The URL can be used to link to this page

066 of 2015 - Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Amendments 0 15-1 T 15-5 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. 66 of 2015 (Amending the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan) An ordinance amending the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan pursuant to a petition by Mayor Ralph Becker. WHEREAS,the Salt Lake City Planning Commission held public hearings on January 28,201 and February 11,2015 on an application submitted by Mayor Ralph Becker ("Applicant")to comprehensively update and amend the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, which plan was adopted by the Salt Lake City Council in 2004;and WHEREAS,at its February 11,2015 meeting,the planning commission voted in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation to the city council on said application;and WHEREAS,after a hearing before the city council,the city council has determined that adopting this ordinance is in the best interest of the city. NOW,THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah: SECTION 1. Amending and Renaming the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. That the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan shall be renamed the"Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan"and is amended to read and appear as provided in Exhibit"A"attached hereto. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this 1st day of December 2015. C RP ATTEST AND COUNT RSIGN: CI RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on December 8, 2015 . Mayor's Action: X Approved. Veto . ACI— MAYOR CITY RECORDER �•' '$ APPROVED AS TO FORM r'= °; \, Salt Lake City Attomey's Office (SEAL) ` *= �' `le �t u i Date: G! Bill No. 66 of 2015. ti�,,RA? ,�'' P IC.Niel ior City Attorney Published: 0pcemher 31, •2015. HB_ATTY-#43738-v I-Ordinance_amendingpedestrian_and_bicycle_MP.DOCX Salt Lake City PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE Master Plan Prepared for Salt Lake City by Alta Planning+Design December 2015 7 ,16.• - _f . . ,. _ — 1 - — _—_ _ _ L - - —_ M - //f?, s•si r �. Y' iT- , a W ' i Y SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Stakeholder Committee Scott Beck(Visit Salt Lake) Hal Johnson (UTA) Ben Bolte (SLC GREENbike) Mark Kennedy(Owner, Saturday Cycles) Philip Carlson (Bicycle Collective) Jon Larsen (WFRC) Tami Cleveland(U of U Facility Planning) Scott Lyttle (Bike Utah) George Deneris (SL Co.Active Trans. Coord.) Jason Mathis (Downtown Alliance) Hans Ehrbar(U of U Professor) John Maynes (21st&2ist Business Assoc.) Dennis Faris (Owner, Faris Wheels) Louis Melini (SLC Bicycle Advisory Committee) Heidi Goedhart (Former U of U Bike Coord.) Robert Miles (UDOT, Region 2) Alexandra Zimmermann (U of U Bike Coord.) Vicki Mori (Principal, Guadalupe School) Dave Iltis (Cycling Utah) Kelly Robinson (Utah Dept. of Health) Jory Johner(WFRC) Evelyn Tuddenham (UDOT Bike/Ped Coord.) University-to-Downtown Focus Group Nate Borgenicht(U of U student) Alexandra Zimmermann (U of U Bike Coord.) Roger Borgenicht(ASSIST,Avenues resident) Brent Hulme (Owner, Salt Lake Bicycle Co.) Tami Cleveland (U of U Facility Planning) Esther Hunter(Chair, East Cent. Comm. Council) Jennifer Colby(U of U Sustainability, East Central Scott Lyttle (Bike Utah, East Central resident) resident) Jason Mathis (Downtown Alliance) Cindy Cromer(East Central resident) Chad Mullins (SL Co. Bike Advisory Comm.) Jesse Dean (Downtown Alliance) Glenn Sorensen (East Central resident) Heidi Goedhart (Former U of U Bike Coord.) Steering Committee Robin Hutcheson (Director, SLC Transportation) Jonathan Springmeyer(SLC Trans.Advisory Becka Roolf(Project Manager, SLC Transportation) Board) Dan Bergenthal (SLC Transportation) Mike Brown (Deputy Chief of Police) Cris Jones (SLC Transportation) Lisa Pascadlo (SLCPD Bicycle Liaison) Colin Quinn-Hurst(SLC Transportation) Kort Utley(SLC RDA) Nick Britton (SLC Planning) Jessica Thesing(SLC Econ. Dev., Deputy Director) Jeff Snelling (SLC Engineering, City Engineer) Angela Dunn (SLC Econ. Dev.) Anna Johnson (SLC Engineering) Kate Lohnes (SLC Sustainability) Parviz Rokhva (Director, SLC Streets) Sara Rose Tannenbaum (SLC Sustainability) Cabot Jennings (SLC Streets) Lee Bollwinkel (SLC Parks&Public Lands) Michael Stott(Mayor's Office Comm. Liaison& Leslie Chan (SLC Parks &Public Lands) ADA Coord.) Brandon Fleming (SLC Parks&Public Lands) Roni Thomas (SLC Arts Council) e• =; �4� We are grateful to members of the City's Transportation Advisory Board and a lta Bicycle Advisory Committee for their input. Special thanks also to members of Q =�= Y P p k try `A the general public who provided input through open houses, online surveys, '`w , , ,.`= PLANNING DESIGN community events, and other channels. SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Vision Walking and bicycling in Salt Lake City will be safe, convenient, comfortable, and viable transportation options that connect people to places, foster recreational and economic development opportunities, improve personal health and the environment, and elevate quality of life. Goals Complete Streets ;, c - _ :. Streets are an integral part of everyday life and public space.The term"Complete Streets"refers to designing 6'R ,.i y FK _. / 1" ' streets for people of all ages and abilities who walk, I I bicycle,use transit, and drive. Salt Lake City's Complete _ �' Streets ordinance seeks to balance the competing needs r _ _ °;; I of different transportation modes within the unique — — .-. - contexts of each roadway.The walking and bicycling INTEGRATION NETWORK recommendations presented in this plan are consistent Integrate walking and Develop a safe,comfortable, with and support Complete Street principles. bicycling into community and attractive walking and planning to enhance livability, bicycling network that Why Invest I n health,transportation,the connects people of all ages, environment,and economic abilities,and neighborhoods Walking & Bicycling development. to the places they want to go. Access for All Walking and bicycling are affordable transportation '1' r , . options available to everyone.This master plan -+ , R' -_ 3 - emphasizes facilities that can be used by all City �:{ .. A ` 1 .: ;hi. residents,not just those who are fit and fast walkers or • lcA _ ?' those confident riding bicycles swiftly or in traffic. Street . �, ,_ y_ :" ''= �� redesign can also result in safer driving,fewer user ' ,. ' .� 0. conflicts through consistency and predictability,and •MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS reduced peak hour congestion for motorists. Maintain the walking and Promote the safety and Personal Health bicycling system year-round. attractiveness of walking and Active transportation is any self-propelled,human- bicycling through education, powered mode of transportation such as walking or encouragement,and bicycling. Such activities help people meet recommended II i j• id penforcement programs. physical activity levels,thereby reducing chronic disease "_ and associated health care costs.Improved walkingand ... -" `' bicycling infrastructure for recreation and daily trips such as travel to work,run errands or take kids to school d�� creates a sustained increase in physical activity,and a healthier community. TRANSIT Economic Health CONNECTIONS Business and employee relocation decisions are increasingly being made based on quality Integrate pedestrian and of life considerations such as walking and bicycling facilities.Active transportation bicycle facilities with transit infrastructure also generates tourism revenue,supports local business,and creates jobs. routes,stations,and stops. Air Quality Combustion engines and industry combine with geographic constraints to create air quality concerns in the Salt Lake Valley. Replacing driving trips with walking and bicycling trips can play an important part in a comprehensive strategy to improve air quality. DECEMBER 2015 I ES-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Outreach Ongoing input from focus group, Pedestrian Preferences Bicyclist Preferences stakeholder committee, and steering committee. » Direct engagement with Multi Use Path thousands of residents includingI' Multi-Use Path through the following venues: » 2 public open houses II • Online survey with nearly Protected Bike Lane 0 1,000 responses Sidewalk buffered fe (separated by planters or by landscaping landscaping) » Nearly 3o other community events such as farmers markets and community VI festivals Sidewalk buffered10 OP Buffered Bike Lane » Open City Hall by parking I'"" 4* Sidewalk next 4I to traffic Bike Lane -, iik \\�_ 1 1 . S' Crosswalk with A „_ pedestrian refuge island Shared Lane Markings j. .i P t 'II )1 .4/11:1i. l'i 11 M "I love it" "I moderately dislike it" lr Standardcrosswalk • "I like it" • "I really dislike it" \Ali • "No opinion" Results of the online survey show clear community preference for sidewalks buffered Attendees at a master plan open house from traffic,safer pedestrian crossings,and low-stress bikeways that allow for all ages and abilities to ride a bicycle comfortably. Key Themes A number of key themes emerged amidst the large amount of information collected through the public input process: » Support for the plan's goals and objectives » Strong support of the City's efforts to install high-visibility pedestrian treatments to improve crossings of major streets » Desire for better winter maintenance,particularly enforcement of laws requiring landowners to clear snow » Support for conventional and low stress bikeways that are designed well,especially to minimize intersection conflicts ES-2 I DECEMBER 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Walking The Importance of Walking Salt Lake City is first and foremost a place where walking should be comfortable and safe. Many trips begin or end with a walk,and it is important to take a citywide view of infrastructure and programs that addresses conditions over a broad area, versus at only a few spot locations. This Plan recommends that the City treat all areas as walking environments,and provides guidance for several`typologies'that are found throughout the City. The walking environment should be prioritized during any project of the City,as well as through regular review and study of the transportation network. / A a - . , - _ Pedestrian crossing at HAWK-controlled Trail user walking her dog on the Jordan Pedestrian crossing at 200 S/800 E in a mid-block crosswalk near City Creek Center River Parkway Trail high visibility school crosswalk Salt Lake City has a robust system of sidewalks and pathways. However,the City's wide streets and large blocks can create a challenging environment for pedestrians. Ultimately,every street and every intersection in the city should be designed with the pedestrian in mind—emphasizing safety,first,as well as comfort. Throughout this plan,the terms"pedestrian"and "walk"are meant to be inclusive of people of all ages and abilities,including those who use mobility aids,such as wheelchairs, scooters,strollers,or other devices. The City has an established crossing prioritization process to evaluate locations for mid-block signals and enhanced crosswalks,as well as other pedestrian-friendly amenities such as bulb-outs,refuge islands,and pavement markings. Lower speed limits and tightened corner radii are recommended to improve the pedestrian experience by slowing traffic especially downtown and in other business areas. Ultimately,pedestrian enhancements are very 't• —, — — — District fine-grained and should be incorporated at the project design level.National guidelines such as I O Main Street Retail Core SALT the National Association of City Transportation 1,00 S o u ME Officials'Urban Street Design Guide are also I Green Loop/Park recommended. I .: -...-. ; Opportunity Site I Proposed Mid-block uuuwmuunun�Ip,,,,,„U n:le tuna ununununulmmnnnunu°m„„„„„„wuumIm wmmu Walkways Downtown Mid-Block I G, „A Q Walkway Network Entrance Landmarks I 0 m• Existing TRAX Lines& 00 SOU Stations Within the downtown area,this plan tlAII I I I I I I I I I I I TRAX Extensions identified incorporates the Downtown Community - in Downtown in Motion Master Plan's recommendation to use 1 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Proposed Downtown Streetcar Preferred Route alleys and minor streets as a network of IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII##Iml1R pl,LJ,lll—,idl II(IIIIII17111ll1#IIrtllllIIrt1111lllllllrtt1111 II'♦11111111 Ill walkways redesigned to become inviting — I i SI I CTyg Proposed Mid-Block COUNTY LIBRARY places for pedestrians.In other areas of �- BUILDING SQUARE Walkways Network in the the City,especially where development is = 9 Central Business District ( rapidly occurring,this same philosophy 1 500 S 0 U = (from the draft Downtown should be applied.This is especially Community Master Plan) relevant in Sugar House. DECEMBER 2015 I ES-3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bicycling Citywide Bikeway Network The maps and graphic below show how Salt Lake City's bikeway system will grow over time as the plan recommendations are implemented. EXISTING BIKEWAYS 2025 BIKEWAYS 2035 BIKEWAYS OR Roadway 0-10 10-20 Roadway 0-10 10-20 1.3 MILES Classification Existing Years Years Classification Existing Years Years iii City Arterial III 1115 City Collector ID 040 , ..,.,...: .,. _�M .4____ 50% 67% 85% 56% 68% 84% �_- t-_ A UDOT Arterial / fp 41 City Local 4111 0, The entire 220-mile recommended 11% 44% 55% 8% 16% 24% bikeway network could be built for the Percentage of road miles with bikeways same amount of money as widening 1.3 miles of freeway Low-Stress Bikeway Network Low-stress facilities such as multi-use paths,protected and buffered bike lanes,and neighborhood byways appeal to people who want more separation from traffic.Surveys show that 50-6o%of people say they would like to bike more but are deterred by conventional bikeways. Development of a low-stress bikeway network is a key component of this master plan. —-rl��__ ter ;- \ir . ; S . °f — !;l + 1 f 11 1 lii i r rI ;►. ' ` `t 1 .. p .I tea '• rtA4 ,id_A -\. `r .;,' • &_.,atir r Ate i. . '-* N4'%.414.1%`4=,11;, , V 4 111 . , .'-, -4:-- Multi-use path connecting 900 S to the Protected bike lane on 300 S Multi-use path in Liberty Park 9-Line near 900 W ES-4 I DECEMBER 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Programs The programs recommended in this plan typically have an education, encouragement, or enforcement focus. Multi-Modal Programs Bicycling-Specific Programs The plan contains recommendations for multi-modal programs that Bicycling programs include user counts, benefit multiple user groups. Some are targeted at pedestrians and training,bicycle-friendly business efforts,route bicyclists only,while others include other groups such as transit riders mapping,social rides,and recreational route and drivers. Programs include efforts such as driver education,media designation among others.They are geared toward campaigns,comprehensive safety and crash analysis and enforcement, encouraging people to bicycle more,particularly Smart Trips,and Open Streets events. user groups who are less likely to ride now. , ii 1 1 let ilt IlligllF'Ih), . . ,... ! 1-4.,. ,. k. ., , .`",i- 4 .--411P. ,.. ' . 0:014 .... , A. lbiiii III J Ca WI% ' 1*., 1. \ I - ilit i - - i 'a ,`r I ' Afit• (�....'" . .., , Pedestrian-Specific Programs ; r , . Examples of recommended pedestrian programs include walking °'.'`'%' 1 school buses,targeted crosswalk enforcement,and mid-block walkway programming.These programs are geared toward encouraging people - to walk and making their experience safer and more comfortable. -- t, 4114 -• ....z _ VS �I , 71:::#, r�7z == V 1111 4"4•a y Miff 7 .141 ' 4 1\ .., :" t. illA— 'Iv 1' -4---i: 7.,:".:.:::::— ' J „osort.1 CA, _ ,-- __ .:. ', , ,,. --- .. ,r Ali ';"7.1".. ' 111111 ' f — W - t41 , t y # �� .a".�.. . rho-r_4 y ^ r"r, _. ..,;**' ►a• DECEMBER 2015 I ES-5 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS This edition of the plan is designed for printing. For a clickable table of contents, please see the electronic version. Chapter One: Walking & Bicycling Background 1 1.1 History of Active Transportation in Salt Lake City 2 1.2 National Trends 6 1.3 Local Trends 12 1.4 Relationship to City Plans i6 1.5 Relationship to Regional Plans i8 Chapter Two: Goals & Objectives 21 2.1 Updating the 2004 Plan 22 2.2 Vision 22 2.3 Goals &Objectives 23 Chapter Three: Public Process 29 3.1 Master Plan Committees 30 3.2 Public Open Houses 3o 3.3 Online Survey 32 3.4 Other Outreach Events 33 3.5 Key Themes 33 Chapter Four: Complete Streets 35 4.1 Relationship to Pedestrian&Bicycle Master Plan 36 4.2 Strengthening the Complete Streets Ordinance 36 4.3 Design Guidance for Complete Streets 36 4.4 Complete Streets for East-West Connections 37 4.5 Policy Considerations for Non-Bicycle Wheeled Transportation 37 4.6 Speed Limit Policies 38 Chapter Five: Pedestrian Recommendations 41 5.1 Walking Facility Descriptions 42 5.2 Traffic Signal&Warning Beacon Considerations 46 5.3 Pedestrian Counts 5o 5.4 Enhancing Corridors and Neighborhood Byways for Pedestrians 5o 5.5 Pedestrian Spot Improvements 52 5.6 Pedestrian Typologies 53 DECEMBER 2015 I 1 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Chapter Six: Bicycling Recommendations 69 6.1 Bikeway Type Descriptions 70 6.2 Evolution Toward Low Stress Bicycling 72 6.3 Bikeway Recommendations 73 6.4 Interim Bypass Routes 87 6.5 Bikeway Maintenance 87 6.6 Traffic Signal Considerations 95 6.7 Bicycle Parking and Other End-of-Trip Facilities 99 6.8 Mountain Biking&BMX 100 6.9 Bicycle Counts&Surveys 100 Chapter Seven: Program Recommendations 103 7.1 Multi-Modal Programs 104 7.2 Pedestrian-Specific Programs 108 7.3 Bicycling-Specific Programs 110 7.4 Program Implementation Schedule ii5 7.5 Program Summary Tables ii5 Chapter Eight: Cost Estimates & Implementation 121 8.1 Spot Improvements 122 8.2 Linear Bikeways 122 8.3 Fundinglmplementation 124 8.4 Performance Measures 124 1i I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT)by Age Group 6 Figure 1-2 Average Annual Mileage by Age 7 Figure 1-3 Overweight&Obese Population in Utah 8 Figure 1-4 Utahns'Physical Activity Habits 8 Figure 1-5 U.S. Bicycle Commuting Growth, 2000-2010 10 Figure 1-6 Types of Bicyclists Figure 1-7 Bike Trip Purposes in Salt Lake City(Utah Travel Survey) 13 Figure i-8 Walk Trip Purposes in Salt Lake City(Utah Travel Survey) 13 Figure 1-9 Pedestrian Count&Survey Locations 14 Figure 1-to June 2012 Weekday Pedestrian Counts 14 Figure 1-11 Bike Counts, Sidewalk Riding, Female Bicyclists,&Helmet Use by Year 15 Figure 3-1 Demographics of Public Survey Respondents 32 Figure 3-2 Types of Bicyclists (Pedestrian&Bicycle Master Plan Public Survey) 32 Figure 5-1 Mid-Block Walkways Map from the draft Downtown Community Master Plan 51 Figure 5-2 Multi-Use Trails,Neighborhoods Byways, &Enhanced Pedestrian Crossings Map 55 Figure 5-3 Neighborhood Business Node 57 Figure 5-4 Strip Mall Retrofit 59 Figure 5-5 Suburban Business Park Without Sidewalks 61 Figure 5-6 Protected Bike Lane Streetscape 63 Figure 5-7 Conceptual Design for Improving Neighborhood Connections Across an Arterial Street 65 Figure 5-8 Conceptual Design for Improvements to a Neighborhood Commercial Area 67 Figure 6-i 2013 Public Survey Bicycle Facilities Preferences 72 Figure 6-2 Percentage of Road Miles With Bikeways 73 Figure 6-3 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions Map 75 Figure 6-4 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions+Short Term(o-io Years)Recommendations Map 77 Figure 6-5 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions+Long Term(to-2o Years)Recommendations Map 79 Figure 6-6 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions + 20 Year Vision Map (2035) 81 Figure 6-7a Low Stress Bicycling Network Recommendations Map(Citywide) 83 Figure 6-7b Low Stress Bicycling Network Recommendations Map(Downtown) 85 Figure 6-8 Bicycling Access to Fixed Route Transit Stations Map 89 Figure 6-9 Bicycling Spot Improvement Recommendations Map 91 Figure 6-to i3oo South Interim Bypass Route 93 DECEMBER 2015 I HI SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN LIST OF TABLES Table i-i Statewide Walking&Bicycling Mode Share 12 Table 1-2 Downtown Walking&Bicycling Mode Share 12 Table 4-1 Percentage of Roads with Bikeways 36 Table 7-1 Program Implementation Schedule 116 Table 7-2 Multi-Modal Programs Summary 117 Table 7-3 Pedestrian&Bicycle Programs Summary ii9 Table 8-i Spot Improvement Capitol Cost Ranges 122 Table 8-2 Spot Improvement Annual Maintenance Cost Ranges 122 Table 8-3 Per-Mile Capital Cost Estimate Ranges 123 Table 8-4 Per-Mile Annual Maintenance Cost Estimate Ranges 124 iv I DECEMBER 2015 • • . , •Imo' • a lettiddiWirbir." c: . ive • . Americans increasingly demand walkable, ' • . , bikeable cities,and Salt Lake City residents are no * . �. 2110 different. Providing quality, walkable places and �, f " •• , I • • •AK transportation options is key to the City's ability U to attract and retain people, businesses, and the A TE j convention and tourism economies. 4 • . s O N E Salt Lake City's previous Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan was adopted in 2004. While this - r document served the City well, much has - changed in the past decade in the realm of active .4e! transportation. Some innovative facilities the y WALKING & City now constructs were not even invented a 401 decade ago. While the sidewalk network is fairly BICYCLING• complete, pedestrian facility innovations include crossing treatments especially appropriate for BACKGROUND wide streets. Historically,Salt Lake City's bicycle facilities have primarily served people comfortable riding in or r near traffic, a group which comprises less than . io%of the population.This master plan leads Salt N Lake City boldly into a new era where people of all • ( t`" ages and abilities can comfortably travel on foot A — .- . ! , or by bike.The plan outlines goals and objectives, , - , 4,7,„„. proposes a 20-year build-out of bicycle facilities, it h •• and recommends changes to City processes and non-infrastructure programs. 1' 1 Walking and bicycling investments benefit - y---- everyone. More people traveling on foot and .........44. r.4 I,04.- - _ by bicycle will boost our community's health, improve our air, invigorate local businesses, V. and incentivize employers to locate here. This V - • chapter provides historical context for active transportation in the City, outlines important 4,e LI14,‘ j demographic trends, and discusses how this L2k ', master plan interfaces with other City efforts. • t I lot 1-1' � . Main subsections include: f�; - History of Active Transportation in the City • --- • National Trends _ �- r • Local Trends •-r • Relationship to City Plans -__ • Relationship to Regional Plans f DECEMBER 2015 I 1 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1.1 History of Active Transportation in Salt Lake City From the pioneers who founded it to those who continue its legacy, Salt Lake City has a long and rich history when it comes to active transportation, a term which includes walking, bicycling, and Ar ;.;' • other people-powered transportation devices. _ . 4 .., \ 11 The City was founded 5o years prior to cars arriving on the scene, when walking was the dominant transportation mode. Pedestrians i, ,f originally shared the dirt streets with horse- _ • drawn carriages and streetcars. Soon afterwards, ..•, st _ :- boardwalks were constructed allowing people to - " avoid the mud and filth found in the streets. ''- Renowned cyclist Marshall "Major" Taylor at the Salt The bicycle became a popular device for both Palace race track, 1920 (Photo: Shipley Collection, transportation and recreation in our community Utah State Historical Society) almost immediately after it was first introduced to the American public in the late i800s. By the the latest changes residents are experiencing 189os,much like today,the increasing presence of which aim to improve safety for all transportation bicycles in the City brought conflict that required modes. This Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan action, as well as a cultural shift,in how residents builds upon the many challenges and successes of related to each other on streets and sidewalks. Salt Lake City's past and present to work toward The recent and pending installation of protected a more balanced and sustainable transportation bike lanes on 30o South and 200 West are just future. 1890s ."r� S 50L0 • Bicycle ownership in the City, previously / a°"G"r go Y Ott;YCLE Goo- Co. only afforded by people of substantial ,. } eeW�A�ovEiiirtas F??'T,w� means, becomes more widespread. - Bicrc�Es f GUTHRIE BIKE HAIRS • Bicycles allow lower, middle, and working { • ate, class families to live further away from = -."�' ma - work in more affordable areas of town. 4l, . er ` _ - - • Bicycle shops in the City double from -- '' four to eight. Early bike shop in Salt Lake City (Photo: Shipler Collection, Utah State Historical Society) 2 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND » Exclusive clubs such as the Social Wheel Club begin to form around cycling as a summer pastime. » Lagoon Amusement Park begins sponsoring an annual Memorial Day Race from Salt Lake City to Farmington. » Growing numbers of bicyclists take to sidewalks to avoid muddy streets during inclement weather. Salt Lake City Council passes legislation to make it illegal to ride a bicycle on many downtown sidewalks between the months of May and October or face a fine up to $25 (more than $650 today). » Citizen group proposes reserving one side of downtown streets and sidewalks exclusively for cyclists while another group proposes that bicycles be licensed and taxed $1 per year to help pay to pave bike paths and make it easier for pedestrians to identify scofflaws. Both proposals are rejected. » Pedestrian and bicycle collisions necessitate ordinances regulating cycling. » Bicyclists lead the movement to pave Salt Lake City streets. 