maze Blvd H St Kansas Ave College Ave Tully Rd Coffee Rd Blue Gum Ave N Carpent e r R d Oakdale Rd Prescott Rd Roselle Ave Sta n d iford Ave Sylvan Ave Yosemite Blvd E Briggs more Ave G St Modesto Virginia Corridor Sylvan M e a d ows Dr Conant Ave Woodland Ave Mable Ave California Ave Millb r ook A v e Bowen Ave I St Cree k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave Sh e rw o od Ave W Hatch R d Sunrise Ave Bangs Ave W Roseburg Ave M o u n t Vernon Dr W Whitmore Ave E Rumble Rd K o d i a k Dr N 9th St Encina Ave Dale Rd Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Lateral W O r angeburg Ave W Briggsm ore Ave Lateral Number 6 W R u m ble Rd S isk R d Carver Rd Claus Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave State Hwy 99 Pela ndale Ave S c enic D r State Hwy 108 E Orangeburg Ave State Hwy 132 Vintage Faire Mall Central Valley Plaza Coffee Plaza Wood Colony Plaza The Lakes Center Caruso Shopping Center Marshall's Plaza Briggsmore Square Century Center Tully Manor Shopping Center Amtrak Station 0 0.5 1 MILES I LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS MODESTO CA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum Shopping Center Park City Boundary Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Level 1 All Ages and Abilities (Trail) Level 1 All Ages and Abilities (Residential) Level 2 Average Adult Level 3 Confident Adult Level 4 Fearless Adult Figure 10: Level of Traffic Stress ---PAGE BREAK--- Safety Collisions were examined between 2013- 2017. Despite being a relatively small part of all trips, bicyclist- and pedestrian-involved collisions account for over 15% of all collisions (881 pedestrian- or bicycle-involved collisions). In that same five-year period, bicyclist injuries have risen by and pedestrian injuries have increased by 33%. Between 2013-2017, there were 448 pedestrian-involved collisions, including 23 pedestrian fatalities. In that same period, there were 433 bicyclist-involved collisions, including eight fatalities. Thirty-one active transportation users died in this period. Across all modes in the same period, there were 76 fatalities. Walking and biking fatalities account for over 40% of Modesto traffic-related deaths. Four corridors recorded multiple pedestrian or bicyclist fatalities: McHenry Avenue SR-99 Tully Road and Yosemite Boulevard HIGH INJURY NETWORK Several corridors throughout the City had a high concentration of pedestrian- or bicycle- involved collisions. Corridors with elevated collision levels were grouped to create a high injury network. The corridors, grouped by direction, are noted in the list that follows: East-West Corridors ▶Standiford Avenue/Sylvan Avenue ▶Mount Vernon Drive Orangeburg Avenue ▶Yosemite Boulevard (SR-132) North-South Corridors ▶Prescott Road ▶Carver Road ▶McHenry Avenue (SR-108) ▶Oakdale Road ▶Tully Road ▶Coffee Road Downtown and South of SR-99 ▶J Street ▶I Street ▶H Street/Paradise Road ▶D Street (SR-132) Martin Luther King Jr. Drive/Sutter Avenue Many of these corridors provide essential connections to neighborhood-serving destinations. Still, they are high-speed collector and arterial streets that are very uncomfortable and uninviting to people walking, biking, and rolling. The following heatmaps in Figures 11 and 12 show the approximate location of the bicycle- and pedestrian-involved collisions. 42 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Ã 108 Ã 132 Ã 219 Ã 99 Amtrak Station PHOENIX A V E OAKDALE RD M C GUIR E D R FLOYD AVE W RUMBLE RD SYLV A N M E A D O WS DR COLDWELL AVE KEARNEY AVE POUST RD STANDIFORD AVE CARVER RD SUNRISE AVE GRE C I A N AVE CH EYEN N E WY SNYDER AV E MERLE AVE M ILLB R OO K A V E HILLGLEN AVE E RUMBLE RD MOUNT VERN ON DR L ARAMIE DR WYLIE DR W UNION AVE L A LOMA AVE E ORANGEBURG AVE LUCERN AVE ROSE AVE NORWEGIAN AVE N MC CLURE RD W GRANGER AVE E MORRIS AVE PENNY LN STODDARD AVE 6TH ST SONOMA AVE MABLE AVE S H ELDON DR 5TH ST WOODROW AVE C R EE K W O O D DR H A S H E M D R 14TH ST MARIN AVE GAGO S D R CE L ESTE DR SHERWO O D A VE FINE AVE KRUGER D R CONANT AVE BOWEN AVE E NCINA AVE TOKAY AVE SH A RON AVE KODIAK DR PEARL ST W ROSEBURG AVE NEE C E D R I ST WY CL I F F E DR 11TH ST SYLVAN AVE BANGS AVE AIRPORT WY TULLY RD PELANDALE AVE 0 0.5 1 MILES I BICYCLE COLLISIONS MODESTO CA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Sources: City of Modesto, Caltrans, Esri, UC Berkeley TIMS. Map produced February 2019. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station City Boundary Collisions per Hexagon (2013 - 2017) 1 to 2 Collisions 3 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 15 Collisions Bicycle Fatality Figure 11: Bicycle Collisions ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 12: Pedestrian Collisions ---PAGE BREAK--- Accessibility An accessibility analysis was conducted to study how easily residents can access important neighborhood destinations using low-stress routes. Accessibility was studied around schools, parks, and major commercial centers. Combining this analysis with the LTS analysis creates a more comprehensive understanding of conditions around each set of destinations. Highlights from each of the analyses are below: SCHOOLS Schools across all levels are reasonably distributed across the City. The relative distance between each student’s residence and the school is a huge factor in determining the practical transportation options. School enrollment boundaries, where present—see Figures 3–6 on pages 30–33—somewhat control travel distance, but larger enrollment areas mean many families will live too far to walk or bike, especially for middle and high schools. In many cases, schools are not centered within these areas, creating inequitable distances. If a family does not live within a reasonable walking (1/4 mile – 1 mile) or biking (up to 2 miles) distance, the lack of low-stress facilities can discourage families from using active transportation. Some may choose to take a more circuitous route to avoid stressful areas, but many may choose to use a different travel mode. PARKS Across the City, most residents are within a reasonable distance of a park. The dozens of City parks and other recreational facilities provide most residents with relatively short, low-stress access. Crossing wider streets is necessary for some residents to reach parks. This can be challenging for some people, especially children and seniors, who are walking, biking, or rolling. Crossing improvements that make it easier and more accessible for people to walk, bike, or roll can make those trips more inviting. It is also is important to improve end-of-trip facilities (discussed in Chapter 5) at parks. SHOPPING Most Modesto residents can access their closest shopping centers by bicycle using low-stress streets without having to travel very far out of direction. Many of these tend to front a large collector or arterial road, creating an uncomfortable end and beginning to those trips. If someone wants to travel to a further commercial center, they will likely have to cross or travel on a higher-stress corridor at some point along their journey. While many of the city’s crosstown streets have an existing facility, very few of them are low-stress. If a family does not live within a reasonable walking distance, the lack of low-stress facilities can discourage families from using active transportation. 45 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Barriers Natural and infrastructure barriers limit connectivity, alter travel behavior, and directly affect modal and route choices. Natural barriers include rivers, steep terrain, and canals. Infrastructure barriers include freeways, highways, and railroad tracks. In addition to these “linear” barriers, major roadway crossings and larger intersections can also act as barriers, especially for vulnerable road users like seniors and children. Many existing walking, biking, and rolling facilities (sidewalks and bike lanes) typically change or are not present at most crossings of these barriers. NATURAL BARRIERS Modesto's natural barriers include the Briggsmore Avenue Lateral, Root Lateral, Moulton Lateral, Dry Creek crossing, and the Tuolumne River. INFRASTRUCTURE BARRIERS Multiple state highways cross Modesto: SR-132 (Yosemite Blvd./Maze Blvd.), SR-108 (McHenry Ave.), and SR-99 (Golden State Highway). Segments of 9th Street, K Street, L Street, 6th Street, and Needham Street in downtown are also designated as part of the State Highway System. State Route-99 is the only conventional freeway of this group. However, the other routes still carry high volumes of cars at high travel speeds and have limited signalized crossing locations. Railroad tracks also act as long linear barriers with limited formalized crossing opportunities. Within Modesto, railroad tracks generally run parallel to 9th Street and parallel to Santa Fe Avenue. Figure 13 shows how various barriers limit permeability, access, and connectivity across Modesto. 46 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 13: Permeability 108 132 219 99 Maze Blvd H St Kansas Ave College A v e Tully Rd Coffee Rd Mable Ave Blue Gum Ave N Carpenter Rd Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Roselle Ave Standiford Ave Sylvan Ave M o u n t V e r n o n D r Yosemite Blvd E Briggs more Ave G St Dale Rd Modesto Virginia Corridor Conant A ve Woodland Ave California Ave Millbr ook A v e I St Cr ee k w o o d D r Enslen Ave Sherwo o d A v e W Hat ch Rd Sunrise Ave Bangs Ave W Roseburg Ave W Whitmore Ave E Rumble Rd Kodiak Dr N 9th St Encina Ave Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Late ral W Orangeburg Ave W Briggsm ore Ave Lateral Number 6 W R u mb le Rd S i s k Rd Carver Rd Claus Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave Sta te Hwy 9 9 Pelandale Ave Scenic Dr E Orangeburg Ave State Hwy 132 Amtrak Station Intersection Barriers High Collision Locations LTS 3 & LTS 4 Corridors 0 0.5 1 MILES PERMEABILITY MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced March 2019. Destinations + Boundaries Transit Hub Shopping Center School Major Employer College Hospital Library City Boundary Park ---PAGE BREAK--- Modesto has many transportation corridors that, if enhanced, can foster and support comfortable, low-stress active transportation. Extending existing trails and building new trails along canals and other rights-of-way would create new off-street facilities and potentially improve the crossings of barriers. Many of Modesto’s arterial and collector streets are wide, multilane streets, primed for developing a low-stress crosstown network. In many cases, existing bicycle facilities can be enhanced with striped buffers or physical protection upgrading bike lanes to buffered bike lanes or separated bikeways). SUMMARY: OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS Implementing traffic calming on neighborhood streets will make those streets safer for all transportation users: people walking, biking, rolling, and driving. Many of these streets already have great qualities, like tree shade and lower traffic volumes and speeds. Formalizing streets as dedicated multimodal corridors will start forming a high- quality neighborhood low-stress network. This will provide essential linkages to crosstown facilities and be the backbone for most local walking and bicycling trips. There are many constraints that the City will have to work through as they move toward implementation. Streets have limited available width/right-of-way and competing modal uses. Some project recommendations may require trade-offs or road diets, most commonly on arterial or collector streets. Railroad crossings, highway interchanges, underpasses/overpasses, and other large projects each present a unique challenge and can require coordination across multiple agencies. 48 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- 49 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS ANALYSIS ---PAGE BREAK--- CHAPTER 4 Community Engagement ---PAGE BREAK--- ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY Three goals guided this Plan’s community engagement process: ▶Reach a diverse audience ▶Maximize visibility and transparency ▶Make engagement meaningful The City used several different methods to promote the planning process and engage with the community, including social media, email newsletters, pop-up events, an interactive webmap, and community workshops. The COVID-19 pandemic led the City to create an interactive virtual open house for the second phase of the community engagement process. Engagement activities are described in the following section. 51 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Bike to Work Day 2019 The project team hosted a pop-up event during the City’s Bike to Work Day event in downtown. The City gathered input on existing conditions and promoted the interactive webmap. Over 75 comments were logged about walking, biking, and rolling issues and opportunities. Common themes from this pop-up included expanding trails and paths throughout the City, extending Virginia Corridor, and improving the bicycle network’s overall connectivity. Family CycleFest 2019 Family CycleFest, held in May, is a fun, outdoor event dedicated to promoting bicycles and bicycle safety. The project team hosted another pop-up event to listen to the community about walking, biking, and rolling. Over 60 comments were gathered. Many families made comments wanting safer routes to schools and parks. Other common themes from the event included a desire for traffic calming on residential streets, improving the connection between the Virginia Corridor and downtown, and closing sidewalk gaps. Community Workshop In November of 2019, the City hosted a community workshop to engage with residents on existing conditions. In addition to reviewing components of the existing conditions analysis, attendees could provide feedback on existing conditions, share information on places they would walk and bike to, review proposed pedestrian priority areas, and share their priorities for the future of walking and biking. About 20 residents attended the meeting. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES 52 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Online Engagement INTERACTIVE WEBMAP The first phase of community engagement included an interactive webmap. The webmap allowed users to leave comments on existing bicycle facilities, draw their preferred walking and bike routes, and drop pins at locations they had comments on. About 70 comments were provided on the webmap. Roughly one-third of the comments were located in downtown Modesto. Common themes from the webmap included improving connections between neighboring areas and increasing access to trails across the City. VIRTUAL OPEN HOUSE Restrictions from the COVID-19 pandemic prevented the City from hosting in-person events for the second community engagement phase. The City created a virtual open house to present the key themes from community engagement and the draft bicycle and pedestrian recommendations. Through an updated interactive webmap, users could like, dislike, and comment on the draft pedestrian and bicycle recommendations. The virtual open house was available in both English and Spanish. The project team promoted the virtual open house using City social media accounts and targeted social media ads. The project website was also promoted in a Modesto Bee newspaper article. Over 1,800 residents visited thevirtual open house during the comment period, providing more than 1,600 likes/dislikes on pedestrian and bicycle projects. 53 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ---PAGE BREAK--- StanCOG BPAC Meetings The City presented updates on the Plan twice to the StanCOG BPAC. Members were provided information on the Plan process and provided feedback on existing conditions and draft recommendations. Stakeholder Involvement To further expand the reach of the Plan’s engagement, the project team coordinated with multiple stakeholder organizations to help promote the Plan’s engagement efforts. These groups help spread the word about Plan-related events and encouraged their members to participate. 54 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ---PAGE BREAK--- Four common themes emerged across community engagement methods. These themes were the guiding principles used to develop the pedestrian and bicycle recommendations presented in the next chapter. Each theme is detailed below: 1. Improve safety and access to school Improving safety for students and families walking and biking to school was one of the top priorities the City heard from residents. Families had concerns about both walking and biking around schools. Many stated that regardless of mode, wide streets, fast- moving traffic, and uncomfortable crossings discouraged them from using active transportation. Residents who lived near a street(s) without sidewalks added that the missing infrastructure adds to their concerns. 2. Build more crosstown trail facilities like the Virginia Corridor Virginia Corridor is one of the jewels of Modesto’s active transportation network. The trail is one of the most loved pieces of Modesto’s network by residents. Residents stated that they would be like to see the City build more trails like it across Modesto. These corridors would provide safe, comfortable, off-street crosstown connectivity, something many residents believe the City currently lacks. Residents use the Virginia Corridor for many purposes, including commuting and recreating. Building similar facilities across Modesto would expand the health and environmental benefits to these new areas of the city. 3. Slow traffic on residential streets As residents made clear, the key to any successful active transportation network starts with accessibility from their door. Slowing down vehicle traffic and providing walking and bicycle enhancements in residential areas will go a long way to shifting travel behavior on local neighborhood trips. Traffic calming residential streets work in tandem with safe routes to school goals and improves connections to crosstown facilities. 4. Make it safer and more comfortable to cross large streets and to cross streets near neighborhood- serving destinations Many residents cannot walk or bike to a local destination, like a park, school, library, or corner store, without needing to cross at least one large street. Residents stated that many arterial and collector street crossings feel uncomfortable, especially at uncontrolled locations. They also noted that bicycle facilities dropping at some intersections was a design consideration they would like addressed. Residents also shared crossing concerns about off-street facilities like Virginia Corridor; for mid-block crossings and wanting better connectivity/crossing options into downtown. ENGAGEMENT THEMES 55 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ---PAGE BREAK--- CHAPTER 5 Recommendations ---PAGE BREAK--- Built on the needs and opportunities identified by evaluating existing conditions, community input, and data-driven analyses, this chapter presents the recommended bicycle and pedestrian networks for Modesto. Recommendations described in this Plan serve as a blueprint to create successful, well utilized, and safe pedestrian and bicycle networks. Project recommendations outside of Modesto’s rights-of-way play an essential part in the overall comprehensiveness of the active transportation network. Implementing these projects will require additional coordination with outside agencies such as Caltrans, county agencies, or utilities. This Plan proposes 192 miles of new or upgraded bikeways and pedestrian infrastructure improvements at 109 locations. OVERVIEW 57 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- STRATEGIES Bicycle Recommendation Development Bicycle recommendations were developed using a context-sensitive approach that incorporated many factors, including street width, lane configuration, parking, land uses, barriers, nearby destinations, and community engagement. Recommendations focus on connecting residents to schools, shopping areas, parks, trails, and downtown safely and comfortably. The low-stress network includes all shared-use paths, bicycle boulevards, and separated bikeways (existing and proposed). This network shows where most people biking could travel comfortably across the City. Pedestrian Recommendation Development Pedestrian recommendations are concentrated within pedestrian priority areas (PPAs). PPAs were developed based on many factors including the results of the existing conditions analysis (connectivity, demand, and accessibility), proximity to destinations including schools, parks, commercial areas, downtown, locations with high volumes of foot traffic, and prioritizing areas with a history of pedestrian-involved collisions. Figure 14 shows the location of Modesto’s nine pedestrian priority areas. Spot recommendations seek to improve the safety and comfort of people walking and rolling along or across streets. 58 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 14: Pedestrian Priority Areas 108 132 219 99 Maze Blvd H St Kansas Ave Tully Rd Roselle Ave Coffee Rd Mable Ave Blue Gum Ave N Carpen ter Rd Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Sta n d iford Ave Sylvan Ave Sylvan M e a d ows Dr Yosemite Blvd E Briggsmore Ave G St Dale Rd Woodland Ave California Ave M i llbro o k A v e I St Cr e e k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave Sh e rw o od Ave W Hatch R d S u nrise Ave Bangs Ave W Roseburg Ave W Whitmore Ave K o d i a kDr N 9th St E n cina Ave Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Lateral W Bri ggsmore A ve Lateral Number 6 W Rumble Rd S isk Rd Carver Rd Claus Rd Floyd Ave State Hwy 99 Pelandale Ave Sc e ni c Dr State Hwy 108 E Orangeburg Ave State Hwy 132 Vintage Faire Mall Central Valley Plaza Coffee Plaza Wood Colony Plaza The Lakes Center Caruso Shopping Center Marshall's Plaza Briggsmore Square Century Center Tully Manor Shopping Center Amtrak Station McHenry McHenry Tully Tully Sylvan Sylvan Coffee Coffee Downtown Downtown Paradise/ West Modesto Paradise/ West Modesto Northwest Modesto Northwest Modesto Yosemite Yosemite Oakdale Oakdale 0 0.5 1 MILES PEDESTRIAN PRIORITY AREAS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries School Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum Shopping Center Park City Boundary Pedestrian Priority Areas ---PAGE BREAK--- BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Bicycle Facilities CLASS I SHARED-USE PATH (TRAIL) Dedicated paths for walking and bicycling completely separate from the roadway. CLASS II BICYCLE LANE Striped lanes for bicyclists. CLASS IIB BUFFERED BICYCLE LANE Bicycle lanes that include a striped “buffer” area either between the bicycle lane and the travel lane or between the bicycle lane and parked cars (sometimes in both areas). CLASS III BICYCLE ROUTE Signed routes for bicyclists on low-speed, low-volume streets where roadway space is shared with motorists. CLASS IIIB BICYCLE BOULEVARD Bicycle routes that are further enhanced with traffic calming features or other treatments to prioritize bicyclist comfort. A toolkit of bicycle boulevard strategies can be found later in this chapter. Treatments will be specific to each corridor and determined based on local community input and planning/engineering judgment. CLASS IV SEPARATED BIKEWAY On-street bicycle facilities with a physical barrier between the bicycle space and motor vehicle lanes. Barriers can include bollards, curbs, elevation, or parking. 60 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Toolkit Unlike other bicycle facilities, bicycle boulevards are unique in that there are no specific standards or treatments. Bicycle boulevards can be implemented in various ways to create an environment where bicycle travel is prioritized in a shared space with cars. Individual corridors will be analyzed to determine which treatments reflect the solutions that will bring about the highest increase in bicyclist comfort and safety while respecting and coordinating with the needs and desires of nearby residents and stakeholders. Treatments will vary from simple signage and striping only to more advanced intersection redesigns. This Plan does not provide specific treatment recommendations for individual bicycle boulevard corridors. There are three primary categories of improvements: ▶Signs and pavement markings ▶Vehicle speed management ▶Vehicle volume reduction SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS Pavement Markings Bicycle Boulevards can have unique pavement markings or sharrows to reinforce that the street is a shared space for people biking and driving. Sharrows can also have green backing to increase driver awareness further. Wayfinding Signs Wayfinding is an essential component of the overall bicycle network but plays an even more significant role on bicycle boulevards. Bicycle boulevards can weave through neighborhoods, increasing the importance of the signs to help users easily navigate through their trips. Wayfinding can also help raise awareness of the presence of the bicycle boulevard, potentially generating new users. 61 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Curb Extensions Curb extensions extend the curb into the street. They shorten crossing distances for people walking, provide improved visibility at pedestrian and bicycle intersections, and provide additional pedestrian queuing space. Chicanes Chicanes add gentle curves to otherwise straight streets. Adding curves to the road slows car traffic by narrowing the travel lane. The lane adjustments can be created with just striping or with offset curb extensions/ landscaping. VEHICLE SPEED MANAGEMENT Reduce Speed Limit In some areas, especially around schools, reducing the speed limit below 25 MPH may be a helpful strategy in slowing cars and making bicyclists and pedestrians more comfortable in the corridor. Neighborhood Traffic Circle Neighborhood traffic circles are an alternative intersection treatment to a signal or stop sign. Traffic circles can regulate the flow of traffic while adding a traffic calming element. 62 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Chokers/Pinch Points A pinch point narrows available roadway width with two curb extensions. Limiting the available width creates a narrow road environment where drivers drive slower. Speed Bumps/Speed Humps/Speed Cushions Speed bumps (and similar devices) span the roadway's width and encourage cars to slow down. Speed bumps can be designed with slots for emergency vehicle use. Median Islands Median islands create a pinch point for traffic in the center of the roadway and offer shorter crossing distances for pedestrians when used in tandem with a marked crossing. Credit: Seattle DOT 63 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- VEHICLE VOLUME REDUCTION Partial Closure Diverters Partial closure diverters can be installed to allow bicyclists to proceed straight across the intersection while directing motorists to make left or right turns. These installations prohibit all turns from the major street onto the bikeway. Curb extensions can also be incorporated with stormwater management features and/or a mountable island to improve pedestrian crossings while allowing emergency vehicle access. Median Refuge Island Median refuge islands restrict through and left-turn vehicle movements along the bikeway while providing refuge for bicyclists to cross one direction of traffic at a time. This treatment prohibits left turns from the major street onto the bikeway, while right turns are still allowed. Right-in/Right-out Diverters Right-in/right-out diverters can be installed to allow bicyclists to proceed straight through the intersection while directing motorists to turn right. The island can accommodate bicycle access to the corridor while reducing conflicts and still allowing local and emergency vehicles. Left turns from the major street onto the bikeway are typically prohibited, while right turns are still allowed. Full Diverters Full diverters block all motor vehicles from continuing on a neighborhood bikeway, while bicyclists can continue unrestricted. Full closures can be constructed to be permeable to emergency vehicles. 64 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 65 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- PROPOSED BICYCLE NETWORK This Plan recommends 192 miles of new or upgraded facilities across Modesto; proposing upgrades to about 58 miles of existing facilities. Table 6 provides a breakdown of the existing and proposed bicycle networks broken down by bikeway class. Figure 15a–g is a map of the current and proposed bicycle network. When fully built out, Modesto will have 238 miles of dedicated bicycle facilities. Figure 16 shows the low-stress bicycle network. This network consists of all existing and proposed shared-use paths, bicycle boulevards, and separated bikeways. Bicycle boulevards are important connections that can connect residents to crosstown trails and separated bikeways. This network shows were many Modesto residents and visitors can travel comfortably. Appendix B shows all bicycle recommendations by street segment. Recommendations are sorted by bikeway class recommendation and then alphabetically. Table 6: Bicycle Facility Network by Bikeway Classification (Miles) Existing Bikeways Facilities Being Upgraded Recommended Facilities Full Network Build-Out Shared-use Path 17.1 0.0 26.1 43.2 Bicycle Lane 26.0 18.8 11.2 18.4 Buffered Bicycle Lane 17.3 13.0 6.4 10.6 Bicycle Route 39.8 26.5 0.3 13.6 Bicycle Boulevard 0.0 0.0 94.9 94.9 Separated Bikeway 4.4 0.0 53.3 57.7 Total 104.6 58.3 192.2 238.4 66 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 219 99 8th St W Granger Ave Pearl St Kearney Ave H St Norwegian Ave Kansas Ave 9th St College Ave Tully Rd Woodland Ave I St la L o m a Ave Tully Rd W Uni o n Ave Air p ort Way Lateral Nu m b er 4 Coffee Rd Mable Ave N Carpent e r R d N 9th St Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Needham St Roselle Ave Paradise Av e Sta n d iford Ave Clar e m o n t Ave Co l l e g e A v e Haddon Ave Poust Rd Sylvan Ave Lakewood Ave Virginia Ave Claus Rd S ylv an M e a d o w s Dr Yosemite Blvd E Briggsmore Ave G St Dale Rd Neece Dr Colfax Ave el Vecino Ave La ra mi e Dr Crows Landing Rd B righton Ave H a s h e m D r 6th St D r ag o o Park Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Lincoln A v e Parker Rd 11th St Carpenter Rd Claratina Ave Celeste Dr Morse Rd Lucern Ave E Morris Ave Sutter Ave Miller Ave Claratina Ave M o d e s t o Virginia Corridor Tuolumne Blv d 7th St California Ave Millb r ook A v e Cr e e k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave She rwo od Ave W Hatch R d Bangs Ave W Rumble Rd W Whitmore Ave K o d i a kDr Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Late ra l E Bri ggsmore Ave W Briggsmore Ave Lateral Number 6 Sisk R d Carver Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave P elan dale Ave S ce ni c D r E Orangeburg Ave S Mo r t o n Blvd Amtrak Station 0 0.5 1 MILE BICYCLE PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS MODESTO CA NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Modesto City Boundary Shopping Center Park Proposed Bicycle Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Existing Bicyle Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bike Route Class IV Separated Bikeway K St H St 7th St I St 12th St B St 11th St 10th St B e a rd S t I St Downtown Figure 15a: Recommended Bikeways RECOMMENDATIONS 67 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 99 8th St D St H St 1st St 9th St C o ll ege Ave I St la L om a Ave N Martin Luther King Dr Sierra Dr Lateral Numbe r 4 Lane St J St N 9th St N Morton Blvd S Morton Blvd Bodem St Locust St Campus Way Jennie St Merced Ave Johnson St Downey Ave Poplar Ave Maple St Pine St 14th St Virginia Ave Scenic Dr Yosemite B l vd M St 17th St 11th St Paradise Ave 3rd St E St S Washington St Burney St Tyo lume River Trail ex t ension 16th St Stoddard Ave Needham St G St F St 10th St 5th St 13th St K St 12th St 7th St 0 0.1 0.2 MILE PROPOSED BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Existing Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bike Route Class IV Separated Bikeway Recommended Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Figure 15b: Recommended Bikeways 68 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 99 8th St Sylvan Ave Griswold Ave W Granger Ave 14th St Norwegian Ave 9th St E Roseburg Ave I St la Lo ma Ave E Union Ave Tully Rd W Roseburg Ave Coldwell Ave J St L ateral Nu mbe r 4 Sy l v a n M e a d o ws Dr Downey Ave Coffee Rd M ount Vern on D r College A v e K o d i a k Dr E Granger Ave W Rumble Rd M St 10th St Merle Ave Floyd Ave Elm Ave 17th St G St Burney St Keller St Bodem St Locust St G r e e n w ich Ln Johnson St E n cina Ave Sha w ne e Dr Palmwood Dr W Morris Ave Standiford Ave 16th St Stoddard Ave Oakdale Rd Needham St Sunrise Ave 12th St 13th St H St Gre c ian Ave K St N Emerald Ave Wylie Dr Princeton A v e Woodrow Ave W Union Ave el Vista Ave Kansas Ave Brighton Ave H a s h e m Dr Pearl St Dragoo Park Dr Mable Ave Celeste Dr Bowen Ave E Morris Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Encina Ave Trail Sher w ood Ave P elandale Ave E Rumble Rd W Br i ggsmore Av e Rose Ave Roo t La t eral E Briggs more Ave Sce nic Dr Orangeburg Ave Carver Rd 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Existing Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bike Route Class IV Separated Bikeway Recommended Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Cl IV S t d Bik Figure 