1900s - 1920s >> Half of Salt Lake City's 50,000 residents • � , own bicycles. I _ » I Streetlights are installed primarily to I , � make streets safer for pedestrians. = I1111 » Amount of sponsorship money made • +-� �' .. 'r • available by Salt Lake City businesses for y professional bicycle racers makes the City ;t 4 .> -, one of the most important destinations � y �� for track cycling in the country. :AN . » Salt Lake City boasts three outdoor �. � �. bicycle race tracks located at the Salt __ Palace, Saltair, and Calder's Park (now Nibley Park). The Salt Lake YMCA Bike Club at 100 South/State Street, 1906 (Photo: Shipler Collection, Utah State » Both Democratic and Republican mayoral Historical Society) candidates vow to pave five-foot-wide bicycle paths on several downtown streets including South Temple, Main Street, 200 South, 400 South, 800 South, and West Temple. DECEMBER 2015 I 3 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1930s - 1950s » Salt Lake City's streetcar system closes in 1941. » 1943 City Plan recommends parks within 1/4 mile of every residence so that kids could walk to the parks. » City adopts "Salt Lake City Major Street Plan" (1948) that called for widening pavements widths for the sole purpose of moving automobiles. 1960s - 1970s • �•: -_ \ � / �_< » The Second Century Plan sets a strategy z - �� - • to improve Main Street with emphasis y on pedestrians: widening sidewalks and planting trees. » An underground crossing of State Street r: :;•.�,:: • at 50 South was constructed, and a mid- ro block walkway system was first proposed rz • • The City's 1967 master plan proposes bypasses for through traffic, including grade separated roadways along Foothill Curb-separated protected bike lanes were proposed Boulevard and 1300 East. on streets in Salt Lake City in the 1970s • Protected bike lanes are proposed by regional and City planners for Foothill Drive, Redwood Road, Beck Street, and 1700 South. » The concept of the Jordan River Parkway/Trail was developed, primarily as a flood control measure. 19ROs » By the mid-80s, lengthy sections of multi-use trail completed within the Jordan River Parkway. » Urban Design Element recommends pedestrian "launching pads" (curb extensions) and "gallerias" (enclosed pedestrian walkways) to improve downtown walkability. » Salt Lake City constructs early painted bike lanes, and in 1985 publishes the City's first bikeways map. 4 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND 1990s » In the early 1990s, the Mayor's Bicycle Advisory Committee (MBAC) creates a bicycle plan for the City. » The first TRAX light rail line opens connecting downtown Salt Lake City to Sandy. 200us • The City's first professionally-created Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan is adopted. » Salt Lake City becomes well-known for its pedestrian crossing flags program, and is recognized nationally for improving pedestrian safety. » Bronze-level Bicycle Friendly Community status is granted by the League of American Bicyclists in 2007. Downtown in Motion Master Plan balances pedestrian and bicycle needs with transit, automobile, and service needs to create a balanced, integrated, efficient, and accessible Downtown. » Seeking a solution for some narrower streets Downtown, Salt Lake City invents the "green shared lane" or "super sharrow". 2010s » The City Council passes a Complete Streets ordinance in 2010, requiring the consideration of bicyclists and pedestrians in street repaving and design projects. » Salt Lake moves up to a silver-level Bicycle Friendly Community in 2010. » North Temple is reconstructed as a multi-modal corridor incorporating TRAX light rail, bike lanes, and wide sidewalks. » A new downtown bike sharing system, GREENbike, is launched to complement the City's growing bikeway network. » A first downtown protected bike lane is constructed on Broadway (300 South) including separator curbs and planters. » The Sugar House Greenway and The Draw, two key pieces of the Parley's Trail, are completed and open. DECEMBER 2015 I 5 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1.2 National Trends factors contribute to the decline in car ownership Pedestrian and bicycle planning in the U.S. is a among Millennials: economic recession, recent rapidly evolving field. The following sections trends toward urban living, and the desire to describe national trends relating to bicycling and stay connected to social media sites and other walking. Understanding these trends and the technologies that are not conducive to driving. underlying reasons behind them helps to inform The younger generation appears to place less decisions here in Salt Lake City. value on vehicle ownership and suburban living due to a combination of high costs, improved 1.2.1 Demographic Shifts travel options, and changing preferences for living and commuting.4 The United States has experienced demographic shifts in recent decades. These shifts directly and In 2011, Zipcar performed a travel preference indirectly impact transportation patterns. For survey that confirmed these trends, as illustrated instance,between 2010 and 2020"Baby Boomers" in Figure 1-1.5 Based on these trends and will make more than 200 million residential forecasted predictions, it is estimated that the moves. They also will increase the size and size of the U.S. vehicle fleet and annual vehicle reshape the demographic character of rural areas sales will continue to decline (Figure 1-2).6 and small towns throughout the country. Studies also show that quality-of-life considerations have 1.2.2 Benefits of Walking & Bicycling begun to replace employment-related factors in Bicycling and walking provide a wide range of decisions about when to move and where to live.' benefits to individuals, their communities, and Recent studies have noted trends revealing that the surrounding environment. Millennials — those born between 1981 and 1.2.2.1 Safety Benefits 2001 — are a part of a generation of declining car ownership.2 For example, people between the Studies show that installing pedestrian and bicycle ages of 18 and 34 make up just 11%of today's auto facilities directly improves safety by reducing market — down from 17% in 2o07.3 A number of the risk of pedestrian-automobile and bicycle- 14000 Annual motor vehicle travel ■2001 Per Capita 12000 !1;1111110VMT is significantly lower for people born after 1978 than 10000 ■2008 Per Capita previous generations at the VMT same age. This indicates in- sow • tergenerational changes in 6000 consumer preferences and lifestyles. Although younger 4000 people are likely to increase their vehicle travel as they 2000 earn more and become par- ents, they are unlikely to 0 drive as much as the Baby tits 1. 3a 35 t>°) Q' �� ,a h� 4) '\° �'1°' h1 Boom generation. 55.5 Figure 1-1 Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) by Age Group 6 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND If there were more options in my areas, such as public transportation, car sharing, or convenient carpooling, I would drive less than I do now. (Licensed drivers only) Agree Ages 18-34 70°0 64% Consumer preference sur veys indicate that younger Ages 35-44 59% people want to drive less 55% and rely more on alternative 49% modes than older people. Ages 45-54 49% Ages 55+ 37% 41% ■ Licensed Drivers 2011 Liconsecl Drivers 2010 Figure 1-2 Average Annual Mileage by Age automobile crashes. For example, streets with disease.9 It is also the third-highest cause of bike lanes have been shown to be safer not just for preventable death in the U.S., behind only bicyclists (compared with no bicycle facilities), tobacco use and poor nutrition.'° Today many but also for pedestrians and motorists.? Streets cities and businesses are facing a crisis as they without bicycle facilities may pose a greater attempt to cope with the growing healthcare costs collision risk. When walking and bicycling rates associated with preventable chronic diseases. A double, per-mile pedestrian-motorist collision recent Institute of Medicine report states that the risk can decrease by as much as 34%.8 estimated annual cost of obesity-related illness is Improved walking and bicycling environments $190.2 billion (in 2005 dollars), or nearly 21% of contribute to a safer transportation system in two annual medical spending in the United States. important ways:by directly reducing collision risk The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and by increasing walking and bicycling rates. recommend at least 2.5 hours of moderate New York City saw a 73% decrease in the average exercise each week, yet many people do not risk of serious injury to bicyclists at the same time have convenient access to places where they can they experienced a 400% increase in ridership. be physically active. Walking and bicycling are Portland (OR) saw a similar dip in injury rates some of the most basic forms of physical activity. concurrent with an increased bicycling rate. Safe Improving facilities for these activities and linking places to walk and bike are especially important them to recreational and daily destinations would for non-drivers who require safe, reliable, and help better connect people with convenient convenient transportation options. exercise options. 1.2.2.2 Health Benefits Active transportation options such as walking Lack of physical activity is associated with and bicycling help people meet recommended increased risk of many health problems, physical activity levels, thereby reducing chronic particularly obesity, diabetes, and heart disease and associated health care costs. About half of Utahns are overweight and do not exercise DECEMBER 2015 I 7 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN enough (see Figures 1-3 and 1-4)2142 According Walking and biking also provide greater to the Salt Lake Valley Health Department, these social interactions than some other forms statewide obesity and physical activity data match of transportation. These interactions may local data closely.'3 be associated with mental health and social Studies show that people walk more in safe, engagement benefits. walkable, and aesthetically pleasing places. 1.2.2.3 Economic Benefits Improved facilities promote physical activity by Walking and bicycling are affordable making walking and bicycling more appealing, transportation options. Walking is virtually free easier, and safer.14 A Portland (OR) study on the and owning and operating a bicycle for one year benefits of bicycle projects found that by 204o costs approximately $121.16 The average cost of Portland's investment of $138-605 million in owning and operating a vehicle for one year is bicycling will have saved $388-594 million in $8,94617 health care costs and provided an additional $7- 12 billion in the value of increased life span.15 Cities that invest in active transportation are investing in people and their quality of life. tit Business decisions are increasingly being made W W W T t ! based on quality of life amenities for employees and their families. Sidewalks, on-street Mitt ? MI i t t ? bicycle facilities, multi-use paths, and transit itittt , - service are important quality of life indicators. They demonstrate a commitment to healthy I I I it I it 1t 1t 1t 1t 1t transportation options and lifestyles. I t I it I l t I l t I - 56% of Utahns are Accordingto the National Association of it 1t 1t it 1' 1r 1r 1r 1r it overweight Homebuilders, trails are consistently ranked as �r 1t 1t 1t 1t 1t 1t 1t 1t ft f -22% of Utahns one of the most important community amenities I * t t t ,t I t ft * f are obese by prospective homebuyers - above golf courses, parks, and security.i8 More than two-thirds of Figure 1-3 Overweight & Obese Population In Utah Americans say that having bike lanes or paths in their community is important to them, and two- I t 111f 1f thirds of homebuyers consider the walkability t t t of an area in their purchase decision.�9 This preference for communities that accommodate fitittittli f i t i t t i t t l i walking and bicycling is reflected in property 48% of Utahns do values across the country.2° Houses in walkable WWI * " - not meet neighborhoods have property values $4,000 to • * * f 1I * it 1 -f physical recommendations $34,00o higher than houses in areas with average daily phy iity needed to walkability.21 avoid I I * I I I I 11I I I -disease Active transportation infrastructure and programs 1t 1t 1t 1t 1t * 1t 1t 1t 1t it 17% do not generate tourism revenue,support local business, —engage in any I I ' ' I II I I I I I _ physical activity and create jobs.22 In the North Carolina Outer Banks,an investment of$6.7 million in paths and Figure 1-4 Utahns' Physical Activity Habits wide paved shoulders has generated $68 million 8 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND in annual tourism revenue from bicyclists.23 After bike lanes were added to Valencia Street in San 1/2 Francisco,two-thirds of merchants surveyed said that the lanes had a positive overall impact on their business.24 New York City installed the first protected bike lanes in the U.S. on 8th and 9th Avenues in Manhattan in 1997 and by so doing o f a l l trips i n the U S a r e brought more people to these streets.As a result, less than 3 miles, y e t 9th Avenue had a 49% increase in retail sales nearly at locally based businesses compared to a 3% increase across Manhattan as a whole.25 7 i Employers are increasingly locating in vibrant urban centers with diverse transportation options in order to attract young workers and of these short trips a r e improve current employees' satisfaction. Active done by car. transportation investments heighten Salt Lake City's appeal to existing and potential employers. The majority of short trips are currently made by car 1.2.2.4 Transportation Efficiency Short trips typically taken in carsz6 can more easily bicycling prevents 73o pounds of carbon dioxide be made on foot or by bike if safe, comfortable, from entering the atmosphere annually.31 This and convenient facilities are provided. By shifting reduction minimizes the transportation sector s 160 annual trips(about three per week)averaging air quality impacts, improves air quality, and 2.4 miles in length from driving to bicycling, an decreases public health concerns such as asthma. individual can reduce congestion costs to other road users by approximately $216 in urban areas 1.2.3 State of the Planning Practice for and about $108 in rural settings.27 Providing a Walking & Bicycling variety of travel options also reduces dependency Though still a small fraction of total travel, the on foreign oil and promotes energy efficiency. number of people bicycling for transportation has grown dramatically in major cities during 1.2.2.5 Climate Impacts the last io years. Cities with high walking and Over the past four decades,population has grown bicycling rates realize that conditions need to be rapidly in the western U.S., an area sensitive to safe, pleasant, and convenient for people of all drought,air pollution,and heat waves.z8 Scientists ages and physical abilities in order to have broad project that warmer temperatures from climate appeal. change will increase the frequency of days with The League of American Bicyclists awards unhealthy levels of air pollution.29 Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) status to As of 2003, 27% of U.S. greenhouse gas communities that have made significant strides emissions were attributed to the transportation toward becoming comfortable places to bicycle. sector and personal vehicles accounted for 62% Bicycle commuting rates in large BFCs increased of all transportation emissions.3° Replacing by 80% between 2000 and 2010 and 47% across two miles of driving each day with walking or the U.S. as a whole (Figure 1-5).32 DECEMBER 2015 I 9 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Growth from 1.6% _ 2000-2010 0 38 largest Bicycle Friendly tp 1.496 Communities (BFCs) 1.2% $ — 70 largest cities 1.0% _ 63% 0.8% - - 32 largest non-BFC cities § 0.0% 39% — US average ae 0.2% 0.0% Figure 1-5 U.S. Bicycle Commuting Growth, 2000-2010 (Source: American Community Survey & League of American Bicyclists) Research indicates the need for improved the City hired a bicycle/pedestrian coordinator walking and bicycling facilities. A 2014 report (followed by additional staff), increased active from Smart Growth America ranks U.S. cities by transportation expenditures, increased outreach pedestrian safety and examines the types of roads and enforcement efforts by the Police Department, where fatalities are most likely to occur.33 In a initiated an annual bicycle summit, instituted 2002 National Highway Transportation Safety annual bicycle counts,and formalized a Complete Administration survey, 84% of respondents said Streets policy. These efforts were rewarded in that bicycling is "a great form of exercise" for 2010 with a silver BFC designation. The City is them. More than two-thirds said they would like now focused on achieving gold status. to ride more than they do now. However, less As than 50% were satisfied with the current bicycle a result of dissatisfaction with traditional infrastructure in their community. designs, many cities developed new bicycle facility types and intersection treatments Salt Lake City continues to be at the forefront of that respond to uniquely urban challenges. walking and bicycling innovation, pioneering the In 2009, the Cities for Cycling initiative was use of green shared lanes, making efficient use launched within the National Association of of pavement management systems to affordably City Transportation Officials (NACTO). NACTO expand the bikeway network, and becoming well produced its own Urban Bikeway Design Guide in known for pedestrian crossing enhancements 2011 and has since published two updates. This such as countdown timers, orange crossing flags, new resource includes guidance for protected and"LOOK"pavement messages. bike lanes, intersection treatments, signals, and neighborhood byways. Salt Lake City endorsed In 2007, the League of American Bicyclists rated the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide in 2010 Salt Lake City as a bronze "Bicycle Friendly and the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide in Community (BFC)". In the years that followed, 2013 10 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND 1.2.3.1 Types of Bicyclists from a more direct route in favor of a preferred Bicycle planning and engineering professionals facility type. This group includes all kinds historically classified bicycle users into three of bicyclists — commuters, recreationalists, types — Advanced, Basic, or Child.34 Another racers, and utilitarian bicyclists. methodology was developed by planners in • Interested But Concerned: People who Portland (OR) and has since been corroborated typically only ride a bicycle on low traffic by data from other U.S. cities. This classification, streets or multi use paths under favorable illustrated in Figure 1-6, provides the following weather conditions. They perceive significant barriers to bicycling more, specifically traffic four categories:35 and other safety concerns. This group may • Strong & Fearless: People who will ride become "enthused and confident" with anywhere regardless of roadway conditions encouragement, education, and experience. or weather. They ride faster than other user • No Way, No How: People who don't desire types and prefer direct routes even if they to bicycle. They may perceive severe safety must share lane space with cars. issues with riding near traffic. Though some • Enthused & Confident: People who are of them may eventually bicycle, a significant comfortable riding all types of bikeways but portion will not ride under any circumstances. usually choose lower-volume streets or multi- use paths when available. They may deviate •H: Strong and \ ` Enthusiastic FOUR TYPES • 2'' FeOarless and Confident OF BICYCLISTS *�- r - i /° 7% No .., no how • .. ,= .�, -N/ 33% ' . . 6-A 'Interested but Concerned ., !fit/. 0141;60% , ....i. ,:,.. , ..,.. -t : `r .r .l% . '1. 0.011 9, • 4 , -tc._ .. . N. 4 ' J1 A ,,, 4,f, 1 ,,, i. . ... ,ea! 1 V- J... . ,. .2-- ii ir 4,. , 4& \ . , - in- . ' i ' • 1 ___ : jai li - _ it 4.6 !it,pli - Figure 1-6 Types of Bicyclists DECEMBER 2015 I 11 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1.3 Local Trends commute, such as walking from a transit stop or According to the 2012 American Community parking garage to an office building. Survey (ACS), Salt Lake City has one of the Walking is more common in urban areas like highest bicycling and walking mode shares in Salt Lake City because destinations are closer Utah, surpassed only by the college cities of together and more easily accessible by foot. Logan and Provo.This is not surprising given the Additionally, walking to lunch, meetings, or to higher concentrations of college-age students in other destinations may be more convenient than Logan and Provo that normally live very close to driving. This trend is apparent in the downtown their daily destinations. Salt Lake City data represented in Table 1-2. 1.3.1 Local Demographic Shifts Table 1-1 Statewide Walking & Bicycling Mode Share Utah is the youngest state in the union, and the Region All Trips Commute Trips Salt Lake region is growing rapidly. In the next Walk Bike Walk Bike 30 years,the population along the Wasatch Front is anticipated to increase by 65%, adding another Salt Lake City 17.4% 4•8% 18.2% 4.3% 1.4 million residents. The regional Wasatch Wasatch Front 7.8% 1.7% 3.1% 1.9% Choices for 204o Plan provides guidance to Cache 7.7% 2.7% 3.8% 4.3% communities in directing this growth, including Dixie 6.0% 1.3% 0.5% 2.4% providing transportation choices to decrease Utah Total 7.5% 1.8% 2.9% 2.o congestion, reduce air quality, and strengthen Source: Utah Travel Survey neighborhoods and quality of life. Table 1-2 Downtown Walking & Bicycling Mode Share Salt Lake City,as the capital city,economic center of the state, and home to several institutions of Purpose* To Downtown SLC Within Downtown SLC higher learning, will be pivotal in this growth, Walk Bike Walk Bike including increased residential density downtown Commute 30.5% 5.0% 53.6% 3.4% and in surrounding neighborhoods. The City's All Trips 27.5% 5.8% 48.o% 5.5% population is also shifting in tandem with Source: Utah Travel Survey national trends. With the millennial generation *Including trip segments of multi-modal journeys raising families and baby boomers retiring to the city, Salt Lake has an increasing need for walking and bicycling facilities appropriate for all ages 1.3.1.2 Bicycling Mode Share and abilities. In Salt Lake City, 70.5% of households own at least one adult bicycle and 50%own two or more. 1.3.1 Utah Travel Survey In households with children, 31% own at least A coalition of regional transportation planning one child's bike. Salt Lake City far surpasses all agencies jointly conducted a Utah-specific travel other communities in the State when it comes survey in 2012. Results shed light on walking and to bicycle mode share, except for commute trips bicycling trends in Utah. where it is tied with the Cache Valley area. 1.3.1.1 Walking Mode Share 1313 Trends On average, Salt Lake City residents take Salt Lake City residents enjoy walking and about three to four times more walking trips bicycling for many of the same reasons. Figures than bicycling trips (see Table 1-1). Walking 1-7 and 1-8 show the relative breakdown of trip trips include short segments of a multi-modal purposes for walking and bicycling, respectively. 12 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND ■Commute 1.3.3 Air Quality Urban air quality is a national concern, with many cities across the country falling short of ■Shopping Clean Air Act standards. In the Salt Lake Valley, 42% industry, automobiles, trucks, fires, and various other small air pollution sources combine with ■School geographic constraints to create air quality and health concerns for residents. Air quality g Other or Personal concerns are most acute during winter months Business but may also occur at other times of year. (including exercise) Air quality issues are often raised by businesses Figure 1-7 Bike Trip Purposes in Salt Lake City (Utah and individuals looking to relocate to or stay in Travel Survey) Salt Lake City. The City hosts many conventions such as Outdoor Retailers and air quality issues ■Commute have been raised by organizers when considering alternate venues. 38/ ■Shopping Salt Lake City's investments in walking and bicycling help to mitigate transportation impacts to air quality.While active transportation cannot ■School solve all air quality issues,it can be one of the vital components within a comprehensive strategy, particularly combined with transit. 3/ Other or Personal Business 1.3.4 Safer and More Comfortable (including exercise) Driving Figure 1-8 Walk Trip Purposes in Salt Lake City (Utah With some changes to street designs for bicycling Travel Survey) and walking, motorists may be concerned that lanes are being taken away or congestion created. Other commonly cited benefits of walking and In reality, many street changes increase safety bicycling are enjoyment of the outdoors, saving and comfort for motorists as well as bicyclists money, and improving the environment.36 and pedestrians. Lane repurposing designs, such as from four automobile lanes to three 1.3.2 Bicycle Infrastructure Focus automobile lanes with a center turn lane and Salt Lake City's on-street bikeway efforts going new bike lanes, improve driver safety. Providing back to the 197os have primarily focused on pedestrian and bicycle facilities also increases conventional painted bike lanes complemented predictablity interactions between motorists and by multi-use paths such as the Jordan River those walking or bicycling, thus creating a safer Parkway. More recently, the City's focus has and more comfortable environment for everyone. shifted to "lower stress" bikeways both on-road and off-road that accommodate a wider range of people, abilities, and experience. Low stress facilities are discussed further in Chapter 6. DECEMBER 2015 I 13 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1.3.5 Pedestrian Counts Al hi Pedestrian counts were conducted at sixI -1... 0¶•••fli IL" '" downtown mid-block walkways in June 2012 as airll -J mi• _'s'_part of a study conducted by the City.Four counts I� - wr conductedeach site — threeweekdays 0i � ' — MA e e at on A from 8-9 am, noon- 1 p.m., and 5-6 p.m., and one i6.. 0 rL1 '�: O on Saturday from noon-1 p.m. 5 = .0 O la�. _, „., , iii,., ....., 1.3.5.1 Count Locations I J � ) " _�_ Each of the six count sites shown in Figure 1-9 is ��'. ,- '� a mid-block walkway. Prior to the counts, use of Figure 1-9 Pedestrian Count & Survey Locations these walkways was unknown, as was the extent 1. Regent Street/100 South to which quality of the pedestrian environment 2. Regent Street/200 South 3. Alleyway at 222 South Main Street impacts use. 4. Gallivan Avenue 5. Edison Street/300 South On average, foot traffic ranged from 46 people 6. East Exchange Place per hour at the Edison Street/3oo South location to 265 people per hour at the Regent Street/ioo South location near City Creek. Figure 1-10 shows Regent St/100 S the full results of the weekday counts. Exchange PI The Regent Street/ioo South walkway offers more pedestrian-friendly elements than the other Regent St/200 S five locations, which coincides with its high use. Many of the lesser-used walkways like Gallivan Gallivan Ave Avenue, East Exchange Place, and Edison Street were designed as pedestrian-friendly spaces but 222 S Main St Alley lack programming, nearby multi-use buildings, and the attention to design detail that would Edison St/300 S make them more inviting or useful to pedestrians. 0 200 400 600 800 ■8:00-9:00 am ■12:00-1:00 pm ■5:00-6:00 pm 1.3.5.2 Surveys During the counts, surveys were administered Figure 1-10 June 2012 Weekday Pedestrian Counts to determine opinions about the mid-block walkways.Respondents said that convenience and - Ft - safety contribute to a good walking environment. _- Some people stated that trees and landscaping -- 1 contribute positively. Others mentioned the i - ' iiis .. _ number of people on the street and adequate _ i� � )I� . • maintenance. ``, I�yj_ _ , a 7 • i E f ^ AF Regent Street mid-block walkway at 100 South had the highest pedestrian counts 14 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND 1.3.6 Bicycle Counts period, bicycle commuting rates rose from 2.2% Beginning in September 2010, Salt Lake City has to 2.5%,while male bicycle commuters increased conducted annual bicycle user counts during the from 3.0%to 3.2%and females from 1.3%to 1.7%. second full week of September. Counts are taken at each location on Tuesday, Wednesday, and 1.3.6.1 Count Locations Thursday evenings (5-7 pm) and Saturday and The original count in 2010 involved 12 locations. Sunday afternoons (12-2 pm). In subsequent years, the City has incorporated two or three new locations per year in order In 2011, Salt Lake City reported a citywide to collect before/after data for specific facility 27% increase in bicycling from the previous improvements.The first"after"data was collected year. Major local media outlets and national in 2014. organizations reported the significant change. Bicycling Magazine listed the 27% increase in Count locations with consistently high ridership bicycling as one of the reasons that Salt Lake City are 800 E/8o0 S, 2O0 S/Main, Sunnyside/ jumped from 43rd (2010) to 26th (2012) in the Arapeen, Sunnyside/Guardsman, and Parley's magazine's "America's Most Bicycle-Friendly Crossing.This may be due in part because they are Cities"biennial ranking. Since 2011,there has not on popular commuting routes, provide access to been another dramatic yearly increase, but the the University of Utah, or are frequented heavily following year saw a modest increase. Weather by recreational bicyclists. during the 2013 counts was very rainy, which likely impacted numbers. 2014 data, recently 1.3.6.2 Analysis of Bicyclist Totals available,was not included in this analysis. Figure 1-11 shows observed trends in overall riders counted, helmet use, sidewalk riding, and This is mirrored in the 2012 ACS Journey to Work female ridership. data (2008-2012 5-Year Estimates) as compared to the same data source for 2010. In that two year 6000 100% +1.4% 90% 5000 +27% -13.5%* 80% 0 i 4000 70% 60% 3 53% 54% 0 00 50/ 0 340� 40% °o 2000 30% 33% 35% 30% 20% 19% 20% 1000 10% 0 0% 2010 2011 2012 2013* Year Yearly Totals (10 constant locations) % Riding on Sidewalk *Rainy weather % Female Bicyclists -% Wearing Helmets during counts Figure 1-11 Bike Counts, Sidewalk Riding, Female Bicyclists, & Helmet Use by Year DECEMBER 2015 I 15 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1.3.6.3 Sidewalk Riding 1.4 Relationship to City Plans Sidewalk ridership is lower at locations near the Many other City planning documents influence University of Utah, at 80o E/800 S, and Beck and are influenced by this Pedestrian and Bicycle St/Chicago Ave. Conversely, west side count Master Plan. Some of the major related planning locations have higher levels of sidewalk riding. efforts include: 1.3.6.4 Helmet Use • Plan Salt Lake(still in draft form) Helmet use was observed during the 2010 and • Downtown Master Plan 2011 counts.It was highest in locations frequented • West Salt Lake Master Plan predominately by recreational bicyclists and those commuting long distances. Count locations 9 Line Corridor Plan downtown and on the west side had lower levels. • Jordan&Salt Lake Canal Trail After collecting adequate baseline data,collecting Implementation Study helmet use data was discontinued after 2011. 1.4.1 Plan Salt Lake 1.3.6.5 Female Bicyclists Plan Salt Lake is still in process and has not yet Since 2012, rider gender has been recorded been adopted.The purpose of this plan is to set a during counts. This data enables City staff to citywide vision for the next 25 years and create an see how changing infrastructure types (from overarching master plan for the City. It considers conventional bike lanes to lower stress facilities), where the City currently is,where people want to other improvements, and weather affect the be, and establishes the framework for decision share of female bicyclists. making that will accomplish the desired end result. The 600 E/13oo S count location had a higher share (30%) of female bicyclists than any other location. Like helmet use, count locations on the 4111fri, east side of the City generally had a higher share of female bicyclists,while the west side had lower glairf percentages. P LA N S A LT LA K E 1.3.6.6 Context & Comparison Salt Lake City is the only city in Utah that performs regular bicycle user counts. Portland (OR)has conducted annual counts since the early All community and system plans will be subsets 1990s. They have experienced a two-decade-long of Plan Salt Lake and help to implement the goals upward trend, which includes a 211% increase contained within it. The City's Transportation since 2000. Portland and Tucson (AZ) have both Master Plan is one such system plan and the experienced ups and downs at specific locations Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan fits within its or in their overall annual totals for individual umbrella. years while maintaining an upward long-term Public input for Plan Salt Lake mirrors the strong trend. interest in active transportation found during the public process conducted for the Pedestrian and 16 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND Bicycle Master Plan (see Chapter 3). Comments 1.4.2 Other City Plans received through Plan Salt Lake reflect a high This modal plan provides detail in support of the level of interest in walking and bicycling, even City's Transportation Master Plan (1996). It also outside of the "transportation" category. The provides corridor-specific recommendations for following categories all had input related to active many of the general concepts recommended in transportation: the Downtown In Motion Master Plan (2008), a • Air quality — while most comments were multi-modal plan focused on transportation in related to public transit and idling,about 25% the downtown area. Some of the transit-focused of responses mentioned walking or bicycling recommendations of this plan will be furthered in as partial solutions. the upcoming Transit Master Plan, which is just • Diversity — about 1.5% of responses related beginning as this plan approaches adoption. The to diversifying transportation choices with updated Pedestrian & Bicycle Master Plan and walking and bicycling strongly mentioned. Transit Master Plan will be incorporated into an Neighborhoods, Downtown, and Outdoors — update to the Transportation Master Plan in the • each category included comments (about 10- future. 2o% of those received) in support of walking and bicycling. ._ • Transportation — between a third and half of .r....f. comments referenced walking or bicycling, .I R C U L AT I O. AND., ' 4 with expansion of the bikeway network being �''fr4 E E TS CA P-E A M E►, , 1' requested in about half of the comments. '��`,,, pr the Sugar iness Ctist;f't" Nearly all comments were positive. ' " r Public input for Plan Salt Lake closely mirrors - results of local opinion polls. The most recent �'` "" edition of the biennial Dan Jones phone survey ' . i • found that approximately two-thirds of City ,r . , residents would be very willing or somewhat - willing to support tax increases for improving ::ff.. .- �;-1 1 f pedestrian and bicycling facilities. -=} Plan Salt Lake identifies connectivity and • circulation as a necessary component of _ ' "- 1 . ` ,- ' sustainable growth. Plan Salt Lake and the + __ Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan share the ►�' r` r goal of providing transportation options and r�,�b � improving connections. Plan Salt Lake also SLCRDA FEHR1'PEERS w,, CRSI Lei e� KT identifies key initiatives related to the PedestrianA OE �`161�' and Bicycle Master Plan, including providing a complete network for all modes of travel and Recommendations from the Sugar House Circulation and Streetscape Amenities plan were incorporated making walking and cycling viable, safe, and into the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan convenient transportation options in all areas of the City. DECEMBER 2015 I 17 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Recommendations from the City's area, modal, program implementation. As the Wasatch and corridor master plans were also reviewed at Front's premier urban center and capital city,Salt the beginning of the master plan effort to gain Lake City has for years been a regional leader in ideas and make sure that previous planning pedestrian and bicycle planning,implementation, efforts were appropriately incorporated. The and innovation. Downtown, West Salt Lake, 9 Line, and Jordan and Salt Lake Canal Trail plans mentioned above Regional plans such as Wasatch Choices for are just a few examples of such plans that provided 204037 and the Utah Collaborative Active input and background for the Pedestrian and Transportation Study (UCATS)38 were Bicycle Master Plan. considered and incorporated in developing this plan, including sharing data, comparing notes The Circulation and Streetscape Amenities about relative municipal and regional priorities, Plan for the Sugar House Business District is and providing input through staff crossover on also illustrative of how information from these steering and stakeholder committees. In some plans was used. That plan included specific cases, the regional plans seek to extend facilities recommendations for bikeways in the area.Those out from Salt Lake's already-established core. recommendations were reviewed and included in In other cases, regional plans suggest a corridor the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. driven by preferable conditions either north or south of the City's boundary. In both instances, the regional routes and priorities are generally 1.5 Relationship to Regional compatible with the recommendations of this Plans plan. Additional collaboration regionally and This plan primarily recommends infrastructure with neighboring municipalities also occurs as and programs within the Salt Lake City projects are implemented.39 municipal limits. The plan also strongly supports collaboration with regional efforts and neighboring municipalities in project and Chapter 1 Sources 1. http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/err79/ 2. "The Future Isn't What It Used To Be: Changing Trends and Their Implications for Transport Planning."Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Page 6. 27 December 2012. 3. "Gen Y Eschewing V-8 for 4G Threatens Auto Demand: Cars."Bloomberg. Hasan Dudar&Jeff Green, 7 August 2012. 4. Santos, et al. (2o11), Summary of Travel Trends: 2oo9 National Household Travel Survey. FHWA (http://nhts.ornl.gov); at http://nhts.ornl.gov/2oo9/pub/stt.pdf. Also see, Nancy McGuckin (2o11), Summary of Travel Trends 1969 to 2oo9, Travel Behavior Associates (www.travelbehavior. us); at www.travelbehavior.us/Nancy-pdfs/Summary%2oof%2oTravel%2oTrends%201969%20 to%t2o2oo9.pdf. 5. Zipcar (2011), Millennials & Driving: Survey Results. Zipcar (www.zipcar.com); at www.slideshare. net/Zipcar_Inc/millennial-slide-share-final. 18 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER ONE: WALKING & BICYCLING BACKGROUND 6. Lester Brown (201o), U.S. Car Fleet Shrank by Four Million in 2009. Earth Policy Institute (www. earth-policy.org); at www.earth-policy.org/index.php?/plan_b_updates/2oio/update87. 7. Ewing,R.and Dumbaugh,E.(2010).The Built Environment and Traffic Safety:A Review of Empirical Evidence. Injury Prevention 16: 211-212. 8. Jacobson, P. (2003). Safety in Numbers: More Walkers and Bicyclists, Safer Walking and Bicycling. Injury Prevention 9: 205-209. 9. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Physical Activity and Nutrition Branch. Eat Smart, Move More NC: The Obesity Epidemic in North Carolina. Retrieved from: www. eatsmartmovemorenc.com/ObesityInNC/ObesityInNC.html. 10. Mokdad, A., Marks, J., Stroup, D., & Gerberding, J. (2000). Actual Causes of Death in the United States. 2000.Journal of the American Medical Association 29i: 1238 - 1245. 11. CDC Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System: Prevalence and Trend Data - Overweight and Obesity, U.S. Obesity Trends,Trends by State. 201o.Available online at http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/. 12. CDC. BRFSS Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System: Prevalence and Trend Data - Physical Activity, U.S. Physical Activity Trends by State 2009-201o.Available online at http://nccd.cdc.gov/ NPAO_DTM/. 13. http://www.slvhealth.org/programs/weighActiveAndHealthy/obesity.html. 14. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Active Transportation: Making the Link from Transportation to Physical Activity and Obesity.Active Living Research.Research Brief; 2009.Available at http://www. activelivingresearch.org/files/ALR_Brief ActiveTransportation.pdf. 15. Gotschi, Thomas (2011). "Costs and Benefits of Bicycling Investments in Portland, Oregon."Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 8 (Suppl 1), S49-S58. 16. USGCRP (2009). Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States . Thomas R. Karl, Jerry M. Melillo, and Thomas C. Peterson (eds.). United States Global Change Research Program. Cambridge University Press, New York,NY, USA. 17. AAA(American Automobile Association) 18. National Association of Homebuilders.www.nahb.com. 19. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. (2010).Transportation Statistics Annual Report. Retrieved from http://www.bts.gov/publications/transportation_statistics_annual_report/201o/. 20.Racca, D.P. and Dhanju, A. (2006). Property Value/Desirability Effects of Bike Paths Adjacent to Residential Areas. Prepared for Delaware Center for Transportation and the State of Delaware Department of Transportation. 21. Cortright,J. (2009).Walking the Walk: How Walkability Raises Housing Values in U.S. Cities. CEOs for Cities. 22. Garrett-Peltier, H. (2010). Estimating the Employment Impacts of Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Road Infrastructure: Case Study: Baltimore. Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts, Bike League. DECEMBER 2015 I 19 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 23. "Pathways to Prosperity: The Economic Impact of Investments in Bicycle Facilities" (http://atfiles. org/files/pdf/NCbikeinvest.pdf). 24. "Economic Effects of Traffic Calming on Urban Small Businesses" (http://www.bikewalk. org/2004conference/sessions/28_Business_calm/TrafficCalming_summary.pdf). 25. New York City Department of Transportation (2012). Measuring the Street: New Metrics for list Century Streets. 26. SQW. (2007). Valuing the Benefits of Cycling: A Report to Cycling England. Cycling England, UK Department for Transport. Retrieved from www.dft.gov.uk/cyclingengland/site/wp-content/ uploads/2008/08/valuing-the-benefits-of-cycling-full.pdf. 27. League of American Bicyclists. http://www.bikeleague.org/. 28.CCSP(2008).Analyses of the effects of global change on human health and welfare and human systems . A Report by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Gamble, J.L. (ed.), K.L. Ebi, F.G. Sussman, T.J. Wilbanks, (Authors). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Washington, DC, USA. 29. EPA(2o1o).Our Nation's Air:Status and Trends Through 2008(PDF).U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-454/R-09-002. 30.Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency. (2006). Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the U.S. Transportation Sector: 1990-2003. Report number EPA 42o R o6 003. 31. Federal Highway Administration. (1:992). Benefits of Bicycling and Walking to Health. 32. Flusche,Darren. "The Economic Benefits of Bicycle Infrastructure Investments."League of American Bicyclists. June 2009. 33. http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/dangerous-by-design-2014/dangerous-by- design-2014.pdf 34. Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles. (1994). Publication No. FHWA- RD-92-073. 35. Four Types of Cyclists. (2009). Roger Geller,City of Portland Bureau of Transportation: http://www. portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?&a=237507. 36. Utah Household Travel Survey. (2013). Resource Systems Group, Inc., prepared for Wasatch Front Regional Council, Cache Metropolitan Planning Organization, Dixie Metropolitan Planning Organization, Mountainland Association of Governments, Utah Department of Transportation, and Utah Transit Authority: http://www.wfrc.org/new_wfrc/publications/Utah_FinalReport_i3o228. pdf. 37. http://envisionutah.org/wasatch-choice-2040 38.http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=9809803039696480 39. http://www.wfrc.org/new_wfrc/index.php/wfrc-programs/bike-and-pedestrian-planning 20 I DECEMBER 2015 j ,14•• rY 2., .'c. 4' L, .01 Vision statements, goals, and objectives are r the guiding forces behind the development and f ^,r-� _ ' .. ',E`"' implementation of infrastructure and programs. r ' a'. They direct resource allocations and priorities.A -,i41 • vision statement outlines what a citywants to be. A', ' _ •.•-- It concentrates on the future and is a source of ,,f , r • '' 7S"° "a ' 1, inspiration. Goals provide a guide to fulfilling the ` vision. Objectives are more specific statements ` • ►± .`' ' ` ' '' that define how each goal will be achieved. They - `• 't-: ' ' ` it.` are measurable and allow tracking of progress *: ` s `{•''' toward achieving the goals and overall vision. •Is`�� .{` - :' Main sections of this chapter are as follows: `�tt �i� ' - .f{ :' • Updating the 2004 Plan 14001. ••. • Vision .,,, t „ 1,,-:.; -• • Goals&Objectives ' 1- is • CHAPTER -:T W O ... ,,,...,. . _ , . „.,r _ re, . .. . GOALS & OBJECTIVES ,, , . C'4 DECEMBER 2015 I 21 1 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 2.1 Updating the 2004 Plan A vision statement, goals, and objectives were part of the previous Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan adopted in 2004. These items were all updated during the course of this current master plan effort. The public had opportunities at both open houses to comment on how they would like to see the vision,goals, and objectives updated. The Steering and Stakeholder Committees were able to provide targeted input during their meetings. The documents were then reviewed and refined based on a series of meetings, including City Council meetings. 2.2 Vision This master plan is guided by the following vision statement: "Walking and bicycling in Salt Lake City will be safe, convenient, comfortable, and viable transportation options that connect people to places, foster recreational and economic development opportunities, improve personal health and the environment, and elevate quality of life." .I) ,-J , I t. N 444N7.11C1 ? f J Icy` . . , t•L+' 4, m+i 11 .w • i big y ... s+II A/ I ' I 1. 1 ' - : 11 , MI Library patrons walking between the Downtown Main Branch and the City-County Building 22 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER TWO: GOALS & OBJECTIVES Goal #1 Integrate walking and bicycling into community planning to enhance livability, health, transportation, the environment, and economic development. Objectives • Update City policies and ordinances, including the Complete ..1 "` 4,Y ' ;;;i �' t.i Streets Ordinance, to foster desired walking and biking ' I;1." outcomes. ' ` •,.+ .. " , %' ' o • Educate City staff and leadership on benefits of active ",,. transportation to individuals,government, and business. • Provide walking and bicycling context to the City's area master plans including support for neighborhood business areas and , � `' mixed use development to enable shorter trips that people are more likely to make by walking and biking. �- �P ,,4: €,,, • Coordinate with Plan Salt Lake, community master plans, and °a ;: other Citydivisions on their planningdocuments andprocesses, "' -- .l ; y including updates to zoning to allow for more commercial and .. ,,, ! . retail within walking or bicycling distance of neighborhoods �"`+ throughout the City. ::4,.."Awe-' I ' ~= • Use best design practices from appropriate publications. `" - , • Participate in long-term regional active transportation planning - �i / , .4 efforts. It I' • Work with neighboring cities to extend walkways and bikeways � `, ", beyond Salt Lake City boundaries, with special emphasis on 1 M _ '` Wit. connections to transit stations. 1 7 `' • Coordinate with UDOT regarding desired improvements on their roadways within the City. , i(fix • Work with the State of Utah Driver License Division to enhance Walking, running, and bicycling are healthy active transportation curricula. activities enjoyed by many Salt Lake City Achieve higher level Bicycle Friendly Community status and residents • continue to improve ranking. • Partner with clean air advocates and health insurers to increase walking and bicycling rates. • Work with the police department, used bicycle dealers, pawn shops, and other entities to address bike theft. • Expand the bike sharing system throughout the City. • Continue to support the annual Utah Bike Summit. • Continue efforts to host conventions and conferences such as Outdoor Retailers,Interbike,and ProWalk/ ProBike, and recruit bike-related retailers and manufacturers to the City. • As density of an area increases,evaluate neighborhood business districts and other areas as appropriate to ensure sidewalks are wide enough for pedestrian traffic. DECEMBER 2015 I 23 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Goal #2 Develop a safe, comfortable, and attractive walking and bicycling network that connects people of all ages, abilities, and neighborhoods to the places they want to go, such as work; home; school; shopping; places to socialize; places to worship; and parks, trails, and open space. Objectives • Expand walking and bicycling networks to enhance connectivity across barriers such as freeways, rail lines, '." waterways,and disconnected street networks. • Conform to pedestrian design standards that promote accessibility for people with disabilities and implement " • innovative ideas that enhance the pedestrian experience _ for a diversity of types of pedestrians. • Implement a low stress bikeway network (multi-use , __ � paths, protected bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, and =— —= neighborhood byways) citywide to provide access for -- — people who are uncomfortable riding close to or in •-_ C traffic. *WO k • More fully connect the various multi-use path systems _—s = — _--- - - L -4 of (e.g. Jordan River Parkway, 9 Line Trail) and enhance wayfinding between them and other important cross- streets and destinations. • Educate the community about neighborhood byways and ' protected bike lanes as they are constructed to heighten Families enjoy walking and bicycling in Liberty Park awareness and understanding of these new bikeway types, as well as highlight benefits to pedestrians. • Educate the school district about planned active transportation projects that will help students walk or bike to school. • Enhance traffic signal systems to detect bicycles through use of pavement markings and sensor technology. • Enable connections to all destinations by walking and bicycling as well as by driving. • Use turn queue boxes,intersection crossing markings,curb extensions,and other innovations to increase bicyclist and pedestrian comfort and safety at intersections. In areas with high pedestrian traffic,design streets to reduce motor vehicle speeds through smaller turn radii, pedestrian refuges, bollards, and lighting. • Conduct bike counts throughout the year to determine long-term trends and seasonal ridership, and consider adding trend-monitoring pedestrian counts. • Seek opportunities to enhance existing(and develop new)bicycle recreation facilities such as BMX and pump tracks. 