15c: Recommended Bikeways 69 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 99 8th St Sylvan Ave Griswold Ave W Granger Ave 14th St Norwegian Ave 9th St E Roseburg Ave I St la Lo ma Ave E Union Ave Tully Rd W Roseburg Ave Coldwell Ave J St L ateral Nu mbe r 4 Sylv an Me a dows Dr Downey Ave Coffee Rd M ount Vern on D r College A v e Ko d i ak Dr E Granger Ave W Rumble Rd M St 10th St Merle Ave Floyd Ave Elm Ave 17th St G St Burney St Keller St Bodem St Locust St G r e enwich Ln Johnson St E n cina Ave Sha w ne e Dr Palmwood Dr W Morris Ave Standiford Ave 16th St Stoddard Ave Oakdale Rd Needham St Sunrise Ave 12th St 13th St H St Gre c ian Ave K St N Emerald Ave Wylie Dr Princeton A v e Woodrow Ave W Union Ave el Vista Ave Kansas Ave Brighton Ave H a s h e m Dr Pearl St Dragoo Park Dr Mable Ave Celeste Dr Bowen Ave E Morris Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Encina Ave Trail Sher w ood Ave P elandale Ave E Rumble Rd W Br i ggsmore Av e Rose Ave Roo t La t eral E Briggs more Ave Scen ic Dr Orangeburg Ave Carver Rd 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Existing Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IV Separated Bikeway Recommended Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Figure 15d: Recommended Bikeways 70 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Amtrak Station Merle Ave Roselle Ave Lakewood Ave Keller St Palmwood Dr Belh arb o ur Dr L i llian Dr Ma n or Oak Dr Norseman Dr Oakdale Rd E d g e br o ok Dr Sharon Ave Kodiak Dr Brighton Ave Penny Ln N McClure Rd Dry Creek Dr Mable Ave Sylvan Ave Lincoln Oak Dr Wylie Dr Floyd Ave Sonoma Ave Celeste Dr E B riggsm o re A v e Lincoln Av e el Vista Ave Lara mi e Dr H a s h e m Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Parker Rd Cr e e k w o o d Dr M i llb r ook Ave Encina Ave Trail Claus Rd Rose Ave S cenic Dr Orangeburg Ave 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Existing Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bike Route Class IV Separated Bikeway Recommended Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Figure 15e: Recommended Bikeways 71 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 132 99 Amtrak Station Rosell e Ave Tioga Dr N Riverside Dr Merle Ave Coffee Rd Lakewood Ave E n cina Ave Sharon Ave Hi ll s i d e D r Yosemite Blvd Pe ppermint Dr Lill ia n Dr L e gi on Par k Dr la Lo m a Ave Norseman Dr Oakdale Rd E d g e br o ok Dr Penn y Ln Dry Creek Dr Wylie Dr Sonoma Ave N McClure Rd Lara mie Dr Bri g hton Ave Claus Rd Lincoln Ave Parker Rd el Vista Ave Celeste Dr Cr e ek wo o d Dr E Br iggs more Ave Encina Ave Trail Rose Ave Scenic Dr Orangeburg Ave 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Existing Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bike Route Class IV Separated Bikeway Recommended Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Figure 15f: Recommended Bikeways 72 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 99 8th St D St H St 9th St Woodland Ave I St la Lo ma Ave N Martin Luther King Dr Sierra Dr Coldwell Ave Lateral Number 4 J St N Mo r t o n B l v d Downey Ave California Ave 14th St M St Yos e mite Blvd Coffee Rd 17th St 11th St Tully Rd 3rd St Bodem St Locust St Johnson St Paradise Rd Mercy Ave E St Elm Ave S Emerald Ave Burney St 16th St Stoddard Ave Needham St G St De zza n i Ln Boise A v e F St Morse Rd 10th St 5th St N Emerald Ave Scenic Dr N e e c e Dr 13th St K St R o ot Lat eral Crows Landing Rd 12th St Carpenter Rd Paradise Ave E Morris Ave Sutter Ave 7th St N Carpenter Rd W Hatch Rd Kansas Ave 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Existing Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane Class III Bike Route Class IV Separated Bikeway Recommended Facilities Class I Shared-Use Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class IIB Buffered Bike Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard Class IV Separated Bikeway Figure 15g: Recommended Bikeways 73 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 219 99 8th St W Granger Ave Pearl St Kearney Ave H St Stoddard Ave Norwegian Ave Kansas Ave 9th St College Ave Tully Rd Woodland Ave I St la L o ma Ave Tully Rd W Uni o n Ave Air p ort Way Later al Nu m b er 4 Coffee Rd Mable Ave N Ca rp en ter Rd N 9th St Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Needham St Roselle Ave Paradise Av e Sta n d iford Ave Clar e m o n t Ave College Av e Haddon Ave Poust Rd Sylvan Ave Lakewood Ave Virginia Ave Claus Rd S ylva n M e a d o w s Dr Yosemite Blvd E Briggsmore Ave G St Dale Rd Ne e c e D r Colfax Ave el Vecino Ave Lar am ie Dr Crows Landing Rd B righton Ave H a s h e m Dr 6th St D ragoo Park Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Lincoln Av e Parker Rd 11th St Carpenter Rd Claratina Ave Celeste Dr Morse Rd Lucern Ave E Morris Ave Sutter Ave Miller Ave Claratina Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Tuolumne Blv d C h eyen ne W a y 7th St California Ave Millbr ook A v e Cr e e k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave She rwo o d Ave W Hatch R d Bangs Ave W Rumble Rd W Whitmore Ave K o d i a kDr Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Lat er a l E Bri ggs more Ave W Briggsmore Ave Lateral Number 6 Sisk R d Carver Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave P elan dale Ave S ce nic D r E Orangeburg Ave S Mo r t o n Blvd Amtrak Station 0 0.5 1 MILE LOW-STRESS BIKEWAYS MODESTO CA NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Modesto City Boundary Shopping Center Park Proposed Bicycle Facilities Class I Paths and Class IV Bikeways Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevards Existing Bicyle Class I Paths and Class IV Bikeways K St H St 7th St I St 12th St B St 11th St 10th St B e a rd S t I St Downtown Figure 16: Citywide Low-Stress Bikeways RECOMMENDATIONS 74 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- Road Diets Road diet projects can play an essential role in the reallocation of space required to design a street that better serves bicyclists and pedestrians. A road diet is reconfiguring a roadway by removing travel lanes and utilizing the space for other uses and travel modes. The reduction of vehicle travel lanes allows the limited roadway space to be reallocated for other uses such as bike lanes, pedestrian refuge islands, transit uses, and parking. Road diet projects require traffic pattern analysis, public engagement, and design work before determining their feasibility. However, these roadway configurations offer many high-level benefits, including enhanced safety, mobility, and access for all road users, creating a complete streets environment along each corridor. These benefits include: ▶Crash reduction rates between 19%-47% ▶Reduced vehicle speeds ▶Improved mobility and access for all road users ▶Better integration of the roadway into surrounding land uses1 Conflicts between high-speed through traffic, left-turning vehicles, and other road users that are more prevalent on traditional multilane streets can lead to relatively higher crash frequencies than roadways that have been reconfigured. These reconfigurations also allow cities to integrate additional pedestrian and bicycle facilities along these corridors. Right-sizing roads with underutilized space can create a solution that addresses safety concerns and benefits for all road users. Impacts on vehicle traffic must also be considered when analyzing corridors for road diets. Vehicle traffic counts, intersection studies, and parking occupancy studies are some of the vehicle-related studies that may also be completed. These reconfigurations can also be cost-effective when combined with planned roadway reconstruction or repaving projects. 1 Federal Highway Administration, Road Diet Informational Guide. diets/guidance/info_guide/. 2014. These roadway configurations offer many high-level benefits, including enhanced safety, mobility, and access for all road users. 75 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Pedestrian Toolkit This Plan’s toolkit groups pedestrian infrastructure into six categories: ▶Pavement markings ▶Pedestrian-actuated beacons ▶Street furniture ▶Sidewalks, trails, and medians ▶Intersection and street design ▶Studies Example infrastructure components from each of the categories are provided below. PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND CROSSWALKS Advance Stop and Advance Yield Markings Advance yield pavement markings, also referred to as “Shark’s teeth,” are markings placed on the roadway 20’-50’ before a mid-block crosswalk or crosswalk at an intersection approach without a signal or stop sign. Stop lines are solid white lines that extend across intersection approach lanes. They may be used to indicate the point behind which vehicles are required to stop in compliance with a stop sign or other traffic control device that requires vehicles to stop, like a pedestrian hybrid beacon. Crosswalks Transverse crosswalks consist of two thick lines that demarcate pedestrian right-of-way at intersections and mid-block locations. High-visibility crosswalks are marked with thick bars, drawing additional attention and awareness to the crossing. There are multiple high-visibility crosswalk designs (continental ladder, etc.). In school zones, these crosswalks are yellow, as opposed to the standard white color. 76 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Decorative Crosswalks Decorative crosswalks can add a placemaking element to the street while still serving a marked crosswalk’s primary visibility and awareness objectives. Decorative crosswalks can be themed to reflect the surrounding neighborhood or nearby destinations. Decorative crosswalks must meet specific design parameters to remain compliant with state and federal standards; most importantly, they include transverse markings around any decorative pavement treatment. Raised Crosswalks and Raised Intersections A raised crosswalk is a modification of a speed table. Speed tables reduce vehicle speeds by elevating the entire wheelbase of a vehicle (unlike a speed bump that raises each axle individually). Speed tables can be designed to include a mid-block raised crosswalk; in these cases, the height of the speed table matches the sidewalk. This treatment makes pedestrians more visible to approaching motorists and also slows vehicles. Raised intersections elevate the entire intersection to the sidewalk level, providing the same improved visibility of people walking and reduction in vehicle speed as raised crosswalks, but for all intersection approaches. Raised intersections are typically applied in areas with high pedestrian usage. Trail Markings Paved trails can include striping to demarcate separate areas for pedestrians and bicyclists. Especially on crowded trails with high pedestrian usage, encouraging spatial separation can reduce conflicts and improve the efficiency and consistency of bicycle travel. 77 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- PEDESTRIAN-ACTUATED BEACONS Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) are user-activated flashing lights used at unsignalized intersections or mid-block crossings. These beacons alert motorists to the presence of people in the crosswalk. These are most commonly used on 2-4 lane roadways. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) A pedestrian hybrid beacon is a signal designed to increase pedestrians’ safety at unsignalized locations on multilane roadways. Thresholds for installation vary based on the posted speed limit, crossing distance, vehicular volumes, and volumes of pedestrian crossings. STREET FURNITURE, UTILITIES, AND SIGNS Signage Signs serve a wide range of functions, from prohibiting movements, limiting parking, or providing advance notice of school zones or crosswalks. Lighting Pedestrian-scale lighting improves visibility for both people walking and driving, particularly at intersections. Lighting can be achieved on one light pole (one light for the road and one light for the sidewalk) or separate poles. These lights focus on illuminating the sidewalk, not the roadway. Lighting is also an important consideration along trails. 78 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Street Furniture/Amenities Street furniture includes benches, transit shelters, trash cans, newsstands, and other items within the public right-of-way. Sidewalks Sidewalks provide dedicated space for pedestrians to walk. Sidewalks are raised from the roadway and sometimes have a planting strip for increased separation from the street. Obstructions like utility boxes, signs, and poles can sometimes limit available sidewalk width. Shared-Use Paths Dedicated paths for walking and bicycling completely separate from the roadway. When paved with asphalt or concrete, trails can include markings to encourage the separation of modes. SIDEWALKS, TRAILS, AND MEDIANS Curb Extensions Curb extensions extend the curb into the street. Curb extensions can provide several valuable traffic calming and safety benefits. They shorten the crossing distance for people walking, provide improved visibility at intersections, and provide additional pedestrian queuing space. They can be installed at intersections or mid-block. Curb extensions can be made with permanent materials like cement or implemented as a “quick build” with pavement markings and bollards/delineators. 79 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Curb Ramps Curb ramps allow for smooth, accessible transitions between the sidewalk and street level. Curb ramps are essential for those with special mobility needs, strollers, and many other users. Ramps must be built to current Americans with Disabilities Act standards. INTERSECTIONS AND STREET DESIGN Intersection Redesign Intersections are not always symmetrical. Intersections can have confusing or asymmetric designs when more than two streets come together or when two streets come together at acute angles. There are design components like curb extensions, painted buffer areas, and medians that can make these intersections more inviting and less stressful for active transportation users. Free-Right Turn Lane/Slip Lane Removal Free-right turn lanes facilitate increased vehicle throughout and faster turns at intersections at the expense of pedestrian and bicyclist safety and movement. Traffic Calming Traffic calming is the implementation of roadway changes to slow down vehicle traffic. Engineers can consider a wide array of tools to slow vehicle traffic, including speed bumps, chicanes, speed feedback signs, and other items. Traffic calming is also an essential component of bicycle boulevards. 80 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Stop Signs and Traffic Signals Stop signs and traffic signals are traffic control devices used to regulate traffic through an intersection. Implementing stop signs and traffic signals is regulated by the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) and requires a technical analysis before implementation. STUDIES Complex Intersections and Crossings While most of the locations that were examined for the Plan have recommendations, some sites will require additional study and traffic analysis to develop recommendations. Some locations will also require coordination with other agencies. 81 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Pedestrian Recommendations The Plan recommends pedestrian infrastructure improvements at 109 locations across Modesto. Figure 17a–g shows the location of each pedestrian improvement. Table 7 provides specific details of each recommendation. 82 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 219 99 8th St W Granger Ave Kearney Ave Norwegian Ave Kansas Ave 9 t h St College Ave Woodland Ave Tully Rd W Uni o n Ave Air p ort Way N Ca r penter Rd N 9th St Oakdale Rd Prescott Rd Roselle Ave Paradise Av e St a n d iford Ave Clar e m o n t Ave Colle g e A v e Haddon Ave Sylvan Ave Lakewood Ave Virginia Ave Claus Rd Yosemite Blvd E Briggsmore Ave G St Dale Rd N e e c e Dr Colfax Ave Lar a mie Dr Crows Landing Rd Br i g h ton Ave Ha s h e m D r D ragoo Park Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Lincoln Av e Parker Rd Carpenter R d Claratina Ave Celeste Dr Morse Rd Lucern Ave E Morris Ave Sutter Ave Miller Ave Claratina Ave Mo d esto Virginia Corridor C h e y e nne W ay 7th St California Ave M illbro o k Av e Cr e e k w o od Dr Enslen Ave She rwo o d Ave W Hatch R d Bangs Ave W Whitmore Ave K o d i a k Dr Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Late r al W Briggsmore Ave Lateral Number 6 Sisk R d Carver Rd Floyd Ave P elan dale Ave S cenic D r S Morto n Blvd Great Valley Academy Stanislaus County West Campus Petersen Alternative Center for Education M. Robert Adkison Elementary Virginia Parks Elementary Norman N. Glick Middle Capistrano Elementary Christine Sipherd Elementary Bernard L. Hughes Elementary Alice N. Stroud Elementary Elihu Beard Elementary Bret Harte Elementary Burbank Elementary El Vista Elementary Enslen Elementary Catherine Everett Elementary Franklin Elementary John Muir Elementary La Loma Junior High Mark Twain Junior High James Marshall Elementary Orville Wright Elementary Robertson Road Elementary Roosevelt Junior High Rose Avenue Elementary Shackelford Elementary Wilson Elementary Sonoma Elementary Lakewood Elementary Harriette Kirschen Elementary Alberta Martone Elementary Evelyn Hanshaw Middle James C. Enochs High Fred C. Beyer High Peter Johansen High Grace M. Davis High Thomas Downey High Elliott Adult Education Center Modesto High Robert Elliott Alternative Education Center Independence Charter Mildred Perkins Elementary Mary Lou Dieterich Elementary Josephine Elementary Prescott Junior High George Eisenhut Elementary Agnes M. Baptist Elementary Daniel J. Savage Middle Mary Ann Sanders Elementary Sherwood Elementary Somerset Middle Standiford Elementary Sylvan Elementary Woodrow Elementary Coleman F. Brown Elementary Stockard Coffee Elementary Orchard Elementary Elizabeth Ustach Middle Freedom Elementary Yosemite ROP Caswell Elementary Carroll Fowler Elementary Mae Hensley Junior High Ceres High School Walter White Elementary Blaker-Kinser Junior High Amtrak Station 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1314 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 7778 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 9596 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 0 0.5 1 MILE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES MODESTO CA NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Modesto City Boundary Shopping Center Park H St 7th St I St 12th St B St 11th St 9th St I St 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90 89 79 78 77 28 108 107 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 Downtown Pedestrian Recommendations Improvement Location DT Plan Ped Corridors Trail Facilities Recommendations Class I Shared-Use Path Existing Class I Shared-Use Path Figure 17a: Pedestrian Recommendations RECOMMENDATIONS 83 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 99 8th St D St H St 1st St 9th St C o ll ege Ave I St la L om a Ave N Martin Luther King Dr Sierra Dr Lateral Numbe r 4 Lane St J St N 9th S t N Morton Blvd S Morton Blvd Bodem St Locust St Campus Wa y Jennie St Merced Ave Johnson St Downey Ave Poplar Ave Maple St Pine St 14th St Virginia Ave Scenic Dr Yosem i te B lvd M St 17th St 11th St Paradise Ave 3rd St E St S Washington St Burney St Tyo lume River Trail ex t ension 16th St Stoddard Ave Needham St G St F St 10th St 5th St 13th St K St 12th St 7th St 28 60 61 77 78 79 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 0 0.1 0.2 MILE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Trail Facilities Existing Class I Shared-Use Path Class I Shared-Use Path Pedestrian Recommendations Improvement Location DT Plan Ped Corridors Ped Priority Area Figure 17b: Pedestrian Recommendations 84 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 219 99 Veneman Ave St a n d iford Ave Woodland Ave Tully Rd J a n n a Ave Blue Gum Ave Prescott Rd Conant Ave M ount Ver non Dr G St College A v e Coldwell Ave 2nd St Brink Ave Eicher Ave Woodrow Ave Sha w ne e Dr Hahn Dr Marsala W a y P o ust Rd Evergreen Ave S h e l d on Dr Ga g o s D r Bowen Ave W Unio n Ave Morse Rd Princeton A v e Dale Rd N Carpenter Rd Pearl St Modesto Virginia Corridor Cheyenn e W a y W Roseburg Ave W Rumble Rd P e landa le Ave Snyder Ave Orangeburg Ave W Br i g g smore Ave Lateral Number 6 Carver Rd 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Trail Facilities Existing Class I Shared-Use Path Class I Shared-Use Path Pedestrian Recommendations Improvement Location DT Plan Ped Corridors Ped Priority Area Figure 17c: Pedestrian Recommendations 85 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 99 8th St Sylvan Ave Griswold Ave W Granger Ave 14th St Norwegian Ave 9th St E Roseburg Ave I St la Lo ma Ave E Union Ave Tully Rd W Roseburg Ave Coldwell Ave J St L ateral Nu mbe r 4 Sylv an Me a dows Dr Downey Ave Coffee Rd M ount Vern on D r College A v e Ko d i ak Dr E Granger Ave W Rumble Rd 10th St Merle Ave Floyd Ave Elm Ave 17th St G St Burney St Keller St Bodem St Locust St G r e enwich Ln Johnson St E n cina Ave Sha w ne e Dr Palmwood Dr W Morris Ave Standiford Ave 16th St Stoddard Ave Oakdale Rd Needham St Sunrise Ave 1 2 th St 13th St H St Gre c ian Ave K St N Emerald Ave Wylie Dr Princeton A v e Woodrow Ave W Union Ave el Vista Ave Kansas Ave Brighton Ave H a s h e m Dr Pearl St Dragoo Park Dr Mable Ave Celeste Dr Bowen Ave E Morris Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Encina Ave Trail Sher w ood Ave P elandale Ave E Rumble Rd W Br i ggsmore Av e Rose Ave Roo t La t eral E Briggs more Ave Scen ic Dr Orangeburg Ave Carver Rd 1 2 3 4 5 7 10 12 13 14 15 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 7778 79 83 84 85 87 89 101 102 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Trail Facilities Existing Class I Shared-Use Path Class I Shared-Use Path Pedestrian Recommendations Improvement Location DT Plan Ped Corridors Ped Priority Area Figure 17d: Pedestrian Recommendations 86 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Amtrak Station N Riverside Dr Merle Ave Roselle Ave Lakewood Ave Keller St Palmwood Dr Belharb our Dr Pe p permint Dr Lillia n D r Ma n or Oak Dr Norseman Dr Oakdale Rd E d g eb r ook D r Sha r on Ave Kodiak Dr Brighton Ave Penny Ln N McClure Rd Dry Creek Dr Mable Ave Sylvan Ave Lincoln Oak Dr Wylie Dr Floyd Ave Sonoma Ave Celes te Dr E Briggsm o re A v e Lincoln Ave el Vista Ave Lara m ie Dr H a s h e m Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Parker Rd C r e e kwood Dr M ill b rook Av e Encina Ave Trail Claus Rd Rose Ave S c enic Dr Orangeburg Ave 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 40 109 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Trail Facilities Existing Class I Shared-Use Path Class I Shared-Use Path Pedestrian Recommendations Improvement Location DT Plan Ped Corridors Ped Priority Area Figure 17e: Pedestrian Recommendations 87 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 132 99 Amtrak Station Roselle Ave Tioga Dr N Riverside Dr Merle Ave Coffee Rd Lakewood Ave E n cina Ave Sharon Ave H i llsi d e D r Yosemite Blvd Lillia n D r Le gion Park Dr la Lom a Ave Norseman Dr Oakdale Rd E d g eb r ook D r Pe nny Ln Dry Creek Dr Wylie Dr Sonoma Ave N McClure Rd Lara m ie Dr Bri g hton Ave Claus Rd Lincoln Ave Parker Rd el Vista Ave Celeste Dr C reekw o o d D r Encina Ave Trail Rose Ave Scenic D r Orangeburg Ave 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 37 38 39 42 43 44 45 109 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Trail Facilities Existing Class I Shared-Use Path Class I Shared-Use Path Pedestrian Recommendations Improvement Location DT Plan Ped Corridors Ped Priority Area Figure 17f: Pedestrian Recommendations 88 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 132 99 8th St D St H St 9th St Woodland Ave I St la Lo ma Ave Sierra Dr Coldwell Ave Lateral Number 4 J St N M o r t o n B l v d Downey Ave California Ave 14th St M St 10th St Yos e mite Blvd 17th St Maple St Pine St 11th St Pelton Ave Bodem St Locust St Johnson St Mercy Ave E St Elm Ave S Emerald Ave Burney St 16th St Stoddard Ave Needham St G St De zza n i Ln Boise A v e F St Morse Rd 5th S t N Emerald Ave Scenic Dr N e e ce D r 13th St K St R oot La teral Crows Landing Rd 12th St Carpenter Rd Paradise Ave E Morris Ave Sutter Ave W Hatch Rd Kansas Ave 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 59 60 61 73 7778 79 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 0 0.35 0.7 MILE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Shopping Center Park Trail Facilities Existing Class I Shared-Use Path Class I Shared-Use Path Pedestrian Recommendations Improvement Location DT Plan Ped Corridors Ped Priority Area Figure 17g: Pedestrian Recommendations 89 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 7: Pedestrian Recommendations ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 1 Sylvan Ave Oakdale Rd Study slip lane removal at both western corners. Update all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 2 Floyd Ave Oakdale Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Study removal of the slip lane at the northeast corner and realign the bike lane if removed. 3 Lancey Dr Oakdale Rd Refresh high-visibility crosswalks and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 4 E Briggsmore Ave Oakdale Rd "Refresh the north high-visibility crosswalk and upgrade the other three crosswalks to high-visibility. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Refresh bicycle conflict markings. Study slip lane removal at the southwest corner. 5 E Orangeburg Ave Oakdale Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 6 Sonoma Ave Zuccaro Way Relocate the high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach to the northern approach for greater separation from the school driveway. If relocated, install curb extensions at both northern corners. Add additional red curb where necessary. Consider installing an RRFB for the Sonoma crossing. 7 Scenic Dr Oakdale Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Study removal of all three slip lanes. Install bicycle conflict markings. 8 Ardia Ave N McClure Rd Install a RRFB and advanced yield markings to support the high-visibility crosswalk across N McClure Road. Install a high-visibility crosswalk across Ardia Avenue with an advanced stop bar. 9 Lillian Dr Laramie Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across Laramie Drive and on the northern crossing across Lilian Drive. Install a curb ramp at the northeast corner. 10 Hilliard Way E Orangeburg Ave Install a high-visibility crosswalk with advanced yield markings and an RRFB across E Orangeburg Avenue at the eastern approach. Install a transverse crosswalk across Hilliard Way 90 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 11 Encina Ave N Riverside Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks with advanced stop bars at the southern and western approaches. 12 Encina Ave Covena Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks at all four approaches. Install advance yield markings for the Encina Avenue approaches and advance stop markings for the Covena Avenue approaches. 13 Santa Barbara Ave La Loma Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks with advanced stop bars across both crossing at Santa Barbara Avenue and restripe the high-visibility crosswalk across La Loma Ave with advanced yield markings. Install an RRFB for the La Loma crossing. 14 Miller Ave/La Loma Ave N Santa Cruz Ave Short term: Upgrade and refresh all crosswalks to high-visibility with advance stop markings. Long term: study intersection redesign options to improve visibility/sight lines, shorten crossing distances, and to square up intersection approaches. 15 Haddon Ave/La Loma Ave N Santa Ana Ave Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and install leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Consider installing a curb extension from the triangular island into Haddon Ave and through the crosswalk across La Loma Ave. 16 Monterey Ave Thrasher Ave Refresh all three high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Install curb extensions at all four corners. 17 Herndon Rd Aurora St Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach and a transverse crosswalk across the eastern approach. Install curb extensions at both eastern corners to square up the intersection; install curb ramps. 18 Crows Landing Rd School Ave Refresh all four high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 19 Crows Landing Rd E Hatch Rd Refresh all four high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 91 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 20 Glenn Ave Las Vegas St Upgrade the northern and eastern crosswalks to high-visibility and install advance stop markings. Install curb extensions at all three corners with crosswalk landings. 21 Las Vegas St Butte Ave Upgrade all three crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. Install advance yield markings for the Las Vegas Street crossings and stop markings for the Butte Avenue crossing. Construct curb extensions at both western corners. 22 Red Pine Dr Crippen Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks across the northern and eastern approaches with advance yield markings. Construct a curb ramp at the northwest corner. 23 Pine Tree Ln Robertson Rd Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk at the eastern approach with advance yield markings. Install a high-visibility crosswalk at the northern approach with advance stop markings. 24 Paradise Rd Pine Tree Ln Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across Paradise Road with advance yield markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon for this crossing. 25 Sutter Ave South Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalks across the northern and southern approaches with advance stop marking. Upgrade the eastern crosswalk to high-visibility with advance stop markings. Install curb extensions at all four corners. 26 Rouse Ave Sunset Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk at the eastern approach. Install high-visibility crosswalks at the northern and southern approaches. Install advance stop markings for all approaches. 27 South Ave Roselawn Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks at all four approaches. 28 Sierra Dr Sunset Blvd/3rd St Study intersection redesign options to square up/consolidate intersection approaches (especially the northern approaches) and to determine the best location for a crossing of Sierra Drive near the community center. Upgrade the northern crosswalk to high- visibility and install advance stop markings. 92 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 29 Locust St Sherman Ave Refresh the existing high-visibility crosswalk at the western approach. Install advance yield markings and consider installing an RRFB. Upgrade the crosswalk across the southern approach to high-visibility and install advance yield markings. Install curb ramps at all three corners with landings. 30 Maze Blvd N Emerald Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, install advance stop markings, and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Consider constructing curb extensions at all corners. 31 Sandburg Ave S Emerald Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks with advance yield markings across the northern and southern approaches. Refresh the transverse crosswalk across Sandburg and add advance stop markings. Consider RRFB for the Emerald Avenue crossings. Install curb ramps at all corners. 32 Coffee Rd Sylvan Ave Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 33 E Rumble Rd Coffee Rd Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 34 Niabell Pl Falmouth Way Install a high-visibility crosswalk at the northern approach (avoid driveways on the west side if possible) with advance yield markings. Install a transverse crosswalk across the eastern approach. 35 Floyd Ave Coffee Rd Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 36 Floyd Ave Vera Cruz Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across the western and southern approaches. Install advance yield markings and a RRFB for the western crossing. Install advance stop markings for the southern crossing. 37 Celeste Dr Coffee Rd Install a high-visibility crosswalk with a pedestrian hybrid beacon across the southern approach of Coffee Road. Install a curb ramp at the western landing of this crosswalk. Install advance stop markings. 93 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 38 Spanos Ct/David Ct Coffee Rd Consider removing free-right turn lane at southeast corner. Build out corner to replace removed turn lane.. Upgrade all three existing crosswalks to high-visibility. Consider installing a high-visibility crosswalk at the northern approach. Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 39 E Briggsmore Ave Coffee Rd Short term: Upgrade all crosswalks to high- visibility. Long Term: Conduct traffic study to consider removing both free-right turn lanes and other intersection design/geometry improvements. 40 Palmwood Dr Mable Ave Install a high-visibility crosswalk across Palmwood Dr. 41 Sylvan Meadows Dr Beyer Park Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across all four crossings 42 E Orangeburg Ave Coffee Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advanced stop bars 43 Gloria Way/Brighton Ave Coffee Rd Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach of Coffee Road. Install advance stop markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across Coffee Rd. 44 Lucern Ave Coffee Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advanced stop marking, and leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. Study free-right turn lane removal on the southeast corner. 