24 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER TWO: GOALS & OBJECTIVES Goal #3 Maintain the walking and bicycling system year-round. Objectives • Increase enforcement of the City's sidewalk .. r '' ?: ._` ''' . •"•. " • shoveling and landscape encroachment • 401 { ' ordinances to encourage landowners to r. • •. .+, �, - _ responsibly maintain their sidewalks for the `. i; ••-� •".� •--- - public's safety. �4 :� V � • Provide City resources to maintain winter `' '` • • • access to pedestrian refuge islands and • - „ sidewalks where public properties abut - ' • � • overpasses and underpasses, including State ��` + roads. • Create a prioritized snow plowing schedule for bikeways. • Create a snow plow team for plowing the bike Salt Lake City snow plow during a winter storm lane network with appropriate equipment at the same time as car lanes are plowed. • As needed,increase sweeping frequency and effectiveness for on-street facilities and multi-use paths. • Consider maintenance needs during design of protected bike lanes to ensure that they can be maintained properly after construction. • Enhance current efforts to manage undesirable plant growth(e.g.puncturevine) along multi-use paths, city streets, sidewalks, and private property. • Formalize maintenance of unpaved bike parks and trails such as the I Street Jumps and Tanner Park trail system. • Develop a system to evaluate and prioritize capital maintenance needs of the multi-use path network and end-of-trip facilities, similar to the pavement management monitoring of the City's street network. • Prioritize the elimination and prevention of standing water and ice dams that obstruct pedestrian facilities. • Identify and eliminate unsafe, deteriorated, and non-ADA compliant facilities. • Continue to maintain sidewalks to remove trip hazards and other barriers to pedestrians and people with disabilities. DECEMBER 2015 25 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Goal #4 Promote the safety and attractiveness of walking and bicycling through education, encouragement, and enforcement programs. Objectives • Continue to support efforts by the police department to enforce against driving and bicycling practices that endanger pedestrians. • Educate all users on rules of the road regarding safe interaction: educate drivers about safely operating around people on foot and on bike, and educate people on foot and on bike about safe compliance with traffic laws. • Use various forms of media to disseminate information to the public and heighten awareness of walking and bicycling issues. • Distribute information to residents,employers,and other organizations about the health,environmental, and cost benefits of active transportation and educate them about how to more fully utilize the walking, bicycling, and transit systems. • Encourage pedestrian and bicycle-friendly commercial/residential development and business practices through zoning requirements and encouragement incentives. • Continue to support Open Streets events and explore other opportunities to selectively open roads to more walking and bicycling activities. • Continue to produce online and printed bikeway maps and disseminate them to the public. "' o -_ *14 —— t+...� I ;, • Continue to coordinate with andC*11' � _ ik support the Bicycle Collective's >R�' W community education and v a w 20. encouragement efforts. 5&111; -:‘ �'• '� • Integrate active transportation '" `�,, __� a education and encouragement r ,; activities into K-12 schools. ► r J .1. 4`4 ' -- , ; • , _ , • Continue to enhance training of , r-_• -. -=r - ,is - police officers so that they have , *: ` =�.� �. the tools to properly enforce � .a laws and regulations pertaining I� �4_ , \ .4 ;=4 to walking and bicycling. I # ' C .. ' `K '� A\ , • Provide options for people to 1._ _ - • . , `� 0complete road safety courses in '"4' .: � lieu of paying for pedestrian or Information booth on the 2013 Road Respect Tour in Salt Lake City bicycle related citations. (Photo: Road Respect, UDOT) 26 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER TWO: GOALS & OBJECTIVES Goal #5 Integrate pedestrian and bicycle facilities with transit routes, stations, and stops. Objectives • Plan and implement active transportation Ii/i-- jam,4' ! � '- -% routes to serve major transit stops in order to ;� if'rir foster access to destinations within 1/4-mile or lig ,�-1 j (!' It 7; ii %,, j ___ /2mile of the stations. 'in" . !' Al i', -s-- ,I, • Work with UTA to conduct a station-by- - -` 4. { _ ,.-p I A Wig, ., station, or stop-by-stop, audit for pedestrian • 7- and , - bicycle access. ^M' � :,�I; i� • Work with UTA to include benches and bike _ parking at bus stops using UTA guidelines as - a baseline for what should be installed. • Work with UTA to install bike racks on TRAX t iill a light rail trains. • Work with UTA to install bike racks capable of e - 1 holding at least three bikes on all buses in the y City (most buses currently accommodate two 1•- bikes each). tip :. .— . • Work with UTA to provide secure and Y ., . sheltered bike parking at high demand transit /' ' �-. stops. Bike rack & seating near the Gallivan Center TRAX station • Locate additional bike sharing stations near fixed-route transit stops and major destinations. • Coordinate with UTA to submit applications for bikeways eligible for Federal Transit Administration grant money. DECEMBER 2015 I 27 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 28 I DECEMBER 2015 r - - • , - - _ Community engagement was vital to creating this - -_-- plan.Various avenues were available for City staff, •• _ • key community stakeholders, and the general . ! ,• public to participate in the Pedestrian and Bicycle • t~'" Master Plan development. The planningprocess ' ,,y,_L s included direct input from thousands of residents ti , • .- -. in addition to the related comments received '‘'i., AL - ,. . i through Plan Salt Lake. - ' y••. i i ; . _ =�X. 41 Conventional outreach such as open houses and i t �► '�. ,,; Ir. more community-based outreach such as social r., .r :• i. A media, online surveys, and attendance at events, ;,iz " ` ` concerts,and street fairs were cornerstones of the ".: , lie �'" public engagement. This chapter describes the ••1• = various input opportunities and summarizes the ;= �' a ` public feedback. ` — .�; -.� Main sections of this chapter are as follows: • Master Plan Committees • Public Open Houses • Online Survey • Other Outreach Events �� • Key Themes sportation DNisl�' .u- • w{: -'CHAPTER . ,,,,,,...m: .,„,-,..k.„,,,,. T H. E E ai . ` ='flI • PU, B IC PROCESS c � _ eme 4,- w . `� j ~� • 1� DECEMBER 2015 I 29 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN "When interviewing 3.1 Master Plan Committees teachers for employment Several distinct committees were convened to at my school, candidates accomplish specific purposes in support of this ask whether they can easily master plan. Their various roles are outlined walk or bike to school. below. Improving walking and bicycling is very important 3.1.1 Stakeholder Committee to me because it allows me The Stakeholder Committee provided direct and to attract and hire good strategic input from community representatives teachers." with diverse interests in the outcome of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan. In general, - Vicki Mori, Principal, documents and coordination items were taken Guadalupe School to the Stakeholder Committee after they had already been vetted through the City's internal Steering Committee. Groups with representation on the Stakeholder Committee included: • Active transportation advocates, specifically • Active transportation advocates residents in the area • Downtown business community • Downtown businesses • Government agencies with a regional or The focus group's input informed the City's statewide transportation focus selection of 30o South as the preferred corridor • University of Utah staff for a low-stress bikeway, beginning first with Key members of the project steering downtown and then extending to the University • committee for the Utah Collaborative Active of Utah and to the Intermodal Hub.This has been Transportation Study (UCATS) (i.e. UDOT, incorporated into the bikeway recommendations WFRC, UTA) in Chapter 6. • Residents with strong convictions about both walking and bicycling 3.1.3 Steering Committee The Steering Committee consisted of 3.1.2 Downtown-to-University Focus approximately 25 people from various City Group divisions and committees. Engineering, Providing a recommendation for a prioritized Planning, Parks and Public Lands, Streets, and bikeway between the University of Utah and Sustainability were just some of the City divisions the downtown area was a specific focus of the with representation on the committee. The master plan.A focus group was set up to provide Steering Committee met a total of eight times to guidance and feedback for concepts as they provide direction on such topics as key working were developed. The focus group met twice and documents, route planning, maintenance, public included representatives of: open house planning,and final document review. • Affected community councils and neighborhood groups 3.2 Public Open Houses • University of Utah staff Two public open houses were held, one near the beginning of the project and another after recommendations had been developed. 30 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER THREE: PUBLIC PROCESS process were set up. Attendees circulated to different stations and conversed with City staff and members of the consultant team about t' each topic. The stations addressed the following -'' 1111.1111project emphases: •l • Master plan vision and goals r »w • Importance of accommodating people of all f - 1910 Ell Nia ill ages and physical abilities 4A ° ! i : • Popular origins and destinations for people , , �, r walking and bicycling 4 t'.I • Different types of infrastructure for _�%\° -. :.: pedestrians and bicyclists -� -In 411111 • Desired improvements for walking „oil • Desired improvements to the bikeway I network • Education, encouragement, and enforcement `'. programs to support walking and bicycling 6 ,, . ....... --0° Feedback received at this open house was used to inform the detailed project documents developed later in the process. The first public open house in April 2013 3.2.2 Open House #2 3.2.1 Open House #1 A second open house held in October 2013 The first public open house for the plan was held presented the infrastructure and program in April 2013. The purpose was to introduce the recommendations to the public, explained how project to the public, disseminate information they were developed, and asked for feedback. about the master planning process, and receive Specific stations addressed the following topics: feedback about key elements of the process. • Vision and goals Approximately 100 people attended. Attendees • Feedback received from Open House #1 and learned that the master plan would: other City outreach events • Provide a blueprint for enhancing the City's • Pedestrian and bicycle facility descriptions walking and bicycling networks • Pedestrian design typologies • Recommend ways to strengthen education, • encouragement, and enforcement programs Proposed pedestrian and bicycle spot improvements • Identify and prioritize an enhanced bikeway between downtown and the University of • Proposed citywide bicycle network, including Utah a network of downtown low-stress routes and a prioritized route from the University to • Identify low-stress,family-friendly bikeways downtown • Provide phasing recommendations • Proposed education, encouragement, and Interactive informational stations highlighting enforcement programs for walking and different elements of the master planning bicycling DECEMBER 2015 I 31 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN There was general support for the goals and traffic by parking or landscaping. They also vision with very few specific critiques. Attendees showed an overwhelming emphasis on the strongly supported protected bike lanes and importance of winter sidewalk maintenance. other low stress bikeways as a whole. However, there was targeted feedback about perceived Three-quarters of people support mid-block problems with protected bike lane designs from high-intensity activated crosswalk (HAWK) a convenience and safety standpoint, particularly signals (only >>% dislike) and 78% support LED- at intersections. It was clear that although the illuminated flashing signs at crosswalks (only 5% majority of people want more protected bike dislike),with similar results for overhead flashing lanes, some experienced bicyclists would like to crossing beacons. Nearly everyone supports see their concerns addressed through changes to inclusion of countdown timers on pedestrian future designs. signals (only 2% dislike). Together these results show strong support for mid-block crossing and An online version of the second open house was intersection features that make it easier and safer also available for those who could not attend the for people to cross busy streets. live event.Online input was added to the feedback received at the live open house. Figure 3-2 illustrates how respondents self- identified as different types of bicyclists. It is 3.3 Online Survey 6% An online survey soliciting preferences for different types of pedestrian and bicycle facilities •No way,no how as well as non-infrastructure programs was ox 111111 available to the public for nearly two months •Interested but during Summer 2013. The survey received 969 concerned responses. Figure 3-1 shows a demographic •Enthused and breakdown. confident •Strong and fearless Responses to pedestrian questions showed a strong preference for sidewalks buffered from Figure 3-2 Types of Bicyclists (Pedestrian & Bicycle Age Master Plan Public Survey) Over 64 Under 25 8% 8% Gender Residency on s 4 Resident iiikb,S% Female "IN 45-64 ® 42% 3o% 25-44 Male 54% 58% SLC 1 I 44 Resident 82% Figure 3-1 Demographics of Public Survey Respondents 32 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER THREE: PUBLIC PROCESS evident from this cross-section of the respondents 3.5 Key Themes that people with an interest in bicycling were A number of key themes emerged amidst the much more likely to take the survey than those large amount of information collected through without such an interest. the public input process. The most common and Section 6.2 and Figure 6-1 in Chapter 6 describe pervasive themes are: survey respondents' preference for more • Support for the goals and objectives shown protected,low-stress bicycling facilities. in Chapter 2, with few specific critiques or feedback. 3.4 Other Outreach Events • Heavy support of the City's efforts to install high-visibility pedestrian treatments such City staff set up tables and booths at nearly 3o as HAWKS and LED-illuminated signs to events in Summer 2013 to inform people about improve crossings of major streets. this plan and solicit more input. Events included: • A desire for better winter maintenance, • Downtown Master Plan open house particularly enforcement of laws requiring landowners to clear snow from public • Downtown Streetcar Master Plan open house sidewalks. • Rose Park Community Festival • Support for all types of bikeways, both • West Salt Lake Street Festival conventional and low stress. • 9th&9th Street Festival • Heavy support for the City's vision of creating People's Market,Downtown Farmer's Market, a system of low stress bike facilities,including • and Sugarhouse Farmer's Market protected bike lanes. Twilight Concert Series (4 separate days) • Concern from some very experienced • bicyclists about specific design elements of • UTA Bike Bonanza protected bike lanes, and a desire for the City • Road Respect Festival to implement these types of facilities in ways that minimize intersection conflicts. • Utah Arts Festival (2 separate days) • Support for a designated low stress bikeway • Tour de France Viewing Party between the University and downtown, and a • Midtown Employee Clinic open house preference for it to be located on 30o South. • Solar Day General support for the plan is mirrored by strong • Bike light giveaway support for bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the City's biennial Dan Jones polling. For • Night Out Against Crime (3 separate days) example, in the 2011 edition of the poll, the city • Tour of Utah Stage 4 Circuit Race asked about a tax increase: • Bike To the U Day • 66% would be very willing or somewhat • Greek Festival(2 separate days) willing to support a tax increase to improve Active Transportation&Health Summit pedestrian and bicycle trails. • • 63% would be very willing or somewhat • Blessing of the Bikes willing to support a tax increase to improve Approximately 50 people also submitted commuter bike lanes. comments through the Open City Hall web forum. DECEMBER 2015 I 33 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 34 I DECEMBER 2015 1 ".+, : f w fit• , Streets are an integral part of everyday life and t, +, 0- ,, 1 , public space. The term "Complete Streets" �� ►r . #, •.:" 'r' refers to designing streets for people of all ages • 7411, and abilities using various travel modes such as • - •'` �,► 1 . �+T E ,7 : walking,bicycling,transit, and driving. f -• 1.. ' F411 U R 0 • Salt Lake City adopted a Complete Streets , � �7� ordinance in 20><0.The ordinance seeks to balance ' ,; ' Y , ' '' the competing needs of different transportation 't ' , ,' ' .w.,/, modes within the unique contexts and needs of each roadway. 'r ' t�- P L E T E STREETS The City proactively implements Complete 10 Streets principles during roadway projects. li Examples include the many new bike lanes that 4/1 ? have been striped in conjunction with pavement 1 4; overlay projects. Crosswalks are also evaluated 7 I ', •9�►' ,)' •,, and curb extensions have been added with some No: projects. Striping changes, such as repurposing space from a four lane to three lane change, can improve safety for all modes while maintaining '1motor 1.11 vehicle capacity. - , f 4 t w %• - Main sections of this chapter are as follows: 1 •f {'� • • 1 • Relationship to Pedestrian&Bicycle Master i Plan "- ,� . '� '' - • Strengthening the Complete Streets 71,.. ` : t, '( Ordinance .1 ~ , -3L ,.1 • • _ • Design Guidance for Complete Streets !, \, L f _1 I _ . . • _` • Complete Streets for East-West Connections �—; • 's,_,, I • Policy Considerations for Non-Bicycle c - j ^_ 1\/ i l ,k 0 1 Wheeled Transportation 1 ' Speed Limit Policies e r 44 1 , »sue C,: a .N- ,�� +� DECEMBER 2015 I 35 �n tom-. ti jJ '3. �/� y y Y SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 4.1 Relationship to Pedestrian • Include language allowing for design flexibility & Bicycle Master Plan to meet the needs of all transportation users. The recommendations for enhanced facilities Include language pertaining to context- and programs presented in Chapters 5, 6, and sensitive design. 7 are consistent with and support Complete • Include specific performance measures (e.g. Streets principles. Table 4-1 illustrates how changes in walking/bicycling mode shares, implementing the to-year and 20-year bikeway changes in pedestrian/bicyclist crash rates, recommendations in Chapter 6 would make Salt number of ADA accommodations built) so Lake City's transportation backbone much more that the City can evaluate the ordinance's effectiveness over time. accessible by bicycle in the future. Likewise, the pedestrian recommendations will enable people • Clearly state the City's implementation to more comfortably walk along and across process, project selection criteria, and reporting requirements in the ordinance. streets. Table 4-1 Percentage of Roads with Bikeways 4.3 Design Guidance for Roadway Existing 10 Yr 20 Yr Complete Streets Class City Arterial 50% 67% 85% While this document touches on design guidance State Arterial 11% 44% 55% for both pedestrian and bicycle facilities, this City Collector 56% 68% 84% master plan is not intended to be a design guide. City Local 8% 16% 24% Salt Lake City has recently endorsed the National Association of City Transportation Officials' (NACTO) Urban Street Design Guide and Urban 4.2 Strengthening the Bikeway Design Guide; a Transit Design Guide is Complete Streets in the works.In some cases,these documents may Ordinance benefit from local addenda specifying Salt Lake City's decisions when national guides provide The National Complete Streets Coalition annually several choices. evaluates policies from across the country. The Coalition's assessment of Salt Lake City's current This plan generally makes recommendations ordinance reveals strengths and improvement that work within Salt Lake City's existing right of opportunities. Based on this assessment, the City way, and in many cases within existing curbs. In should consider the following enhancements: this respect, this plan concentrates on providing doable guidance. However, when, in rare • Modify language to explicitly reference other instances,the roadway condition; utility work; or transportation options,particularly transit. significant redesign such as a light rail, streetcar, • Modify language in the ordinance's"Purpose" or other corridor redevelopment provide greater section to include users of all ages. opportunity to incorporate pedestrian and • Extend the ordinance to cover privately-built bicycle accommodation, additional significant roads. improvements should be incorporated as • Explicitly state the importance of the need to appropriate to the network concepts and work with partnering agencies on roads passing connections in this plan. through the City that are owned, operated, and maintained by other jurisdictions. Locally, the Mid-Block Walkway Design Guide informs the development of the downtown • Include specific references to additional best walking network. Salt Lake City's Urban Design practice design guidance. 36 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FOUR: COMPLETE STREETS Element, compiled in the 1980s and finalized in 4.5 Policy Considerations for 199o, should also be updated to reflect current Non-Bicycle Wheeled best practice in urban design. This document Transportation primarily addresses land use, development, and buildings, but also offers some guidance on As the City moves forward in planning a connected transportation corridors. bicycle network, policy questions may arise regarding accommodations for other wheeled transportation devices such as skateboards,inline 4.4 Complete Streets for skates, motorized wheelchairs, and scooters. East-West Connections Such questions should be referred to the City's Salt Lake City's division by I->5 and freight and Transportation Advisory Board,ADA Committee, and Bicycle Advisory Committee for further passenger rail lines is challenging for all modes of consideration. transportation, but is especially problematic for those walking and biking. This is generally an esoteric area of vehicle code, with many cities and states having original Many east-west streets do not traverse this language. There is little national guidance or division, and those that do may be inhospitable accepted best practice; for example, the Uniform due to freeway interchanges and railroad Vehicle Code is mostly silent on these topics. crossings where trains routinely stop across an There have been only a few academic and intersection. When a corridor is blocked by a governmental papers published providing solid train for an hour or more at a time, pedestrians recommendations or suggestions. and bicyclists must make a long detour which may add 2-3 miles and up to an hour of walking. Motorized wheelchair users are most often legally A considerable safety concern arises in that many considered to be pedestrians, but questions may people choose instead to scramble between the arise whether motorized wheelchairs may also be railroad cars of a stopped train. used in bike lanes,especially protected bike lanes. Neither Utah nor Salt Lake City codes currently This plan recommends improvements to several address this potential use. Some states,including east-west corridors, including low-stress bikeway Oregon and Rhode Island, have statutes that connections at 30o North, North Temple, 400 permit motorized wheelchairs to use bicycle lanes. South, 90o South, and 1700 South. Utah statute is currently silent on the topic of As part of these vital east-west corridor skateboards, roller-skates, and other similar connections, the City and UDOT should consider devices being used on roadways, other than to pedestrian and bicycle overpasses/underpasses, allow local governments to regulate these uses. redesign of freeway interchanges, significant Additionally, state law protects these users as changes to train operations, or other innovative "vulnerable users" in a recent statute providing solutions to address the considerable safety that motorists must give at least three-feet concerns and transportation barriers of these of clearance to bicyclists, pedestrians, and crossings. In addition to basic functionality,these others. The City's current ordinances regarding crossings should be transformed into safe,inviting skateboards, inline skates, and non-motorized passages that are safe, comfortable and aesthetic. scooters provide that these devices may be used Art and placemaking creativity, in addition to in bike lanes while having the responsibilities of engineering solutions,could help transform these pedestrians—thus facing traffic rather than going crossings into landmark experiences. with the follow of traffic.The City ordinance does DECEMBER 2015 I 37 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN not permit skateboards on neighborhood streets pedestrians and bicyclists. Since the rise of the without bike lanes.The use of skateboards, inline automobile, major urban arterials throughout skates, and similar devices is currently prohibited the country have been designed for increasing on sidewalks in the Central Traffic District,as well capacity and higher speeds, to the potential as in the Sugar House Traffic District. Bicycles are detriment of those walking and bicycling. currently prohibited on sidewalks in the Central Traffic District, but are permitted in the Sugar Around the country, cities are now reconsidering lower speed limits, particularly on downtown House Traffic District. streets. Cities as diverse as New York City, Electric bicycles are legally defined in Utah Burlington (VT), Miami Springs (FL), and statute as equivalent to a bicycle. City code does San Mateo (CA) have recently implemented not currently address electric bicycles.Within the downtown speed limits of 25 mph. While some context of the state law, the City could regulate larger arterials in Salt Lake City are likely to some aspects of electric bicycle use such as speed keep higher speeds in keeping with their role limits. in regional travel, many downtown collector The above discussion serves to illustrate that these streets are appropriate for reduced speed limits. Lower speeds produce less traffic noise, improve are complex topics,with little standard guidance, and many nuances for safety considerations crosswalk yielding behavior, and contribute to a between many types of users traveling at different more people-friendly environment. speeds. The City has an interest in promoting In addition to creating a more pleasant urban transportation choice, balanced with safety for streetscape for people, reduced speed limits all, and may wish to further consider these topics are critical for safety. Research shows that a for additional public input and possible policy pedestrian who is hit by a car traveling 3o mph is changes: over twice as likely to die as someone hit by a car Allowing devices other than bicycles in on- traveling 25 mph, and five-times more likely than • road bikeways someone hit by a car traveling only 20 mph. • Clarifying the applicability of shared lane The de facto speed limit in Salt Lake City is 25 markings mph when not otherwise posted. This applies • Allowing devices on slow speed, low traffic to many local streets. However, most through residential streets streets in downtown are classified as collectors or Requiring safety equipment, such as lights, arterials and many speed limits have been posted • for other on-road uses at 30 or 35 mph. • Providing storage for non-bicycle devices at Downtown speed limits were considered in destinations the 2008 Downtown in Motion Master Plan, • Allowing devices on City sidewalks or in which recommends lowering speed limits in certain sections of the City the downtown area to a maximum of 25 mph, Allowing devices on transit vehicles with local and collector streets preferably at • 20 mph, toward the goal of maintaining speeds "compatible with pedestrian and bicycle activity". 4.6 Speed Limit Policies In accordance with these recommendations, Appropriate speed limits, in tandem with other speed limits on several downtown streets were changes to the streetscape, are a vital part of lowered to 20 or 25 mph in 2010. making urban streets safe and comfortable for 38 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FOUR: COMPLETE STREETS Lower speeds will also contribute to the safety and comfort of the emerging low stress bikeway network that the City seeks to expand. In 2014, the 20 mph speed limit on 3Oo South was extended east to 60o East in conjunction with the 3Oo South protected bike lane project. Speed reductions should generally be achieved through physical roadway changes rather than only changing signs. Studies show that most people will drive at a speed that feels safe based on the physical conditions presented to them. Arbitrarily lowering speed limits leads to poor compliance, difficult enforcement, and resentment of regulatory speed limits. As part of the Complete Streets approach, the City should evaluate each street for potential lowered speed limit in conjunction with road striping and other design changes. Additionally, a 20 mph speed limit should be considered for neighborhood byways and other local residential streets. Lowered speed limits should be particularly considered where a review of crash data indicates a safety concern. Consideration of speed limits, tighter curb radii, and updated considerations for turn lanes citywide should be further incorporated in an update to the City's Transportation Master Plan, as the overarching multi-modal document guiding transportation in the City. Chapter 4 Sources >i. Rosen, Erik and Sander, Ulrich. "Pedestrian fatality risk as a function of car impact speed".Accident Analysis and Prevention 41 (2009). Viewed online at: http://nacto.org/docs/usdg/pedestrian_ fatality_risk_function_car_impact_speed_rosen.pdf DECEMBER 2015 I 39 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 40 I DECEMBER 2015 I 1 I '.„ _ Complete Streets principles dictate that the ..' . I - ~- transportation network should accommodate f'v , < I pedestrians with a variety of needs, abilities, and fl "' ,~ ' `. " , A possible impairments. Sidewalks are the most t ,�: ` Y^,..? * �* ► I fundamental element of the pedestrian network. r ', '-�`-'' - w ' • ' . i They provide an area for pedestrian travel that ` : .A • •s•• A ;,Y is separated from vehicle traffic. Fundamental • _, "1•' P, ; • tenets of good sidewalk design include: , �, •« i 2..v. - • Accessibility for all users �� '' ! 17. • Separation from traffic by landscaped park '�?Q�'il, •` , ,IIII I. �� , • ; ' ,, strips and/or parking 4 • V 9 . r -''"*0 • •. • • Continuity :1 • . J . - • Proper drainage ', f • Street lighting ' _ ! I • Sun in winter and shade in summer li • Social space for standing,sitting,and visiting in neighborhood and business districts CPAPTEFt . Intersections are also an important piece of the •--11 i pedestrian realm. Although design decisions will 11 FIVE ...',---1 vary according to context, typical attributes of pedestrian-friendly intersection design include: fe 1 • Areas for pedestrians to congregate Of • Appropriate accessibility to(and P e D E S T R I A N- maintenance of)all corner pedestrian features „ ___ '_ C O M M E N I A IONS • Corner and intersection design for pedestrian safety and comfort _— • Minimization of pedestrian crossing distances > • Lighting that promotes visibility,legibility, and accessibility • Transit stops where appropriate Primary subsections of this chapter include: R • Walking Facility Descriptions • Traffic Signal&Warning Beacon Considerations ' `.s., - Pedestrian Counts • Enhancing Corridors and Neighborhood •, Byways for Pedestrians Y �+ ~ , . • \��, • Pedestrian Spot Improvements • Pedestrian Typologies VW ' ' DECEMBER 2015 I 41 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 5.1 Walking Facility 5.1.1.2 Neighborhood Byways Descriptions Neighborhood byways are multi-modal linear Most trips begin and end as walking trips even facilities on streets with low traffic volumes and when a car,bicycle,bus, or train is also involved. speeds. Additionally, intersection improvements Generally, Salt Lake City has a very complete that allow bicyclists and pedestrians to cross walking network and there are few places where large or busy streets are critical to their utility. walking facilities are not available. The City Wayfinding signage and shared lane markings continually adds sidewalk improvements as a are also important components.Traffic diversion part of redevelopment, street reconstruction, and calming measures are often used when traffic new or upgraded traffic signals,and targeted spot volumes or speeds are higher than desirable. This plan recommends 68 miles of neighborhood improvements. byways. 5.1.1 Linear Facilities Pedestrians use several different types of facilities , 0,y to travel in Salt Lake City, primarily sidewalks OJ and multi-use paths. Every street in the City should be designed for pedestrians. - i (, v , , l,' ii .-r • • III 1 ��,M\� r ♦ �- • 5.1.1.1 Multi Use Paths , * - z - ' These facilities are shared by many active ,gyp _ _ _ transportation and recreation users including j _ =__ pedestrians, bicyclists, and in-line skaters. The _ _ _ Jordan River Parkway Trail, Legacy Parkway _. - Trail,Liberty Park Path,9-Line Trail,and Parley's "1 / .. Trail are all examples of multi-use paths in Salt Lake City. This plan recommends 38.5 miles of Pedestrians and bicyclists on a neighborhood byway new multi-use paths (Figure 5-2). in Long Beach (CA) R = � 5.1.1.3 Sidewalks a jw ,, F "` / • „, ' , Sidewalks are the most common walking facility . *j in Salt Lake City,approximately 1,40o miles total. `:•- ` ; "' )fo" Some are directly adjacent to travel lanes without 4 °• t. ` any buffer or barrier,while others are buffered by r' landscaping, parking, seating, or other physical�� ` P g, p g, g, P Y `j I I1 A means. While City Ordinance requires adjacent •21. --'N,„,.. property owners to be responsible for sidewalk maintenance, the City also provides some - assistance: s -j' _ _ Concrete saw-cutting service to level steps E — created by broken or lifted sections of sidewalk A family riding on the Jordan River Parkway Trail • Fixing approximately io,000 tripping hazards (Photo: Suzanne Stensaas) by sawing off uneven sections of concrete to be level with the surrounding sidewalk 42 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS • Federal and other funding as available are missing on some corridors, such as Redwood to replace failed sidewalk in priority and Road, and in some developments, such as in the qualifying areas. Some improvements are International Center. These sidewalks should be made directly while others are made through a filled in as redevelopment allows. However, in matching program with the adjacent resident the interim, the pedestrian typology in Figure Many residential streets in the city are lined 5-5 recommends that pedestrians may be with large trees in the park strip, which can lift accommodated in painted bike lanes, similar sidewalks and make them difficult to use.In these to pedestrians in a rural setting using paved cases,the City's Urban Forestry and Engineering shoulders to walk, run, or jog. Divisions work with the property owner to identify a solution. 5.1.1.4 Landscaping & Street Furniture Landscaping, street trees, and street furniture The identification of gaps in the City's sidewalk can have a profound effect on improving the network is a very fine-grained exercise.Sidewalks pedestrian feel of a corridor. The City should include the following in appropriate streetscape designs: rx „* • Landscaping and street trees, especially , ' shade trees. (1 v0 Al', Planters ,4. ,� f _ • Benches,tables, and chairs r- "a - 5.1.1.5 Lighting ne"'�+V-— }' -� . Street lighting is often designed primarily for a_�... ' ^"'''' the safety and comfort of motorists except at 0 �,`^`\,, a i intersections, where crosswalks are typically illuminated. The illumination of sidewalks and Sidewalk on South Temple separated from traffic by other walkways is often a separate consideration. landscaping Pedestrian lighting typically includes shorter lights (14-18' maximum pole heights) directly ; off►' y� y ,' 1 above walkways and accent lighting that / ; �" illuminates features on or near buildings. if i o Pedestrian lighting increases drivers' visibility k ` �/ of pedestrians, promotes perceived personal ` ,, ,ir ,-- 1 or security, illuminates potential hazards, and i E creates vibrant and inviting streetscapes. Salt . �. Lake City should consider the addition of = pedestrian-scale lighting primarily in downtown N and neighborhood business districts,along multi- " IIP - use paths, and in conjunction with significant street reconstructions. Sidewalk separated from traffic by trees, planters, and parking DECEMBER 2015 I 43 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 5.1.2 Crossings and Intersections Every intersection in Salt Lake City should be designed for pedestrian safety and comfort, _ - A OPI , with pedestrian enhancements appropriate . I . . to traffic speed, traffic volume, pedestrian crossing distance, and other similar factors. The section below, together with the following _ _ _ signals section, describes the primary palette of _ _ options that should be considered for crossing ��' --= and intersections improvements. As streets are repaved and reconstructed, pedestrian crossing ramps are being added. When reconstruction projects allow, additional improvements should be considered as part of those projects. Salt Lake City uses double ladder crosswalks in school zones and at midblock crosswalks in the downtown Central Business District 5.1.2.1 Crosswalks Crosswalks exist everywhere that sidewalks and streets intersect, whether marked or not. veil Marked crosswalks provide a delineated space for - , T -.CROS pedestrians and other sidewalks users to cross. -,� , , r Differences in striping patterns (e.g. double s ._ '•; - ladder or piano key crosswalks) and paving �� i, �,j. °":. y! surfaces (e.g. raised and/or brick crosswalks) -r- } 1T. offer varying levels of visibility and delineation _ between pedestrians and automobiles, bicyclists, and other roadway users. 5.1.2.2 Crosswalk Flags Salt Lake City has been providing crosswalk flags at downtown crosswalks for many years. This raised crosswalk on 2nd Ave calms speeds and Flags are simple, low cost, popular, and effective elevates the crossing for better visibility at improving pedestrian safety. The Adopt-a- _ Crosswalk program allows individuals, schools, A ' neighborhood councils, and businesses to install I , may,, y crosswalk flags by sponsoring a crosswalk. The ' 'City installs the flag equipment and the sponsors , { • ' =-• It. ,� maintain their flags by providing labor and • f w minimal financial assistance. 5.1.2.3 Bulbouts r ` i Bulbouts reduce the width of roadway crossings at - • _ _ intersections and mid-block crossings. They also Mid-block double ladder crosswalk with crossing create a visual traffic calming cue to drivers to slow flags at 300 S/Regent St for pedestrians, improve pedestrian visibility, 44 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS �' ;:; ,�, :. volumes or speeds are high or roads are wide. d „ ! = Sometimes other traffic control measures such as 5 '' I I� s r signals or flashing beacons are also used._ S SilLor, iiiiiiiiiimm: ___ iii 5.1.2.E Mid-Block Crossing Prioritization IL' Process +_' The City uses a process to prioritize appropriate -- 1.r. mid-block crossing treatments. Prioritization factors include traffic volume, nearby pedestrian Intersection bulbouts on 400 West traffic generators, traffic speed, crash history, roadway crossing distance, and gaps in traffic. and protect transit passengers as they board or Refinements and updates to this process were alight from buses or streetcars. Sufficient space completed as part of this master planning effort. for bicyclists is a necessary design consideration. 5.1.3 Other Treatments 5.1.2.4 Traffic Circles & Roundabouts Salt Lake City uses additional treatments to Traffic circles and roundabouts allow for constant improve the pedestrian experience, calm traffic, vehicular traffic flow through intersections and create streets more amenable to walking. and do provide some benefits to pedestrians and bicyclists, such as reduced traffic speeds. 5.1.3.1 Curb Ramps However, they also have drawbacks. Yielding The City will continue to place high priority compliance at crosswalks may be reduced if the on increasing accessibility by converting step- facility is not designed properly. Also, designs up curbs to curb ramps. Approximately 200 often require bicyclists to merge into traffic accessible ramps are installed annually. through the roundabout, which is uncomfortable for many riders. 5.1.3.2 Transit Stop Amenities Bus shelters and benches protect pedestrians 5.1.2.5 Median Refuge Islands from rain, snow, and the sun; increase comfort; Refuge islands enable pedestrians to cross one and may encourage more people to ride transit. direction of a street at a time. They are typically used in conjunction with crosswalks where traffic �` to .: 'i 07 . • vm r�7.� 1 I� , , q n !"" h,,s 41 l1 .in wui,s, _ - Vim' ylfut!trour s<t, n, i+ • Bus shelter at Ogden Intermodal Center (Photo: Median refuge island near Bennion Elementary on UTA) 800 East DECEMBER 2015 I 45 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN "There should be better ways to cross major and • Delays caused by long signal cycles busy streets, and not just • Lack of understanding of WALK and flashing for bicyclists, but also for DON'T WALK indications pedestrians." • Uncertainty about whether the button must be pressed to activate a pedestrian signal, particularly in downtown areas where signals - Comment from 2013 public operate differently during different times of survey day • Lack of confirmation that someone has already pressed a pushbutton • Conflicts with turning vehicles at intersections 5.1.3.3 "LOOK" Pavement Markings Salt Lake City installs pavement markings in the 5.2.1 Pedestrian Countdown Timers downtown area to encourage pedestrians to look The City installs pedestrian countdown timers at both ways before entering a crosswalk. all City owned traffic signals.Many UDOT owned signals also have pedestrian countdown timers and as UDOT upgrades pedestrian facilities, new countdown timers are installed. Pedestrian countdown timers improve safety by providing information to assist pedestrians with crossing -41,- L OOK decisions. Pushbuttons with confirmation lights are also sometimes used so that people can see whether the signal has been activated. "LOOK" pavement marking in Salt Lake city Ih�''�00® `0 5.2 Traffic Signal & Warning iti Beacon Considerations ,nnw/ ,f r! Traffic signal standards are well established in iI �M l the U.S. Salt Lake City has been in the forefront - enr i of implementing many pedestrian and bicycle ;•, related best practices including countdown >o timers,audible signals,HAWK signals,and other effit »_ „I innovations. Section 4 of the Utah Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Utah MUTCD) defines minimum requirements for signal timing, Pedestrian countdown timer at 200 E/200 S displays, pushbuttons, and other pedestrian intersection signal considerations. The City carefully adheres to state and national standards and exceeds them in many cases. Typical concerns that pedestrians experience at signalized crossings include: 46 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.2.2 Actuated & Recalled Signal 5.2.3 Exclusive Pedestrian Phases & Phasing Scrambles Phasing determines which traffic movements Exclusive pedestrian phases allow pedestrians to are allowed to operate simultaneously and cross the street in both directions simultaneously. which occur separate from one another. Timing Salt Lake City operates a few traffic signals this refers to the amount of time given to particular way in locations where pedestrian volumes are movements during a phase. high,such as the Main/South Temple,i0o S/West For many years, Salt Lake City has not had Temple, and 40o S/University St intersections. pedestrian buttons in the downtown area, "Scrambles" permit pedestrians to cross all four meaning that the pedestrian phase is recalled on legs of an intersection or to cross diagonally every signal cycle 24 hours a day. This allows a while all motor vehicle traffic is stopped. This pedestrian phase at all times without having to benefits car traffic by reducing turning conflicts push a button. One negative aspect of the "no- and allowing cars to clear intersections more button" approach is that signals operate in a efficiently during their signal phase. pre-timed fashion 24 hours a day regardless of actual traffic flows and pedestrians, which leads Scrambles are not widely used in the U.S., but to unnecessary stops and driver delay in the when used they are typically found at downtown downtown area, especially late at night, early intersections with high volumes of pedestrians morning, and weekend periods when there is relative to motor vehicles. While they provide little pedestrian or vehicle traffic. the convenience of a diagonal crossing, they have a number of disadvantages including longer The City recently began installing pushbuttons pedestrian crossings times, complications to in the downtown area when traffic signals are coordination with other nearby signals, and upgraded. However, during the day (typically 6 delay to pedestrians that only need to cross one AM to io PM)most signals operate in coordination leg of the intersection. Salt Lake City has not to achieve efficient flow, meaning that one or implemented any scrambles to date. both of the principal directions are recalled automatically regardless of traffic detection and " - the pedestrian phase is also displayed. This is I , . the most efficient way to operate signals when r 1 _' amass.- car volumes are steady and predictable (as they - I 1. are on most weekdays). It is also better for " — a , Y. pedestrians during these hours. The downside of this method is that when traffic AMR 4 volumes are light and few pedestrians are present, ., 1. " pedestrians must push the button to activate the signal. Pedestrians who use the signals during the day and are accustomed to receiving a WALK - _ signal automatically may not realize that they 41116 need to push a button during the off-peak hours. Scramble in Carlsbad (CA) that serves 8,000 pedestrians per day DECEMBER 2015 I 47 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 5.2.4 Leading Pedestrian Intervals • Warning Sign with Flashing Beacons Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) are common • Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (also known as in cities across the U.S. They give pedestrians a a High Intensity Activated Crosswalk or WALK indication before (typically 3-7 seconds) "HAWK") vehicles are given a green light. The advantage of • Toucan Signal (signalized pedestrian LPI is that it puts pedestrians in the crosswalk in crossing that also allows bicyclists to cross advance of cars and makes them more visible to simultaneously) turning motorists. The LPI can be omitted if no pedestrians press the pushbutton. 5.2.6.1 Flashing Beacons Various types of flashers may accompany warning 5.2.5 Accessibility for People with signs. Examples include rectangular rapid Disabilities flashing beacons (RRFB), yellow ball flashers, Accessible pedestrian features at traffic signals and LED flashers outlining the signs. Although consist of audible and/or tactile communication these methods differ, they share a common goal to assist visually impaired persons with locating of garnering motorists' attention with flashing pushbuttons, identifying the appropriate button beacons. Flashing beacons are typically used for the desired crossing, locating the curb ramp, at marked mid-block crosswalks where extra and conveying the pedestrian signal status. motorist warning is desired. They are relatively inexpensive compared to higher-level mid-block Currently, the City and UDOT install accessible signalization options like HAWKs, Toucans, and signals where there is an identified need. standard traffic signals. Accessible signals may be a requirement at all new and reconstructed pedestrian signals when Yellow ball flashers are often attached to overhead the Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines mast arms, whereas RRFB and LED flashers are (PROWAG)are adopted.The City and UDOT have typically used in combination with street signs. installed accessible pedestrian features at many The Utah MUTCD contains the most up to date locations with known needs, such as the audible state and national standards for these devices. "chirp" signals in the downtown and Sugarhouse RRFB is currently the accepted standard for areas. flashing beacons on signs, but LED flashers are being considered as well. The City will consider upgrades to signals and other devices as advances in technology 4111, emerge. For example, there are now signals that tiris.Ar verbally describe the active direction to cross at jai an intersection and the number of seconds in the " .' ` sl r countdown timer. 5.2.6 Mid-Block Crossings - ©� J___ ." In addition to standard pedestrian traffic signals, ""'deg . the following three types of mid-block pedestrian — traffic control devices may be used to improve safety: RRFB pedestrian crossing at 1100 East South Temple 48 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS 1— pii; ,M b . gil 2 r ▪ / , Ai "Raiff r THHEE t' r i - i 4. � 11: t i•Aaowa�wnp/ , r }}4Y ripe- h .t•E o. '0. qi L :u n ,,.