45 Scenic Dr Coffee Rd Upgrade all existing crosswalks to high-visibility and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. Study free-right turn lane removal. 46 McHenry Ave Coralwood Rd Coordinate with Caltrans to install high- visibility a crosswalk across Coralwood Rd with advanced stop markings 47 McHenry Ave Meily Way Coordinate with Caltrans to install high-visibility a crosswalk across Meily Way with advanced stop markings 48 McHenry Ave W Union Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars. Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 94 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 49 McHenry Ave mid-block south of Sylvan Ave Sylvan Ave/Standiford Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all existing crosswalks to high-visibility with advance stop markings. Provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 50 McHenry Ave Woodrow Ave/Robin Hood Dr Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 51 McHenry Ave E Rumble Rd Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop markings and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 52 McHenry Ave Floyd Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 53 McHenry Ave W Briggsmore Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to study the removal of the free-right turn lane at the southeast corner. Consider installing a bulb-out to square up the intersection if the lane is removed. Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all 54 McHenry Ave Tokay Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to construct a curb extension at the northwest corner. Upgrade existing crosswalks to high-visibility and install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach with advanced stop bars at all approaches. Provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 55 McHenry Ave Granger Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 56 McHenry Ave Orangeburg Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 57 McHenry Ave Fairmont Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across McHenry Ave and high- visibility crosswalks across both approaches to McHenry Ave on Fairmont Ave. 95 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 58 McHenry Ave Hintze Ave/Griswold Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade existing crosswalks to high-visibility and install a pedestrian hybrid beacon with advanced yield markings across McHenry Ave. Consider realigning or relocating the crosswalk across McHenry Ave as a perpendicular crossing. 59 McHenry Ave "Morris Ave” Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 60 McHenry Ave Almond Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade the crosswalk across McHenry Ave to high-visibility with advanced yield markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across McHenry Ave. 61 McHenry Ave Grant St Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade the crosswalk across McHenry Ave to high-visibility with advanced yield markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across McHenry Ave. 62 Trail crossing between Clevenger Dr and Union Ave Tully Rd At the trail crossing between Clevenger Drive and Union Avenue, refresh the high-visibility crosswalk and install advance yield markings. Install an RRFB with an additional actuation push button in the existing median. 63 Woodrow Ave Tully Rd Refresh the existing crosswalks to high-visibility. Install advance stop markings and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 64 W Rumble Rd Tully Rd Upgrade the existing eastern and western crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 65 Mount Vernon Dr Tully Rd Refresh all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks with advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 66 Bowen Ave Tully Rd Refresh all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks with advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 67 W Granger Ave Tully Rd Construct curb extensions at the two eastern corners and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 96 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 68 Pearl St Tully Rd Install high-visibility crosswalks at the eastern and western approaches. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon for the crossing of Tully Road. Construct curb extensions at the two eastern corners. 69 W Orangeburg Ave Tully Rd Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 70 W Roseburg Ave Tully Rd Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 71 Fordham Ave Tully Rd Install a high-visibility crosswalk across Tully Road connecting the southwest and northeast corners with advance yield markings. Install an RRFB for the Tully crossing. Install transverse crosswalks across the eastern and western approaches. 72 Princeton Ave Tully Rd Construct curb extensions at all corners to square up intersection approaches. Install an RRFB for Tully Road crossing. Install transverse crosswalks for the eastern and western approaches. 73 Coldwell Ave Tully Rd Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 74 Carver Rd Orangeburg Ave Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 75 Evergreen Ave Carver Rd Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk at the western approach. Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach. Install a curb ramp at the southeast corner. 76 Martin Ave Orangeburg Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across the eastern approach and install advance yield markings. Install high-visibility crosswalks across the northern and southern approaches with advance stop markings. Consider upgrading the existing RRFB to a PHB. 77 Needham St Park Ave/14th St/L St Coordinate with Caltrans to study intersection redesign options to simplify intersection and improve pedestrian crossings. 78 Needham St Sycamore Ave/15th St Coordinate with Caltrans to study intersection redesign options to simplify intersection and improve pedestrian crossings. 79 H St/Burney St 19th St/La Loma Ave Study intersection redesign options to simplify the intersection, reduce approaches, and improve pedestrian crossings. 97 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 80 N Rosemore Ave Blue Gum Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across the western approach. Install advance stop markings. Build out the northwest corner to fill the current crosshatched area. 81 Poust Rd Mack Ct Extend the red curb south of the school driveway on the west side of Poust Road. Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach and curb ramp at the southwest corner. Install advance yield and "Keep Clear" pavement markings. Install a transverse crosswalk across Mack Court. 82 Brenner Way Conant Ave Relocate the existing high-visibility crosswalk from the southern approach to the northern approach. and install advance yield markings. Upgrade the transverse crosswalk at the western approach to high-visibility and install advance stop markings. 83 Janet Cir Sheldon Dr Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across Sheldon Drive (west approach). Install advance yield markings and construct curb extensions at both corners. Refresh the transverse crosswalk across Janet Circle and install advance stop markings. Refresh the high- visibility crosswalk across Janet Drive. 84 Mount Vernon Dr Earlmar Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across the northern and southern legs of the intersection. 85 Cheyenne Way Shawnee Dr Refresh all high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 86 Blue Bird Dr Snyder Ave Upgrade both crosswalks to high-visibility and install advance stop markings. Install a curb ramp at the southwest corner. 87 Woodrow Ave John Lee Ln Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the northern approach with advance stop markings. 88 Tuolumne Blvd Neece Dr/Merced Ave Upgrade the crossing of Neece Dr to high- visibility. Construct a high-visibility crosswalk across the western approach of Tuolumne. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon. Convert existing median islands to pedestrian refuge islands where appropriate. 89 J St 9th St - 11th St From Downtown Master Plan: Create a shared or flush street from the Transit Center entrance on 9th Street till 11th Street. 98 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 90 J Street Railroad Tracks between 7th and 9th St From Downtown Master Plan: Study the construction of an underpass under the railroad tracks to connect the two transit corridors. 91 6th St H St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 92 I St 6th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 93 5th St I St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 94 5th St H St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 95 H St 3rd St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions and upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. 96 H St 4th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions and upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. 97 H St 7th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 98 H St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 99 I St 7th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 100 J St 7th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions and upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. 99 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation 101 K St 10th Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, coordinate with Caltrans to install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high- visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 102 J St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, consider installing curb extensions at the two western corners for the crossing of J Street. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 103 I St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, consider installing curb extensions at the two eastern corners for the crossing of I Street. Refresh the existing decorative crosswalks. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 104 F St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install high-visibility crosswalks across all approaches and curb extensions at all four corners. 105 10th St E St Install high-visibility crosswalks at all four approaches. Install advance yield markings for the 10th Street crosswalks. Consider installing for 10th Street crossings. 106 10th St D St In coordination with other pedestrian improvements between D Street and B Street, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 107 10th St B St In coordination with other pedestrian improvements between D Street and B Street, install high-visibility crosswalks with advance yield markings at all four approaches. Consider installing pedestrian railroad crossing safety equipment. 108 10th St Morton Blvd In coordination with other pedestrian improvements between B Street and Morton Boulevard, install a high-visibility crosswalk with RRFB for a crossing of Morton Boulevard. 109 Scenic Dr Lakewood Ave Construct a protected intersection. 100 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Wayfinding NAVIGATIONAL ELEMENTS The fundamental family of signs that provide bicyclists and pedestrians with navigational information consists of decision, confirmation, and turn signs, described in Table 8. Figure 18 provides typical locations of signs. Decision signs are located before an intersection of two routes. Turn signs are found before turns. Confirmation signs are located after the turning movement and periodically along routes for reassurance. SIGNAGE TECHNICAL GUIDANCE A variety of standards and guidelines influence both the designs and placement of wayfinding elements in Modesto. The Manual of Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) provides standards and guidelines for the design, size, and content of wayfinding signs. However, many jurisdictions have implemented unique signs to enhance visibility while reinforcing local identity. BICYCLE GUIDE SIGNS Both on-street and off-street bicycle facilities are required to follow the standards within the MUTCD. The State of California has adopted specific state standards for all traffic control devices called the CA MUTCD, which supersedes the MUTCD: ▶D11-1: Bicycle Route Guide Sign ▶D1-1b: Destination Supplemental Sign ▶M7-1 through M7-7 Directional Arrow Supplemental Sign The combination of standard signs with modifications allows for consistent signage throughout Modesto while branding the network. COMMUNITY WAYFINDING Community wayfinding signs allow for an expression of community identity, reflect local values and character, and provide more information. California has not yet adopted MUTCD community wayfinding standards, but many communities use these. OTHER WAYFINDING ELEMENTS In addition to the core elements, several other wayfinding elements should be considered: Distance and time Adding distance in familiar units can be a helpful encouragement tool for bicycling and walking. Some cities include travel time. Street name sign blades and sign toppers Some cities have enhanced street name sign blades to recognize bikeways and major pedestrian routes. Pavement markings Directional pavement markings indicate confirmation of bicycle or pedestrian presence on a designated route and indicate turn locations. Pavement markings can often be more visible and can help supplement or reinforce signage. SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE 101 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 8: Wayfinding Sign Types Decision Sign Confirmation Sign Turn Sign ▶Clarify route options when more than one is available ▶Typically include a system brand ▶Up to 3 destinations ▶Distance in time or miles (based on 10 mph or 6 minutes per mile) ▶FHWA standard size for 3 destinations is 18” H x 30” W ▶Municipalities can modify, often 24” W x 30” or 36” H, and place a bicycle symbol at the top ▶Generally, 6” of vertical space per destination ▶Sign width not standardized by the CA MUTCD ▶Placed after turn movement or intersection to reassure that they are on the correct route ▶Standard D11-1 series signs, system brand mark, and route or pathway name may be included ▶The minimum size of 24” W x 18” H should be used for bike route signs, both on and off-street ▶Clarify a specific route at changes in direction ▶Used when only one route option is available ▶Standard D1-1 series sign: system brand mark, route or pathway name, and/or a directional arrow may be included ▶A minimum of 6” should be used for arrow plaque, the width may vary with destination length ▶Standard turn arrows (M5 and M6 series) may be used to clarify movements Figure 17: Typical Locations for Wayfinding Signs 102 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Parking Bicycle parking is typically divided into short- term and long-term parking. Short-term parking is meant to accommodate bicyclists who park for up to two hours, e.g., shoppers, post office customers, and library patrons. Long-term parking, such as bike lockers, is for riders who park over two hours, e.g., employees, students, and residents. The city should coordinate with local businesses, property owners, and open space agencies to install secure bicycle parking near major destinations across the city. The installation of bike racks is subject to environmental, security, right-of-way, maintenance, and property owner factors. BICYCLE RACKS Bike racks provide short-term parking and should accommodate visitors, customers, and others expected to depart within two hours. Racks should follow an approved standard, with appropriate placement and weather protections. Racks should also accommodate a variety of bicycle types. BICYCLE CORRALS On-street bike corrals (also known as on-street bicycle parking) consist of bicycle racks grouped in a common area on the street, typically in a former car parking stall. Bicycle corrals are reserved exclusively for bicycle parking and provide a relatively inexpensive solution to providing high-capacity bicycle parking. Bicycle corrals can be implemented by converting one or two on-street motor vehicle parking spaces into on-street bicycle parking. Each motor vehicle parking space can be replaced with approximately 6-10 bicycle parking spaces. BICYCLE LOCKERS Bike lockers offer a secure, dedicated long- term parking area for bicycles. They typically provide a semi-enclosed space that provides a higher level of security than standard bike racks. They are usually accessible via key-card, combination lock, or key. Increased security protections enable biking to be a practical transportation option for those whose most significant concern is theft and vulnerability. 103 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- End-of-Trip Facilities Besides providing secure bicycle parking for people biking, jurisdictions, businesses, and employers also need to provide end-of-trip facilities. End-of-trip facilities include changing rooms, clothes lockers, restrooms, and showers. These promote and facilitate active trips (especially commute trips) by making bicycling (and walking) commutes more practical. Multiple studies and references have indicated that robust end-of-trip facilities can encourage additional walking and biking commuting trips by removing obstacles for active transportation users.1 In addition to making walking and biking more attractive, these studies also touted many workplace performance benefits from employees who used active transportation to get to work. Green Infrastructure There are opportunities to allow streets to function as more than just public space and mobility corridors; roads can become a vital, functional component of the natural ecosystem. Green infrastructure is a catchall term that describes sustainable stormwater management practices and infrastructure. As urban landscapes have paved and built over green space, they have disrupted hydrological cycles and have required stormwater infrastructure to manage stormwater runoff and protect water quality. Green stormwater infrastructure can reintroduce ecological functions back into the environment. Through strategies including biofiltration planters, bioretention swales, trees, and permeable pavement surfaces, more water can return to the ground and natural systems while reducing strain on existing water systems. These stormwater strategies can be implemented in various transportation facilities, including sidewalks and trails, planted buffers, curb extensions, medians, and landscaping projects. School Zone Speed Limits On January 1, 2008, AB 321 took effect allowing local governments to extend school zones up to 1,000 feet and reduce speed limits within 500 feet of a school site to 15 mph in residential neighborhoods or on highways with speed limits of 30 mph or less. At 15 mph, more than 90% of pedestrians are likely to survive a crash with only minor injuries. As speeds increase, however, crash severity increases dramatically. At 30 mph, most collisions result in severe injuries to pedestrians, and nearly half may be fatal. At 40 mph, 90% of pedestrians will be killed in a crash. Reducing speeds even can have a profound effect on safety for people walking and bicycling to school. This Plan recommends the City consider this change around eligible schools. AB 321 requires engineering and traffic surveys to indicate that the existing speed limit is not appropriate. 2 “End-of-trip facilities for bicycle riders.” Queensland Transport. Queensland Government. (2006). bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/BFB_Queensland_End_ of_trip_facilities_for_bicycle_riders.pdf 104 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- PROGRAMS This section describes recommended bicycle and pedestrian-related programs. The recommendations are organized in four E’s: Education programs are designed to improve safety and awareness. They can include programs that teach how to safely cross the street or teach drivers where to anticipate bicyclists and safely share the road. Encouragement programs provide incentives and support to help people leave their car at home and try walking and biking instead. Engagement with residents and other essential stakeholders is vital to developing community-serving programs. Continued engagement with the public is also key to the successful promotion and distribution of programming efforts. Evaluation programs are an important component of any investment. They help measure success at meeting the goals of this Plan and identifying adjustments that may be necessary. The fifth commonly associated with active transportation is Engineering, which is reflected by the bicycle and pedestrian project recommendations listed earlier in this chapter. Programs recommended on the following pages should include outreach and engagement in all languages necessary to serve all Modesto residents. Given limited staff time and available resources, programs should be implemented or continued as funding and resources allow. Partnering with local organizations and other agencies is an essential strategy to creating a sustainable program. Education, encouragement, and evaluation programs are described below. Education “STREETSMARTS” CAMPAIGN Modesto can join other California cities in implementing “StreetSmarts” media campaigns. StreetSmarts uses print media, radio, and television to educate the community about safe driving, bicycling, skateboarding, and walking behavior. Modesto can develop messages to address current priorities that they have heard from the community, including not texting while driving or walking, how to securely lock your bicycle, the importance of being seen at night as a pedestrian or bicyclist, helping drivers understand where to anticipate bicyclists and increasing awareness of California’s Three Foot Passing law. Local students could create artwork for the updated campaign as part of a Traffic Safety Poster Contest. The posters can highlight and share information about newly completed projects, such as green transition areas and new separated bikeways. Funding could be provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety. The city can develop messaging and choose graphics with involvement from the BPAC or Citizens Advisory Group (if created), law enforcement, schools, business owners, civic leaders, and community advocates to maximize engagement and effectiveness. 105 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- BICYCLE SAFETY EDUCATION FOR ADULTS Courses for bicycle safety are based on a curriculum from the League of American Bicyclists that focuses on how bicyclists should behave to be safer, more predictable, and more confident riding on streets both with and without dedicated bicycle facilities. The classes can also incorporate photos and video clips of local roads to help students understand how various scenarios apply to Modesto locations. The city can support by advertising the courses and providing meeting space. Encouragement HIRE A BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COORDINATOR This Plan recommends hiring a staff person who can work on bicycle and pedestrian projects and program coordination full time (understanding sufficient funding must be identified to create and sustain the position). This person ensures that all planning, public works, and transportation projects account for bicyclists and pedestrians. They can also write grant applications to fund projects and programs and be tasked to support all bicycle and pedestrian coordination with the public and neighboring jurisdictions. Some organizations and foundations will fund staff member salaries, fellowships, or contractor salaries for a set period. The city may consider applying for grants from one or more of these foundations. SOCIAL WALKS/RIDES Supporting social walks and bicycle rides in Modesto can provide many benefits to the community. People who are uncomfortable bicycling or walking alone or unfamiliar with the best routes to use will benefit from having a group show them the way. Rides can also be used as informal education opportunities to remind participants about safe walking and bicycling behavior and sharing the road. They can also be combined with other efforts like tours of historic neighborhoods. This Plan recommends the city partner with or support local organizations that wish to host rides or walks. ADOPT-A-TRAIL PROGRAM The City of Modesto may consider a voluntary Adopt-a-Trail Program to assist with the maintenance and cleanup of trails in the community. Participants commit to maintaining their adopted section of the pathway for one year, including maintaining it at least once per month. Maintenance activities performed as part of the program include litter removal and vegetation trimming, and participants are encouraged to discuss additional ideas with the Public Works Director. Path adopters are recognized on a sign on their section of trail. 106 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- BIKE RACK PROGRAM Bike rack programs coordinate and streamline bike rack installations. Staff would work with business owners to install bike racks and corrals citywide. Where appropriate, this program could also coordinate with local businesses to provide bicycle lockers or other secure parking for employees and long- term visitors. Secure long-term parking is a crucial component of the bicycle network to encourage employees to bicycle instead of driving and helps reduce bicycle theft. Bicycle lockers should also be considered in downtown Modesto and commercial hubs to serve people shopping or running multiple errands who need a secure place to store their bicycle and deposit purchases or other items during their trip. BICYCLE FRIENDLY BUSINESS PROGRAM Bicycle Friendly Business programs recognize businesses that make it easy and convenient for both employees and customers to arrive by bicycle. Bicycle Friendly Businesses use different strategies to accommodate the diverse needs of customers and employees. Providing bicycle parking and supporting bicycling projects can make it more comfortable and accessible for customers and employees to travel by bicycle. Some businesses also choose to offer discounts or incentives to people who arrive by bike. For employees, offering secure long-term parking for bicycles is key. Long-term parking could include a secure gated bicycle parking area or access to bicycle lockers. If space is not available for dedicated secure bicycle parking, business owners and landlords can consider allowing employees and tenants to bring bicycles inside and store them in their workspace or another designated location. Providing changing areas, showers, or lockers to keep belongings can also make it easier for employees to bicycle to work. By recognizing businesses that support bicycling, Modesto can support their local economy while fostering partnerships with the Chamber of Commerce and business owners to build community support for bicycling projects and programs. The League of American Bicyclists has a Bicycle Friendly Business program, and some communities have chosen to develop their own programs. Evaluation ANNUAL REPORT CARD An annual report card assesses the City’s progress toward goals and objectives outlined in this Plan, its projects and programs, and shifting mode share for active transportation. Annual report cards can also incorporate a review of effectiveness to evaluate the costs and benefits of various efforts and adjust investments to maximize results. This Plan recommends the City work with the BPAC and Citizens Advisory Group to develop an annual report card that tracks progress toward implementing this Plan. The report card should incorporate annual collision data, safe routes to school program and participation data, walking and bicycling counts, and other relevant information to highlight successes and challenges of improving walking and bicycling each year. 107 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- 108 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- CHAPTER 6 Implementation ---PAGE BREAK--- The following prioritization strategy reflects a systematic approach to determining each project’s community benefit in a feasible, fundable, equitable, and sustainable manner. Projects will be sorted into four implementation categories based on the combined results of two evaluation processes: 1. Community Priority 2. Project Feasibility Each evaluation process will score individual projects on specific criteria described on the following pages. PRIORITIZATION 110 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- METHODOLOGY Community Priority The Community Priority evaluation will place projects into one of two categories, “low” or “high,” based on the following metrics. Community Priority is ranked based on four criteria: enhanced safety, equity, improved connectivity, and increased accessibility. Each criterion has its own scoring metrics, worth a maximum of ten (10) points. Projects that score six or more points will be rated “high,” and projects that score five-and-a-half (5.5) or fewer points will be rated as “low.” The criterion and scoring metrics are described below: ENHANCED SAFETY Ranks projects based on their likelihood of helping reduce the number/rate of future collisions at various locations. Public feedback on their perception of safety was also considered. ▶Projects will score one point if located near a bicycle-involved or pedestrian-involved collision (2013-2017). ▶Projects will score one point if located on a street classified as LTS 3 or 4. ▶Bikeway projects will score an additional point if the project is a Class I, Class IIIB, or Class IV recommendation. ▶Pedestrian projects will score an additional point if the project includes enhancements other than signage and striping (beacons, curb extensions, etc.). EQUITY Ranks projects based on their location within disadvantaged communities. This prioritization will use the CalEnviroScreen 3.0 and Free and Reduced-Price Meal analyses. The thresholds for scoring prioritization points are in line with Active Transportation Program grant metrics. ▶Projects will receive one point if they are located in a census tract that ranks in the top 25 disadvantaged percentiles in the CalEnviroScreen 3.0 analysis. ▶Projects will receive one half point if they are located within a quarter-mile of a school with more than 75% of students eligible for free or reduced-priced meals. IMPROVED CONNECTIVITY Ranks projects based on their overall effect on helping close gaps in the pedestrian and bicycle networks, strengthening network connectivity. Projects will also be rated based on enhanced connectivity over barriers, including highways and railroad tracks. ▶Projects will score one point if they improve connectivity across highways or railroad tracks. ▶Projects will score one point if they close a bicycle or pedestrian network gap. ▶Projects will score one point if they address connectivity to major transit stations. 111 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- INCREASED ACCESSIBILITY Ranks proposed facilities based on their overall effect on accessibility to community destinations or enhanced accessibility at major crossings/barriers. ▶Projects will score one point if they improve access to essential community destinations parks, schools, and trails). ▶Pedestrian projects that include crossing enhancements near important community destinations will score one additional point. ▶Bikeway projects that provide new access to destinations (not upgraded facilities) will receive one additional point. Project Feasibility The project feasibility evaluation will categorize projects based on their complexity and costs. Generally speaking, projects that only require signage and striping changes will be considered highly feasible. Projects that require interagency coordination, require hardscape changes, or potential road diets (including parking removal) will be considered low-feasibility projects. A maximum of two points are available for project feasibility. A scoring breakdown is below: COST Projects that only require signage and striping (Class II, Class IIB, Class III, Class IIIB, and some pedestrian crossing improvements) will score one point. COMPLEXITY Projects that will not require interagency coordination (ex. Caltrans rights-of-way) will score one point. PHASED IMPLEMENTATION Projects with a short-term implementation alternative (paint-and-post curb extension instead of concrete) will receive one half point. Only projects that score 0 points in the cost criteria are eligible for this point. Projects that receive 1.5 or two points will be considered highly feasible. Projects with one or fewer points will be considered low-feasibility projects. 112 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Projects are arranged based on their combined point total within each category. The graphic below provides further details: ▶Short-term projects are rated high-priority and high-feasibility and represent projects that could be pursued for implementation within the first three to five years. ▶Medium-term projects are rated high priority and low feasibility. They may require more study or analysis than short-term projects, more significant interagency coordination, or additional funding for construction. ▶Opportunity improvements are projects rated low priority and high feasibility. They may be pursued when nearby developments or an overlapping project creates an opportunity to include these easy to implement projects. ▶Long-term projects are rated low priority and low feasibility. They represent challenging projects or projects that may not add significant value to the walking or bicycling network on their own. Still, they are part of a long-term vision for active transportation in Modesto. PRIORITY Medium-Term Project Projects for further study and evaluation. Seek grant funding to advance these projects. Opportunity Project Lower-priority projects that may become an opportunity if funding or partnership occurs. Long-Term Project Low-priority, challenging projects that may be pursued long term, but are not a priority at this time. Short-Term Project High-priority and easy-to-implement projects for short-term development. LOW HIGH LOW HIGH FEASIBILITY Priority points: 6+ points Feasibility points: ≤1 point Priority points: ≤5 points Feasibility points: ≤1 point Priority points: ≤5 points Feasibility points: 1.5+ points Priority points: 6+ points Feasibility points: 1.5+ points 113 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- PRIORITIZATION RESULTS Bicycle Projects Out of a maximum of 12 possible priority points (detailed in the previous sections), the average project scored 6.2 points. No project received more than 10.5 points and the lowest score achieved was 1 point. IMPLEMENTATION CATEGORIES ▶Short Term: 30 Projects ▶Medium Term: 18 Projects ▶Opportunity: 49 Projects ▶Long Term: 14 Projects Table 9 shows recommended bicycle projects with their priority points and implementation category. TOP PRIORITY BICYCLE PROJECTS Forty-six projects scored 7 or more overall prioritization points. These 46 projects are a mix of short-term, medium-term, and opportunity projects. The prioritization process also identified 15 First Phase projects. These First Phase projects are the highest- scoring short-term projects. These First Phase projects represent the improvements that can bring the greatest community and safety benefits. First Phase projects should be among the next group of projects that Modesto implements. These 15 projects are listed below and can be seen in Figure 19: ▶1 H St (1st St - Downey Ave) - Separated Bikeway ▶2 Crows Landing Rd (City limit - E Hatch Rd) - Separated Bikeway ▶3 El Vista Ave (Yosemite Blvd - Oakdale Rd) - Separated Bikeway ▶4 Parker Rd (Claus Rd/E Briggsmore Ave - East city limit) - Separated Bikeway ▶5 W Orangeburg Ave (Carver Rd - Evergreen Ave) - Bicycle Lane ▶6 La Loma/Encina/Miller Bike Boulevard Group ▶7 Sutter/Emerald Bike Boulevard Group ▶8 Claus Rd (Yosemite Blvd - Creekwood Dr) ▶9 Paradise Ave (Beverly Dr/Harris Ave/Wade Ave - South city limit) - Separated Bikeway ▶10 I St (Washington St - 17th St) - Separated Bikeway ▶11 Carver Bike Boulevard Group ▶12 Floyd/Sunrise Bike Boulevard Group ▶13 Scenic Dr (McGuire Dr - Lakewood Ave) - Separated Bikeway or Shared-use Path ▶14 Lakewood Ave (Briggsmore Ave - Scenic Dr) - Separated Bikeway or Shared-use Path ▶15 Lakewood-Lincoln Ave Trail Bridge (Scenic Dr - Dry Creek Trail Connector/Bridge) - Shared-use Path 114 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To Street From Street Bikeway Class Miles Total Priority Category First Phase H St 1st St Downey Ave Class IV 1.34 10.5 Short-Term Yes Crows Landing Rd City Limit E Hatch Rd Class IV 0.85 9.5 Short-Term Yes El Vista Ave Yosemite Blvd Oakdale Rd Class IV 0.98 9.5 Short-Term Yes Parker Rd Claus Rd, E Briggsmore Ave East city limit Class IV 0.98 9.5 Short-Term Yes La Loma/ Encina/ Miller Bike Boulevard Group La Loma Ave Encina Ave, N Santa Rosa Ave Class IIIB 8.50 9.0 Short-Term Yes Sutter/ Emerald Bike Boulevard Group Kirschen Dr Yellow Pine Dr Class IIIB 5.09 9.0 Short-Term Yes W Orangeburg Ave Carver Rd Evergreen Ave Class II 0.59 9.0 Short-Term Yes Claus Rd Yosemite Blvd Creekwood Dr Class IV 0.84 8.5 Short-Term Yes Paradise Ave Beverly Dr, Harris Ave, Wade Ave South city limit Class IV 0.45 8.5 Short-Term Yes Floyd/ Sunrise Bike Boulevard Group W Orangeburg Ave W Granger Ave Class IIIB 11.02 8.0 Short-Term Yes McClure Bike Boulevard Group Poppypatch Dr Penny Ln Class IIIB 3.27 8.0 Short-Term Monterey/ Empire Bike Boulevard Group Oregon Dr Hillside Dr Class IIIB 1.90 8.0 Short-Term Neece Bike Boulevard Group Sierra Dr 3rd St Class IIIB 3.30 8.0 Short-Term Orangeburg/ Rose Bike Boulevard Group Locke Rd Coffee Rd Class IIIB 12.34 8.0 Short-Term Snyder Bike Boulevard Group Class IIIB 6.72 8.0 Short-Term West Rumble Bike Boulevard Group Park Pl Conant Ave Class IIIB 5.04 8.0 Short-Term Carver Bike Boulevard Group McHenry Ave Tully Rd Class IIIB 8.68 8.0 Short-Term Yes I St Washington St 17th St Class I 1.13 8.0 Medium- Term Yes Morton Blvd Rue De Yoe Yosemite Blvd Class I 0.54 8.0 Medium- Term Sutter Ave Rouse Ave Robertson Rd Class II 0.50 8.0 Short-Term 12th St Needham St D St Class IV 0.93 7.5 Medium- Term Table 9: Bike Priority Table 115 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To Street From Street Bikeway Class Miles Total Priority Category First Phase 9th St S 9th St, Trail Connector, S Morton Blvd Tully Rd Class IV 1.66 7.5 Medium- Term Carpenter Rd Maze Blvd Chicago Ave Class IV 0.99 7.5 Short-Term Claus Rd E Briggsmore Ave Northern city limit Class IV 1.77 7.5 Short-Term Coffee Rd Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class IV 1.25 7.5 Short-Term G St 2nd St La Loma Ave Class IV 1.25 7.5 Medium- Term K St 4th St Needham St Class IV 0.86 7.5 Medium- Term Standiford Ave McHenry Ave Dale Rd Class IV 3.14 7.5 Short-Term Sylvan Ave McHenry Ave Jeffrey Dr Class IV 2.34 7.5 Short-Term W Briggsmore Ave McHenry Ave N Carpenter Rd Class IV 2.28 7.5 Short-Term W Briggsmore Ave McHenry Ave N Carpenter Rd Class IV 2.29 7.5 Short-Term Ironside/ Santa Fe Bike Boulevard Group W Hatch Rd Ustick Rd Class IIIB 3.03 7.0 Opportunity Project Union/ E Rumble Bike Boulevard Group Lancashire Ln Dragoo Park Dr Class IIIB 10.52 7.0 Opportunity Project West Modesto Bike Boulevard Group G St Blue Gum Ave Class IIIB 5.53 7.0 Opportunity Project 14th St D St Needham St Class II 0.41 7.0 Opportunity Project 8th St B St Kansas Ave Class I 1.35 7.0 Medium- Term Creekwood Dr Norseman Dr Yosemite Blvd Class IIB 1.25 7.0 Opportunity Project E Briggsmore Ave McHenry Ave Claus Rd Class I 4.03 7.0 Medium- Term Encina Ave Trail Phoenix Ave Lincoln Ave Class I 1.31 7.0 Short-Term Lateral Number 5 Lateral Number 4 S Carpenter Rd Class I 1.48 7.0 Medium- Term N Emerald Ave Maze Blvd Kanas Ave Class II 0.51 7.0 Opportunity Project N McClure Rd Dry Creek Dr N McClure Rd Connector Trail Class II 0.11 7.0 Opportunity Project 116 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To Street From Street Bikeway Class Miles Total Priority Category First Phase Needham St McHenry Ave Park Ave Class II 0.28 7.0 Medium- Term Paradise Ave S Washington St, H St Sheridan St Class IIB 0.66 7.0 Opportunity Project S Morton Blvd N 7th St 11th St Class I 0.40 7.0 Medium- Term Tully Rd Briggsmore Ave Standiford Ave Class IIB 1.30 7.0 Opportunity Project B St 9th St 7th St Class IV 0.19 6.5 Opportunity Project Coffee Rd North city limit Briggsmore Ave Class IV 2.37 6.5 Opportunity Project Kansas Ave 8th St Morse Rd Class II 2.15 6.5 Opportunity Project Oakdale Rd E Orangeburg Ave Sylvan Ave Class IV 2.51 6.5 Opportunity Project Oakdale Rd El Vista Ave E Orangeburg Ave Class IV 0.77 6.5 Opportunity Project Pelandale Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Salida Blvd Class IV 3.85 6.5 Opportunity Project Prescott Rd Bangs Ave W Briggsmore Ave Class IV 2.39 6.5 Opportunity Project Scenic Dr (WB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class I 0.89 6.5 Short-Term Yes Scenic Dr (WB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class IV 0.77 6.5 Short-Term Yes Sierra Dr 7th St, S Morton Blvd Sunset Blvd, 3rd St Class IV 0.43 6.5 Opportunity Project Tully Rd Standiford Ave Pelandale Ave Class IV 0.77 6.5 Opportunity Project Tully Rd Stoddard Ave W Briggsmore Ave Class IV 1.44 6.5 Opportunity Project Yosemite Blvd D St City Limit Class IV 3.80 6.5 Medium- Term Merle Bike Boulevard Group Merle Ave Belharbour Dr, Millbrook Ave Class IIIB 3.52 6.0 Opportunity Project Roseburg/ Princeton Bike Boulevard Group N 9th St Stoddard Ave Class IIIB 5.95 6.0 Opportunity Project 17th St F St Downey Ave, J St Class II 0.36 6.0 Opportunity Project 117 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To Street From Street Bikeway Class Miles Total Priority Category First Phase Coldwell Ave Sycamore Ave College Ave Class II 0.58 6.0 Opportunity Project College Ave W Briggsmore Ave Bowen Ave Class III 0.26 6.0 Opportunity Project Downey Ave McHenry Ave N Morton Blvd Class II 0.50 6.0 Opportunity Project F St 9th St 12th St Class II 0.36 6.0 Opportunity Project N Carpenter Rd Maze Blvd Fire Science Ln, Student Center Dr Class I 1.57 6.0 Long-Term N Carpenter Rd N 9th St W Briggsmore Ave Class I 0.18 6.0 Medium- Term Norseman Dr South end of street Garst Rd Class II 0.53 6.0 Long-Term Scenic Dr (EB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class II 0.75 6.0 Short-Term Yes Sylvan Ave Jeffrey Dr Claus Rd Class IIB 1.65 6.0 Opportunity Project Crows Landing Rd Amador Ave W Whitmore Ave Class IV 0.89 5.5 Opportunity Project D St 7th St Burney St Class IV 0.49 5.5 Long-Term Dale Rd Standiford Ave Pelandale Ave Class IV 1.04 5.5 Opportunity Project Mable Ave Coffee Rd Oakdale Rd Class IV 0.99 5.5 Opportunity Project Maze Blvd Washington St Helen White Memorial Trail Class IV 0.42 5.5 Medium- Term Millbrook Ave Sylvan Ave Belharbour Dr, Dermond Rd Class IV 0.60 5.5 Opportunity Project Roselle Ave E Briggsmore Ave North city limit Class IV 2.09 5.5 Opportunity Project S Morton Blvd Grand St, Toulume River Trail Extension Yosemite Blvd Class IV 0.02 5.5 Opportunity Project S Washington St Maze Blvd Paradise Ave Class IV 0.50 5.5 Opportunity Project Tioga Dr Monterey Ave Hillside Dr Class IV 0.19 5.5 Opportunity Project Hillglen/ Kodiak Bike Boulevard Group La Force Dr, Kodiak Dr Roselle Ave Class IIIB 2.34 5.0 Opportunity Project 118 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To Street From Street Bikeway Class Miles Total Priority Category First Phase 19th St Burney St, La Loma Ave Downey Ave Class II 0.09 5.0 Opportunity Project Blue Gum Ave N Carpenter Rd Morse Rd Class IIB 1.00 5.0 Opportunity Project D St 7th St Burney St Class I 0.42 5.0 Medium- Term Dale Rd Pelandale Ave Kiernan Ave Class I 0.79 5.0 Long-Term Fine Ave Merle Ave Hillglen Ave Class II 0.96 5.0 Opportunity Project Modesto Virginia Corridor Woodrow Ave Pelandale Ave Class I 1.03 5.0 Opportunity Project Morse Rd Kansas Ave Blue Gum Ave Class II 1.00 5.0 Opportunity Project Root Lateral E Briggsmore Ave, Coffee Rd Virginia Ave, W Morris Ave Class I 1.99 5.0 Long-Term Tioga Dr S Conejo Ave Monterey Ave Class I 0.16 5.0 Long-Term College Ave 10th St, Needham St Stoddard Ave Class IV 0.25 4.5 Opportunity Project Lakewood Ave Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class IV 0.81 4.5 Medium- Term Yes W Hatch Rd East City limit Monticello Ln Class IV 1.39 4.5 Opportunity Project Belharbour Dr Dermond Rd Temescal Dr Class IIB 0.50 4.0 Opportunity Project Brink Ave Student Center Dr North city limit Class I 0.36 4.0 Long-Term Hashem Dr Carson Oak Dr, Sylvan Ave Oakdale Rd Class II 0.90 4.0 Opportunity Project Lakewood Ave Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class I 0.81 4.0 Medium- Term Yes Lakewood-Lincoln Ave Trail Bridge Scenic Dr Dry Creek Trail Connector/ Bridge Class I 0.19 4.0 Medium- Term Yes Lateral Number 4 9th St N Carpenter Rd Class I 1.42 4.0 Long-Term Lateral Number 4 Modesto Virginia Corridor, College Ave 9th St Class I 0.19 4.0 Long-Term Litt Rd Sylvan Ave Kodiak Dr Class II 0.39 4.0 Opportunity Project N Martin Luther King Dr Ash St Sutter Ave, Tuolumne Blvd, Paradise Ave Class II 0.11 4.0 Opportunity Project 119 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To Street From Street Bikeway Class Miles Total Priority Category First Phase S Morton Blvd 11th St Grand St Class I 0.52 4.0 Long-Term S Conejo Ave Tioga Dr Tioga Dr Class IV 0.16 3.5 Opportunity Project Lateral Number 6 Sisk Rd Prescott Rd, Snyder Ave Class I 2.58 3.0 Long-Term Legion Park Dr S Santa Cruz Ave Tioga Dr Class I 0.51 3.0 Long-Term Lincoln Ave Trail Scenic Trail Connector Yosemite Blvd Class I 0.99 3.0 Short-Term Morse Rd Blue Gum Ave North end of the street Class II 0.15 3.0 Opportunity Project N McClure Rd Connector N McClure Rd Scenic Trail Class I 0.13 3.0 Long-Term Lateral Number 1 Snyder Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Class I 1.12 1.0 Long-Term 120 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 18: Priority Bike Facilities 108 132 219 99 8th St W Granger Ave Pearl St Kearney Ave H St Stoddard Ave Norwegian Ave Kansas Ave 9th St College Ave Tully Rd Woodland Ave I St la Lo m a Ave S t u d e nt C e n t e r D r Tully Rd A irport Wa y Late ral Nu m b er 4 Coffee Rd Mable Ave N Carpenter Rd N 9th St Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Needham St Roselle Ave Paradise Av e Sta n d iford Ave Clar e m o n t Ave Haddon Ave Sylvan Ave Lakewood Ave Virginia Ave Claus Rd S ylvan M ea do w s Dr Yosemite Blvd E Bri ggs m ore Ave G St Dale Rd Ne e c e D r Colfax Ave el Vecino Ave Lar a mie Dr Crows Landing Rd Brig h t o n Ave H a s h e m Dr 6th St D ra go o Park Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Lincoln A v e Parker Rd 11th St Carpenter Rd Claratina Ave Celeste Dr Morse Rd E Morris Ave Lucern Ave Sutter Ave Miller Ave Claratina Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Tuolumne Blv d C h eyen ne W a y 7th St California Ave M il l brook Ave C r e e k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave She rwo o d Ave W Hatch R d Bangs Ave W R u mb le Rd W Whitmore Ave Kodiak Dr Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Late ra l W Briggsmore Ave Lateral Number 6 Sisk R d Carver Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave P eland ale Ave S c en ic Dr E Orangeburg Ave S Mo r t o n Blvd Great Valley Academy Stanislaus County West Campus Petersen Alternative Center for Education Stanislaus County Special Education M. Robert Adkison Elementary Aspire Summit Charter Academy Virginia Parks Elementary Norman N. Glick Middle Capistrano Elementary Christine Sipherd Elementary Bernard L. Hughes Elementary Alice N. Stroud Elementary Hart-Ransom Academic Charter Hart-Ransom Elementary Elihu Beard Elementary Bret Harte Elementary Burbank Elementary El Vista Elementary Enslen Elementary Catherine Everett Elementary Fairview Elementary Franklin Elementary John Fremont Elementary William Garrison Elementary John Muir Elementary La Loma Junior High Mark Twain Junior High James Marshall Elementary Orville Wright Elementary Robertson Road Elementary Roosevelt Junior High Rose Avenue Elementary Shackelford Elementary Tuolumne Elementary Wilson Elementary Sonoma Elementary Lakewood Elementary Harriette Kirschen Elementary Alberta Martone Elementary Evelyn Hanshaw Middle James C. Enochs High Fred C. Beyer High Peter Johansen High Grace M. Davis High Thomas Downey High Elliott Adult Education Center Modesto High Robert Elliott Alternative Education Center Paradise Charter Paradise Elementary Independence Charter Mildred Perkins Elementary Mary Lou Dieterich Elementary Josephine Elementary Stanislaus Elementary Prescott Junior High George Eisenhut Elementary Agnes M. Baptist Elementary Daniel J. Savage Middle Mary Ann Sanders Elementary Aspire University Charter Sherwood Elementary Somerset Middle Standiford Elementary Sylvan Elementary Coleman F. Brown Elementary Stockard Coffee Elementary Orchard Elementary Elizabeth Ustach Middle Freedom Elementary Yosemite ROP Caswell Elementary Carroll Fowler Elementary Mae Hensley Junior High Ceres High School Walter White Elementary Amtrak Station 0 0.5 1 MILE FIRST PHASE BICYCLE PROJECTS MODESTO CA NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Modesto City Boundary Shopping Center Park K St H St 7th St I St 12th St B St 11th St 10th St B e a rd S t I St Downtown First Phase Projects Bicycle Projects IMPLEMENTATION 121 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- Pedestrian Projects Out of a maximum of 12 possible priority points (detailed in the previous sections), the average project scored 5.8 points. No project received more than 9 points, and the lowest score achieved was 2 points. IMPLEMENTATION CATEGORIES ▶Short Term: 12 Projects ▶Medium Term: 66 Projects ▶Opportunity: 14 Projects ▶Long Term: 17 Projects Table 10 shows recommended pedestrian projects with their priority points and implementation category. ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 13 Santa Barbara Ave La Loma Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks with advanced stop bars across both crossing at Santa Barbara Avenue and restripe the high-visibility crosswalk across La Loma Ave with advanced yield markings. Install an RRFB for the La Loma crossing. 9 Short Term Yes Table 10: Pedestrian Priority Table TOP PRIORITY PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS Twenty-two projects scored 7 or more overall prioritization points. The prioritization process also identified 12 First Phase projects. These First Phase projects are the highest-scoring short-term projects. These First Phase projects represent the improvements that can bring the greatest community and safety benefits. First Phase projects should be among the next group of projects that Modesto implements. These 12 projects are listed below and can be seen in Figure 20. ▶1 Santa Barbara Ave/La Loma Ave ▶2 Crows Landing Rd/School Ave ▶3 Crows Landing Rd/ E Hatch Rd ▶4 Paradise Rd/ Pine Tree Ln ▶5 Lucern Ave/Coffee Rd ▶6 W Rumble Rd/Tully Rd ▶7 Carver Rd/Orangeburg Ave ▶8 E Briggsmore Ave/Coffee Rd ▶9 Scenic Dr/Coffee Rd ▶10 W Granger Ave/Tully Rd ▶11 H St/7th St ▶12 10th St/Morton Blvd 122 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 18 Crows Landing Rd School Ave Refresh all four high- visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 8.5 Short Term Yes 19 Crows Landing Rd E Hatch Rd Refresh all four high- visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 8.5 Short Term Yes 24 Paradise Rd Pine Tree Ln Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across Paradise Road with advance yield markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon for this crossing. 8.5 Short Term Yes 44 Lucern Ave Coffee Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advanced stop marking, and leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. Study free- right turn lane removal on the southeast corner. 8.5 Short Term Yes 64 W Rumble Rd Tully Rd Upgrade the existing eastern and western crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 8.5 Short Term Yes 123 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 74 Carver Rd Orangeburg Ave Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 8 Short Term Yes 30 Maze Blvd N Emerald Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, install advance stop markings, and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Consider constructing curb extensions at all corners. 7.5 Opportunity Project 39 E Briggsmore Ave Coffee Rd Short term: Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility. Long Term: Conduct traffic study to consider removing both free-right turn lanes and other intersection design/geometry improvements. 7.5 Short Term Yes 45 Scenic Dr Coffee Rd Upgrade all existing crosswalks to high- visibility and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. Study free- right turn lane removal. 7.5 Short Term Yes 54 McHenry Ave Tokay Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to construct a curb extension at the northwest corner. Upgrade existing crosswalks to high-visibility and install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach with advanced stop bars at all approaches. Provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 7.5 Opportunity Project 124 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 67 W Granger Ave Tully Rd Construct curb extensions at the two eastern corners and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 7.5 Short Term Yes 97 H St 7th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 7.5 Short Term Yes 108 10th St Morton Blvd In coordination with other pedestrian improvements between B Street and Morton Boulevard, install a high-visibility crosswalk with RRFB for a crossing of Morton Boulevard. 7.5 Short Term Yes 46 McHenry Ave Coralwood Rd Coordinate with Caltrans to install high-visibility a crosswalk across Coralwood Rd with advanced stop markings 7 Opportunity Project 49 McHenry Ave mid-block south of Sylvan Ave Sylvan Ave/ Standiford Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all existing crosswalks to high- visibility with advance stop markings. Provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 7 Opportunity Project 50 McHenry Ave Woodrow Ave/Robin Hood Dr Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 7 Opportunity Project 125 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 51 McHenry Ave E Rumble Rd Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop markings and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 7 Opportunity Project 56 McHenry Ave Orangeburg Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 7 Opportunity Project 69 W Orangeburg Ave Tully Rd Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 7 Medium Term 73 Coldwell Ave Tully Rd Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 7 Medium Term 90 J Street Railroad Tracks between 7th and 9th St From Downtown Master Plan: Study the construction of an underpass under the railroad tracks to connect the two transit corridors. 7 Opportunity Project 14 Miller Ave/La Loma Ave N Santa Cruz Ave Short term: Upgrade and refresh all crosswalks to high-visibility with advance stop markings. Long term: study intersection redesign options to improve visibility/ sight lines, shorten crossing distances, and to square up intersection approaches. 6.5 Medium Term 126 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 15 Haddon Ave/ La Loma Ave N Santa Ana Ave Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and install leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Consider installing a curb extension from the triangular island into Haddon Ave and through the crosswalk across La Loma Ave. 6.5 Medium Term 16 Monterey Ave Thrasher Ave Refresh all three high- visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Install curb extensions at all four corners. 6.5 Medium Term 25 Sutter Ave South Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalks across the northern and southern approaches with advance stop marking. Upgrade the eastern crosswalk to high-visibility with advance stop markings. Install curb extensions at all four corners. 6.5 Medium Term 31 Sandburg Ave S Emerald Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks with advance yield markings across the northern and southern approaches. Refresh the transverse crosswalk across Sandburg and add advance stop markings. Consider RRFB for the Emerald Avenue crossings. Install curb ramps at all corners. 6.5 Medium Term 127 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 37 Celeste Dr Coffee Rd Install a high-visibility crosswalk with a pedestrian hybrid beacon across the southern approach of Coffee Road. Install a curb ramp at the western landing of this crosswalk. Install advance stop markings. 6.5 Medium Term 43 Gloria Way/ Brighton Ave Coffee Rd Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach of Coffee Road. Install advance stop markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across Coffee Rd. 6.5 Medium Term 53 McHenry Ave W Briggsmore Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to study the removal of the free-right turn lane at the southeast corner. Consider installing a bulb-out to square up the intersection if the lane is removed. Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all 6.5 Opportunity Project 57 McHenry Ave Fairmont Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across McHenry Ave and high-visibility crosswalks across both approaches to McHenry Ave on Fairmont Ave. 6.5 Opportunity Project 128 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 58 McHenry Ave Hintze Ave/ Griswold Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade existing crosswalks to high-visibility and install a pedestrian hybrid beacon with advanced yield markings across McHenry Ave. Consider realigning or relocating the crosswalk across McHenry Ave as a perpendicular crossing. 6.5 Opportunity Project 60 McHenry Ave Almond Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade the crosswalk across McHenry Ave to high-visibility with advanced yield markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across McHenry Ave. 6.5 Opportunity Project 80 N Rosemore Ave Blue Gum Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across the western approach. Install advance stop markings. Build out the northwest corner to fill the current crosshatched area. 6.5 Medium Term 89 J St 9th St - 11th St From Downtown Master Plan: Create a shared or flush street from the Transit Center entrance on 9th Street till 11th Street. 6.5 Medium Term 96 H St 4th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions and upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. 6.5 Medium Term 98 H St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 6.5 Medium Term 129 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 99 I St 7th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 6.5 Medium Term 102 J St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, consider installing curb extensions at the two western corners for the crossing of J Street. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 6.5 Medium Term 107 10th St B St In coordination with other pedestrian improvements between D Street and B Street, install high-visibility crosswalks with advance yield markings at all four approaches. Consider installing pedestrian railroad crossing safety equipment. 6.5 Medium Term 109 Scenic Dr Lakewood Ave Construct a protected intersection. 6.5 Medium Term 11 Encina Ave N Riverside Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks with advanced stop bars at the southern and western approaches. 6 Medium Term 12 Encina Ave Covena Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks at all four approaches. Install advance yield markings for the Encina Avenue approaches and advance stop markings for the Covena Avenue approaches. 6 Medium Term 130 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 23 Pine Tree Ln Robertson Rd Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk at the eastern approach with advance yield markings. Install a high-visibility crosswalk at the northern approach with advance stop markings. 6 Medium Term 26 Rouse Ave Sunset Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk at the eastern approach. Install high- visibility crosswalks at the northern and southern approaches. Install advance stop markings for all approaches. 6 Medium Term 35 Floyd Ave Coffee Rd Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 6 Medium Term 42 E Orangeburg Ave Coffee Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and install advanced stop bars 6 Medium Term 47 McHenry Ave Meily Way Coordinate with Caltrans to install high-visibility a crosswalk across Meily Way with advanced stop markings 6 Long Term 48 McHenry Ave W Union Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars. Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 6 Long Term 52 McHenry Ave Floyd Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 6 Long Term 131 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 55 McHenry Ave Granger Ave Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 6 Long Term 59 McHenry Ave "Morris Ave ” Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility with advanced stop bars and install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 6 Long Term 63 Woodrow Ave Tully Rd Refresh the existing crosswalks to high-visibility. Install advance stop markings and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 6 Medium Term 65 Mount Vernon Dr Tully Rd Refresh all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks with advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 6 Medium Term 66 Bowen Ave Tully Rd Refresh all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks with advance stop markings. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 6 Medium Term 70 W Roseburg Ave Tully Rd Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 6 Medium Term 77 Needham St Park Ave/14th St/L St Coordinate with Caltrans to study intersection redesign options to simplify intersection and improve pedestrian crossings. 6 Opportunity Project 132 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 78 Needham St Sycamore Ave/15th St Coordinate with Caltrans to study intersection redesign options to simplify intersection and improve pedestrian crossings. 6 Opportunity Project 79 H St/Burney St 19th St/La Loma Ave Study intersection redesign options to simplify the intersection, reduce approaches, and improve pedestrian crossings. 6 Long Term 4 E Briggsmore Ave Oakdale Rd "Refresh the north high- visibility crosswalk and upgrade the other three crosswalks to high- visibility. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Refresh bicycle conflict markings. Study slip lane removal at the southwest corner.“ 5.5 Medium Term 7 Scenic Dr Oakdale Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Study removal of all three slip lanes. Install bicycle conflict markings. 5.5 Medium Term 20 Glenn Ave Las Vegas St Upgrade the northern and eastern crosswalks to high- visibility and install advance stop markings. Install curb extensions at all three corners with crosswalk landings. 5.5 Medium Term 133 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 21 Las Vegas St Butte Ave Upgrade all three crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. Install advance yield markings for the Las Vegas Street crossings and stop markings for the Butte Avenue crossing. Construct curb extensions at both western corners. 5.5 Medium Term 22 Red Pine Dr Crippen Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks across the northern and eastern approaches with advance yield markings. Construct a curb ramp at the northwest corner. 5.5 Medium Term 28 Sierra Dr Sunset Blvd/3rd St Study intersection redesign options to square up/ consolidate intersection approaches (especially the northern approaches) and to determine the best location for a crossing of Sierra Drive near the community center. Upgrade the northern crosswalk to high-visibility and install advance stop markings. 5.5 Medium Term 38 Spanos Ct/ David Ct Coffee Rd Consider removing free- right turn lane at southeast corner. Build out corner to replace removed turn lane. Upgrade all three existing crosswalks to high-visibility. Consider installing a high- visibility crosswalk at the northern approach. Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 5.5 Medium Term 134 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 61 McHenry Ave Grant St Coordinate with Caltrans to upgrade the crosswalk across McHenry Ave to high-visibility with advanced yield markings. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon across McHenry Ave. 5.5 Long Term 68 Pearl St Tully Rd Install high-visibility crosswalks at the eastern and western approaches. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon for the crossing of Tully Road. Construct curb extensions at the two eastern corners. 5.5 Medium Term 71 Fordham Ave Tully Rd Install a high-visibility crosswalk across Tully Road connecting the southwest and northeast corners with advance yield markings. Install an RRFB for the Tully crossing. Install transverse crosswalks across the eastern and western approaches. 5.5 Medium Term 88 Tuolumne Blvd Neece Dr/ Merced Ave Upgrade the crossing of Neece Dr to high- visibility. Construct a high- visibility crosswalk across the western approach of Tuolumne. Install a pedestrian hybrid beacon. Convert existing median islands to pedestrian refuge islands where appropriate. 5.5 Medium Term 135 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 92 I St 6th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 5.5 Long Term 93 5th St I St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 5.5 Long Term 94 5th St H St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 5.5 Long Term 95 H St 3rd St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions and upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. 5.5 Medium Term 100 J St 7th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions and upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks. 5.5 Medium Term 136 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 101 K St 10th Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, coordinate with Caltrans to install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 5.5 Long Term 103 I St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, consider installing curb extensions at the two eastern corners for the crossing of I Street. Refresh the existing decorative crosswalks. Provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 5.5 Medium Term 104 F St 10th St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install high-visibility crosswalks across all approaches and curb extensions at all four corners. 