+- - .y, —�L 44 h iJPj rnnu .' A�7 i.F, �� I°I 4-! uun Ia•f_ � all A i . ��l1 hnnu uun 1 • c: "nit jr: •ii `1I 1I J • '- inu1i : • _ .. ,..,.., , Ahe 1 ei . Ltiit, 'II". ,i:- . iii7.:.,. - .ir:-.7 Flashing yellow ball crossing at Regent St/200 South HAWK signal on 100 S between West Temple and Main St " the countdown phase ends the overhead traffic A signal goes completely dark and the pedestrian _ • / ' signal displays a solid upraised hand. • HAWKs are much more expensive than flashing �:•.Ny _ beacons, typically costing almost as much as a ill i' -* standard traffic signal. However, they are more { _ effective than flashing beacons because they require vehicles to stop,helping pedestrians cross ..— - busy high-speed streets safely and comfortably - while minimizing traffic flow interruptions better LED flashing sign at Presidents Circle/200 S than a standard traffic signal. 5.2.6.2 HAWKs 5.2.6.3 Toucans HAWK signals consist of two red lenses above a Toucan signals allow pedestrians and bicyclists single yellow lens.The beacon head is dark until a to make mid-block crossings simultaneously(i.e. pedestrian activates it by pushbutton. After brief ^'o can cross"). These signals are commonly yellow flashing and steady yellow intervals, the used where multi-use paths or neighborhood signal displays a steady red indication to drivers ar^111 .i 111.0r, ...,,,,01 and a WALK indication to pedestrians, allowing them to cross the road while traffic is stopped. After the WALK phase ends, the pedestrian J. ., indication changes to a flashing upraised hand _ __�,,,,..,,,_n and countdown timer. During the countdown phase, the hybrid beacon displays alternating _ — flashing red lights to drivers, indicating a STOP w condition just as if a STOP sign were present. R' After stopping for crossing pedestrians, drivers can then proceed when pedestrians are outside of their lane and the adjoining lane(s). After Toucan signal in Tucson (AZ) DECEMBER 2015 I 49 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN byways cross a road. Separate pedestrian and • Consider implementing a proactive policy to bicycle signal heads allow the signal to time the identify locations where additional accessible crossing differently depending on which button signal features may be desirable, standardize is pushed, thereby minimizing delay. These equipment according to best practices and heads are displayed to pedestrians and bicyclists PROWAG guidelines,and describe conditions as they approach the signal. under which they will be installed. • Continue installing mid-block pedestrian Toucans are typically activated by pushbuttons warning beacons and signals using the but passive detection can also be used. treatments most appropriate for specific Conventional three-section traffic signal heads sites, per the City's current process that are displayed to drivers.The signal rests in green considers traffic speeds, volumes, number of until activated by a pedestrian or bicyclist. It lanes, and expected pedestrian use as major displays a yellow signal followed by a steady red determining factors. during the pedestrian/bicycle phase. Costs are • Where possible, ensure that pedestrian similar to HAWK signals. signals on opposite legs of an intersection are both triggered by pedestrian buttons on one 5.2.7 Pedestrian-Related of the two legs. Work with UDOT to ensure Signal & Warning Beacon application at intersections as appropriate. Recommendations • In the downtown area, continue to provide 5.3 Pedestrian Counts an automatic walk sign at signalized Salt Lake City recently purchased infrared intersections even when the pedestrian button is not pushed (or "recalled" signal counters that can be used to count pedestrians on phasing)during peak,or busy,hours; require a regular basis. Resources to assist the City with use of the pedestrian button to obtain a walk future pedestrian counts may be found at the sign during off-peak, light traffic hours. This National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation represents the best balance between being Project website. pedestrian-friendly and creating unnecessary vehicle delays and air pollution. • Continue installing countdown timers and 5.4 Enhancing Corridors a n d latching pushbuttons with confirmation lights Neighborhood Byways as new signal equipment is installed and old for Pedestrians equipment is replaced. This plan recommends three initiatives • Evaluate protected bike lane impacts to in addition to the citywide guidance to pedestrian phasing and timing at specific accommodate pedestrians at every intersection intersections on a case-by-case basis as the and on every street. The combined goal is to City builds more of those types of facilities. create more inviting and comfortable byways for • Continue to consider exclusive pedestrian people on foot, linking neighborhoods, business phases and scrambles in conjunction with areas, downtown, and parks and open space. special events, at signals with significant These initiatives further enhance the existing year-round pedestrian loads, or where they sidewalk network and help focus recommended may yield signal operation benefits. improvements to mid-block crossings. • Consider using LPIs in the downtown and other areas where pedestrian volumes are relatively high.Also consider using "No Turn on Red" blank-out signs in conjunction with LPIs. 50 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS ____ • North Temple RIIIIIIIIIIIIRIIIIIIIIIIIRII RIIII�II,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIRIII II IIIIIIIIRIIIIIIIIRS 0 0 o I i i E E I LEGEND Si .aA . 1_ - - RE 11 -, n�W0 \ase'''' I InIIIII�IIIIIIIIII�nIImIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIMUiI{IIInIIInIQII�IIIII�IInIIIIIIl1I�llllllllllll�l ICI--w�H — — — O _ 0 _ .0 O Study Area O I _ O >1• IOr coN alG n ❑ L E ] I I] ClIN I ill 0.III Existing TRAX Lines&Stations I I I Existing Frontrunner Lines&Stations s PIIIIIIIII IIII�IIIIQIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII�• I ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ I 0 1 ❑ 1 ❑ 1 1 �I -/ - - y _ ❑ Existing Crosswalks r %,I It_ ''" 300 S • Existing Mid-block Crossings I • E _ rR I - r \ I Proposed Mid-block Walkways \ = ] - Cl Cl 0 Cl IIIIIIIRIIarlll llllllll�llllllllll llllllpiuuii l�llll�llllllllll lllq - "wE \ 500 S 1. I 1 I I . ❑ pIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII7IIII uuuuutuuuuuEI Cl [i a T �..._: r i� •I• 1 0 - m ❑ ❑ ❑ •• ❑ MID-BLOCK WALKWAY NETWORK \ rr -- \ I • 900 S ❑ 0 I cl ■■■■ ,. - ( -1 J /� ■■■■ • — r= o, 660' tszo' n■n■ -- I • / ■■■■ Figure 5-1 Mid-Block Walkways Map from the draft Downtown Community Master Plan (Note: The mid-block walkway network shows the potential for improved pedestrian connectivity on alleys and minor streets.) 5.4.1 Downtown Mid-Block Walkways parcel where the Downtown Master Plan identifies Within the downtown area, the mid-block a midblock walkway is required to provide the walkways already in adopted master plans, as portion that is on their property. The Downtown well as the additional walkways proposed in the Community Master Plan draft proposes additional draft Downtown Community Master Plan, serve mid-block walkways, as shown in Figure 5-1. to penetrate Salt Lake's formidably sized blocks This network and the related Mid-Block Walkway with human-scale corridors. These walkways Guidelines are both recommended for shaping create inviting spaces, convenient short cuts, and the future of Salt Lake's walkable downtown. a pedestrian experience primarily away from busy automotive traffic. 5.4.2 Neighborhood Byways Mid-block walkways included in the City's master A proposed network of "neighborhood byways" plans have been regulated by the zoning ordinance taps quiet neighborhood streets and formalizes since 1995, so that any new development on a them into transportation corridors designed to DECEMBER 2015 I 51 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN crisscross the city and link to key destinations 5.4.3.4 Folsom Trail including neighborhood retail areas and This proposed trail is on an abandoned rail line corridors, parks, schools, and transit stations. from 50o West, connecting downtown to the Few changes are needed on the quiet streets Jordan River Trail. themselves; the network is realized by providing for safe, often signalized crossings at the major 5.4.3.3 Antelope Island Trail barrier streets, and reducing traffic volumes This proposed trail would connect the to make walking safer and more enjoyable. International Center to Antelope Island. "Neighborhood byways" is a term recognizing Primarily a recreational trail, the corridor could that these corridors create a network for both use one of several historical access points to the pedestrians and bicyclists. Island, provided that access could be secured from several institutional property owners and 5.4.3 Urban Trails with proper considerations for wildlife habitat. In addition to the Jordan River Trail, Salt Lake City has in recent years developed an increased 5.4.3.3 Surplus Canal Trail focus on trails both within the City limits and in Adjacent to a canal, this proposed trail would partnership with our neighboring municipalities. tap an existing maintenance road and has the Several sections of the Parley's Trail have recently potential to connect Glendale neighborhoods to been constructed spanning Salt Lake County, the International Center. Salt Lake City, and City of South Salt Lake. Other urban trails in development are shown in Figure 5-2, and include: 5.5 Pedestrian Spot Improvements 5.4.3.1 Parley's Trail Some recommended locations for the signals and The trail, with recently constructed connections treatments discussed previously are identified through Hidden Hollow and along the S-Line as in this plan as spot improvements. Spot the Sugar House Greenway, is heavily used as a improvements are small non-linear projects, pedestrian corridor. Extensions east are in this such as intersection upgrades, crosswalks, plan; the western connection to the Jordan River and mid-block crossing installations, that Trail is in the City of South Salt Lake. cannot be easily represented by lines on a map. Figure 5-2 shows recommended pedestrian 5.4.3.2 9 Line Trail spot improvements associated with this plan. A segment from 700 West to Redwood Road This map is not an exhaustive representation was recently constructed, with extensions east of pedestrian spot improvements that will be and west in the works. The TransValley Corridor planned or implemented in Salt Lake City. As study will likely incorporate this area. mentioned in Section 5.1.2.6, the City will use a pedestrian crossing and signalization toolbox 5.4.3.3 Jordan & Salt Lake City Canal Trail to improve pedestrian crossings throughout the Also known as the McClelland Canal Trail, City. construction on this corridor will begin in 2015. This project has some portions that are off-street Some bicycling spot and linear recommendations multi-use paths and some sections that are on also benefit pedestrians. Neighborhood byways neighborhood streets. help pedestrians cross busy roadways and protected bike lanes also offer benefits as illustrated in Figure 5-6. 52 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS 5.6 Pedestrian Typologies The pedestrian typologies shown in Figures 5-3 to 5-6 are not specific corridor or site designs. Rather, they provide conceptual design information for four typical situations that the City may encounter when trying to improve pedestrian conditions. Similarly, the conceptual designs shown in Figures 5-7 and 5-8, while based on two real world corridors,are included to illustrate the type of fine-grained analysis that is needed to improve pedestrian connections along a corridor. DECEMBER 2015 I 53 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 54 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 5-2 Multi-Use Trails, Neighborhood Byways, & Enhanced Pedestrian Crossings Map Recommended Pedestrian I ---/ ■ • Spot Improvements I j —__—__—__�____—__ ___-------_—_---/ • Enhanced Road Crossings and Signals I i I I I • Intersections and Signage I j I _ • New Pavement and Curb Cuts • Structure Improvements •—.I ® o�'ne I '� • Neighborhood Byways 0cte•°c'^�� Crossings&Improvements I I Recommended Facilities ------ ••—•- 9 , C • Multi-Use Paths(0-10 Yrs) 'Ij —Multi-Use Paths(10-20 Yrs) ® Tra nSVa ey Corridor' SALT LAKE CITY R°°N • n 800N 0. ♦• ,l ' 1 L INT'L AIRPORT I -East-West Pedestrian Priority Corridors o fi°°N 1* i 1 —Neighborhood Byways(0-10 Yrs) • = s a —Neighborhood Byways(10-20 Yrs) ``k, • - m1 300N = 2�. ® •_ •� Pirport Pau • ♦•_ N^th Tea' a___ _ _ -0 Nor M1Temple N N — •>i Existing Facilities ♦♦ ""'ter♦�iL go`ro Q SSS`_. • • • q��°°# ``` g ♦ ^Is mnaa Q_ —Multi-Use Paths ♦•••••■■•••♦•♦♦ _ o. tT! ® ••0•• S e i —Natural Surface Trails(Bonneville Shoreline) r ; r il,, a0os d Downtown I u NlV o>F AN• West slde RyrL rx1 I — • ■■¢■■■o. . O• • ,.: Existing Transit and Other Facilities \N.\ RefertoFigure5-1 •■ •■a' nR o 5 _ ■•Mid-Blo:Wna:nays p d./P Q TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop ml • c^mmnuntrytot terneF� 005 • —':" •■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line 9c^e • i • ^cnaPtersd�tln:pan. BOOS 9005 • • • p 9005 �• uld\ .•`r u "•.ps-- ■ �`', erber yme •-•�; vale jilt NH` r I 'a/ry ■ Paxton' for r/ 13.5 •'The exact alignment for the Transvalley •E Corridor(800 S/900 S)is pending.Per the - ge^:m9m.m`r • Ke^:m m^ 1992 Salt Lake City Open Space Plan,the -' Woos 3 N I Transvalley Corridor is an opportunity to t I link"the City east of 1-15 to the City west of a ® 1-15 and provide a pedestrian and bicycle n oc we.mmaten e='fi`Ip - -/ route from the foothills,through the urban f ____ , area,into the wetlands."The map shows a ---•---- ---'--------------------- ---- •'�- _•� ---------. —..— -� mir •• • ill:" western terminus based on the City's ""—"'—"'— •■ ` Pale•:Troll I t� 1992 Open Space Plan.Due to changes in this area of the city,a different western I • - °ai1"�at1 • • •4 connection may now be appropriate, • • ,1 • j possibly extending to the Salt Lake Marina • t- ra r.r. •Pa,, or Antelope Island. • L _ 'kw •®- •o■■■•■■ ■ m - - - 0 0.5 1 2 N • •• I,7-� , 1 • a Miles •♦ � I I L. December 2015 •••■o ■ - r1 ■ • L- j� SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 56 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 5-3 Neighborhood Business Node Description Guidance Neighborhood business nodes are usually intersec- ments like trees and planter boxes,on-street parking, • Back-in angled parking is recommended when • Curb extensions should use under-utilized or tions where a concentration and mix of uses exist, curb extensions,reduced speed limits,and medians adjacent to a bike lane. unused space on the street,like space needed particularly retail and entertainment(e.g.movie that provide a pleasant environment for walking, • Curb extensions,sidewalk furniture,median for parking setbacks.They should not block bike theatres,retail stores,coffee shops,restaurants, dining,shopping and bicycling,and opportunities for refuge islands,benches,and marked crossings lanes. outdoor dining and seating,etc.).Neighborhood placemaking and gathering. create more space and an enjoyable setting business nodes usually incorporate streetscape ele- for pedestrians and also reduce vehicle speeds. Back-in angled parking next to /• bike lane and streetscape: Sidewalk furniture and trees ; ' " A r create a functional and aesthetic t ' buffer between the sidewalk and / r4 the roadway. ' p...,: l l" I _ dy ., 1 / . I�� W. r.i!ai ie_; . . .„,. 11 .r / , Front-in angled parking next to / bike lane(requires more room) Vegetated medians are mid-street and streetscape: `-:' ` " t 1 1 711111111114-- Bak-in angled parking is / refuges for crossing foot and bike ��, traffic.They also visibly narrow -- be�eficial to motorists loading• an the street and reduce the amount exiting dng and to bicyclists �� in the adjacent lane due to the of pavement in the road that must ple, be maintained. / i increased visibility offered to < i �r '� exiting drivers. �I -=v !O Ali Colored pavingsr intersections ion • 4 ,ii�r ` ,.. 41 and driveways draws attention to --mixing and crossing areas. I I i i I I i Parking Parking,landscaping, Furnishing Sidewalk Frontage Building _ buffer and curb extensions zone through zone zone It If front-in angled parking is used • / next to a bike lane, there should Discussion be a buffer large enough for Livable streets and sidewalks are the living rooms of neighborhoods-where neighbor meets neighbor. backing cars to pull out,orient / They are also social spaces,rallying points,incubators for ideas and business,and where community is built. without entering the bike lane, Sidewalks are often the life of neighborhood business nodes.They should be more than areas to travel;they and then merge with traffic. should provide places for people to gather and interact.There should be places for standing,visiting,and sitting.Sidewalks and streetscape design should contribute to the character of neighborhoods and business / .' districts,strengthen their identity,and be an area where adults and children can safely participate in public life. / Curb extensions promote visibility / Additional References&Guidelines Materials and Maintenance of pedestrians,make crossing Salt Lake City Planning Division.(2013)."Outdoor Due to Salt Lake City's winter climate,some distances shorter,and reduce Dining Design Guidelines". sidewalk and on-street amenities(like chairs and vehicle speeds. tables)may need to be seasonal in nature and Salt Lake City.(2013).Downtown Master Plan removed for safekeeping. Guideline."Mid-block Walkways". SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 58 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 5-4 Strip Mall Retrofit Description Guidance Strip malls are often characterized by large surface reliance on automobiles for access to work,shop- • Buildings should be located near the sidewalk • Strip malls are often characterized by frequent parking lots that divide store frontages from the ping,entertainment,and socializing.Improving the to increase pedestrian and bicyclist access driveway access.Where possible,driveway access roadway and sidewalks.Additional buildings that streetscape with vegetation and travel lane reduc- as well as to better define the street from the should be consolidated and remaining driveways front the sidewalk and streetscape will create a tions(where possible)will also contribute to a more motorist perspective. should be calmed through the use of narrower more walking-friendly environment and decrease the attractive enviroment. • Widen sidewalks where possible. entrances,curb extensions,and other designs that • Excess roadway width can be converted reduce vehicle speeds and make walking more into street parking,bike lanes,and/or traffic comfortable. buffers. Many strip mall streetscapes lack vegetation and shade. ` Trees create a natural buffer and Medians are refuges for Before: decrease perceived heat. pedestrians may also have / a motor vehicle traffic •=0..--—...-111111". AO r calming effect. / / 4pm% / / ;7411/ .10"f/'i • / / r The ling f n of this superimposed oseeI / building watfootprintwould eliminate / the driveway at this location, / which is an example of driveway �� / 4.1 consolidation. ` ,/ After: 01°I....—"%%:. Curb extensions promote //1. T visibility of pedestrians,make / '� tl _ -, • crossing distances shorter,and / �O —. ir / reduce vehicle speeds. . _ is _ - � -�' + 11:- �= •••4,11#711' / , /, / / �, .or !1 / The asymmetry in this graphic ` is meant to show two options for roadway redesign:near / side maintains travel lanes but I i / removes parking in favor of bike Bicycle' icycle Sidewalk,landscaping,curb extensions,and/or sidewalk furniture lanes;the far side maintains Lane Parking 0 parking,adds a buffered bike lane and curb extensions,and removing one travel lane. The outside travel lane can / r be converted into a bike laneIlli/......'<- Discussion and/or curbside parking. / Road reconstruction and private business investments are essential elements of strip mall retrofits.In order / / / , I to successfully remake strip malls into more pedestrian-and bicycle-friendly streetscapes,zoning changes may be required. "Flipping"the orientation of / / buildings and parking brings , buildings closer to the sidewalk / Materials and Maintenance while still allowing for parking behind and to the side of In Salt Lake City's winter climate,adding square footage to or creating new building footprints will reduce buildings. the need for parking lot snow removal and snow storage. SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 60 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 5-5 Suburban Business Park Without Sidewalks Description Guidance Historically,these job centers have been located on in the morning and departing in the evening and • Sidewalks may replace some green space in • Encourage Transportation Demand Management the fringes of a city or town and combine suburban frequently lack sidewalks.A retrofit of this type of order to accomodate walking,access to and including corporate transit pass programs,bike development elements with the daytime employment land use would accommodate and encourage more from transit,and exercising. to work promotions,and showers/bicycle storage peak hours and demands.They are primarily designed walking,exercise,and more options for transportation • Due to the frequent presence of large surface as part of a strategy to improve air quality and for motorists in single occupancy vehicles arriving to and from the site,as well as mid-day users. parking lots,on-street parking is,for the most decrease peak-hour congestion. part,unnecessary.Providing it may not be an efficient use of roadway space. Some of the land used by,,A,,,, ,, y�/tl surface parking lots can 116, , /00 be redeveloped into more �� office space. ,, I��// Bicyclist&pedestrian lane interface: N " , -- - �. _ A physical barrier(curb, - planters,etc.)can be added i Bike lanes can be curbside �� -",\ if additional separation and ' because the need for on-street - -- —, --- protection is desired. } / �` parking is dramatically reduced in // /_y these areas. / . / .......'"...;" I \ ( ,. \ s„ \ „, • . Transit stop accomodation: -') , \ A combined bike lane and \ walking lane could accomodate '''''------ /I pedestrians and bicyclists - Y iik sq& \ exercising or walking to lunch \ where sidewalks are not presently I available and are not likely to be 1\6,0\ \ constructed in the future. lit I 4 id lk _.. ,. • • r /' %\ \ r Discussion ```' Sidewalks and paved platforms Businesses within suburban business parks are often self-contained,which reduces the need for employees �\ ` should be constructed at 1R to go out for lunch or other needs.However,some people like to use their lunch hour for exercise or to walk \ transit stops. to a lunch destination and providing places for them to walk and bike helps to satisfy this demand.Specific \ ` attention should be given to making transit stops more accessible and attractive to employees. `. When the opportunity to retrofit suburban business parks arises,consideration should be given to consoli- \ ` dating parking between the various businesses.Unused green space should also be consolidated into more productive,usable vegetated spaces.Building accesses should be added or reoriented to face the street y \ rather than only face parking lots located at the rear of the buildings.Sidewalks would preferably be added \ along all streets as part of retrofits but this graphic emphasizes improvements that could be made in lieu of ` continuous sidewalks.\ \ SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 62 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 5-6 Protected Bike Lane Streetscape Description Bike lane protection is provided through physical Guidance One-way protected bike lanes are physically barriers and can include bollards,planter strips, • 7 foot recommended minimum protected bike • When placed adjacent to a travel lane,one-way separated from motor traffic and distinct from the lane width to allow passing. raised protected bike lanes may be configured sidewalk.Protected bike lanes are either raised or at raised curbs,on-street parking,or medians.Protected bike lanes using these protection elements are 3 foot buffer between parked cars and with a mountable curb to allow entry and exit street level and use a variety of elements for physical typically"street level"and share the same elevation protected bike lane recommended to allow from the bicycle lane for passing other bicyclists protection from passing traffic. as adjacent travel lanes. for standard plows to clear snow,to make or to access vehicular turn lanes. passenger loading easier,and to prevent / -e.n ter, bicyclist collisions with car doors. Medians can provide mid-block A._k' 1 ,.. • In advance of intersections, refuges for pedestrians crossing 410p , "bend-in"the protected bike •the street.They also visibly lane,toward to the roadway for c�`rr narrow the street and may increased visibility. ' reduce speeds. Paint and bollard street-level �. protected bike lane retrofit: - � ��,�� I Curb extensions may - r/ reach past the protected _ j - li �"� bike lane to promote ■ � �1' visibility of pedestrians. — ■ .. A .;' �,, - li � c�,o r. �� ' ` jam cf-�' Planter box-separated street-level 2� Continuing pavement markingslo protected bike lane retrofit: :o' A • , , -,e through intersections and �� /ar.,.. ,_ / driveways draws attention to ,�� _ ' 1 t 1111.1114.s.liiiikN i\\N,,, potential conflict. �` ♦ — q -Iller SIIP' / , ` '4 A / / t /ontrasting materials will �� ,� ..... �� provide visual cues to keep pedestrians off of j 1 I i r I I I I the protected bike lane. ♦\7 Center turn lane Travel lane Parking Buffer Bike Sidewalk 10-12' 10-12' 7-9' 3' lane Width varies / Turn queue boxes will help 6-10' bicyclists turning left from the Note:actual numbers of lanes and dimensions of those lanes will vary from street to street. 