5.5 Medium Term 5 E Orangeburg Ave Oakdale Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 5 Medium Term 8 Ardia Ave N McClure Rd Install a RRFB and advanced yield markings to support the high-visibility crosswalk across N McClure Road. Install a high-visibility crosswalk across Ardia Avenue with an advanced stop bar. 5 Medium Term 32 Coffee Rd Sylvan Ave Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 5 Medium Term 137 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 33 E Rumble Rd Coffee Rd Install leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases 5 Medium Term 36 Floyd Ave Vera Cruz Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across the western and southern approaches. Install advance yield markings and a RRFB for the western crossing. Install advance stop markings for the southern crossing. 5 Medium Term 62 Trail crossing between Clevenger Dr and Union Ave Tully Rd At the trail crossing between Clevenger Drive and Union Avenue, refresh the high-visibility crosswalk and install advance yield markings. Install an RRFB with an additional actuation push button in the existing median. 5 Medium Term 75 Evergreen Ave Carver Rd Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk at the western approach. Install a high- visibility crosswalk across the southern approach. Install a curb ramp at the southeast corner. 5 Medium Term 81 Poust Rd Mack Ct Extend the red curb south of the school driveway on the west side of Poust Road. Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach and curb ramp at the southwest corner. Install advance yield and "Keep Clear" pavement markings. Install a transverse crosswalk across Mack Court. 5 Medium Term 138 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 82 Brenner Way Conant Ave Relocate the existing high- visibility crosswalk from the southern approach to the northern approach. and install advance yield markings. Upgrade the transverse crosswalk at the western approach to high- visibility and install advance stop markings. 5 Medium Term 87 Woodrow Ave John Lee Ln Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the northern approach with advance stop markings. 5 Medium Term 106 10th St D St In coordination with other pedestrian improvements between D Street and B Street, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 5 Long Term 17 Herndon Rd Aurora St Install a high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach and a transverse crosswalk across the eastern approach. Install curb extensions at both eastern corners to square up the intersection; install curb ramps. 4.5 Medium Term 139 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 29 Locust St Sherman Ave Refresh the existing high- visibility crosswalk at the western approach. Install advance yield markings and consider installing an RRFB. Upgrade the crosswalk across the southern approach to high- visibility and install advance yield markings. Install curb ramps at all three corners with landings. 4.5 Medium Term 72 Princeton Ave Tully Rd Construct curb extensions at all corners to square up intersection approaches. Install an RRFB for Tully Road crossing. Install transverse crosswalks for the eastern and western approaches. 4.5 Medium Term 83 Janet Cir Sheldon Dr Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across Sheldon Drive (west approach). Install advance yield markings and construct curb extensions at both corners. Refresh the transverse crosswalk across Janet Circle and install advance stop markings. Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across Janet Drive. 4.5 Medium Term 91 6th St H St Consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, install curb extensions, upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks, and provide leading pedestrian intervals for all crossing phases. 4.5 Long Term 140 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 105 10th St E St Install high-visibility crosswalks at all four approaches. Install advance yield markings for the 10th Street crosswalks. Consider installing for 10th Street crossings. 4.5 Medium Term 10 Hilliard Way E Orangeburg Ave Install a high-visibility crosswalk with advanced yield markings and an RRFB across E Orangeburg Avenue at the eastern approach. Install a transverse crosswalk across Hiliard Way 4 Medium Term 27 South Ave Roselawn Ave Install high-visibility crosswalks at all four approaches. 4 Medium Term 40 Palmwood Dr Mable Ave Install a high-visibility crosswalk across Palmwood Dr. 4 Medium Term 76 Martin Ave Orangeburg Ave Refresh the high-visibility crosswalk across the eastern approach and install advance yield markings. Install high- visibility crosswalks across the northern and southern approaches with advance stop markings. Consider upgrading the existing RRFB to a PHB. 4 Long Term 86 Blue Bird Dr Snyder Ave Upgrade both crosswalks to high-visibility and install advance stop markings. Install a curb ramp at the southwest corner. 4 Medium Term 141 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 6 Sonoma Ave Zuccaro Way Relocate the high-visibility crosswalk across the southern approach to the northern approach for greater separation from the school driveway. If relocated, install curb extensions at both northern corners. Add additional red curb where necessary. Consider installing an RRFB for the Sonoma crossing. 3.5 Medium Term 85 Cheyenne Way Shawnee Dr Refresh all high-visibility crosswalks and install advance stop markings. Construct curb extensions at all four corners. 3.5 Medium Term 9 Lillian Dr Laramie Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across Laranie Drive and on the northern crossing across Lilian Drive. Install a curb ramp at the northeast corner. 3 Medium Term 34 Niabell Pl Falmouth Way Install a high-visibility crosswalk at the northern approach (avoid driveways on the west side if possible) with advance yield markings. Install a transverse crosswalk across the eastern approach. 3 Medium Term 41 Sylvan Meadows Dr Beyer Park Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across all four crossings 3 Medium Term 84 Mount Vernon Dr Earlmar Dr Install high-visibility crosswalks across the northern and southern legs of the intersection. 3 Medium Term 142 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- ID Cross Street 1 Cross Street 2 Recommendation Total Category Priority 1 Sylvan Ave Oakdale Rd Study slip lane removal at both western corners. Update all crosswalks to high-visibility and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 2 Long Term 2 Floyd Ave Oakdale Rd Upgrade all crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. Study removal of the slip lane at the northeast corner and realign the bike lane if removed. 2 Long Term 3 Lancey Dr Oakdale Rd Refresh high-visibility crosswalks and provide a leading pedestrian interval for all crossing phases. 2 Long Term 143 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Figure 19: Priority Pedestrian Facilities 108 132 219 99 8th St W Granger Ave Kearney Ave H St Stoddard Ave Norwegian Ave Kansas Ave 9th St College Ave Tully Rd Woodland Ave I St la Lo m a Ave S t u d e nt C e n t e r D r Tully Rd A irport Wa y Late ral Nu m b er 4 Coffee Rd Mable Ave N Carpenter Rd N 9th St Oakdale Rd Bowen Ave Prescott Rd Needham St Roselle Ave Paradise Av e Sta n d iford Ave Clar e m o n t Ave Haddon Ave Sylvan Ave Lakewood Ave Virginia Ave Claus Rd S ylvan M ea do w s Dr Yosemite Blvd E Bri ggs m ore Ave G St Dale Rd Ne e c e D r Colfax Ave Lar a mie Dr Crows Landing Rd Brig h t o n Ave H a s h e m Dr 6th St D ra go o Park Dr Hillglen Ave Fine Ave Lincoln A v e Parker Rd 11th St Carpenter Rd Claratina Ave Celeste Dr Morse Rd E Morris Ave Lucern Ave Sutter Ave Miller Ave Claratina Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Tuolumne Blv d C h eyen ne W a y 7th St California Ave M il l brook Ave C r e e k w o o d Dr Enslen Ave She rwo o d Ave W Hatch R d Bangs Ave W Rumble Rd W Whitmore Ave Kodiak Dr Rose Ave Snyder Ave Merle Ave Root Late ra l W Briggsmore Ave Lateral Number 6 Sisk R d Carver Rd McHenry Ave Floyd Ave P eland ale Ave S c en ic Dr E Orangeburg Ave Great Valley Academy Stanislaus County West Campus Petersen Alternative Center for Education M. Robert Adkison Elementary Virginia Parks Elementary Norman N. Glick Middle Capistrano Elementary Christine Sipherd Elementary Bernard L. Hughes Elementary Alice N. Stroud Elementary Elihu Beard Elementary Bret Harte Elementary Burbank Elementary El Vista Elementary Enslen Elementary Catherine Everett Elementary Franklin Elementary John Fremont Elementary William Garrison Elementary John Muir Elementary La Loma Junior High Mark Twain Junior High James Marshall Elementary Orville Wright Elementary Robertson Road Elementary Roosevelt Junior High Rose Avenue Elementary Shackelford Elementary Wilson Elementary Sonoma Elementary Lakewood Elementary Harriette Kirschen Elementary Alberta Martone Elementary Evelyn Hanshaw Middle James C. Enochs High Fred C. Beyer High Peter Johansen High Grace M. Davis High Thomas Downey High Elliott Adult Education Center Modesto High Robert Elliott Alternative Education Center Independence Charter Mildred Perkins Elementary Mary Lou Dieterich Elementary Josephine Elementary Prescott Junior High George Eisenhut Elementary Agnes M. Baptist Elementary Daniel J. Savage Middle Mary Ann Sanders Elementary Sherwood Elementary Somerset Middle Standiford Elementary Sylvan Elementary Woodrow Elementary Coleman F. Brown Elementary Stockard Coffee Elementary Orchard Elementary Elizabeth Ustach Middle Freedom Elementary Yosemite ROP Caswell Elementary Carroll Fowler Elementary Mae Hensley Junior High Ceres High School Walter White Elementary Amtrak Station 13 18 19 24 30 39 44 45 54 64 67 74 97 108 0 0.5 1 MILE FIRST PHASE PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES MODESTO CA NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN Map produced December 2018. Destinations + Boundaries Amtrak Station College Hospital Library Museum School Modesto City Boundary Shopping Center Park K St H St 7th St I St 12th St B St 11th St 10th St B e a rd S t I St 97 108 Downtown Pedestrian Recommendations First Phase Projects Downtown Plan Ped Corridors IMPLEMENTATION 144 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN ---PAGE BREAK--- FUNDING Table 11 provides high and low planning level per mile cost estimates for each class of bicycle facility (includes 30% extra for "soft" costs). These are order of magnitude planning budgetary figures; a full detail engineering design will be needed to determine the most probable price of individual projects recommended in this document. Based on the planning level cost estimates in Table 11, the full bicycle network build-out would cost approximately between $41,000,000 and $230,000,000. Table 12 provides planning level per unit/ per mile cost estimates for some pedestrian infrastructure treatments. Appendix A contains detailed descriptions of local, regional, state, and federal funding opportunities. Table A-1 within Appendix A breaks down funding sources by eligible project types. Table 11: Bicycle Project Planning Level Cost Estimates Bikeway Class Cost Per Mile Assumptions Low High Shared-Use Path $500,000 $1,500,000 Includes AC path and minor crossing improvements. Does not include signal modification or right-of-way acquisition. Bicycle Lane $50,000 $350,000 Low cost assumes signage, striping. High cost assumes green conflict marking, traffic signal modification including bike signal detection. Buffered Bicycle Lane $100,000 $400,000 Low cost assumes signage, striping, and a painted buffer. High cost assumes green conflict marking, traffic signal modification including bike signal detection, and wayfinding signage. Bicycle Boulevard $70,000 $1,000,000 Low cost assumes signage, striping, and minor traffic calming such as speed humps, and up to 3 other elements such as medians, diverters or a raised crosswalk. High cost assumes low cost items plus traffic circles, curb extensions, traffic signal modification including bike signal detection, and wayfinding signage. Bicycle Route $15,000 $25,000 Includes signage and striping. Separated Bikeway $300,000 $1,500,000 Low cost assumes signage, striping, and a painted buffer with flexible delineators. High cost assumes green conflict marking, traffic signal modification including bike signal detection, and a raised concrete buffer. 145 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 12: Pedestrian Project Planning Level Cost Estimates Facility Type Cost Unit Notes High-visibility crosswalk $4,000 Each Transverse crosswalk $3,000 Each Curb extensions/Corner Radii $50,000 Each Varies by size Leading Pedestrian Interval $100,000 Each Cost varies based on the cost of existing and required equipment Slip Lane (Free-Right Turn Lane) Removal $100,000 Each Varies by size Pedestrian-only Signal Phase $100,000 Each Cost varies based on the cost of existing and required equipment Median Refuge Island $50,000 Each Varies by size Curb Ramps $5,000 Each Signage $500 Each RRFB $60,000 Each Pavement Markings (stop/yield) $2,000 Each Wayfinding Signs $30,000 Per Mile Ten signs per mile Neighborhood Traffic Circle $150,000 Each Median (short) $50,000 Each Varies by size Protected Intersection $500,000 Each Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon $400,000 Each Red Curb Paint $26,500 Per Mile Sidewalk $500,000 Per Mile Six-foot wide sidewalk on one side of the street 146 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- INTERAGENCY COORDINATION As previously mentioned, some of the recommendations in the Plan are on the right-of-way of agencies other than the City of Modesto, like Caltrans or County Flood Control. These projects will need to be carefully coordinated with the appropriate stakeholders for planning, design, funding, and implementation purposes. While within city limits, as it is their property, the other agency has the final say over these projects. 147 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A Funding Sources ---PAGE BREAK--- Local and Regional Funding MEASURE L Measure L is a 25-year half-cent sales tax in Stanislaus County. Measure L provides funding for local transportation projects including street maintenance, traffic safety improvements, and safe routes to schools. 5% of program funds are allocated for bicycle and pedestrian improvements (~$700,000 annually for Modesto). Funds are programmed by the Stanislaus Council of Governments (StanCOG). SJVAPCD BIKE PATHS PROGRAM The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District has a Bicycle Paths program that will assist funding some bicycle projects. The program will currently help fund Class I, Class II, and Class III bicycle facilities; up to $150,000 per project (depending on bikeway class). Award amounts are capped at $150,000 per jurisdiction per year. Projects must work toward reducing vehicle miles traveledand air emissions. Funds are programmed by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). NEW DEVELOPMENT OR REDEVELOPMENT/ REHABILITATION Future new development and redevelopment projects including new road construction, resurfacing, and construction projects are one method of providing pedestrian improvements and bike facilities. To ensure that pedestrian and bicycle improvements are included in these projects, it is important that the review process includes an individual (designated active transportation coordinator) or group (BPAC) to monitor the review process. Funds are programmed by the City of Modesto. ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS Different types of assessment districts can be used to fund the construction and maintenance of bikeway facilities. Examples include Mello-Roos Community Facility Districts, Infrastructure Financing Districts (SB 308), Open Space Districts, or Lighting and Landscape Districts. These types of districts have specific requirements relating to the establishment and use of funds. Funds are programmed by the City of Modesto. IMPACT FEES Another potential local source of funding are developer impact fees, typically tied to trip generation and traffic impacts as a result of proposed projects. A developer may be required to help mitigate the overall impact of vehicular trips by paying an impact fee; the City should ensure that planning policies consider bicycle and pedestrian planning, design, and construction costs to be an eligible uses of these fees. Funds are programmed by the City of Modesto. 149 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN FUNDING SOURCES ---PAGE BREAK--- State and Federal Grant Programs CALIFORNIA ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM California’s Active Transportation Program funds infrastructure and programmatic projects that support the program goals of shifting trips to walking and bicycling, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and improving public health. Competitive application cycles occur every one to two years, typically in the spring or early summer. Eligible projects include construction of bicycling and walking facilities, new or expanded programmatic activities, or projects that include a combination of infrastructure and non-infrastructure components. Typically, no local match is required, though extra points are awarded to applicants who do identify matching funds. Funds are programmed by the California Transportation Commission (CTC). SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANTS Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants are available to communities for planning, study, and design work to identify and evaluate projects, including conducting outreach or implementing pilot projects. Communities are typically required to provide an 11.47% local match, but staff time or in-kind donations are eligible to be used for the match provided the required documentation is submitted. Funds are programmed by Caltrans. HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Caltrans offers Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grants every one to two years. Projects on any publicly owned road or active transportation facility are eligible, including bicycle and pedestrian improvements. HSIP focuses on projects that explicitly address documented safety challenges through proven countermeasures, are implementation-ready, and demonstrate cost-effectiveness. Funds are programmed by Caltrans. SOLUTIONS FOR CONGESTED CORRIDORS PROGRAM Funded by SB1, the Congested Corridors Program strives to reduce congestion in highly traveled and congested roads through performance improvements that balance transportation improvements, community impacts, and environmental benefits. This program can fund a wide array of improvements including bicycle facilities and pedestrian facilities. Eligible projects must be detailed in an approved corridor- focused planning document. These projects must include aspects that benefit all modes of transportation using an array of strategies that can change travel behavior, dedicate right-of-way for bikes and transit, and reduce vehicle miles traveled. Funds are programmed by the CTC. 150 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN FUNDING SOURCES ---PAGE BREAK--- OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY Under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, 5% of Section 405 funds are dedicated to addressing non-motorized safety. These funds may be used for law enforcement training related to pedestrian and bicycle safety, enforcement campaigns, and public education and awareness campaigns. Funds are programmed by the California Office of Traffic Safety. RECREATIONAL TRAILS PROGRAM The Recreational Trails Program helps provide recreational trials for both motorized and non-motorized trail use. Eligible products include trail maintenance and restoration, trailside and trailhead facilities, equipment for maintenance, new trail construction, and more. Funds are programmed by the California Department of Parks and Recreation. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM The Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program funds land-use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects that support infill and compact development that reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Projects must fall within one of three project area types: transit-oriented development, integrated connectivity project, or rural innovation project areas. Fundable activities include affordable housing developments, sustainable transportation infrastructure, transportation-related amenities, and program costs. Funds are programmed by the Strategic Growth Council and implemented by the Department of Housing and Community Development. URBAN GREENING GRANTS Urban Greening Grants support the development of green infrastructure projects that reduce GHG emissions and provide multiple benefits. Projects must include one of three criteria, most relevantly: reduce commute vehicle miles traveled by constructing bicycle paths, bicycle lanes or pedestrian facilities that provide safe routes for travel between residences, workplaces, commercial centers, and schools. Eligible projects include green streets and alleyways and non-motorized urban trails that provide safe routes for travel between residences, workplaces, commercial centers, and schools. Funds are programmed by the California Natural Resources Agency. HABITAT CONSERVATION FUND The Habitat Conservation Fund Program supports projects that bring urban residents into park and wildlife areas, protect plant and animal species, and acquire and develop wildlife corridors and trails. Funds are programmed by the California Department of Parks and Recreation. STATEWIDE PARK PROGRAM (SPP) The Statewide Park Program solicits competitive grants to fund new parks and recreation opportunities in critically underserved communities across California. Funds can be used to create and expand/ renovate existing parks. All projects must include at least one “recreation feature” which includes non-motorized trails. No match is required. Funds are programmed by the California Department of Parks and Recreation. 151 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN FUNDING SOURCES ---PAGE BREAK--- Other State Funds SENATE BILL 1: LOCAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM This program provides local and regional agencies that have passed sales tax measures, developer fees, or other transportation- imposed fees to fund road maintenance and rehabilitation, sound walls, and other transportation improvement projects. Jurisdictions with these taxes or fees are then eligible for a formulaic annual distribution of no less than $100,000. These jurisdictions are also eligible for a competitive grant program. Local Partnership Program funds can be used for a wide variety of transportation purposes including roadway rehabilitation and construction, transit capital and infrastructure, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and green infrastructure. Funds are programmed by CTC. SENATE BILL 1: ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION PROGRAM Senate Bill 1 created the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program to address deferred maintenance on state highways and local road systems. Program funds can be spent on both design and construction efforts. On-street active transportation-related maintenance projects are eligible if program maintenance and other thresholds are met. Funds are allocated to eligible jurisdictions. Funds are programmed by the State Controller’s Office. 152 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN FUNDING SOURCES ---PAGE BREAK--- Funding Source Planning / Design / Construction On-Street Bikeways Trails Safe Routes to School Safe Routes to Transit Crossings / Intersections Programs Studies Local & Regional Programs Measure L (StanCOG) P D C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Bike Paths Program (SJVAPCD) C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ New Developments/Resurfacing Projects (Modesto) D C ◆ ◆ ◆ Assessment Districts (Modesto) P D C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Impact Fees (Modesto) P D C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Competitive Grant Programs Active Transportation Program (CTC) P D C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants (Caltrans) P ◆ Highway Safety Improvement Program (Caltrans) D C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Solutions for Congested Corridors (CTC) C ◆ ◆ ◆ Office of Traffic Safety (CA OTS) ◆ Recreational Trails Program (CA DPR) C ◆ Affordable Housing & Sustainable Communities (CA HCD) C ◆ ◆ ◆ Urban Greening Grants (CA NRA) C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Statewide Park Program (CA DPR) C ◆ Other State Funds Local Partnership Program (CTC) C ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Road Maintenance and Rehabili- tation Program (Controller’s Office) D C ◆ ◆ ◆ Table A-1: Funding Sources by Eligible Project Types 153 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN FUNDING SOURCES ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX B Bicycle Recommendation Table ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To From Bikeway Class Miles 12th St Needham St D St Class IV 0.93 14th St D St Needham St Class II 0.41 17th St F St Downey Ave, J St Class II 0.36 19th St Burney St, La Loma Ave Downey Ave Class II 0.09 8th St B St Kansas Ave Class I 1.35 9th St S 9th St, Trail Connector, S Morton Blvd Tully Rd Class IV 1.66 B St 9th St 7th St Class IV 0.19 Belharbour Dr Dermond Rd Temescal Dr Class IIB 0.50 Blue Gum Ave N Carpenter Rd Morse Rd Class IIB 1.00 Brink Ave Student Center Dr North city limit Class I 0.36 Carpenter Rd Maze Blvd Chicago Ave Class IV 0.99 Claus Rd Yosemite Blvd Creekwood Dr Class IV 0.84 Claus Rd E Briggsmore Ave Northern city limit Class IV 1.77 Coffee Rd Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class IV 1.25 Coffee Rd North city limit Briggsmore Ave Class IV 2.37 Coldwell Ave Sycamore Ave College Ave Class II 0.58 College Ave W Briggsmore Ave Bowen Ave Class III 0.26 College Ave 10th St, Needham St Stoddard Ave Class IV 0.25 Creekwood Dr Norseman Dr Yosemite Blvd Class IIB 1.25 Crows Landing Rd City Limit E Hatch Rd Class IV 0.85 Crows Landing Rd Amador Ave W Whitmore Ave Class IV 0.89 D St 7th St Burney St Class IV 0.49 D St 7th St Burney St Class I 0.42 Table B-1: Bicycle Recommendations 155 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Dale Rd Standiford Ave Pelandale Ave Class IV 1.04 Dale Rd Pelandale Ave Kiernan Ave Class I 0.79 Downey Ave McHenry Ave N Morton Blvd Class II 0.50 E Briggsmore Ave McHenry Ave Claus Rd Class I 4.03 El Vista Ave Yosemite Blvd Oakdale Rd Class IV 0.98 Encina Ave Trail Phoenix Ave Lincoln Ave Class I 1.31 F St 9th St 12th St Class II 0.36 Fine Ave Merle Ave Hillglen Ave Class II 0.96 G St 2nd St La Loma Ave Class IV 1.25 H St 1st St Downey Ave Class IV 1.34 Hashem Dr Carson Oak Dr, Sylvan Ave Oakdale Rd Class II 0.90 I St Washington St 17th St Class I 1.13 K St 4th St Needham St Class IV 0.86 Kansas Ave 8th St Morse Rd Class II 2.15 Lakewood Ave Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class IV 0.81 Lakewood Ave Briggsmore Ave Scenic Dr Class I 0.81 Lakewood-Lincoln Ave Trail Bridge Scenic Dr Dry Creek Trail Connector/Bridge Class I 0.19 Lateral Number 1 Snyder Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Class I 1.12 Lateral Number 4 9th St N Carpenter Rd Class I 1.42 Lateral Number 4 Modesto Virginia Corridor, College Ave 9th St Class I 0.19 Lateral Number 5 Lateral Number 4 S Carpenter Rd Class I 1.48 Lateral Number 6 Sisk Rd Prescott Rd, Snyder Ave Class I 2.58 Legion Park Dr S Santa Cruz Ave Tioga Dr Class I 0.51 156 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Lincoln Ave Trail Scenic Trail Connector Yosemite Blvd Class I 0.99 Litt Rd Sylvan Ave Kodiak Dr Class II 0.39 Mable Ave Coffee Rd Oakdale Rd Class IV 0.99 Maze Blvd Washington St Helen White Memorial Trail Class IV 0.42 Millbrook Ave Sylvan Ave Belharbour Dr, Dermond Rd Class IV 0.60 Modesto Virginia Corridor Woodrow Ave Pelandale Ave Class I 1.03 Morse Rd Kansas Ave Blue Gum Ave Class II 1.00 Morse Rd Blue Gum Ave North end of the street Class II 0.15 Morton Blvd Rue De Yoe Yosemite Blvd Class I 0.54 N Carpenter Rd Maze Blvd Fire Science Ln, Student Center Dr Class I 1.57 N Carpenter Rd N 9th St W Briggsmore Ave Class I 0.18 N Emerald Ave Maze Blvd Kanas Ave Class II 0.51 N Martin Luther King Dr Ash St Sutter Ave, Tuolumne Blvd, Paradise Ave Class II 0.11 N McClure Rd Dry Creek Dr N McClure Rd Connector Trail Class II 0.11 N McClure Rd Connector N McClure Rd Scenic Trail Class I 0.13 Needham St McHenry Ave Park Ave Class II 0.28 Norseman Dr South end of street Garst Rd Class II 0.53 Oakdale Rd E Orangeburg Ave Sylvan Ave Class IV 2.51 Oakdale Rd El Vista Ave E Orangeburg Ave Class IV 0.77 157 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Paradise Ave Beverly Dr, Harris Ave, Wade Ave South city limit Class IV 0.45 Paradise Ave S Washington St, H St Sheridan St Class IIB 0.66 Parker Rd Claus Rd, E Briggsmore Ave East city limit Class IV 0.98 Pelandale Ave Modesto Virginia Corridor Salida Blvd Class IV 3.85 Prescott Rd Bangs Ave W Briggsmore Ave Class IV 2.39 Root Lateral E Briggsmore Ave, Coffee Rd Virginia Ave, W Morris Ave Class I 1.99 Roselle Ave E Briggsmore Ave North city limit Class IV 2.09 S Conejo Ave Tioga Dr Tioga Dr Class IV 0.16 S Morton Blvd N 7th St 11th St Class I 0.40 S Morton Blvd Grand St, Toulume River Trail Extension Yosemite Blvd Class IV 0.02 S Morton Blvd 11th St Grand St Class I 0.52 S Washington St Maze Blvd Paradise Ave Class IV 0.50 Scenic Dr (EB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class II 0.75 Scenic Dr (WB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class I 0.89 Scenic Dr (WB) McGuire Dr Lakewood Ave Class IV 0.77 Sierra Dr 7th St, S Morton Blvd Sunset Blvd, 3rd St Class IV 0.43 Standiford Ave McHenry Ave Dale Rd Class IV 3.14 Sutter Ave Rouse Ave Robertson Rd Class II 0.50 Sylvan Ave McHenry Ave Jeffrey Dr Class IV 2.34 Sylvan Ave Jeffrey Dr Claus Rd Class IIB 1.65 Tioga Dr Monterey Ave Hillside Dr Class IV 0.19 Tioga Dr S Conejo Ave Monterey Ave Class I 0.16 158 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Tully Rd Briggsmore Ave Standiford Ave Class IIB 1.30 Tully Rd Standiford Ave Pelandale Ave Class IV 0.77 Tully Rd Stoddard Ave W Briggsmore Ave Class IV 1.44 W Briggsmore Ave McHenry Ave N Carpenter Rd Class IV 2.28 W Briggsmore Ave McHenry Ave N Carpenter Rd Class IV 2.29 W Hatch Rd East City limit Monticello Ln Class IV 1.39 W Orangeburg Ave Carver Rd Evergreen Ave Class II 0.59 Yosemite Blvd D St City Limit Class IV 3.80 159 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Snyder Bike Boulevard Group Blue Bird Dr Pelandale Ave Vintage Dr Class IIIB 0.53 Eastport Dr Snyder Ave Northern end of street Class IIIB 0.23 Gagos Dr Pelandale Ave Vintage Dr Class IIIB 0.57 Marsala Way Veneman Ave Snyder Ave Class IIIB 0.51 Pickford Way Snyder Ave Warm Springs Dr Class IIIB 0.13 Snyder Ave Carver Rd Blue Bird Dr Class IIIB 1.98 Veneman Ave Conant Ave West of Dale Rd Class IIIB 0.61 Vintage Dr Gagos Dr Blue Bird Dr Class IIIB 0.10 Warm Springs Dr Eastport Dr Pickford Way Class IIIB 0.23 West Rumble Bike Boulevard Group Budd St Park Pl Conant Ave Class IIIB 0.10 Dr Prescott Rd Park Pl Class IIIB 0.34 Conant Ave Sisk Rd Veneman Ave Class IIIB 1.17 Park Pl Budd St W Rumble Rd Class IIIB 0.36 W Rumble Rd McHenry Ave Sisk Rd Class IIIB 3.07 Carver Bike Boulevard Group Bowen Ave McHenry Ave Tully Rd Class IIIB 1.00 Carver Rd N 9th St Bangs Ave Class IIIB 3.28 Cheyenne Way Carver Rd Prescott Rd Class IIIB 0.52 College Ave Bowen Ave W Rumble Rd Class IIIB 0.62 Higbee Dr Tully Rd Otis Ave Class IIIB 0.40 Leveland Ln McKenry Ave College Ave Class IIIB 0.62 Mount Vernon Dr College Ave Prescott Rd Class IIIB 1.37 Otis Ave Higbee Dr Sheldon Dr Class IIIB 0.05 Sheldon Dr Royalton Ave Prescott Rd Class IIIB 0.84 Table 13: Bicycle Recommendations - Bicycle Boulevards 160 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Roseburg/ Princeton Bike Boulevard Group Campus Way N 9th St Stoddard Ave Class IIIB 0.21 Coldwell Ave College Ave N 9th St Class IIIB 0.53 Evergreen Ave Carver Rd Sisk Rd, W Briggsmore Ave Class IIIB 0.52 Griswold Ave McHenry Ave Virginia Corridor Class IIIB 0.51 Kearney Avey Princeton Ave Princeton Ave Class IIIB 0.02 Poplar Ave Needham St Stoddard Ave Class IIIB 0.24 Princeton Ave Griswold Ave, Modesto Virginia Corridor Kearney Ave Class IIIB 0.78 Princeton Ave Kearney Ave Carver Rd Class IIIB 0.29 Stoddard Ave Sycamore Ave College Ave Class IIIB 0.54 Sycamore Ave Stoddard Ave Griswold Ave Class IIIB 0.44 Virginia Ave Stoddard Ave W Morris Ave, Root Lateral Class IIIB 0.13 W Morris Ave McHenry Ave Sycamore Ave Class IIIB 0.21 W Roseburg Ave McHenry Ave Carver Rd Class IIIB 1.54 West Modesto Bike Boulevard Group 2nd St G St Blue Gum Ave Class IIIB 0.35 5th St Blue Gum Ave F St, Student Center Dr Class IIIB 0.31 Chapparal Pl Morse Rd N Rosemore Ave Class IIIB 0.50 G St Student Center Dr 2nd St Class IIIB 0.28 Mercy Ave Woodland Ave Kansas Ave Class IIIB 0.50 N Rosemore Ave Kansas Ave Finley Ct Class IIIB 0.19 N Rosemore Ave Woodland Ave Blue Gum Ave Class IIIB 0.51 Poust Rd Woodland Ave Blue Gum Ave Class IIIB 0.51 161 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles West Modesto Bike Boulevard Group Shaddox Ave Seneca Pl, Seneca Ct N Rosemore Ave Class IIIB 0.25 Shasta Ave Kansas Ave Alum Rock Ct Class IIIB 0.19 Student Center Dr 5th St N