0 protected bike lane to cross , ` near the curb extension. Park is set back in front f 64 Discussion of driveway entrances to promote visibility. Special consideration should be given at transit stops to manage bicycle and pedestrian interactions. Driveways and minor street crossings are unique challenges to protected bike lane design.Parking should it be prohibited within 30 feet of each intersection and major driveway to improve visibility.Color,yield ' r' markings,and"Yield to Bikes"signage should be used to identify the conflict area and make it clear that the protected bike lane has priority over entering and exiting traffic. Commercial or otherwise ;f large driveways are marked - with symbols or color. Additional References and Guidelines Materials and Maintenance /; i ".1-.y • NACTO.(2012).Urban Bikeway Design Guide. In cities with winter climates,barrier-protected / , ` bike lanes may require special equipment for snow Salt Lake City.(2013).Downtown Master Plan Guideline."Mid-block Walkways". removal. /:" SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 64 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 5-7 Conceptual Design for Improving Neighborhood Connections Across an Arterial Street Note:This conceptual design shows the type of fine-grained,yet corridor-based analysis that is appropriate for pedestrian access across a busy arterial.Several improvements are likely to be considered together to make the area more pedestrian friendly. Install new crossings iw Construct a hard-or 1111111.11111 greenscaped raised and add curb exten- "� '�""�r median to replace sions on both ends of the crosswalks(to the existing paint- - striped center turn shorten crossing pp distance and time), % left turning motorissts median refuge island, to enter major LED flashing signs, / .t and a left turn lane / adequate toar majo and east of the crosswalk for left turning for turning motorists. motorists. Example pedestrian crossing on Raised center median with left turn 1700 South in Salt Lake City bays for turning traffic on 700 East near Liberty Park in Salt Lake City 0./ \-- r <. 7i►- w ::yam^ »- .; - R r 1 =r j •—Neighborhood j cli ' `• ;Ns ! Byway L- Park � ' • i —— -le--_ e 4— --- -- _— " .,a . IK, Exit(ss)o j• Main Auto Ingress) 'q�' ' i- !++ _• -- _' Entrance ,` I - .5icu " i I e:Office M v 0 ' o Tennis Courts _ _.. '-- '�.. -)0 b' LI` Water Park yr • Proposed Install new signal- at-grade or GENERAL NOTE -- " ized crossing grade-separated - treatments(e.g. crossing Replacing some - Y. HAWK,Toucan)to A'-Ill/ on-street parking provide opportuni- spaces with curb ' . ties for pedestrians - t Re x Putnam H.S. extensions will help and bicyclists to ,,,, -,1 calm traffic speed. cross major road- - The curb exten- •� ways.Consider curb « �:•:_� sions should not extensions to - ' impede bicycle `1\. shorten pedestrian - - - traffic. crossing time and — - 4 distance and install -- - —. - wayfinding signage. Planters and curb extensions in HAWK crossing Wayfinding signage in the parking lane on Sunset Blvd in (Photo:Mike Cynecki) Portland,OR Santa Clara,UT (Photo:PBOT) SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 66 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER FIVE: PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 5-8 Conceptual Design for Improvements to a Neighborhood Commercial Area Note:This conceptual design shows the type of fine-grained,yet corridor-based analysis that is appropriate for pedestrian access across a busy arterial.Several improvements are likely to be considered together to make the area more pedestrian friendly. GENERAL NOTE Pedestrians cross parking lots to access V.- . i.-- - - t An ` �. .i. , businesses they wish a-' T I 1 .- t to patronize.Consider _ 1� il creating a program for - businesses with large At. i'z Eimer •setbacks to build safe, • I I _., ' well-designed walk- • '�� '� I. ways from the street00. .. . .- .-.,. it e.r; to their main ' entrance(s). , • - .'.• • iL I . I J e • -; •i ___ I I A- , . . ... . .. , , . __, i ___„... ___............ ,_....., . ......„..,.. . ,...„ i . . . ., i. ,. .., lor.----- . , 0,„.. . ., ., ., . ... ... .7_',i' l•-•1. v:.;i.r;" _... .,:.._-_•.7..._,1-4.-•.fI, e-a.... I . .......-.7....._.„,, - ®I - „.... ..,,%,.. , , -... aii r 7 , t f w ,i *- .' E , -.-_•.. p. 4 1F /o 7 } - 't�� 1 r 7 __ Bike lane and one travel lane I Buffered bike lane and one travel lane in each South side parking lane,buffered y in each direction,and a direction,and a landscaped center median and bike lane,two travel lanes in each landscaped center median turn bay area direction,and a landscaped center and turn bay area median and turn bay GENERAL Recon- y . NOTE struct the i' Replace the intersec- yy�L_ ( - . - , p g paint- `-- ;�.� - tion with ''�,. -�K RRFB or LED- ..Z. Or Intersection existingbrick or controlled a i. ' stripe center - colored crossing with ` '"'*, �' improve pedes- turn lane with a - concrete in colored con- __— hard-or green- - --- - I order to crete or brick at •Q� ~ t 0 than safety, soaped raised _ ! possibly to _ _ _ . include refuge �� marka cee �� intersection. islands,curg median along •. # entrance& . - b the entire exit of the O. Further traffic extensions,and - corridor.Leave ,07f analysis should 'physical a s for ke `� district, �, Y �, p y g p Y ` alert determine what changes to !tI?t riveo classofcrossi•des •in tsss • cross , .'MA and calm .- j t driveways. traffic. Buffered bike lanes and a raised center median Textured and colored intersection Brick RRFB-controlled crossing in a Pedestrian crossing in a roundabout (Photo:FHWA) school zone(Photo:Safe Routes to School Coalition) SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 68 I DECEMBER 2015 . 443: 4444. •�, } , i • 4 fit, /0)/ . •0 •• •,r:. / , le • io 1./v' , Bicyclists are much more affected by facility CHAPT _ , , .i ' • ,• ►'� design, construction, and maintenance practices N',.. than motor vehicle drivers because of their S - ; •� ' 6.• / . r exposure level. They lack the protection from �' , ... ; •..��A I 'i _ weather and roadway hazards provided by an ., - ` ,� automobile's structure and safety features. By . i' . understanding their unique characteristics and ! B I. �'� '•, % 'L.` needs, Salt Lake City can provide Complete ' ' v ��! +'i'' Is Streets for bicyclists. Y RECOIA' ,' III; ATI4i'1\I ;II_ • ,d:a it: , . People who bicycle vary in their physical abilities,.k. :'t r • experience levels, and the types of bicycles that r ''• _ ,, 1 y they ride. In the context of bicyclists, a Complete �;. .• 't: ,� ••�4414/' f , w • Street is one that is designed to comfortably -.. ,t4 ; •AL.: A, yt• _*1 i accommodate the different types of people •�.• ' • , ,efr ` �;A' . •� expected to ride there. Many streets such as low '�►� ; 'i;t�► " ► < ; speed,low volume local streets may not need any - ••/ •• • �'' ;Net special facilities to accommodate bicyclists,while ,� -.•,�'' _ . ��*ro; ;.- others with larger volumes and higher speeds .' -. . • -:: .•, ,� „'' may require significant bikeway infrastructure • : , 4, . • • `•Y investments. .jam, a _ •"I i • The bicycling recommendations provided in ""---' • • -• , •' :_ „"'�� this chapter represent a master planning level _ �'• of thought and detail. Recommendations may i :II _ _ change as individual projects are implemented. .1 .• , Primary subsections of this chapter include: i % `` • Bikeway Type Descriptions • i - • Evolution Toward Low-Stress Bicycling - .\. • Bikeway Recommendations • Interim Bypass Routes \ . ----.:-- • Bikeway Maintenance • Traffic Signal Considerations • Bicycle Parking and Other End-of-Trip Facilities : 40.4144. . — . • Mountain Biking&BMX d. • Bicycle Counts&Surveys \ ._ ... .. _ i 1\: yr I r) 1 • ' • + DECEMBER 2015 I 69 It • SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 6.1 Bikeway Type _ __ Descriptions '1 , , _ • Bicycle facilities can generally be grouped into two ,,1#4,rR categories—conventional and low stress facilities. )' .� ,:+, �" L-A, 'i Salt Lake City currently has nearly every type of ' ' .F facility described in this chapter in its network. 1 The bikeway classes described in this chapter are organized first by group (conventional and low 1.1'r' stress) and then within each group by degree of _ ' separation from motor vehicle traffic, from most separation to least separation. Conventional bike lane on 200 S 6.1.1 Conventional Bike Facilities Conventional facilities like bike lanes and shared w(• lane markings have been standard practice in the — - * �. ,.3 = r U.S. for many years. They provide dedicated or ,,\i' ! �"° shared space for confident bicyclists who have __ '� experience riding next to traffic. , 6.1.1.1 Conventional Bike Lanes �� This type of bikeway uses signage and striping A. to delineate roadway space for exclusive use of �` lai%, bicyclists. Conventional bike lanes are typically I located to the right of the outside car lane.Parking r maybe allowed to the right of the bike lane. Shared lane marking on 1700 s 6.1.1.2 Shared Lane Markings Shared lane markings (i.e. "sharrows") indicate 6 + I. ; a travel lane shared by bicyclists and motor RIME 70 �, . `�+.�' a ,iE .ci'. vehicles. According to NACTO, shared lane s,,� '. x r markings "reinforce the legitimacy of bicycle v b I traffic on the street and recommend proper 7,. ``-- •" bicyclist positioning." ` 6.1.1.3 Signed Shared Roadways .ad •+L ' ' This type of facility is typically used on streets - with lower motor vehicle traffic volumes or speeds 1_ _. where bike lanes are not feasible or necessary. It's Bicyclist on signed shared roadway; depending defining characteristic is the green "Bike Route" on network connectivity, a similar street could be included in a neighborhood byway sign used to mark the route. 70 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLING RECOMMENDATIONS "I wish there were more protected and buffered q••. , ,, bike lanes in Salt Lake City." "- '.� -; �'� sr, - Comment from 2013 public yy< ¢ lt ' Y.tik " . ' 1�y 14 'Ail. survey -- Y ]i b '. 6.1.2 Low Stress Bike Facilities Low stress bikeways appeal to a `_ -= e-- broader cross section of the public - - - _ ,_ 42.: than conventional facilities. Their - -- - low stress nature is a result of greater separation Child riding on the Jordan River Parkway Trail from traffic;use of low volume,low speed streets (Photo: Suzanne Stensaas) depending on the specific facility type; and/ or directional wayfinding signage that directs ,e bicyclists to destinations and specific routes much like interstate highway signage for automobiles. 6.1.2.1 Multi-Use Paths Multi-use paths are separated from cars by open �— — space or barriers and are for the exclusive use of „qui%NI bicyclists, pedestrians, and other non-motorized users. They are frequently located along waterways, utility corridors, and other rights-of- Bicyclist on 300 E protected bike lane way where interactions with cars are limited. 6.1.2.2 Protected Bike Lanes _ Protected bike lanes are separated from traffic `�' 4 by a physical barrier of some kind and are also _— ;, . r ' r distinct from the sidewalk. Barriers may be in the MIII e i .� form of planters, raised curbs, parking, bollards, 'MaP o� — or other streetscape elements. Protected bike _ _ - =- lanes can be configured for either one-way or , 1, r- � , two-way travel. re.— _ 6.1.2.3 Buffered Bike Lanes People riding in a buffered bike lane on 300 E These are similar to conventional bike lanes with the difference being a painted buffer between the 6.1.2.4 Neighborhood Byways bike lane and adjacent car lane.Alternatively,the Neighborhood byways, described in further buffer may also be placed between the bike lane detail in 5.1.1.2, are multi-modal linear facilities and parked cars. Where space permits, buffers on streets with low traffic volumes and speeds are sometimes placed on both sides of the bike designed for bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages lane. Buffered bike lanes differ from protected and abilities. bike lanes because the buffer space is paint rather than a physical barrier. DECEMBER 2015 I 71 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 6.2 Evolution Toward Low Stress Bicycling Salt Lake City's established system of multi-use M u t Use Path paths and on-street bike lanes enables a modest percentage of the population to feel comfortable traveling by bicycle. People who feel comfortable riding in mixed traffic or in bike lanes adjacent to mixed traffic are generally able to access most Protected Bike Lane places in the City currently. However, a much (separated by planters or larger segment of the public would like to ride 4' landscaping) bicycles more but are discouraged from doing so by the currently available bikeways. Surveys both nationally and locally show that 50-60% of people say they would ride more (or °rfr Protected Bike Lane start riding) if they had access to bikeways that (separated by parking) provide more separation from traffic,lower traffic speeds,and lower traffic volumes.For this reason, identifying opportunities for more low stress bikeways was an emphasis of this master plan. Input received from the nearly 3o community Buffered Bike Lane event tables also indicated a strong demand for more facilities like the 300 South and 30o East protected bike lanes. In the online survey(see Section 3.3),people were asked to rank bicycle facilities by their preference. 4P Results reveal that even those who are currently Bike Lane urban bicyclists generally favor bikeways with more separation, as illustrated by Figure 6-1. Support for non-separated facilities also remains high. Particular emphasis was placed in this master Shared Lane Markings plan upon providing recommendations for a low stress bikeway network in the downtown area. Downtown Salt Lake City is a destination for jobs, . residential housing,entertainment,and shopping. Many people desire to ride to these destinations • "I love it" • "I moderately dislike it" but historically the downtown bikeways on City "I like it" • "I really dislike it" streets have not been comfortable enough to "No opinion" appeal to a wide cross section of the public. Figure 6-1 2013 Public Survey Bicycle Facilities Preferences Bringing more people downtown without cars benefits businesses, frees up valuable street parking, reduces car traffic, and improves air 72 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLING RECOMMENDATIONS quality. It also supports business employment of Roadway 0-10 10-20 highly educated professionals,who are often more Classification Existing Years Years interested in bicycling to work. Large employers, especially those in high-tech industries, are finding that this lifestyle choice is key to attracting . and retaining the best employees.' City Arterial io 415 6.3 Bikeway 50% 67% 85% Recommendations The bikeway recommendations — both low stress and conventional — presented in this section UDOT Arterial are based on public input, coordination with the Stakeholder and Steering Committees, and 11% 44% 55% connectivity needs. Non-City entities such as ill,. 0 UDOT and the University of Utah were included in the Stakeholder Committee. Additional City Collector coordination will be needed to implement facilities in corridors owned by outside agencies. 56% 68% 84% Recommendations may change as individual projects are implemented. S . . 6.3.1 General Network Maps City Local Figure 6-2 shows how implementation of the bikeway recommendations over the next 20 8% 16% 24% years would increase the percentage of roads that include bikeways. Approximately 85% of Figure 6-2 Percentage of Road Miles With Bikeways City arterial and collector mileage would have bikeways if all recommendations are brought to fruition. 6.3.3 Further Study Figures 6-3 presents the City's existing bicycling Some roads are indicated in this plan for further network. Figure 6-4 shows the short term study,where road space is constrained by width or recommendations (o-io years), Figure 6-5 shows the long term recommendations (a o- higher traffic volumes. Salt Lake City's intention 20 years), and Figure 6-6 shows all bicycle is to accomodate walking and bicycling on these facility recommendations (0-20 years). Phasing roads, but the recommended design cannot be recommendations are based on building a logical determined without additional study including network as well as tapping the City's pavement input from the public and other agency partners maintenance process as a good opportunity to on the potenttial trade-offs.Some streets indicated change street designs. for further study include UDOT arterials. As part of this plan's implementation, the city will work 6.3.2 Low Stress Network Maps with UDOT to determine how to best accomodate Figures 6-7a and 6-7b show the low stress safe and comfrtable bicycle and pedestrian travel recommendations for the entire City and downtown, respectively. on these streets. DECEMBER 2015 I 73 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 74 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-3 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions Map ----------------------- Existing Bikeways -------- ■ —Multi-Use Paths I --- - --� • I_ , i I i • 11 Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes • • I I I r n • —Bike Lanes _—_ 2100N ■ - I ■` —Shared Roadways' --- � zooaN • ® ■ —Natural Surface Trails(Bonneville Shoreline) oe r°' 3 1700N des \ I I 8 •eclamation 0■• �t``Qe"an oc "Includes marked&signed shared roadways • P I • A • • • / -----.1— I.Existing Transit Facilities 1 - .i I O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop $ II1000N • _ ♦1• I SALT LAKE CITY 11 ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line INTL AIRPORT '" ; - C-1 , I ]UON F. R 3 0 _ 600 m 11th Ave s I w ■ o = L ■ 3 3 3 m 7 • 'i. _ r rton Amelia EarhartE _ °' ♦ 300N ark E m ` .♦ Wiley Post 3rd Ave Frontage ® • Air ort Pad =orth Temple a a t(orth Temple®—D_ 2nd Ave • •• 9 �L ,♦ a uth emPle •Q ♦ •♦• ♦ 30 _4 r �I wl I UNIV OF• ♦♦♦■■■■•••® 200 5 ■JJ.O— 200 5 U T A H • •O. c „3005 u NQEp 5 o 5005 atl 3 : BoasC. • ♦1■QS m` II ♦■♦■V .e, ah 7005 '1 o 1 43 Indiana 8005 n 8005 1 3 y ' Sunnysitle a 2 9005 9Line , 9005 �005 9005 11005 • Gilmer Directors Row 8 ■ °°F 3�d` r' ■ ® ■ California 13005 13005 ■ 2. gy m E , ■• c �o• m n f I , I. 1]305 3 1700S 17005 17005^ 1700S Oo 4 0 n 18205 c ■ 3 3 3, ,: ® ■ - w � w w • 0 0 o c o R o 8 ■ r n s Parma 4 ® shall s ■ ■ ■ I 27005 s 27005 0 0.5 1 2 N ♦ III I.-1 Miles : • : "�-- December 2015 ■ • S E_- SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 76 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-4 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions + Short Term (0-10 Years) Recommendations Map /. Recommended Bikeways -- .J--.---- ---_---------. —Multi-Use Paths 8 el ; . --- ■ I■ Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes ' I warm Springs ■ Bike Lanes I I I ■ c tiNeighborhood Byways • Neighborhood Byways o� I 0 Crossings&Improvements ^0 I Na ■ -Shared Roadways' � o ♦ 3 111 • —Bikeways Proposed in Univ.of Utah 0,v --I al �) ---_-, Bicycle Master Plan 2➢ ^ ,�F ♦ ' A .410 —Requires Further Study ' a 3 I3005 ® �. Transvalley Corridor'" ♦♦ SALT LAKE CITY INT'L AIRPORT 3 _ I o Existing Bikeways Haroldxatty ` f MOON n I • I y -All Existing Bikeways ma I ■ 1 li arnan ♦ I.A.A.;� —Natural Surface Trails(Bonneville Shoreline) I •• m 1 111 . NOT rem.le a o,rr a .I: ExistingTransit Facilities ® 0 • Pols mlail( •�• • • •4 ` O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop •• •3 r�00s " �I • 3 ` ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line 3005 zoos ® 30' �j bA UN IV OF�fAH� % ' aoas K7■■••■O E•o w 'rr y•• / � h `•ql 5005 5005 I w� •♦ • L•Poothi111 1v ncludes marked&signed shared roadways / a a 'h Ja05 s E _as --_. "The exact alignment for the Transvalley S;s 8005 f'• m ROas ' Corridor(800 S/900 S)is pending.Per the Sass ' •—• 0 • soon side •� 1992 Salt Lake City Open Space Plan,the Sri Transvalley Corridor is an opportunity to s , • ILI 0` 1 link"the City east of 1-15 to the City west of - ■ wI r • • I-15 and provide a pedestrian and bicycle wa-n I route from the foothills,through the urban ® r3005ci- area,into the wetlands:'The map shows a •western terminus based on the City's : I Ke• s1992 Open Space Plan.Due to changes in • this area of the city,a different western on n J nm connection may now be appropriate, I i • possibly extending to the Salt Lake Marina I 'd. ® ■ o d. • d weominster arfiel, / or Antelope Island. ■ ..I. .d'a-'" "—i— �'----- -----�- ------ — ' I 21005 zto05 Note:The protected bike lanes on 200E •■ - Pade'sTrall '1' (South Temple to 900 S)and 300 E(100 S to • �• ® ` 'a 1 ■ 600 S)are both shown on the map,but only ■ one of the two options will be constructed. ■ i ■ i a41m Stratford Pa 0 0.5 1 2 N • • I I-1 x •o ' , Miles •♦ • I a o I I .- ♦• • I n, December 2015 - -'—' •■•■o • SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 78 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-5 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions + Long Term (10-20 Years) Recommendations Map 1 _ _- � i Recommended Bikeways -------- —Multi-Use Paths I 1 _ __--_- ■ I ■ Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes ! . 1 ■ ■ I—Bike Lanes I— I I ■ c Neighborhood Byways _ I ■ 0. • Neighborhood Byways I Io, e Crossings&Improvements I I • • —Shared Roadways" • • —Bikeways Proposed in Univ.of Utah \ -----------I not •• _______ Bicycle Master Plan ; • / I —Requires Further Study •• Transvalley Corridor'" ® ��`^ ••• cl SALT LAKE CITY a OONp . - INT'L AIRPORT �( 1 700N Existing Bikeways of Harold Gate ■ \ 600 N I 1 • 3 3 aL i All Existing Bikeways q°te ■ —Natural Surface Trails(Bonneville Shoreline) "'_,° ^ �I •• 300•_ 1111111EM o I a0 Existing Transit Facilities ® r •• "I ,I °. a P,` N� I ••• •1 Temnle �-- � U O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop •♦• ® •■• I r r '05 i )� i •■■■■•••• 205 YJ Y ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line T • - o 0 8"- TTrail 1 o e 11NIV 0F�fFH�� ' Weri5ide0.W O 4005 •••• ' <Pcl / O. ! s00s 8 5005 Pootn• �_•-9 "Includes marked&signed shared roadways 7005 . _/ II 0 60' `�'�` Pa,. �� Baas c° ---, Oto,, 3 , ®� BOo ,'Sunrryslde "The exact alignment for the Transvalley 9005 LieMI Ell Corridor(800 S/900 S)is pending.Per the I � : 1992 Salt Lake City Open Space Plan,the o1M r Transvalley Corridor is an opportunity to < Illinois _ link"the City east of 1-15 to the City west of ® U£ I 1-15 and provide a pedestrian and bicycle California . �,3°os �� route from the foothills,through the urban 3 d 1, area,into the wetlands."The map shows a '_- western terminus based on the City's M 3 Woos I PI 1992 Open Space Plan.Due to changes in a noes illthis area of the city,a different western ' o connection may now be appropriate, I ® m �possibly extending to the Salt Lake Marina «; e ow w0h � _ TI or Antelope Island. ------ ---• -- ----- oo — — ___________ --�--- - - ,2„0s - - ll ■ •W' Note:The protected bike lanes on 200E / 7•■■•�■■ `I I (South Temple to 900 S)and 300 E(100 S to y • S w e ■ • 600 5)are both shown on the map,but only • I one of the two options will be constructed. ■ n 27005 i • 0 0.5 1 2 to • • I , Miles •• � I _�-- December 2015 • • — ,ter _— ----I I.._, • • ■■•° • is '-1 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 80 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-6 Bicycling Network Existing Conditions + 20 Year Vision Map (2035) - - i Recommended Bikeways -------- • ____ —Multi-Use Paths I ® _-.--. ■ I- ■ Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes : I Warm5mmos • —Bike Lanes I I I I • c -Neighborhood Byways • Neighborhood Byways I o• Crossings&Improvements \ Shared Roadways' • 3 3 ♦ .f -Bikeways Proposed in Univ.of Utah - 3 : -----_-, Bicycle Master Plan F ¢ a • i I —Requires Further Study ' ,suus _ w ♦ ` Transvalley Corridor" SALT LAKE CITY ® o,� •••• r J 3 INT'L AIRPORT '0 / I o 1 700N V Eh' 1 • 600 N F I Existing Bikeways Nar°matt All Existing Bikeways q°e ■ I I g G ti o, 8 •men. na a • —Natural Surface Trails(BonnevilleShoreline) e'va, ♦ 300N �?I dr �� m 200 1 n Norm rem.le � � • I Existing Transit Facilities ® ,:- m all � ® P\, \` O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop •♦ . �3 i0 . ,,, u, tons ' ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line ® o z 05 I�eva •5 • tR • 8 a a I uNly 0 AHtl>'n @`+� stlest5ide0.W'TTran `r _•—i 4005 rs C 5005 gl rr =• zoos • • ••1■ L• 7, G 49,' Includes marked&signed shared roadways oos aos 6005 a y to 3 "The exact alignment for the Transvalley I - eons Corridor(800 S/900 S)is pending.Per the o 9005 ' • •• ElM�— 900 Sums 5 1992 Salt Lake City Open Space Plan,thea Y1rA' I T� G Transvalley Corridor is an opportunity to 3 — `3e' v �� v.le •,' ""w link"the City east of I-15 to the City west of a Pax_ + 1-15 and provide a pedestrian and bicycle .:/- - ® o (9LigT . IeOos• I route from the foothills.through the urban California area,into the wetlands."The map shows a 3 410 • l e rimer,° a Ke.I"• I western terminus based on the City's s 5 - .,'S s 1992 Open Space Plan.Due to changes in s 17005 0 -3 L IWoos7.this area opf the cit a different western -Y, , --.._-.