Carpenter Rd Class IIIB 0.53 Torrid Ave N Carpenter Rd Western city limit Class IIIB 0.42 Woodland Ave N Carpenter Rd Morse Rd Class IIIB 1.00 Union/ E Rumble Bike Boulevard Group Barringham Ln Lancashire Ln Dragoo Park Dr Class IIIB 0.07 Beyer Park Dr Forest Glenn Dr Claratina Ave Class IIIB 0.70 Claremont Ave E Rumble Rd Dragoo Park Dr Class IIIB 0.28 Dragoo Park Dr Claremont Ave Grecian Ave Class IIIB 0.92 Drakeshire Dr Montana Dr Grecian Ave Class IIIB 0.03 E Rumble Rd McHenry Ave Hashem Dr Class IIIB 1.73 E Union Ave McHenry Ave Dragoo Park Dr Class IIIB 0.53 Forest Glenn Dr Sylvan Ave Beyer Park Dr Class IIIB 0.08 Grecian Ave Drakeshire Dr McHenry Ave, State Hwy 108 Class IIIB 0.73 Greenwich Ln Robin Hood Dr Lancashire Ln Class IIIB 0.43 Keller St Floyd Ave Coffee Villa Dr Class IIIB 0.41 Keller St Clovewood Ave Sylvan Ave Class IIIB 0.19 Kentwood Ave Beyer Park Dr Northview Dr Class IIIB 0.17 Lancashire Ln Greenwich Ln Barringham Ln Class IIIB 0.05 Montana Dr Coffee Rd Drakeshire Dr Class IIIB 0.27 Northview Dr Sylvan Meadows Dr Mable Ave Class IIIB 0.20 Palmwood Dr Sylvan Ave Mable Ave Class IIIB 0.50 162 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Union/ E Rumble Bike Boulevard Group Robin Hood Dr McHenry Ave Greenwich Ln Class IIIB 0.07 Sylvan Meadows Dr Dragoo Park Dr Palmwood Dr Class IIIB 1.15 W Union Ave McHenry Ave Tully Rd Class IIIB 1.01 Woodrow Ave McHenry Ave Tully Rd Class IIIB 1.00 Floyd/ Sunrise Bike Boulevard Group Bodem St Morris Ave Lucern Ave Class IIIB 0.12 Bronson Ave W Orangeburg Ave W Granger Ave Class IIIB 0.25 E Fairmont Ave Sunrise Ave Coffee Rd Class IIIB 0.50 E Granger Ave McHenry Ave Sunrise Ave Class IIIB 0.50 E Morris Ave McHenry Ave Coffee Rd Class IIIB 1.00 E Roseburg Ave McHenry Ave Root Lateral Class IIIB 0.56 El Vecino Ave E Morris Ave E Orangeburg Ave Class IIIB 0.87 Floyd Ave McHenry Ave Fine Ave Class IIIB 1.99 Johnson St Downey Ave Lucern Ave, Ila Way, Root Lateral Class IIIB 0.50 Lucern Ave Johnson St, Ila Way, Root Lateral Sunnyside Ave Class IIIB 1.00 Sheffield Ln Sunrise Ave E Rumble Rd Class IIIB 0.13 Sherwood Ave W Granger Ave W Briggsmore Ave Class IIIB 0.19 Sunnyside Ave Lucern Ave Locke Rd Class IIIB 0.09 Sunrise Ave Bodem St Sheffield Ln Class IIIB 2.04 Tokay Ave McHenry Ave Sunrise Ave Class IIIB 0.50 W Granger Ave McHenry Ave College Ave Class IIIB 0.75 163 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Orangeburg/ Rose Bike Boulevard Group Brighton Ave Locke Rd Coffee Rd Class IIIB 0.65 Celeste Dr Coffee Rd Oakdale Rd Class IIIB 1.00 E Orangeburg Ave McHenry Ave Held Dr Class IIIB 3.44 Eastridge Dr Surrey Ave E Orangeburg Ave Class IIIB 0.45 Glenbrook Way Springcreek Dr E Orangeburg Ave Class IIIB 0.18 Held Dr Orangeburg Ave North end of street Class IIIB 0.44 Lillian Dr Springcreek Dr E Orangeburg Ave Class IIIB 0.28 Locke Rd Coffee Rd Rose Ave Class IIIB 0.50 Middleboro Pl Eastridge Dr Lakewood Ave Class IIIB 0.27 Muirswood Way Wylie Dr E Orangeburg Ave Class IIIB 0.38 Rose Ave Locke Rd Floyd Ave Class IIIB 1.66 Sonoma Ave Surrey Ave E Orangeburg Ave Class IIIB 0.50 Springcreek Dr Scenic Dr Glenbrook Way Class IIIB 0.39 Surrey Ave Oakdale Rd Eastridge Dr Class IIIB 0.74 Vera Cruz Dr Celeste Dr Floyd Ave Class IIIB 0.42 Woodbine Dr Lillian Dr Springcreek Dr Class IIIB 0.27 Wylie Dr Brighton Ave Oakdale Rd Class IIIB 0.76 Wylie Dr Brighton Ave Oakdale Rd Class IIIB Bicycle Boulevard 0.76 164 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Merle Bike Boulevard Group Dermond Rd Merle Ave Belharbour Dr, Millbrook Ave Class IIIB 0.25 Lincoln Oak Dr Merle Ave Kodiak Dr Class IIIB 0.50 Maid Mariane Ln Merle Ave Allan Adale Ct Class IIIB 0.21 Merle Ave Oakdale Rd Claus Rd Class IIIB 1.99 Oaklawn Dr Lincoln Oak Dr Temescal Dr Class IIIB 0.23 Sharon Ave Snowy Egret St Fine Ave Class IIIB 0.20 Temescal Dr Oaklawn Dr Bellharbour Dr Class IIIB 0.02 Wisdom Way Merle Ave Southern end of street Class IIIB 0.12 Hillglen/ Kodiak Bike Boulevard Group Hillglen Ave La Force Dr, Kodiak Dr Roselle Ave Class IIIB 0.94 Hillglen Ave Esta Ave Fine Ave Class IIIB 0.38 Kodiak Dr Hillglen Ave Bear Cub Ln Class IIIB 0.61 La Force Dr Oakdale Rd Kodiak Dr Class IIIB 0.16 Wood Sorrel Dr Sylvan Ave Hillglen Ave Class IIIB 0.25 McClure Bike Boulevard Group Capistrano Dr Poppypatch Dr Penny Ln Class IIIB 0.19 Dry Creek Dr Lincoln Ave Creekwood Dr Class IIIB 0.73 Jarena Dr N McClure Rd Creekwood Dr Class IIIB 0.22 Mechalys Way N McClure Rd Creekwood Dr Class IIIB 0.22 N McClure Rd Yosemite Blvd Dry Creek Dr Class IIIB 0.75 Penny Ln Lincoln Ave N McClure Rd Class IIIB 0.48 Poppypatch Dr Capistrano Dr N McClure Rd Class IIIB 0.69 165 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles La Loma/ Encina/ Miller Bike Boulevard Group Buena Vis La Loma Ave Encina Ave, N Santa Rosa Ave Class IIIB 0.17 Covena Ave Yosemite Blvd Northern end of street Class IIIB 0.64 Edgebrook Dr El Vista Ave N Riverside Dr Class IIIB 0.56 El Rio Ave El Rio Ave Trail La Loma Ave Class IIIB 0.19 Encina Ave N Santa Rosa Ave, Buena Vis Phoenix Ave Class IIIB 1.00 Kerr Ave Yosemite Blvd Mono Dr Class IIIB 0.19 La Loma Ave 19th St, Burney St Yosemite Blvd Class IIIB 1.06 La Sombra Ave El Rio Ave Las Palmas Ave Class IIIB 0.28 Lane St Burney St N Morton Blvd Class IIIB 0.16 Las Palmas Ave Pequino Ave La Sombra Ave Class IIIB 0.05 Miller Ave La Loma Ave, N Santa Cruz Ave N Riverside Dr Class IIIB 1.44 N Conejo Ave Yosemite Blvd Encina Ave Class IIIB 0.48 N Morton Blvd Rue De Yoe Downey Ave Class IIIB 0.08 N Riverside Dr Yosemite Blvd Edgebrook Dr Class IIIB 0.63 Pequeno Ave Las Palmas Ave N Santa Ana Ave Class IIIB 0.12 Phoenix Ave Scenic Trail Yosemite Blvd Class IIIB 0.94 Santa Barbara Ave Yosemite Blvd La Loma Ave Class IIIB 0.18 Seagull Way Encina Ave Encina Ave Trail Class IIIB 0.01 Wilson Ave Pequino Ave Edgebrook Dr Class IIIB 0.31 Monterey/ Empire Bike Boulevard Group Empire Ave Oregon Dr Hillside Dr Class IIIB 0.43 Hillside Dr S Santa Cruz Ave Tioga Dr Class IIIB 0.49 Monterey Ave S Santa Cruz Ave Tioga Dr Class IIIB 0.47 Oregon Dr S Santa Cruz Ave S Conejo Ave Class IIIB 0.38 Tioga Dr Hillside Dr Legion Park Dr Class IIIB 0.13 166 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Neece Bike Boulevard Group 2nd St Sierra Dr H st Class IIIB 0.08 F St Sierra Dr 3rd St Class IIIB 0.05 Merced Ave 5th St, Sierra Dr Tuolumne Blvd Class IIIB 0.23 Neece Dr Tuolumne Blvd Sunset Ave Class IIIB 0.81 Pelton Ave Roselawn Ave Colorado Ave Class IIIB 0.13 Roselawn Ave Roselawn Ct Colorado Ave Class IIIB 0.64 Roselawn Ave Sierra Dr South Ave Class IIIB 0.53 Rouse Ave Western city limit Eastern city limity (east of Roselawn Ave) Class IIIB 0.10 Rouse Ave Neece Dr Western city limit Class IIIB 0.18 Sierra Dr Sunset Blvd, 3rd St 1st St Class IIIB 0.16 Tuolumne Blvd Frontage Road Neece Dr Merced Ave Class IIIB 0.03 Sutter/ Emerald Bike Boulevard Group Crippen Ave Kirschen Dr Yellow Pine Dr Class IIIB 0.27 Hammond Ave Robertson Rd Rouse Ave Class IIIB 0.50 Locust St Martin Lither King Dr Maze Ct Class IIIB 0.21 Maple St S Washington St Briggs Ditch St Class IIIB 0.37 N Martin Luther King Dr Ruberto St Elm Ave Class IIIB 0.91 Pelton Ave Sutter Ave Hammond St Class IIIB 0.38 Pine Tree Ln Paradise Rd Robertson Rd Class IIIB 0.47 Red Pine Dr Crippen Ave Hammond St Class IIIB 0.13 Rouse Ave Wade Ave Josi Ln Class IIIB 0.50 S Emerald Ave California Ave Laurel Ave Class IIIB 0.72 Sutter Ave Paradise Rd Rouse Ave Class IIIB 0.50 Yellow Pine Dr Crippen Ave Pine Tree Ln Class IIIB 0.12 167 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle Boulevard Group Street To From Bikeway Class Miles Ironside/ Santa Fe Bike Boulevard Group Boise Ave W Hatch Rd Ustick Rd Class IIIB 0.58 Cielito Dr Jardin Way Rancho Encantado Ln Class IIIB 0.12 Ironside Dr Waldo Ct Jardin Way Class IIIB 0.28 Jardin Way Cielito Dr Ironside Dr Class IIIB 0.09 Jim Way Olivero Rd Winmoore Way Class IIIB 0.19 Rancho Encantado Ln W Hatch Rd Cielito Dr Class IIIB 0.18 Rio Grande Ave Crows Landing Rd Santa Fe Ave Class IIIB 0.26 Santa Fe Ave Pecos Ave Rio Grande Ave Class IIIB 0.47 School Ave Crows Landing Rd Santa Fe Ave Class IIIB 0.25 Tudor Ct Waldo Ct Ustick Rd Class IIIB 0.05 Ustick Rd Boise Ave Tudor Ct Class IIIB 0.05 Waldo Ct Ironside Dr Tudor Ct Class IIIB 0.05 Winmoore Way Jim Way Crows Landing Rd Class IIIB 0.47 168 MODESTO NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN BICYCLE RECOMMENDATION TABLE ---PAGE BREAK--- GET IN TOUCH Address 1010 10th Street, Suite 3100 Modesto CA 95354 Phone [PHONE REDACTED] Learn more: www.modestogov.com/465/Transportation- Engineering-Design-TED ---PAGE BREAK--- Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guide ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-2 CONTEXT 01 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Guidance A-4 User Design A-6 Pedestrian Facility Selection...........A-13 Sidewalks and Sidewalk Zones........A-14 02 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AT INTERSECTIONS ADA Curb Ramps A-18 Marked Crosswalks A-20 Median Refuge Island A-22 Curb Extensions A-23 Active Warning Beacons A-24 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons A-25 03 BICYCLE FACILITIES AT INTERSECTIONS BICYCLE FACILITY AMENITIES Intersection Crossing Markings..... A-46 Bike Lanes at Right A-48 Bike Boxes A-52 Two Stage Turn Boxes A-54 Bicycle Actuation/Detection and Signal Head A-56 Protected Intersections A-60 Wayfinding Sign A-64 Wayfinding Sign Placement........... A-66 Bike Parking Bikeway Maintenance 05 06 BICYCLE FACILITIES Bicycle Facility Selection.................A-27 Shared Use A-28 On-Street Bike A-30 Buffered Bike Lanes A-32 Bike One-way Separated A-38 Two-way Separated Bikeways....... A-40 04 ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-3 01: Context ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-4 Guidance Basis The sections that follow serve as an inventory of pedestrian and bicycle design treatments and provide guidelines for their development. These treatments and design guidelines are important because they represent the tools for creating a bicycle-friendly, safe, accessible community. The guidelines are not, however, a substitute for a more thorough evaluation by a professional upon implementation. The following standards and guidelines are referred to in this guide: National Guidance A blueprint for designing 21st century streets, the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide (2013) unveils the toolbox and tactics cities use to make streets safer, more livable, and more economically vibrant. The Guide outlines both a clear vision for complete streets and a basic road map for how to bring them to fruition. The document charts the principles and practices of the nation’s foremost engineers, planners, and designers working in cities. The National Association of City Transportation Officials’ (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide (2012) provides cities with state-of-the-practice solutions that can help create complete streets that are safe and enjoyable for bicyclists. The designs were developed by cities for cities, since unique urban streets require innovative solutions. In August 2013, the Federal Highway Administration issued a memorandum officially supporting use of the document. Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide (2015) provides national guidance on the planning and design of separated bike lane facilities. Released by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), this guide documents best practices as demonstrated around the U.S., and offers ideas on future areas of research, evaluation, and design flexibility. Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings Report recommends engineering treatments to improve pedestrian safety at unsignalized locations with high speeds and traffic volumes. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-5 The California Highway Design Manual (HDM) (Updated 2015) establishes uniform policies and procedures to carry out highway design functions for the California Department of Transportation. Complete Intersections: A Guide to Reconstructing Intersections and Interchanges for Bicyclists and Pedestrians (2010) is a reference guide that presents information and concepts related to improving conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians at major intersections and interchanges. The guide can be used to inform minor signage and striping changes to intersections, as well as major changes and designs for new intersections. Main Street, California: A Guide for Improving Community and Transportation Vitality (2013) reflects California’s current manuals and policies that improve multi-modal access, livability and sustainability within the transportation system. The guide recognizes the overlapping and sometimes competing needs of main streets. The Caltrans Memo: Design Flexibility in Multimodal Design (2014) encourages flexibility in highway design. The memo stated that “Publications such as the NACTO “Urban Street Design Guide” and “Urban Bikeway Design Guide,” are resources that Caltrans and local entities can reference when making planning and design decisions on the State highway system and local streets and roads.” The Caltrans resource Class IV Bikeway Guidance (2018) provides enhanced guidance for two-way separated bikeways, with added information on transit stops and separated bikeways adjacent to street parking. It also provides a discussion of maintenance using Caltrans equipment. The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) (2014) is an amended version of the FHWA MUTCD 2009 edition modified for use in California. While standards presented in the CA MUTCD substantially conform to the FHWA MUTCD, the state of California follows local practices, laws and requirements with regards to signing, striping and other traffic control devices. California Guidance ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-6 Bicycle as a Design Vehicle Similar to motor vehicles, bicyclists and their bicycles exist in a variety of sizes and configurations. These variations occur in the types of vehicle (such as a conventional bicycle, a recumbent bicycle or a tricycle), and behavioral characteristics (such as the comfort level of the bicyclist). The design of a bikeway should consider reasonably expected bicycle types on the facility and utilize the appropriate dimensions. The figure to the right illustrates the operating space and physical dimensions of a typical adult bicyclist, which are the basis for typical facility design. Bicyclists require clear space to operate within a facility. This is why the minimum operating width is greater than the physical dimensions of the bicyclist. Bicyclists prefer five feet or more operating width, although four feet may be minimally acceptable. In addition to the design dimensions of a typical bicycle, there are many other commonly used pedal- driven cycles and accessories to consider when planning and designing bicycle facilities. The most common types include tandem bicycles, recumbent bicycles, and trailer accessories. The figure to the left summarizes the typical dimensions for bicycle types. Bicycle Rider - Typical Dimensions Operating Envelope 8’ 4” Eye Level 5’ Handlebar Height 3’8” Preferred Operating Width 5’ Minimum Operating Width 4’ Physical Operating Width 2’6” User Design Dimensions The purpose of this section is to provide the facility designer with an understanding of how bicyclists operate and how their bicycle influences that operation. Bicyclists, by nature, are much more affected by poor facility design, construction, and maintenance practices than motor vehicle drivers. Bicyclists lack the protection from the elements and roadway hazards provided by an automobile’s structure and safety features. By understanding the unique characteristics and needs of bicyclists, a facility designer can provide quality facilities and minimize user risk. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-7 Source: AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 4th Edition Bicycle as Design Vehicle - Design Speed Expectations * Typical speed for causal riders per AASHTO 2013. Bicycle Type Feature Typical Speed Upright Adult Bicyclist Paved level surfacing 8-12 mph* Crossing Intersections 10 mph Downhill 30 mph Uphill 5 -12 mph Recumbent Bicyclist Paved level surfacing 18 mph 3’ 11” 2’ 6” 3’ 9” 8’ 5’ 10” 6’10” The expected speed that different types of bicyclists can maintain under various conditions also influences the design of facilities such as shared use paths. The table to the right provides typical bicyclist speeds for a variety of conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-8 Strong and Fearless – Characterized by bicyclists that will typically ride anywhere regardless of roadway conditions or weather. These bicyclists can ride faster than other user types, prefer direct routes and will typically choose roadway connections (even if shared with vehicles) over separate bicycle facilities such as shared-use paths. Enthused and Confident - This user group encompasses bicyclists who are fairly comfortable riding on all types of bikeways but usually choose low traffic streets or shared-use paths when available. These bicyclists may deviate from a more direct route in favor of a preferred facility type. This group includes all kinds of bicyclists such as commuters, recreationalists, racers and utilitarian bicyclists. Interested but Concerned – This user type comprises the bulk of the cycling population and represents bicyclists who typically only ride a bicycle on low traffic streets or shared-use paths under favorable weather conditions. These bicyclists perceive significant barriers to their increased use of cycling, specifically traffic and other safety issues. These people may become “Enthused & Confident” with encouragement, education and experience. No Way, No How – Persons in this category are not bicyclists, and perceive severe safety issues with riding in traffic. Some people in this group may eventually become more regular cyclists with time and education. A significant portion of these people will not ride a bicycle under any circumstances. 1% 5-10% 60% 30% Interested but Concerned No Way, No How Enthused and Confident Strong and Fearless Typical Distribution of Bicyclist Types Bicyclist User Type The 2012 AASHTO Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities encourages designers to identify their rider type based on the trip purpose (Recreational vs Transportation) and on the level of comfort and skill of the rider (Causal vs Experienced). A user-type framework for understanding a potential rider’s willingness to bike is illustrated in the figure below. Developed by planners in Portland, OR and supported by research, this classification identifies four distinct types of bicyclists. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-9 Pedestrian Design Needs Types of Pedestrians Pedestrians have a variety of characteristics and the transportation network should accommodate a variety of needs, abilities, and possible impairments. Age is one major factor that affects pedestrians’ physical characteristics, walking speed, and environmental perception. Children have low eye height and walk at slower speeds than adults. They also perceive the environment differently at various stages of their cognitive development. Older adults walk more slowly and may require assistive devices for walking stability, sight, and hearing. The table below summarizes common pedestrian characteristics for various age groups. Pedestrian Characteristics by Age Age Characteristics 0-4 Learning to walk Requires constant adult supervision Developing peripheral vision and depth perception 5-8 Increasing independence, but still requires supervision Poor depth perception 9-13 Susceptible to “darting out” in roadways Insufficient judgment Sense of invulnerability 14-18 Improved awareness of traffic environment Insufficient judgment 19-40 Active, aware of traffic environment 41-65 Slowing of reflexes 65+ Difficulty crossing street Vision loss Difficulty hearing vehicles approaching from behind Walking 2’ 6” (0.75 m) Preferred Operating Space 5’ (1.5 m) Eye Level 4’ 6” - 5’ 10” (1.3 m - 1.7 m) Shoulders 1’ 10” (0.5 m) The MUTCD recommends a normal walking speed of 3.5 feet per second when calculating the pedestrian clearance interval at traffic signals. The walking speed can drop to 3 feet per second for areas with older populations and persons with mobility impairments. While the type and degree of mobility impairment varies greatly across the population, the transportation system should accommodate these users to the greatest reasonable extent. Additional References and Guidelines AASHTO. Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, Exhibit 2-1. 2004. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-10 Design Needs of Dog Walkers Dog walking is a common and anticipated use on shared use paths. Dog sizes vary largely, as does leash length and walking style, leading to wide variation in possible design dimensions. Shared use paths designed to accommodate wheelchair users are likely to provide the necessary dimensions for the average dog walker. Amenities such as dog waste stations may enhance conditions for dog walkers. Preferred Operating Space 5’ (1.5 m) Shoulders 1’ 10” (0.5 m) Sweep Width 4.3’ (1.3 m) Sweep Width Varies Eye Level 4’ 6” - 5’ 10” (1.3 m - 1.7 m) Runner Typical Speed User Typical Speed Runner 6.2 mph Physical Length Up to 5’ (1.5 m) Design Needs of Runners Running is an important recreation and fitness activity commonly performed on shared use paths. Many runners prefer softer surfaces (such as rubber, bare earth or crushed rock) to reduce impact. Runners can change their speed and direction frequently. If high volumes are expected, controlled interaction or separation of different types of users should be considered. Additional References and Guidelines FHWA. Characteristics of Emerging Road and Trail Users and Their Safety. (2004). ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-11 Design Needs of Wheelchair Users As the American population ages, the number of people using mobility assistive devices (such as manual wheelchairs, powered wheelchairs) increases. Manual wheelchairs are self-propelled devices. Users propel themselves using push rims attached to the rear wheels. Braking is done through resisting wheel movement with the hands or arm. Alternatively, a second individual can control the wheelchair using handles attached to the back of the chair. Power wheelchairs user battery power to move the wheelchair. The size and weight of power wheelchairs Minimum Operating Width 3’ (0.9 m) Minimum Operating Width 3’ (0.9 m) Minimum to Make a 180 Degree Turn 5’ (1.5 m) Minimum to Make a 180 Degree Turn 5’ (1.5 m) Physical Width 2’6” (0.75 m) Physical Width 2’2” (0.7 m) Armrest 2’5” (0.75 m) Handle 2’9” (0.9 m) Eye Height 3’8” (1.1 m) Wheelchair User Typical Speed User Typical Speed Manual Wheelchair 3.6 mph Power Wheelchair 6.8 mph Wheelchair User Design Considerations Effect on Mobility Design Solution Difficulty propelling over uneven or soft surfaces. Firm, stable surfaces and structures, including ramps or beveled edges. Cross-slopes cause wheel- chairs to veer downhill. Cross-slopes of less than two percent. Require wider path of travel. Sufficient width and maneuver- ing space. limit their ability to negotiate obstacles without a ramp. Various control units are available that enable users to control the wheelchair movement, based on their ability joystick control, breath controlled, etc). Maneuvering around a turn requires additional space for wheelchair devices. Providing adequate space for 180 degree turns at appropriate locations is an important element for accessible design. Additional References and Guidelines FHWA. Characteristics of Emerging Road and Trail Users and Their Safety. 2004. USDOJ. 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- 02: Pedestrian Facilities ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-13 Midblock Crossings Midblock crossings are an important street design element for pedestrians. They can provide a legal crossing at locations where pedestrians want to travel, and can be safer than crossings at intersections because traffic is only moving in two directions. Locations where midblock crossings should be considered include: • Long blocks (longer than 600 feet) with destinations on both sides of the street. • Locations with heavy pedestrian traffic, such as schools, shopping centers. • At midblock transit stops, where transit riders must cross the street on one leg of their journey. FACILITY TYPE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING CONTEXTUAL GUIDANCE LEGEND At unsignalized locations 2 lane 3 lane 2 lane 2 lane with median refuge 3 lane 2 lane 2 lane with median refuge 3 lane 4 lane 4 lane with median refuge 5 lane 6 lane 6 lane with median refuge Crosswalk Only (high visibility)   EJ EJ X EJ EJ X X X X X X Crosswalk with warning signage and yield lines EJ     EJ EJ EJ X X X X X Active Warning Beacon (RRFB) X EJ       X  X X X Hybrid Beacon X X EJ EJ EJ EJ        Full Traffic Signal X X EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ      Grade separation X X EJ EJ EJ X EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ   Most Desirable  Engineering Judgement EJ Not Recommended X Local Streets 15-25 mph Collector Streets 25-30 mph Arterial Streets 30-45 mph 1 Marked Crosswalks 4 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon 3 Active Warning Beacon (RRFB) 6 Grade Separation 5 Full Traffic Signal 2 Crosswalk with Warning Signage 1 2 3 4 5 6 Crossing Treatment Selection The specific type of treatment at a crossing may range from a simple marked crosswalk to full traffic signals or grade separated crossings. Crosswalk lines should not typically be used by themselves, and appropriate selection of crossing enhancements should be evaluated in an engineering study. The engineering study should consider the number of lanes, the presence of a median, the distance from adjacent signalized intersections, the pedestrian volumes and delays, the average daily traffic (ADT), the posted or statutory speed limit or 85th-percentile speed, the geometry of the location, the possible consolidation of multiple crossing points, the availability of street lighting, and other appropriate factors. Pedestrian Crossing Location and Facility Selection ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-14 Frontage Zone Pedestrian Through Zone Buffer Zone Curbside Lane The through zone is the area intended for pedestrian travel. This zone should be entirely free of permanent and temporary objects. Wide through zones are needed in downtown areas or where pedestrian flows are high. The frontage zone allows pedestrians a comfortable “shy” distance from the building fronts. It provides opportunities for window shopping, to place signs, planters, or chairs. The buffer zone, also called the furnishing or landscaping zone, buffers pedestrians from the adjacent roadway, and is also the area where elements such as street trees, signal poles, signs, and other street furniture are properly located. The curbside lane can act as a flexible space to further buffer the sidewalk from moving traffic., and may be used for a bike lane. Curb extensions and bike corrals may occupy this space where appropriate. In the edge zone there should be a 6 inch wide curb. Sidewalk Zones & Widths Sidewalks are the most fundamental element of the walking network, as they provide an area for pedestrian travel separated from vehicle traffic. Providing adequate and accessible facilities can lead to increased numbers of people walking, improved accessibility, and the creation of social space. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-15 Street Classification Parking Lane/En- hancement Zone Buffer Zone Pedestrian Through Zone Frontage Zone Local Streets Varies 4 - 6 ft 6 ft N/A Downtown and Pedestrian Priority Areas Varies 4 - 6 ft 12 ft 2.5 - 10 ft Arterials and Collectors Varies 4 - 6 ft 6 - 8 ft 2.5 - 5 ft Typical Application • Wider sidewalks should be installed near schools, at transit stops, in downtown areas, or anywhere high concentrations of pedestrians exist. • At transit stops, an 8 ft by 5 ft clear space is required for accessible passenger boarding/alighting at the front door location per ADA requirements. • Sidewalks should be continuous on both sides of urban commercial streets, and should be required in areas of moderate residential density. • When retrofitting gaps in the sidewalk network, locations near transit stops, schools, parks, public buildings, and other areas with high concentrations of pedestrians should be the highest priority. Approximate Cost Cost of standard sidewalks range from about $25 per square foot for concrete sidewalk. This cost can increase with additional right-of-way acquisition or addition of landscaping, lighting or other aesthetic features. As an interim measure, an asphalt concrete path can be placed until such time that a standard sidewalk can be built. The cost of asphalt path can be less than half the cost of a standard sidewalk. Materials and Maintenance Sidewalks are typically constructed out of concrete and are separated from the roadway by a curb or gutter and sometimes a landscaped boulevard. Less expensive walkways constructed of asphalt, crushed stone, or other stabilized surfaces may be appropriate. Ensure accessibility and properly maintain all surfaces regularly. Surfaces must be firm, stable, and slip resistant. Colored, patterned, or stamped concrete can add distinctive visual appeal. ---PAGE BREAK--- 03: Pedestrian Facilities at Intersections ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-17 This page is intentionally blank ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-18 Design Features • Because the effectiveness of marked crossings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining marked crossings should be a high priority. • Thermoplastic markings offer increased durability than conventional paint. Continental markings provide additional visibility The crosswalk should be located to align as closely as possible with the through pedestrian zone of the sidewalk corridor Transverse markings are the most basic crosswalk marking type Typical Application At signalized intersections, all crosswalks should be marked. At unsignalized intersections, crosswalks may be marked under the following conditions: • At a complex intersection, to orient pedestrians in finding their way across. • At an offset intersection, to show pedestrians the shortest route across traffic with the least exposure to vehicular traffic and traffic conflicts. • At an intersection with visibility constraints, to position pedestrians where they can best be seen by oncoming traffic. • At an intersection within a school zone on a walking route. Marked Crosswalks A marked crosswalk signals to motorists that they must stop for pedestrians and encourages pedestrians to cross at designated locations. Installing crosswalks alone will not necessarily make crossings safer; especially on multi-lane roadways. At mid-block locations, crosswalks must be marked to establish a legal crossing. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-19 Marked crosswalks at Stony Point Road and Stony Circle Further Considerations Pedestrians are sensitive to out-of-direction travel, and reasonable accommodations should be made to make crossings both convenient at locations with adequate visibility. Continental crosswalk markings should be used at crossings with high pedestrian use or where vulnerable pedestrians are expected, including: school crossings, across arterial streets for pedestrian-only signals, at mid-block crosswalks, and at intersections where there is expected high pedestrian use and the crossing is not controlled by signals or stop signs. High-visibility crosswalks are not appropriate for all locations. Other crosswalk marking patterns are provided for in the CA MUTCD. Some cities prohibit omitting or removing a marked crosswalk at intersections in order to require a three-stage pedestrian crossing. Intersections with three-stage crossings lead to arduous and increased crossing distances, pedestrian frustration, encourages jaywalking, and exhibits modal bias favoring motor vehicle level-of-service over other modes. There are circumstances when only three crosswalks are utilized and typically occur at or near interchanges and freeway ramps. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of marked crossings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining marked crossings should be a high priority. Thermoplastic markings offer increased durability than conventional paint. Approximate Cost Depending on the type of material used, width of the crossing and width of the roadway, approximate installation costs are $500 for a regular striped crosswalk, $1,000 for a ladder crosswalk, and $8,000 for a patterned concrete crosswalk. In addition, the cost of a curb ramp is about $5,000-$10,000 per ramp. Due to various number of crosswalk styles in use, signing standards, color and aesthetics, other factors will affect the final cost. Maintenance of markings should also be considered. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-20 Typical Application • Can be applied on any roadway with a left turn center lane or median that is at least 6 feet wide. • Appropriate at signalized or unsignalized crosswalks. • On multi-lane roadways, consider configuration with active warning beacons for improved yielding compliance. Cut-through median refuge islands are preferred over curb ramps to better accommodate wheel chairs users. Median Refuge Island W11-2, W16-7P Median refuge islands are located at the mid-point of a marked crossing and help improve pedestrian safety by allowing pedestrians to cross one direction of traffic at a time. Refuge islands minimize pedestrian exposure by shortening crossing distance and increasing the number of available gaps for crossing. Design Features • The refuge island must be accessible, preferably with an at-grade passage through the island rather than ramps and landings. • The island should be at least 6 feet wide to be a legal refuge and be wider to accomodate cargo bikes or bikes with child trailers. • The island should be at least 20 feet long. • On streets with speeds higher than 25 mph there should also be double centerline marking, reflectors, and “KEEP RIGHT” signage (CA MUTCD R4-7a). • If a refuge island is landscaped, the landscaping should not compromise the visibility of pedestrians crossing in the crosswalk. Shrubs and ground plantings should be no higher than 1 and a half feet. Materials and Maintenance Refuge islands may require frequent maintenance of road debris. Trees and plantings in a landscaped median must be maintained so as not to impair visibility, and should be no higher than 1 foot 6 inches. Approximate Cost The approximate cost to install a median refuge island ranges from $500 to $1,100 per foot, or about $3,500 to $4,000, depending on the design, site conditions, landscaping, and whether the median can be added as a part of a larger street reconstruction project or utility upgrade. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-21 Curb extension length can be adjusted to accommodate bus stops or street furniture. 1‘ buffer from edge of parking lane preferred (Curb radii not to scale. For illustration purposes only) Crossing distance is shortened Curb Extensions Curb extensions minimize pedestrian exposure during crossing by shortening crossing distance and giving pedestrians a better chance to see and be seen before committing to crossing. They are appropriate for any crosswalk where it is desirable to shorten the crossing distance and there is a parking lane adjacent to the curb. Design Features • In most cases, the curb extensions should be designed to transition between the extended curb and the running curb in the shortest practicable distance. • For purposes of efficient street sweeping, the minimum radius for the reverse curves of the transition is 10 feet and the two radii should be balanced to be nearly equal. Typical Application • At signalized intersections with marked crosswalks should be marked. • At unsignalized intersections with marked crosswalks. • At an intersection with visibility constraints, to position pedestrians where they can best be seen by oncoming traffic. • At an intersection within a school zone on a walking route. • Curb extensions should terminate one foot short of the parking lane to maximize bicyclist safety. • Planted curb extensions may be designed as a bioswale, a vegetated system for stormwater management. • Turning performance of larger vehicles including buses may be impacted by curb extensions Materials and Maintenance Planted curb extensions may be designed as a bioswale, a vegetated system for stormwater management. To maintain proper stormwater drainage, curb extensions can be constructed as refuge islands offset by a drainage channel or feature a covered trench drain. Approximate Cost The cost of a curb extension can range from $2,000 to $20,000 depending on the design and site condition, with the typical cost approximately $12,000. Green/vegetated curb extensions cost between $10,000 to $40,000. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-22 Providing secondary installations of on median islands improves visibility and driver yielding behavior. W11-2, W16-7P Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) dramatically increase compliance over conventional warning beacons. Active Warning Beacons Active warning beacons are user actuated illuminated devices designed to increase motor vehicle yielding compliance at crossings of multi lane or high volume roadways. Types of active warning beacons include conventional circular yellow flashing beacons, in-roadway warning lights, or Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB). Design Features • Warning beacons shall not be used at crosswalks controlled by YIELD signs, STOP signs, or traffic signals. • Warning beacons shall initiate operation based on pedestrian or bicyclist actuation and shall cease operation at a predetermined time after actuation or, with passive detection, after the pedestrian or bicyclist clears the crosswalk. Approximate Cost vary in cost, depending on site conditions, but generally cost between $10,000 to $25,000 for two units. Typical Application • At marked crosswalks where increased pedestrian visibility is needed. • have the most increased compliance of all the warning beacon enhancement options. A study of the effectiveness of going from a no-beacon arrangement to a two-beacon RRFB installation increased yielding from 18 percent to 81 percent. • are recommended as the perferred beacon treatment. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-23 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon W11-2 Should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD signs Push button actuation Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons Hybrid beacons are used to improve non-motorized crossings of major streets. A hybrid beacon consists of a signal-head with two red lenses over a single yellow lens on the major street, and a pedestrian signal head for the crosswalk. Design Features • Hybrid beacons have less stringent warrants than full signals. • If installed within a signal system, signal engineers should evaluate the need for the hybrid signal to be coordinated with other signals. • Parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 100 feet in advance of and Typical Application • At unsignalized intersections with high volumes of pedestrians. • At an intersection within a school zone on a walking route. • Each crossing, regardless of traffic speed or volume, requires additional review by a registered engineer to identify sight lines, potential impacts on traffic progression, timing with adjacent signals, capacity, and safety. at least 20 feet beyond the marked crosswalk to provide adequate sight distance. • Hybrid beacon signals are normally activated by push buttons, but may also be triggered by infrared, microwave or video detectors. The maximum delay for activation of the signal should be two minutes, with minimum crossing times determined by the width of the street • HAWK beacons should be installed at least 100 feet from side streets or driveways that are controlled by STOP or YIELD signs. Parking and other sight obstructions should be prohibited for at least 100 feet in advance of and at least 20 feet beyond the marked crosswalk to provide adequate sight distance. (CA MUTCD 4F) Approximate Cost Hybrid beacons are more expensive than other beacons, ranging in costs from $50,000 to $150,000, but are generally less expensive than full signals. ---PAGE BREAK--- 04: Bike Facilities ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-25 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC (1,000 veh/day or 100 veh/peak hr) BICYCLE BOULEVARD BIKE ROUTE BIKE LANE SHARED USE PATH BUFFERED BICYCLE LANE SEPARATED BICYCLE LANE FACILITY TYPE POSTED TRAVEL SPEED (mph) 20 30 40 50 25 35 45 55 15 60+ 10 6 2 15+ 25+ 4 8 0 20+ 30+ STREET CLASS LOCAL COLLECTOR ARTERIAL COLLECTOR ARTERIAL COLLECTOR ARTERIAL COLLECTOR ARTERIAL LOCAL SPEED max max min min VOLUME Desired Acceptable Acceptable Facility Selection Selecting the best bikeway facility type for a given roadway can be challenging, due to the range of factors that influence bicycle users’ comfort and safety. There is a significant impact on bicycling comfort when the speed differential between bicyclists and motor vehicle traffic is high and motor vehicle traffic volumes are high. Facility Selection Table As a starting point to identify a preferred facility, the chart below can be used to determine the recommended type of bikeway to be provided in particular roadway speed and volume situations. To use this chart, identify the appropriate daily traffic volume and travel speed on or the existing or proposed roadway, and locate the facility types indicated by those key variables. Other factors beyond speed and volume which affect facility selection include traffic mix of automobiles and heavy vehicles, the presence of on-street parking, intersection density, surrounding land use, and roadway sight distance. These factors are not included in the facility selection chart below, but should always be considered in the facility selection and design process. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-26 Design Features • 8 feet is the absolute minimum width (with 2 foot shoulders) allowed for a two-way bicycle path and is only recommended for constrained situations (Caltrans Design Manual). • 10 feet is recommended in most situations and will be adequate for moderate to heavy use. • 12 feet is recommended for heavy use situations with high concentrations of multiple users. A separate track (5 foot minimum) can be provided for pedestrian use. Shared Use Path (Class I) Shared use paths (Class I) are off-street facilities that can provide a desirable transportation and recreation connection for users of all skill levels who prefer separation from traffic. They often provide low-stress connections to local and regional attractions that may be difficult, or not be possible on the street network. Typical Use • In abandoned rail corridors (commonly referred to as Rails-to-Trails or Rail-Trails. • In active rail corridors, trails can be built adjacent to active railroads (referred to as Rails-with-Trails. • In utility corridors, such as powerline and sewer corridors. • In waterway corridors, such as along canals, drainage ditches, rivers, and creeks. • Along roadways. A A ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-27 Overhead Clearance • Clearance to overhead obstructions should be an 8 foot minimum, with 10 feet recommended. Lateral Clearance • A 2 foot or greater shoulder on both sides of the path should be provided. An additional foot of lateral clearance (total of 3 feet) is required by the MUTCD for the installation of signage or other furnishings. • If bollards are used at intersections and access points, they should be colored and/or supplemented with reflective materials to be visible at night. Striping • When striping is required, use a 4 inch dashed yellow centerline stripe with 4 inch solid white edge lines. • Solid centerlines can be provided on tight or blind corners, and on the approaches to roadway crossings. Materials and Maintenance Shared use paths must be regularly maintained so that they are free of potholes, cracks, root lift, and debris. Signage and lighting should also be regularly maintained to ensure shared use path users feel comfortable, especially where visibility is limited. Adjacent landscaping should be regularly pruned, to allow adequate sightlines, daylight, and pedestrian- scale lighting, and so as not to obstruct the path of travel of trail users. Approximate Cost The cost of a shared use path can vary, but typical costs are between $65,000 per mile to $4 million per mile. These costs vary with materials, such as asphalt, concrete, boardwalk and other paving materials, lighting, and ROW acquisition. Prince Memorial Greenway connects users to downtown Santa Rosa. Source: Peter Stetson. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-28 On-Street Bicycle Lanes (Class II) On-street bike lanes (Class II) designate an exclusive space for bicyclists through the use of pavement markings and signs. The bike lane is located directly adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes and is used in the same direction as motor vehicle traffic. Bike lanes are typically on the right side of the street, between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road edge or parking lane. Typical Application • Bike lanes may be used on any street with adequate space, but are most effective on streets with moderate traffic volumes greater than or equal to 6,000 ADT (with a greater than 3,000 ADT min.). • Bike lanes are most appropriate on streets with low to moderate speeds of 25 mph or more. • Appropriate for skilled adult riders on most streets. • May be appropriate for children when configured as 6+ feet wide lanes on lower-speed, lower- volume streets with one lane in each direction. Design Features • Mark inside line with 6” stripe. Mark 4“ parking lane line or “Ts”. • Include a bicycle lane marking (MUTCD Figure 9C-3) at the beginning of blocks and at regular intervals along the route (MUTCD 9C.04). • 6 feet width preferred adjacent to on-street parking (5 feet min.). • 5–6 feet preferred adjacent to curb and gutter (4 feet min.) or 4 feet more than the gutter pan width. A A B B D D C C ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-29 Bike lane word, symbol, and/or arrow markings (MUTCD Figure 9C-3) shall be placed outside of the motor vehicle tread path in order to minimize wear from the motor vehicle path (NACTO 2012). Bicycle lanes provide an exclusive space, but may be subject to unwanted encroachment by motor vehicles. Place Bike Lane Symbols to Reduce Wear Bicycle Lane Further Considerations • On high speed streets (greater than or equal to 40 mph) the minimum bike lane should be 6 feet. • On streets where bicyclists passing each other is to be expected, where high volumes of bicyclists are present, or where added comfort is desired, consider providing extra wide bike lanes up to 7 feet wide, or configure as a buffered bicycle lane. • It may be desirable to reduce the width of general purpose travel lanes in order to add or widen bicycle lanes. • On multi-lane and/or high speed streets, the most appropriate bicycle facility to provide for user comfort may be buffered bicycle lanes or physically separated bicycle lanes. Manhole Covers and Grates • Manhole surfaces should be manufactured with a shallow surface texture in the form of a tight, nonlinear pattern • If manholes or other utility access boxes are to be located in bike lanes within 50 feet of intersections or within 20 feet of driveways or other bicycle access points, special manufactured permanent nonstick surfaces will be required to ensure a controlled travel surface for cyclists breaking or turning. Approximate Cost The cost for installing bicycle lanes will depend on the implementation approach. Typical costs are $16,000 per mile for restriping. • Manholes, drainage grates, or other obstacles should be set flush with the paved roadway. Roadway surface inconsistencies pose a threat to safe riding conditions for bicyclists. Construction of manholes, access panels or other drainage elements will be constructed with no variation in the surface. The maximum allowable tolerance in vertical roadway surface will be 1/4 of an inch. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-30 Design Features • The minimum bicycle travel area (not including buffer) is 5 feet wide. • Buffers should be at least 2 feet wide. If buffer area is 4 feet or wider, white chevron or diagonal markings should be used (CA MUTCD 9C-104). • For clarity at driveways or minor street crossings, consider a dotted line. • There is no standard for whether the buffer is configured on the parking side, the travel side, or a combination of both. A A B B Buffered Bicycle Lanes (Class II) Buffered bike lanes (Class II) are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space, separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. Typical Application • Anywhere a conventional bike lane is being considered. • On streets with high speeds and high volumes or high truck volumes. • On streets with extra lanes or lane width. • Appropriate for skilled adult riders on most streets. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-31 The use of pavement markings delineates space for cyclists to ride in a comfortable facility. The use of pavement markings delineates space for cyclists to ride in a comfortable facility. Buffered Bicycle Lanes Further Considerations • Color may be used within the lane to discourage motorists from entering the buffered lane. • A study of buffered bicycle lanes found that, in order to make the facilities successful, there needs to also be driver education, improved signage and proper pavement markings. • On multi-lane streets with high vehicles speeds, the most appropriate bicycle facility to provide for user comfort may be physically separated bike lanes. • Report #766 recommends, when space in limited, installing a buffer space between the parking lane and bicycle lane where on-street parking is permitted rather than between the bicycle lane and vehicle travel lane. Approximate Cost The cost for installing buffered bicycle lanes will depend on the implementation approach. Typical costs are $16,000 per mile for restriping. However, the cost of large-scale bicycle treatments will vary greatly due to differences in project specifications and the scale and length of the treatment. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-32 A B C Bicycle Boulevards (Class III) Bicycle boulevards (Class III) are low-volume, low-speed streets modified to enhance bicyclist comfort by using treatments such as signage, pavement markings, traffic calming and/or traffic reduction, and intersection modifications. These treatments allow through movements of bicyclists while discouraging similar through-trips by non-local motorized traffic. Typical Application • Parallel with and in close proximity to major thoroughfares (1/4 mile or less). • Follow a desire line for bicycle travel that is ideally long and relatively continuous (2-5 miles). • Avoid alignments with excessive zigzag or circuitous routing. The bikeway should have less than 10 percent out of direction travel compared to shortest path of primary corridor. • Streets with travel speeds at 25 mph or less and with traffic volumes of fewer than 3,000 vehicles per day. Design Features • Signs and pavement markings are the minimum treatments necessary to designate a street as a bicycle boulevard. • Implement volume control treatments based on the context of the bicycle boulevard, using engineering judgment. Target motor vehicle volumes range from 1,000 to 3,000 vehicles per day. • Intersection crossings should be designed to enhance safety and minimize delay for bicyclists and pedestrians. A B C ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-33 Bicycle boulevards are established on streets that improve connectivity to key destinations and provide a direct, low-stress route for bicyclists, with low motorized traffic volumes and speeds, designated and designed to give bicycle travel priority over other modes. Neighborhood bikeways may require additional traffic calming measures to discourage through trips by motor vehicles. Bicycle Boulevards Traffic Calming Further Considerations • Bicycle boulevards are typically located on streets without existing signalized accommodation at crossings of collector and arterial roadways. Without treatments for bicyclists and pedestrians, these intersections can become major barriers along the bicycle boulevard and compromise safety. • Traffic calming can lower speeds along bicycle boulevards and even deter motorists from driving on a street. Anticipate and monitor vehicle volumes on adjacent streets to determine whether traffic calming results in inappropriate volumes. Traffic calming can be implemented on a trial basis. Approximate Cost Costs vary depending on the type of treatments proposed for the corridor. Simple treatments such as wayfinding signage and markings are most cost- effective, but more intensive treatments will have greater impact at lowering speeds and volumes, at a higher cost. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-34 Traffic Calming for Bike Boulevards Traffic calming may include elements intended to reduce the speeds of motor vehicle traffic to be closer to bicyclist travel speeds, or may include designelements that restrict certain movements for motorized travelto discourage the use of bicycle boulevardcorridors for through travel by automobiles.Traffic calming treatments can cause drivers to slow down by constricting the roadway space or by requiring careful maneuvering. Such measures may reduce the design speed of a street, and can be used in conjunction with reduced speed limits to reinforce the expectation of lowered speeds.They can also lower vehicle volumes by physically or operationally reconfiguring corridors and intersections along the route. Typical Application • Bicycle have a maximum posted speed of 25 mph. Use traffic calming to maintain an 85th percentile speed below 20 mph (25 mph maximum). Bikeways with average speeds above this limit should be considered for traffic calming measures. • Maintain a minimum clear width of 14 feet with a constricted length of at least 20 feet in the direction of travel. • Bring traffic volumes down to 1,500 cars per day (4,000 cars per day maximum). Bikeways with daily volumes above this limit should be considered for traffic calming measures. Design Features (Speed Reduction) • Median islands create pinchpoint for traffic in the center of the roadway and offers shorter crossing distances for pedestrians when used in tandem with a marked crossing. • Chicanes slow drivers by requiring vehicles to shift laterally through narrowed lanes and which avoids uninterrupted sightlines. • Pinchpoints, chokers, or curb extensions restrict motorists from operating at high speeds on local streets by visually narrowing the roadway. • Neighborhood traffic circles reduce speed of traffic at intersections by requiring motorists to move cautiously through conflict points. A B C D D C B A E ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-35 Design Features (Volume Reduction) • Partial closure diverters allows bicyclists to proceed straight across the intersection but forces motorists to turn left or right. All turns from the major street onto the bikeway are prohibited. Can incorporate curb extensions with stormwater management features and/ora mountable island. • Right-in/right-out diverters forcemotorists to turn right while bicyclists can continue straight through the intersection. The island can provide a through bike lane or bicycle access to reduce conflicts withright-turning vehicles. Left turns from the major street onto the bikeway are prohibited, while right turns are still allowed. • Median refuge island diverters restrict through and left-turn vehicle movements along the bikeway while providing refuge for bicyclists to cross one direction of traffic at a time. This treatment prohibits left turns from the major street onto the bikeway, while right turns are still allowed. • Full diverters blockall motor vehicles from continuing on a neighborhood bikeway, while bicyclists can continue unrestricted. Full closures can be constructed to be permeable to emergency vehicles. • Street trees narrow a driver’s visual field, subconsiously queing drivers to slow down. • Speed humps slow drivers through vertical deflection. To minimize impacts to bicycles, use a sinusoidal profile and leave a gap along curb so that bicyclists may bypass the hump when appropriate. Speed cushions operate in a similar fashion to speed humps, but allow for unimpeded travel by emergency vehicles. E ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-36 A B C One-Way Separated Bike Lanes (Class IV) When retrofitting separated bike lanes onto existing streets, a one-way street-level design may be most appropriate. This design provides protection through physical barriers and can include flexible delineators, curbs, on-street parking or other barriers. A street level separated bike lane shares the same elevation as adjacent travel lanes.. Typical Application • Street retrofit projects with limited funds for relating curbs and drainage. • Streets with high motor vehicle volumes and/or speeds and high bicycle volumes. • Streets for which conflicts at intersections can be effectively mitigated using parking lane setbacks, bicycle markings through the intersection, and other signalized intersection treatments. • Appropriate for most riders on most streets. Design Features • Pavement markings, symbols and/or arrow markings must be placed at the beginning of the separated bike lane and at intervals along the facility (MUTCD 9C.04). • 7 foot width preferred to allow passing (5 foot minimum). • 3 foot minimum buffer width adjacent to parking. 18 inch minimum adjacent to travel lanes. Channelizing devices should be placed in the buffer area (NACTO, 2012). • If buffer area is 4 feet or wider, white chevron or diagonal markings should be used. A B C ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-37 Street Level Separated Bicycle Lanes can be separated from the street with parking, planters, bollards, or other design elements. Further Considerations • Separated bike lane buffers and barriers are covered in the MUTCD as preferential lane markings (section 3D.01) and channelizing devices (section 3H.01). Curbs may be used as a channeling device, see the section on islands (section 3I.01). • A retrofit separated bike lane has a relatively low implementation cost compared to road reconstruction by making use of existing pavement and drainage and by using parking lane as a barrier. • Gutters, drainage outlets and utility covers should be designed and configured as not to impact bicycle travel. • Special consideration should be given at transit stops to manage bicycle and pedestrian interactions. Approximate Cost The implementation cost is low if the project uses existing pavement and drainage, but the cost significantly increases if curb lines need to be moved. A parking lane is the low-cost option for providing a barrier. Other barriers might include concrete medians, bollards, tubular markers, or planters. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-38 Design Features • 12 foot operating width preferred (10 ft minimum) width for two-way facility. • In constrained locations an 8 foot minimum operating width may be considered (HDM 1003.1(1)). • Adjacent to on-street parking a 3 foot minimum width channelized buffer or island shall be provided to accommodate opening doors (NACTO, 2012) (CA MUTCD 3H.01, 3I.01). • A separation narrower than 5 feet may be permitted if a physical barrier is present (AASHTO, 2013). • Additional signalization and signs may be necessary to manage conflicts. Typical Use • Works best on the left side of one-way streets. • Streets with high motor vehicle volumes and/or speeds • Streets with high bicycle volumes. • Streets with a high incidence of wrong-way bicycle riding. • Streets with few conflicts such as driveways or cross-streets on one side of the street. • Streets that connect to shared use paths. Two-Way Separated Bike Lanes (Class IV) Two-Way Separated Bikeways are bicycle facilities that allow bicycle movement in both directions on one side of the road. Two-way separated bikeways share some of the same design characteristics as one-way separated bikeways, but often require additional considerations at driveway and side-street crossings, and intersections with other bikeways. A A B B ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-39 A two-way facility can accommodate cyclists in two directions of travel. Two-Way Separated Bikeway Further Considerations • On-street bikeway buffers and barriers are covered in the CA MUTCD as preferential lane markings (section 3D.01) and channelizing devices, including flexible delineators (section 3H.01). Curbs may be used as a channeling device, see the section on islands (section 3I.01). • A two-way separated bikeway on one way street should be located on the left side. • A two-way separated bikeway may be configured at street level or as a raised separated bikeway with vertical separation from the adjacent travel lane. • Two-way separated bikeways should ideally be placed along streets with long blocks and few driveways or mid-block access points for motor vehicles. • See Caltrans Design Information Bulletin No. 89 for more details. Materials and Maintenance Bikeway striping and markings will require higher maintenance where vehicles frequently traverse over them at intersections, driveways, parking lanes, and along curved or constrained segments of roadway. Green conflict striping (if used) will also generally require higher maintenance due to vehicle wear. Bikeways should be maintained so that there are no pot holes, cracks, uneven surfaces or debris. Access points along the facility should be provided for street sweeper vehicles to enter/exit the separated bikeway. Approximate Cost Separated bikway construction costs can vary drastically depending on the type of separation used, the amount of new curb and gutter, stormwater mitigation, and crossing treatments. On the lower end of the scale, construction of a striped parking protected bikeway with delineators or other vertical elements can cost as little as $15,000- $30,000 per mile. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-40 6 ft Spacing (variable) 6 ft Typical 4 in Minimum Height 1 ft - 2 ft Typical 10 ft - 40 ft Typical Spacing 3 ft Preferred Continuous Spacing 3 ft Typical Minimum 2 ft Preferred Minimum 3 in - 6 in Height Typical 3 ft Typical Maintain consistent space 1 to 2 ft Shy distance between planters Continuous (Can allow drainage gaps) Planting Strips (optional) 6 in Typical Curb Height 16 in Preferred Minimum Delineator Posts Median Concrete Barrier Raised Lane Curbing Planters Separation Methods Separated bikeways may use a variety of vertical elements to physically separate the bikeway from adjacent travel lanes. Barriers may be robust constructed elements such as curbs, or may be more interim in nature, such as flexible delineator posts. Typical Application Appropriate barriers for retrofit projects: • Parked Cars • Flexible delineators • Bollards • Planters • Parking stops Appropriate barriers for reconstruction projects: • Curb separation • Medians • Landscaped Medians • Raised separated bike lane with vertical or mountable curb • Pedestrian Safety Islands ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-41 Raised separated bikeways are bicycle facilities that are vertically separated from motor vehicle traffic. BIKEWAY SEPARATION METHODS Design Features • Maximize effective operating space by placing curbs or delineator posts as far from the through bikeway space as practicable. • Allow for adequate shy distance of 1 to 2 feet from vertical elements to maximize useful space. • When next to parking allow for 3 feet of space in the buffer space to allow for opening doors and passenger unloading. • The presences of landscaping in medians, planters and safety islands increases comfort for users and enhances the streetscape environment. Further Considerations • Separated bikeway buffers and barriers are covered in the MUTCD as preferential lane markings (section 3D.01) and channelizing devices (section 3H.01). Curbs may be used as a channeling device, see the section on islands (section 3I.01). • With new roadway construction a raised separated bikeway can be less expensive to construct than a wide or buffered bicycle lane because of shallower trenching and sub base requirements. • Parking should be prohibited within 30 feet of the intersection to improve visibility. ---PAGE BREAK--- 04: Bicycle Facilities at Intersections ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-43 This page is intentionally blank ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-44 A B Intersection Crossing Markings Bicycle pavement markings through intersections guide bicyclists on a safe and direct path through the intersection and provide a clear boundary between the paths of through bicyclists and vehicles in the adjacent lane. Typical Application • Streets with conventional, buffered, or separated bike lanes. • At direct paths through intersections. • Streets with high volumes of adjacent traffic. • Where potential conflicts exist between through bicyclist and adjacent traffic. Design Features • Intersection markings should be the same width and in line with leading bike lane. • Dotted lane line extensions should be 2 foot line segments with 2 to 6 foot gaps between them (CAMUTCD 3B.08). • All markings should be white, skid resistant and retro reflective (CAMUTCD 9C.02.02). • Dotted lines may be enhanced with solid green, or dashed green with the same extents as the gotted line itself. A B ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-45 Intersection crossing markings can be used at signalized intersections or high volume minor street and driveway crossings. Intersection Crossing Markings Further Considerations The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has submitted a request to include additional options for bicycle lane extensions through intersections as a part of future MUTCD updates. Their proposal includes the following options for striping elements within the crossing: • Bicycle lane markings • Double chevron markings, indicating the direction of travel. • Green colored pavement. Approximate Cost The cost for installing intersection crossing markings will depend on the implementation approach. On roadways with adequate width for reconfiguration or restriping, costs may be negligible when provided as part of routine overlay or repaving projects. Typical thermoplastic shared lane markings cost $180 each. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-46 Design Features At auxiliary right turn only lanes (add lane): • Continue existing bike lane width; standard width of 5 to 6 feet or 4 feet in constrained locations. • Use signage to indicate that motorists should yield to bicyclists through the conflict area. • Consider using colored conflict areas to promote visibility of the mixing zone. Where a through lane becomes a right turn only lane: • Do not define a dotted line merging path for bicyclists. Colored pavement may be used in the weaving area to increase visibility and awareness of potential conflict Optional dotted lines MUTCD R4-4 (optional) Bike Lanes at Right Turn Lanes The appropriate treatment at right-turn lanes is to place the bike lane between the right-turn lane and the right-most through lane or, where right-of-way is insufficient, to use a shared bike lane/turn lane. The design (below) illustrates conflict markings, with signage indicating that motorists should yield to bicyclists through the conflict area. • Drop the bicycle lane in advance of the merge area. • Use shared lane markings to indicate shared use of the lane in the merging zone. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining the visibility of markings should be a high priority. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-47 Drivers wishing to enter the right turn lane must transition across the bicycle lane in advance of the turn. Further Considerations • The bicycle lane maintains a straight path, and drivers must weave across, providing clear right-of-way priority to bicyclists. • Maintaining a straight bicycle path reinforces the priority of bicyclists over turning cars. Drivers must yield to bicyclists before crossing the bike lane to enter the turn lane. • Through lanes that become turn only lanes are difficult for bicyclists to navigate and should be avoided. • The use of dual right-turn-only lanes should be avoided on streets with bike lanes (AASHTO, 2013). Where there are dual right-turn-only lanes, the bike lane should be placed to the left of both right-turn lanes; however, this merge is uncomfortable for most bicyclists. Keeping the bike lane to the right of the turn lanes is possible if a bicycle signal phase is implemented to separate bicyclists from turning vehicles. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining the visibility of markings should be a high priority. Approximate Cost The cost for installing bicycle lanes will depend on the implementation approach. On roadways with adequate width for reconfiguration or restriping, costs may be negligible when provided as part of routine overlay or repaving projects. Typical costs are $16,000 per mile for restriping. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-48 C Combined Bike Lane/Turn Lane Where there isn’t room for a conventional bicycle lane and turn lane a combined bike lane/turn lane creates a shared lane where bicyclists can ride and turning motor vehicles yield to through traveling bicyclists. The combined bicycle lane/turn lane places shared lane markings within a right turn only lane. Typical Application • Most appropriate in areas with lower posted speeds (30 MPH or less) and with lower traffic volumes (10,000 ADT or less). • May not be appropriate for high speed arterials or intersections with long right turn lanes. • May not be appropriate for intersections with large percentages of right-turning heavy vehicles. Design Features • Maximum shared turn lane width is 13 feet; narrower is preferable (NACTO, 2012). • Shared Lane Markings should indicate preferred positioning of bicyclists within the combine lane. • A “Right Lane Must Turn Right” (CA MUTCD R3-7R) sign with an “EXCEPT BIKES” plaque may be needed to permit through bicyclists to use a right turn lane. • Use “Begin Right Turn Lane Yield To Bikes” signage (CA MUTCD R4-4) to indicate that motorists should yield to bicyclists through the conflict area. • There should be a receiving bicycle lane or shoulder on the far side of the intersection A A B C D D C B ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-49 Approximate Cost • The cost for installing a combined bike/turn lane will depend on the implementation approach. On roadways with adequate width for reconfiguration or restriping, costs may be negligible when provided as part of routine overlay or repaving projects. Some roadways can be retrofitted with simple shared lane markings and accompanying signage. Shared lane markings and signs indicate that bicyclists should right in the left side of this right turn only lane. Combined Bike Lane/Turn Lane (Billings, MT) Further Considerations • This treatment is recommended at intersections lacking sufficient space to accommodate both a standard through bike lane and right turn lane. • Not recommended at intersections with high peak motor vehicle right turn movements. • Combined bike lane/turn lane creates safety and comfort benefits by negotiating conflicts upstream of the intersection area. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining the visibility of markings should be a high priority. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-50 Design Features • 14 foot minimum depth from back of crosswalk to motor vehicle stop bar (NACTO, 2012). • A “No Turn on Red” (MUTCD R10-11) sign shall be installed overhead to prevent vehicles from entering the Bike Box. A “Stop Here on Red” (MUTCD R10-6) sign should be post mounted at the stop line to reinforce observance of the stop line. • A 50 foot ingress lane should be used to provide access to the box. • Use of green colored pavement is optional but recommended. A A B B C C Typical Application • At potential areas of conflict between bicyclists and turning vehicles, such as a right or left turn locations. • At signalized intersections with high bicycle volumes. • At signalized intersections with high vehicle volumes. Bike Box A bike box is a designated area located at the head of a traffic lane at a signalized intersection that provides bicyclists with a safe and visible space to get in front of queuing traffic during the red signal phase. Motor vehicles must queue behind the white stop line at the rear of the bike box. On a green signal, all bicyclists can quickly clear the intersection. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-51 A bike box allows for cyclists to wait in front of queuing traffic, providing high visibility, and a head start over motor vehicle traffic. Bike Box Further Considerations • This treatment positions bicycles together and on a green signal, all bicyclists can quickly clear the intersection, minimizing conflict and delay to transit or other traffic. • Pedestrians also benefit from bike boxes, as they experience reduced vehicle encroachment into the crosswalk. • Two stage turn boxes are better treatments to facilitate bicycle turns as they are available for queing during a parallel green signal indication. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining the visibility of markings should be a high priority. Approximate Cost Costs will vary due to the type of paint used and the size of the bike box, as well as whether the treatment is added at the same time as other road treatments. The typical cost for painting a bike box is $11.50 per sq. foot. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-52 Design Features • The two-stage turn box shall be placed in a protected area. Typically this is within the shadow of an on-street parking lane or separated bike lane buffer area and should be placed in front of the crosswalk to avoid conflict with pedestrians. • 6.5 feet deep by 10 feet wide is the required minimum dimensions of the box to accommodate three bicyclists side by side (FHWA). • Bicycle stencil and turn arrow pavement markings shall be used to indicate proper bicycle direction and positioning (NACTO, 2012). A A B B Two-Stage Turn Boxes Two- stage turn boxes offer bicyclists a safe way to make turns at multi-lane signalized intersections from a physically separated or conventional bike lane. On physically separated bike lanes, bicyclists are often unable to merge into traffic to turn due to physical separation, making the provision of two-stage turn boxes critical. Typical Application • Streets with high vehicle speeds and/or traffic volumes. • At intersections locations of multi-lane roads with signalized intersections. • At signalized intersections with a high number of bicyclists making a left turn from a right side facility. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-53 This MUTCD compliant design carves a jughandle out of the sidewalk to provide space for waiting bicyclists. On separated bike lanes, the two-stage turn box can be located in the protected buffer/parking area. Jughandle Turn Box Separated Bike Lane Turn Box Further Considerations • Provide a “No Turn on Red” sign (MUTCD R10-11) on the cross street if turning vehicles come into conflict with the placement of the turn box. • This design formalizes a maneuver called a “box turn” or “pedestrian style turn.” • Design guidance for two-stage turns apply to both bike lanes and separated bike lanes. • Two-stage turn boxes reduce conflicts in multiple ways; from keeping bicyclists from queuing in a bike lane or crosswalk and by separating turning bicyclists from through bicyclists. • Bicyclist capacity of a two-stage turn box is influenced by physical dimension (how many bicyclists it can contain) and cycle length (how frequently the box clears). • More information on two stage turn boxes is available: • FHWA Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide • NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. 2012 • FHWA Interim Approval-20 Approximate Cost Costs will vary due to the type of paint used and the size of the two-stage turn box, as well as whether the treatment is added at the same time as other road treatments. The typical cost for painting a two-stage turn box is $11.50 per square foot. Materials and Maintenance Because the effectiveness of markings depends entirely on their visibility, maintaining the visibility of markings should be a high priority. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-54 Bicycle Detection and Actuation At fully signalized intersections, bicycle crossings are typically accomplished through the use of a standard green signal indication for Class II and III bikeways. A number of traffic signal enhancements can be made to improve detection and actuation and better accommodate bicyclists. An exclusive bicycle phase provided by bicycle signals offers the highest level of service and protection, especially for Class I and IV bikeways, but feature the same detection and actuation devices used at intersections with standard traffic signals. For more information on bicycle signals, see Protected Bicycle Signal Phase. Typical Application • Bicycle detection and actuation is used to alert the signal controller of bicycle crossing demand on a particular approach. Proper bicycle detection should meet at least two primary criteria: 1) accurately detect bicyclists, and 2) provide clear guidance to bicyclists on how to actuate detection (e.g. what button to push or where to stand). Additionally, new technologies are being developed to provide feedback to bicyclists once they have been detected to increase the likelihood of stop compliance. • Detection mechanisms can also provide bicyclists with an extended green time before the signal turns yellow so that bicyclists of all abilities can reach the far side of the intersection. • All new or modified traffic signals in California must be equipped for bicyclist detection, or be placed on permanent recall or fixed time operation (CalTrans Traffic Operations Policy Directive 09-06). • Detection shall be place where bicyclists are intended to travel and/or wait. • On bicycle priority corridors with on-street bike lanes or separated bikeways, consider the use of advance detection placed 100-200 feet upstream of the intersection to provide an early trigger to the signal system and reduce bicyclist delay. Design Features • Bicycle detection and actuation systems include user-activated buttons mounted on a pole facing the street, in-pavement loop detectors that trigger a change in the traffic signal when a bicycle is detected, video detection cameras that use digital image processing to detect a change in the image at a location, and/or Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor Detection (RTMS) which uses frequency modulated continuous wave radio signals to detect objects in the roadway. • 6 foot by 6 foot Type C loop conductors should be used. • A linear pavement marking should be used to indicate where cyclists should stand to acuate the signal. • Signal heads should depict green, yellow, and red cyclist icons to communicate when the exclusive bicycle phase is in progress. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-55 Bicycle push button actuators are positioned to allow bicycle riders in roadway to stop traffic on busy cross- streets. Type C loop detector have been shown to most reliably detect bicyclists at all points over their surface. Push Button Actuation Type C Loop Detector Materials and Maintenance Bicycle signal detection equipment should be inspected and maintained regularly, especially if detection relies on manual actuation. Pushbuttons and loop detectors will tend to have higher maintenance needs than other passive detection equipment. Approximate Cost Costs vary depending on the type of technology used, but bicycle loop detectors embedded in the pavement typically cost from $1,000-$2,000. Video detection camera systems typically range from $20,000 to $30,000 per intersection. Other traffic signal programming enhancements can be made to existing traffic signal hardware with relatively little to no additional hardware costs. Further Considerations • The location of pushbuttons should not require bicyclists to dismount or be rerouted out of the way or onto the sidewalk to activate the phase. Signage should supplement the signal to alert bicyclists of the required activation to prompt the green phase. • In-pavement Type C Loop detectors are induction circuits installed within the roadway surface to detect bicyclists as they wait for the signal. This allows the bicyclists to stay within the lane of travel. Loop detectors should be sufficiently sensitive to detect bicyclists and be marked with pavement markings instructing bicyclists on where to stand. CAMUTCD provides guidance on stencil markings and signage related to loop detectors. • Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor Detection (RTMS) is unaffected by temperature and lighting which can affect standard video detection. • Bicyclists typically need more time to travel through an intersection than motor vehicles. Green light times should be determined using the bicycle crossing time for standing bicycles. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-56 Design Features • An additional “Bicycle Signal” sign should be installed below the bicycle signal head. • Designs for bicycles at signalized crossings should allow bicyclists to trigger signals via pushbutton, loop detectors, or other passive detection, to navigate the crossing. • On bikeways, signal timing and actuation shall be reviewed and adjusted to consider the needs of bicyclists (CA MUTCD 9D.02). Typical Use • Two-way protected bikeways where contraflow bicycle movement or increased conflict points warrant protected operation. • Bicyclists moving on a green or yellow signal indication in a bicycle signal shall not be in conflict with any simultaneous motor vehicle movement at the signalized location • Right (or left) turns on red should be prohibited in locations where such operation would conflict with a green bicycle signal indication. Separated Bicycle Signal Phase Separated bicycle lane crossings of signalized intersections can be accomplished through the use of a bicycle signal phase which reduces conflicts with motor vehicles by separating bicycle movements from any conflicting motor vehicle movements. Bicycle signals are traditional three lens signal heads with green, yellow and red bicycle stenciled lenses. A A B B ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-57 A bicycle signal head at a signalized crossing creates a protected phase for cyclists to safely navigate an intersection. A bicycle detection system triggers a change in the traffic signal when a bicycle is detected. Further Considerations • A bicycle signal should be considered for use only when the volume/collision or volume/geometric warrants have been met (CA MUTCD 4C.102). • The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has approved bicycle signals for use, if they comply with requirements from Interim Approval 16 (I.A. 16). Bicycle Signals are not approved for use in conjunction with Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons. • Bicyclists typically need more time to travel through an intersection than motor vehicles. Green light times should be determined using the bicycle crossing time for standing bicycles. • Bicycle detection and actuation systems include user-activated buttons mounted on a pole, loop detectors that trigger a change in the traffic signal when a bicycle is detected and video detection cameras, that use digital image processing to detect a change in the image at a location. Materials and Maintenance Bicycle signal detection equipment should be inspected and maintained regularly, especially if detection relies on manual actuation. Pushbuttons and loop detectors will tend to have higher maintenance needs than other passive detection equipment. Approximate Cost Bicycle signal heads have an average cost of $12,800. Video detection camera system costs range from $15,000 to $25,000 per intersection. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-58 Design Features • Setback bicycle crossing of 19.5 feet allows for one passenger car to queue while yielding. Smaller setback distance is possible in slow- speed, space constrained conditions. • Corner island with a 15-20 foot corner radius slows motor vehicle speeds. Larger radius designs may be possible when paired with a deeper setback or a protected signal phase, or small mountable aprons. Two-stage turning boxes are provided for queuing bicyclists adjacent to corner islands. • Use intersection crossing markings. Typical Use • Streets with separated bikeways protected by wide buffer or on-street parking. • Where two separated bieways intersect and two-stage left-turn movements can be provided for bicycle riders. • Helps reduce conflicts between right-turning motorists and bicycle riders by reducing turning speeds and providing a forward stop bar for bicycles. • Where it is desirable to create a curb extension at intersections to reduce pedestrian crossing distance. Protected Intersection A protected intersection, or “Bend Out” uses a collection of intersection design elements to maximize user comfort within the intersection and promote a high rate of motorists yielding to people bicycling. The design maintains a physical separation within the intersection to define the turning paths of motor vehicles, slow vehicle turning speed, and offer a comfortable place for people bicycling to wait at a red signal. A A B B C C ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-59 Protected intersections feature a corner safety island and intersection crossing markings. Protected intersections incorporate queuing areas for two-stage left turns. Approximate Cost The cost of protected intersection elements vary depending on materials used and degree of implementation desired. • Complete reconstruction costs comparable to a full intersection. • Retrofit implementation may be possible at lower costs if existing curbs and drainage are maintained. Inexpensive materials can used, such as paint, concrete planters, and bollards. Further Considerations • Pedestrian crosswalks may need to be further set back from intersections in order to make room for two-stage turning queue boxes. • Wayfinding and directional signage should be provided to help bicycle riders navigate through the intersection. • Colored pavement may be used within the corner refuge area to clarify use by people bicycling and discourage use by people walking or driving. • Intersection approaches with high volumes of right turning vehicles should provide a dedicated right turn only lane paired with a protected signal phase. Protected signal phasing may allow different design dimensions than are described here. Materials and Maintenance • Green conflict striping (if used) will also generally require higher maintenance due to vehicle wear. • Bikeways should be maintained so that there are no pot holes, cracks, uneven surfaces or debris. • Bikeways protected by concrete islands or other permanent physical separation, can be swept by street sweeper vehicles with narrow widths. ---PAGE BREAK--- 05: Bicycle Facility Amenities ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-61 This page is intentionally blank ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-62 D1-1 D11-1/D1-3a D11-1c A B C Wayfinding Sign Types The ability to navigate through a city is informed by landmarks, natural features, and other visual cues. Signs throughout the city should indicate to bicyclists the direction of travel, the locations of destinations and the travel time/distance to those destinations. A bicycle wayfinding system consists of comprehensive signing and/or pavement markings to guide bicyclists to their destinations along preferred bicycle routes. Typical Application • Wayfinding signs will increase users’ comfort and accessibility to the bicycle network. • Signage can serve both wayfinding and safety purposes including: • Helping to familiarize users with the bicycle network • Helping users identify the best routes to destinations • Helping to address misperceptions about time and distance • Helping overcome a “barrier to entry” for people who are not frequent bicyclists “interested but concerned” bicyclists) Design Features • Confirmation signs indicate to bicyclists that they are on a designated bikeway. Make motorists aware of the bicycle route. Can include destinations and distance/time but do not include arrows. • Turn signs indicate where a bikeway turns from one street onto another street. These can be used with pavement markings and include destinations and arrows. • Decisions signs indicate the junction of two or more bikeways and inform bicyclists of the designated bike route to access key destinations. These include destinations, arrows and distances. Travel times are optional but recommended. A B C ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-63 Wayfinding signs can include a local community identification logo, as this example from Oakland, CA. Custom street signs can also act as a type of confirmation sign, to let all users know the street is prioritized for bicyclists. Community Logos on Signs Custom Street Signs (Berkeley, CA) Further Considerations • Bicycle wayfinding signs also visually cue motorists that they are driving along a bicycle route and should use caution. Signs are typically placed at key locations leading to and along bicycle routes, including the intersection of multiple routes. • Too many road signs tend to clutter the right-of- way, and it is recommended that these signs be posted at a level most visible to bicyclists rather than per vehicle signage standards. • A community-wide bicycle wayfinding signage plan would identify: o Sign locations o Sign type – what information should be included and design features o Destinations to be highlighted on each sign – key destinations for bicyclists o Approximate distance and travel time to each destination Approximate Cost Wayfinding signs range from $150 to $500 • Green is the color used for directional guidance and is the most common color of bicycle wayfinding signage in the US, including those in the MUTCD. • Check wayfinding signage along bikeways for signs of vandalism, graffiti, or normal wear and replace signage along the bikeway network as-needed. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-64 Belmont Central Elementary Sacred Heart College Confirmation Sign C Decision Sign D Turn Sign T D C C T T T T C C D D D Wayfinding Sign Placement Signs are placed at decision points along bicycle routes – typically at the intersection of two or more bikeways and at other key locations leading to and along bicycle routes. Typical Application Confirmation Signs • Placed every ¼ to ½ mile on off-street facilities and every 2 to 3 blocks along on-street bicycle facilities, unless another type of sign is used within 150 feet of a turn or decision sign). • Should be placed soon after turns to confirm destination(s). Pavement markings can also act as confirmation that a bicyclist is on a preferred route. Turn Signs • Near-side of intersections where bike routes turn where the street ceases to be a bicycle route or does not go through). • Pavement markings can also indicate the need to turn to the bicyclist. Design Features • MUTCD guidelines should be followed for wayfinding sign placement, which includes mounting height and lateral placement from edge of path or roadway. • Pavement markings can be used to reinforce routes and directional signage. Decision Signs • Near-side of intersections in advance of a junction with another bicycle route. • Along a route to indicate a nearby destination. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-65 Some cities use pavement markings to indicate required turns along the bicycle route. Wayfinding Pavement Markings Further Considerations • It can be useful to classify a list of destinations for inclusion on the signs based on their relative importance to users throughout the area. A particular destination’s ranking in the hierarchy can be used to determine the physical distance from which the locations are signed. For example, primary destinations (such as the downtown area) may be included on signage up to 5 miles away. Secondary destinations (such as a transit station) may be included on signage up to two miles away. Tertiary destinations (such as a park) may be included on signage up to one mile away. Approximate Cost The cost of a wayfinding sign placement plan depends on the scale and scope of the approach. Trail wayfinding signage range from $500-$2000. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-66 Bike Parking Bicyclists expect a safe, convenient place to secure their bicycle when they reach their destination. This may be short-term parking of two hours or less, or long-term parking for employees, students, residents, and commuters. Typical Application • Bicycle parking facilities shall be located in highly visible well-lighted areas. In order to maximize security, whenever possible short-term bicycle parking facilities shall be located in areas highly visible from the street and from the interior of the building they serve (i.e. placed adjacent to windows). • Bike racks provide short-term bicycle parking and is meant to accommodate visitors, customers, and others expected to depart within two hours. It should be an approved standard rack, appropriate location and placement, and weather protection. • On-street bike corrals (also known as on-street bicycle parking) consist of bicycle racks grouped together in a common area within the street traditionally used for automobile parking. Bicycle corrals are reserved exclusively for bicycle parking and provide a relatively inexpensive solution to providing high-volume bicycle parking. Bicycle corrals can be implemented by converting one or two on-street motor vehicle parking spaces into on-street bicycle parking. Each motor vehicle parking space can be replaced with approximately 6-10 bicycle parking spaces. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-67 Design Features • All bicycle facilities shall provide a minimum 4 foot aisle to allow for unobstructed access to the designated bicycle parking area. • Bicycle parking facilities within auto parking facilities shall be protected from damage by cars by a physical barrier such as curbs, wheel stops, poles, bollards, or other similar features capable of preventing automobiles from entering the designated bicycle parking area. • Bicycle parking facilities should be securely anchored so they cannot be easily removed and shall be of sufficient strength and design to resist vandalism and theft. Bike Racks • 2 foot minimum from the curb face to avoid ‘dooring.’ • 4 feet between racks to provide maneuvering room. • Locate close to destinations; 50 foot maximum distance from main building entrance. • Minimum clear distance of 6 feet should be provided between the bicycle rack and the property line. Bike Corrals • Bicyclists should have an entrance width from the roadway of 5-6 feet for on-street corrals. • Can be used with parallel or angled parking. • Parking stalls adjacent to curb extensions are good candidates for on-street bicycle corrals since the concrete extension serves as delimitation on one side. • Off-street bike corrals are appropriate where there is a wide sidewalk furnishing zone (7 feet or greater), or as part of a curb extension. Perpendicular Bike Racks Bike Corral A A B B C C Approximate Cost Costs can vary based on the design and materials used. Bicycle rack costs can range from approximately $60 to $3,600, depending on design and materials used. On average the cost is approximately $660. Bicycle lockers costs range from $1,280 to $2,680. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-68 Signage • Check regulatory and wayfinding signage along bikeways for signs of vandalism, graffiti, or normal wear. • Replace signage along the bikeway network as-needed. • Perform a regularly-scheduled check on the status of signage with follow-up as necessary. • Create a Maintenance Management Plan. MAINTENANCE Sweeping • Establish a seasonal sweeping schedule that prioritizes roadways with major bicycle routes. • Sweep walkways and bikeways whenever there is an accumulation of debris on the facility. • In curbed sections, sweepers should pick up debris; on open shoulders, debris can be swept onto gravel shoulders. A A G C D B B E F Bikeway Maintenance Regular bicycle facility maintenance includes sweeping, maintaining a smooth roadway, ensuring that the gutter-to-pavement transition remains relatively flush, and installing bicycle-friendly drainage grates. Pavement overlays are a good opportunity to improve bicycle facilities. The following recommendations provide a menu of options to consider to enhance a maintenance regimen. ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-69 Roadway Surface • Maintain a smooth pothole-free surface. • Ensure that on new roadway construction, the finished surface on bikeways does not vary more than ¼ inch. • Maintain pavement so ridge buildup does not occur at the gutter-to-pavement transition or adjacent to railway crossings. • Inspect the pavement 2 to 4 months after trenching construction activities are completed to ensure that excessive settlement has not occurred. Pavement Overlays • Extend the overlay over the entire roadway surface to avoid leaving an abrupt edge. • If the shoulder or bike lane pavement is of good quality, it may be appropriate to end the overlay at the shoulder or bike lane stripe provided no abrupt ridge remains. • Ensure that inlet grates, manhole and valve covers are within ¼ inch of the finished pavement surface and are made or treated with slip resistant materials. Drainage Grates • Require all new drainage grates be bicycle- friendly, including grates that have horizontal slats on them so that bicycle tires and assistive devices do not fall through the vertical slats. • Create a program to inventory all existing drainage grates, and replace hazardous grates as necessary – temporary modifications such as installing rebar horizontally across the grate should not be an acceptable alternative to replacement. Gutter to Pavement Transition • Ensure that gutter-to-pavement transitions have no more than a ¼ inch vertical transition. • Examine pavement transitions during every roadway project for new construction, maintenance activities, and construction project activities that occur in streets. Maintenance Activity Frequency Inspections Seasonal – at beginning and end of Summer Pavement sweeping/blowing As needed, with higher frequen- cy in the early Spring and Fall Pavement sealing 5 - 15 years Pothole repair 1 week – 1 month after report Culvert and drainage grate inspection Before Winter and after major storms Pavement markings replace- ment As needed Signage replacement As needed Shoulder plant trimming (weeds, trees, brambles) Twice a year; middle of growing season and early Fall Tree and shrub plantings, trimming 1 – 3 years Major damage response (washouts, fallen trees, flooding) As soon as possible C D E F Landscaping • Ensure that shoulder plants do not hang into or impede passage along bikeways • After major damage incidents, remove fallen trees or other debris from bikeways as quickly as possible • Maintenance Management Plan • Provide fire and police departments with map of system, along with access points to gates/ bollards • Enforce speed limits and other rules of the road • Enforce all trespassing laws for people attempting to enter adjacent private properties G ---PAGE BREAK--- CITY OF MODESTO A-70