--I_ -connection may now be appropriate, t. — ®— ■ Izg 0 z ael, /possibly extending to the Salt Lake Marina oar0p ■ 11 m"n ��•m'_Y,ar or Antelo e Island. s �. ■ 000 Dos ztoos •■ ` Pale's Trail• °)i_8 �R Note:The protected bike lanes on 200 E ii11 Jj (South Temple to 900 S)and 300E(100 S to y • � "�a I 600 5)are both shown on the map,but only I ■ • I "° one of the two options will be constructed. ■ _ 1 mStratford Pa,P I • 11 I -a;,VC ■ ■ noon 0 0.5 1 2 toI il--—- - Miles •♦ • -1-- • I I I. December 2015 • • '" d SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 82 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-7a Low Stress Bicycling Network Recommendations Map (Citywide) Recommended ------ I — • — �" Low Stress Bikeways I 1I---------_ --- _ _— —' �• — — — — — — 1 - — — — — — /• Multi-Use Paths 1 I 1 ■ I ■ Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes 1 I 1._ j : -Neighborhood Byways I • —Bikeways Proposed in the Univ.of Utah I I et •• °N.„'a Bicycle Master Plan , 0 —Requires Further Study I • c cQekcan°° • Transvalley Corridor' N A• I • ".r I F 3 •• / — — a- Existing Low Stress Bikeways - •. t ® = '''• I All Low Stress Bikeways SALT LAKE CITY eo0No -Natural Surface Trails(Bonneville Shoreline) a L INT'L AIRPORT 7 00N 6 e00N C.2\ O 600 N 6000N Harold Gatty • Existing Transit and Other Facilities - U. 3 s • 1 1 O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop 4'aeu ,� Amelia Earhart • !� _ m �= 300N ■ o m CA eiratl`ai/ I •♦ ® 200N o ` 1 1 ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line _ - ® Air•ort Paah North Temple • • • •- O Nor Temple I • Fols•m ail •10■ • • South Temple ~ I .p • II �� I ♦4, • 1.x r05 • IN ® a •NOL■•o o c o m o 200= 1 SideTrail I • ,, ,, a '° 0 3005 UNIV O AH 8Ot ' Wes' R`2T1 li 4005 •m•••■4• O■ 4005 7 1 I. \%%I r< xl 5005 5005 • —bF°oth:1�1 3 1■■o b •h•. loos $,o0 6005 ,� 3 3 3 N )005 E " —"- ' "The exact alignment for the Transvalley 9L;°. 8 8 i 80o5 8005 Corridor(800 S/900 S)is pending.Per the x Roos <�9005 eo0s u Sono side •�, 1992 Salt Lake City Open Space Plan,the V a a f' \ NP1 a r, Transvalley Corridor is an opportunity to '. erne` vale link"the City east of I-15 to the City west of t Kelse I-15 and provide a pedestrian and bicycle lit ®� 0 route from the foothills,through the urban California o — area,into the wetlands."The map shows a 3 •E'II IN e° western terminus based on the City's _ m ■ aide.,° I 1992 Open Space Plan.Due to changes in m • •3 sn•c°" Ke°si % /. this area of the city,a different western s 12005 10005 n_os connection may now be appropriate, possibly extending to the Salt Lake Marina el ■ 1 or Antelope Island. _ -lifiwe.....'the'd ( __—.----- • 21000 _•;� 0 Note:The protected bike lanes on 200 E •■ Y Paae snail it F. (South Temple to 900 S)and 300 E(100 S to / ■ �■ 0,le, I A e`a 600 S)are both shown on the map,but only ■ 'a'1 one of the two options will be constructed. ■ ■ :1 • Stratford , ■ _ gran "®-- 0 0.5 1 2 N 1 • I I , , Miles ••♦ •• - 1of December 2015 • •••■° • SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 84 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-7b Low Stress Bicycling Network Recommendations Map (Downtown) ■ emory 300 N tD7 11 k cro"e 0-10 Year Recommended • - N Low Stress Bikeways • 5th Ave ii Multi-Use Paths ■ 4th Ave ■ ei Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes o 0 0 0 0 0■ o I -- 11Neighborhood Byways0 00 0 0 oQ 00 0 3rd Ave Requires Further Study ■ -. - - -_ - tr_ '_y - , _ Nort_i le 2ndAve 1 vi 10-20 Year Recommended ♦ • rempie 1st Ave ¢ ; u o w vi 0 = `_^ `, Square = Y J Low Stress Bikeways Folsom Trail ■ -Multi-use Paths Folsom ♦., . �I1• South Temple ♦■ ■d ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ �■ ■ ■ ■ -Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes ® ■ 11 —Neighborhood Byways • ■ Sal Q 1005 —Requires Further Study 1 3 Q - i o . i 1 ifiJ „iiiit Transvalley Corridor' • o .• I'IP ♦ 00 • Existing Low Stress Bikeways • I sill ikI. • ente All Low Stress Bikeways ♦ I I I 300 S Existing Transit and Other Facilities 0 s � I I O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop letermodai ♦fl Huo ♦ ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line 400 S T� lir ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ I D■ ■ 1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■7■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■C)• ■ =Central Business District(Downtown) ■ ■ wash rn mr 9 IN ■Q Square ■ 500 S 'The exact alignment for the Transvalley - ■Corridor(800 S/900 S)is pending.Per the al ■ 1992 Salt Lake City Open Space Plan,the o0 00 ■ ?� c v U.S U.S w w w w w w Transvalley Corridor is an opportunity to o ■ 0 0 0 o y N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 link"the City east of 1-15 to the City west of ■ 0 0 0 o F- 2■ 1-15 and provide a pedestrian and bicycle CO v m ry ■ 600 5 ry m v rn n oo rn route from the foothills,through the urban ■ w area,into the wetlands."The map shows a ® ■ i • western terminus based on the City's ■ NI 1992 Open Space Plan.Due to changes in ■ 700 S this area of the city,a different western IN 1 ■ MMMMM 1 connection may now be appropriate, o ■ possibly extending to the Salt Lake Marina 0 ■ I or Antelope Island. ■ 1 I 800 S Note:The protected bike lanes on 200 E ■ 1 (South Temple to 900 S)and 300 E(100 S to ■ 600 S)are both shown on the map,but only ■ I one of the two options will be constructed. ^ ■ D 900 S 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 — w •ai ■ A Miles e • U d�d ■ /I December 2015 ■ N� • ■ — SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 86 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLING RECOMMENDATIONS "Being able to more easily take my bike on TRAX 6.4 Interim Bypass Routes trains would be awesome." Some bikeway implementations require difficult tradeoffs such as removal of traffic lanes or Comment from 2013 public changes to on-street parking. In some cases survey the City may decide that the tradeoffs are not currently feasible in some segments. Interim bypass routes can be created to help bicyclists travel around the problematic areas until a more 6.3.4 Transit Station Access desirable, permanent solution is found. Figure 6-io uses a challenging section of 1300 South to Many transit trips begin and end as walking or illustrate how this can be done. bicycling trips. Figure 6-8 shows the existing and recommended bikeways overlaid on the transit network within Salt Lake City limits. This figure 6.5 Bikeway Maintenance illustrates how people in various parts of the The Salt Lake City Streets Division currently City can access major transit stations by bicycle. sweeps roads with bike lanes on them twice per Identification of needed spot improvements month, whereas roads without bike lanes are at transit stations will be handled as part of a swept once a month. Streets are also sometimes separate Transit Master Plan. swept by special request. Bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, and shared lane markings are plowed 6.3.5 Spot Improvements of snow at the same time as the streets where they The bicycle spot improvements presented in are located. Figure 6-9 complement the linear bikeway recommendations. Spot improvements may consist of short gap closures, intersection • upgrades, bridges, underpasses, curb cuts, or other improvements that are best represented by a dot on a map instead of a line. Maintenance items like pothole repair and minor striping changes are not included in this list because the City handles them routinely through a separate r, a process. ` `� MOW Many of the spot improvements shown in - �.� Figure 6-9 also benefit pedestrians. Only spot ., improvements independent of linear bikeways are included in the spot improvements map. For • example, intersection upgrades necessary for Sweepers in Copenhagen are designed specifically implementation of a particular neighborhood for bicycle facilities and can sweep or clear snow byway are assumed to be included in that linear (Photo: Copenhagenize) project. DECEMBER 2015 I 87 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Protected bike lanes may require greater maintenance efforts than conventional bikeways I _ r because of their separated nature. Protected bike lanes may require specialized equipment or • processes, whereas conventional bikeways can - usually be maintained as part of normal roadway .� maintenance activities.A technical memorandum +►, ' 4.0 discussing protected bike lane maintenance was developed as part of this project and is attached .� as an appendix. In 2014 Salt Lake City established a pilot program to declare snow alert nights to facilitate plowing on Small vehicle clearing a buffered bike lane in Vienna, selected streets with on-street parking. Pending Austria (Photo: I Bike Oulu) the results of this pilot program, additional streets maybe added to the system.Bike lanes are among the considerations when selecting streets to be included. 6.5.1 Maintenance Recommendations • Develop a bikeway maintenance plan to address priority sweeping, priority plowing, equipment needs, weed management, and other bikeway maintenance elements. 6.6 Traffic Signal Considerations Traffic control for bicyclists is a rapidly evolving field. Many recent advances are attributable to a growing demand for protected bike lanes. Protected bike lanes are more likely to need dedicated bicycle signals than conventional bikeways because bicyclists must be re-integrated with car traffic through intersections after having been separated between them. 88 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-8 Bicycling Access to Fixed Route Transit Stations Map Recommended Bikeways ------ Multi-Use Paths ■ ■ Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes • I warm Springs ad a —Bike Lanes - _ I I ■ _ Neighborhood Byways __ N ® `o - -Shared Roadways' m t ° ye —Bikeways Proposed in Univ.of Utah 1 Bicycle Master Plan • \ o • Requires Further Study —"-- a i 3 d`A - Existing Bikeways ® i ♦�• . ci SALT LAKE Ci All Existing Bikeways a o 1 ( KOONLO. N TL AIftPOPT—Natural Surface Trails(Bonneville Shoreline) L 7005 H”„ r. Existing Transit Facilities q - ■ r■ • • Amelia Lamar • O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop Po-a�� ♦♦ p•••• 300 N m `• A. ® _° 1�.. ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line ..... I North pie__■ _'■■ _L_ ■_■,IyortNren Pie 1/2 Mile Buffer Around Fixed Route •Ng, 4 ♦ ehaemp10• _ I Fols m ail ■ ' .0 •..' Transit Stations ♦♦ ■a 1 10 s _•.. .• •,r z.°s •� - aN R 8 8 8 o m�� ors r� W T Trail UNIV OF AH The bolder colored and grayed lines inside West saan coos r ru■■■■■a■ o■ ao°s ■ 4y' 9 Y s°° •• Foocni�- the dashed-bordered area are proposed and / i a - r .�_? • existing bikeways,respectively,that are within zoos zoos / I ll e boos o ce `,! about one 1/2 mile(typical walking trip v/n I '" '3°05 -■— '-•"'� _� roc •Y distance)from a fixed route transit station ' ` e 4 :;,, . ti • (TRAX or FrontRunner). o °°°s ••■ 09?s , ___ 'Includes marked&signed shared roadways _ a vale vale 3 4 Paxson California Ave 1300 S Note:The protected bike lanes on 200 E1. ® r . •o �+ ,3oos '':� ,— (South Temple to 900 S)and 300 E(100 S toig a ■F se �� 600 S)are both shown on the map,but only - m ■„�,' ' '" - Ke„i„over on Ka4 . ��' one of the two options will be constructed. 3 % .■3 m 3 17005 On5 .. ,. 17005 1700 a -------"---- Idl°oS ---•_ :.• : 1.. 31D05 iSGarfiel, ZmOS 'tF. ., �]_ Rar • -----""—"-- .. . Pal =Tr-1iV .Y._ '71111 . WE .........j .Y. ..... •' Stratford . aye 700 S 0 0.5 1 2 N •o■■•••• f -�----Miles ♦i I r _ - r , December 2015 • • �9;n,,. - _�----I SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 90 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-9 Bicycling Spot Improvement Recommendations Map • Rec'd Bike Spot Improvements — ---/ • •/ • Enhanced Road Crossings and Signals I I ______ ------------•------_I • Accelerated repaving ® I j ■ • warms , ■ • Intersections and Signage I ■ _ • New Pavement and Curb Cuts • Structure Improvements - ® ■ I Recommended Bikeways N. ■ .40 • -Multi-Use Paths 3 3 • ♦ f Buffered or Protected Bike Lanes ----'--' F 3 3 -Bike Lanes I 3005 10 —Neighborhood Byways ' ® ♦♦ `A I SALT LAKE CITY -Shared Roadways` 3 r INT'L AIRPORT '0 a 3 $ a o0 N —Bikeways Proposed in Univ.of Utah ` • 600N 6°°`• v Bicycle Master Plan Harold Gatt —Requires Further Study qn ■ 2 m F&•4• ti 111_ goo Ylmeli arhart ♦ _ C`� _ u ♦ m 300 N c •• a 1 I Transvalley Corridor" 3'dr„� ••- •_•, • ®• Im0N , �- •��• ' • ■ �•Nort Tem.le • ,I N Y• .� a:• I Existing Bikeways ♦ ,'' •P"Ismail Tem.le ,,70 '�� •0, �` All Existing Bikeways • •♦ •oI 1005 o m a ® z OS L .-I hleMIN - oos r�•-Natural Surface Trails(Bonneville Shoreline) 2� •Y L�• �= IuNIVOF AH.P, eo West Side 0.WTTrail O 40as '� I. ■•p I• ■ • Cl.h �,`'AI Existing Transit Facilities 5005 •, „y' / g 7 mi r ,os_ •at• woo." - O TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Stop coos Tool Rook ■■6005 4"tl •h•� J� ��,■■EM E ,Pe • ■■ TRAX/Streetcar/FrontRunner Line ' „ r ■QMIMI■■■■�� Roos 3 -s"" ide •r •Includes marked&signed shared roadways o 9005 • m 0E�3fl�■■■■■�fl� •1••• • e�1�"-� •`The exact alignment for the Transvalley - S �� o ▪ o I a.'" ai,�'Yale y� •. c ""w I r• Corridor(800 S/900 S)is pending.Per the ar +f 1992 Salt Lake City Open Space Plan,the m ■ Pax''� "'. 1 Transvalley Corridor is an opportunity to California ' •�� Boos link"the City east of I-15 to the City west of �1111Lillimar ■ 3 •e 11�1I'1�'En e" j• 1-15 and provide a pedestrian and bicycle ■ •M Amer•" route from the foothills,through the urban woos •3, �MMI'lam Ke.i"otor i area,into the wetlands"The map shows a imMil III ••••• no, lif western terminus based on the City's A T ® of w �' this Open Space Plan.Due to changes in o 1'o°s • • o - this area of the city a different western __ • • .d connection may now be appropriate, --- — ---�-- -■ ■ ES['d�li , possibly extending to the Salt Lake Marina — _ _ -- -------� "— - .�• 21005 j••, ,5�r Pale:Trail a iI • Note:The protected bike lanes on 200 E ■ (South Temple to 900 5)and 300E(100 S to I ■ ■ 600 S)are both shown on the map.but only • Is ,,tf,rd �l• ,a P I one of the two options will be constructed. ■ w Woos `a'f -®-- • O 0.5 1 2 NI Miles ♦♦ • °• December 2015 • • `9i""- - _�'---I I._, ••••o • -1 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 92 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLE RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 6-10 1300 South Interim Bypass Route 500 West - West Temple HAWK signal or protected i intersection jog will make 0 a. N • this crossing of 300 West ' a General Application of Bypass Routes _ feel safer and more I I This specific example of a interim bypass route for bicyclists is on 1300 South dedicated Paxton Ave - between nterim 50obypass Westroute andon this 20o Eastcorridor are in Salt typical Lake City.of other The recommensituationswdationsherethe forCity a a) ii : • it may have the need for a temporary bypass. o o _v ., 1 i Cross the light rail tracks on Challenges&Solutions L IM,, v I•- Paxton Ave,enhancing an Lucy Ave • ' „pilla existing crossing,while Bypass routes south of 130o South are not feasible because the UTATRAX light rail - - � providing access to the train corridor(-zoo West)does not have any east-west crossings between 1300 5'wide bike lanes will fit on 1 ii , Ballpark TRAX station via TRAX and woo South.Approval of a bike/ped at-grade crossing by UTA is very unlikely the shoulders through the Lucy Ave. Station freeway underpass �p f„ I and a grade-separated crossing would be very expensive. intersections �;- III 'r• I i . 1111114 The i3oo South bypass route is intended to be a interim solution to providing bicycle - 1 -_.51 access through the area.The City's ultimate vision is accommodating bicyclists — — L'' I `"I'.-I- R .� 1300 South -- ------ on i3oo South itself as parcel redevelopment opportunities arise and building rn�r• setbacks can be increased.An overlay zone should be created along 130o South to Eastbound bicyclists will con- is ti tinue on 1300 South to 300 West v An eastbound bike lane o V: facilitate the long-term goal of acquiring additional right-of-way that would allow because a concrete median and 3 (conventional or protected) IC Q more comfortable facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists.However,such a process traffic congestion preclude left 0 will be created between 0 F- can take years if not decades to implements.As a result,this interim solution is turns at 400 West V 400 W and 300 W by rn F either moving the curb line expected to endure for some time. back a few feet to accom- modate bicyclists on the Cost West Temple-200 East road or by widening the • sidewalk to accommodate a • .a , ,ii-+ ► ©- .,� The 130o South Interim Bypass Route has an estimated cost of$550,000. bicycle traffic ' Low traffic volume and lilt HAWK signal at State "t-_ ■ speeds on West Temple ' Street will be necessary to 1 ' . - 4 and Main Street mean that _ ' facilitate this crossing;a `tr, 3i Shared Lane Markings signalized crossings are not x `:� '•r r / i • _ short section ted I Neighborhood Byways needed 4. a i 120')of protected bike * .1- _ ,� •, i lane on the east side of �'� l ' ` ` State will also be needed -I-, ` L Bike Lanes i� � �44 1 , � s� : Protected Bike Lanes I - -r- Multi-Use Paths I ,• ii . , . ,. ...... . Edith Ave _; ' Ii J .f 61�._ min I in e r , • I�r • m Solid lines represent existing bikeways.Dashed lines denote proposed facilities- e "0 triMalp 0 - •f • w "' thick represents the 1300 South Interim Bypass Route and thin represents other Ballpark - ;� O •'r �= O :f f 7' N 2. N o bikeways proposed in the 2014 Pedestrian&Bicycle&Plan. N Parking , iH i M ! 1300 South 1300 South I. a -- Nutt • Spring Mobile WA ' r.- i I-1... r Ballpark .e SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 94 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLING RECOMMENDATIONS Typical concerns that bicyclists experience at In many cases, existing inductive loops installed signals include: primarily for motor vehicles may be capable of Inability to trigger detection sensors or know sensing a bicycle. However, bicyclists may not be • if a sensor has been triggered aware of loop locations or want to use them if they are located in the middle of a traffic lane where • Inadequate time for bicyclists to cross wide bicyclists may not feel comfortable. Detection streets pavement markings are useful for showing • Conflicts between right turning cars and bicyclists where they should place their bicycle to bicyclists trying to go straight achieve the best likelihood of detection. • Difficulty turning at(or crossing)intersections with unusual geometry or multiple traffic Many bicycle frames are now made with carbon lanes fiber or other materials that are less likely to be detected by inductive loops. Other forms of • Lack of signal coordination to facilitate steady detection such as video and radar are able to bicycle speeds detect any type of bicycle regardless of material. 6.6.1 Detection Salt Lake City and UDOT use radar as their Bicycle detection is used to inform signal standard detection technology.New or retrofitted controllers that a bicyclist is waiting to use an signals in the City will now be better equipped intersection. Detection occurs primarily through to sense bicycles. Radar is capable of detecting automated means (passive detection) such as in- both bicycles and vehicles and has software- pavement inductive loops, video, and microwave configurable detection zones. This provides radar.In recent years bicycle detection has become cost savings by combining vehicle and bicycle more important as traffic signals are increasingly detection needs without compromising bicyclist operated in an actuated or semi-actuated mode safety or convenience. rather than in a pre-timed mode. An actuated signal is one where operations are 6.6.2 Confirmation Lights adjusted automatically based on what the signal Bicycle detector confirmation lights have been is detecting. A pre-timed signal's operations used in Portland(OR)at three locations.The lights are fixed and unresponsive to demand. Semi- illuminate when the bicycle detector is actuated actuated signals operate under actuated and and are relatively inexpensive to purchase and pre-timed conditions at different times of day. Bicyclists may be "stranded" at a red light if the signal cannot detect them and no cars arrive to trigger the sensor. This scenario often leads to bicyclists running red lights. Historically, the most common form of detection . . 1 has been inductive (electrical) loops. The _ introduction of metal within the magnetic field triggers the traffic signal controller. Loops can be .�:. designed specifically for bicycles but the design ,�- and sensitivity must be appropriate. Standard loop detection pavement marking (Photo: NACTO) DECEMBER 2015 I 95 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN install.At this time,the use of confirmation lights when special traffic signal phases are in effect is experimental and there are no formal studies for them. Typical displays in the U.S. consist of that indicate clear benefits to bicyclists or a three-section red-yellow-green heads with bicycle reduction in red light running. symbols on the lenses. 6.6.3 Bicycle Signal Heads & Phases Supplementary signing may be required when special bicycle traffic signal phases are Bicycle signals and phasing have been used for implemented. Of most concern is the possibility many years in Europe but are relatively new of vehicles turning right across the path of to the U.S. More U.S. cities are installing them, bicyclists who are proceeding straight ahead. particularly in conjunction with protected bike The NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide lanes where bicycles are separated from car traffic recommends all-arrow displays for vehicle right at intersections. turns, supplemented by an active blank-out "No- Bicycle signal heads are typically used at signalized Turn-On-Red"sign. intersections to give indications to bicyclists i ri ,, 41 di (teDi7C 44,1,-..4' '..,1.., , • wr J ),f ti f rts • • . f.-411 . _.„„,_.... ,, ., ... . Bicycle signal head (Photo: NACTO) ,_ ,_. , N " di WM' ` Typical applications for bicycle traffic signal 111 r phases include the following: diiiiiiiiira l �j • Where a multi-use path or neighborhood + 11•� 1 4 byway crosses a street, especially where .�� . the needed bicycle clearance time differs substantially from the needed pedestrian - clearance time. ' 1' • To split signal phases at intersections involving ' • protected bike lanes where a predominant bike movement conflicts with a main motor vehicle movement during the same green phase. • At intersections where a bicycle facility White bicycle detector confirmation light (Photo: transitions from a protected bike lane to Jonathan Maus/BikePortland.org) a conventional bike lane if car turning movements are significant. • At intersections with contra-flow bicycle 96 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLING RECOMMENDATIONS o • •7:* . -rvigs "No Right Turn on Red" blankout sign movements that otherwise would have no signal indication and where a normal traffic Sign instructing turning motorists to yield to through signal head may encourage wrong-way driving bicycle traffic (Photo. NACTO) by motorists. • To give bicyclists an advanced green (like a are released in order to reduce conflicts with leading pedestrian interval) or to indicate right-turning vehicles. an "all-bike" phase where bicyclist turning • Considering "green wave" timing of signals movements are high. allowing bicyclists to move smoothly down a • At complex intersections that may otherwise street without stopping at multiple red lights. be difficult for bicyclists to navigate. 6.6.4.1 Minimum Green Time While bicycle signal phases may improve bicyclist Traffic controllers are typically programmed to safety,they may also increase delays to bicyclists if provide a minimum green time when a vehicle is they are no longer permitted to move concurrently detected on an actuated approach and to extend with motor vehicle traffic. Safety needs and extra the green time by two or three seconds for each delay should be weighed on a case-by-case basis. additional vehicle.The minimum green time may Several cities have adopted specific warrants for be set as short as five seconds for lightly traveled bicycle phases and bicycle signal heads. side streets, with the objective of minimizing unnecessary delay to a heavily traveled arterial 6.6.4 Signal Timing street. This situation may create a problem for Traffic signal timing considerations for bicycles bicyclists if they are attempting to cross a wide include the following: street on a green light at the same time as a single • Ensuring adequate initial green time plus vehicle. An initial time of five seconds plus the clearance time for a bicyclist to cross an yellow and all red time may be adequate for the intersection safely. single vehicle but inadequate for the bicyclist. There are three potential solutions: • Considering a "head start" phase to allow bicyclists to start their crossing of an • Ensure that vehicle minimum times at each intersection a few seconds before vehicles intersection are also adequate for a bicyclist DECEMBER 2015 I 97 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN to safely cross the intersection even if bicycles 15 MPH has been found to be effective for both cars are not detected separately. and bicycles. Green waves for bicycles have been • Detect bicycles separately from vehicles and implemented in European cities, particularly in utilize a separate "bike minimum green", Netherlands and Denmark, and on some streets which is a built-in feature of the controllers in Portland and San Francisco. used in Salt Lake City(although not currently used). Progression is much easier to achieve on one- way streets. On two-way streets establishing • In exceptional cases of very wide streets progression in both directions is mathematically intersecting low-traffic minor streets, provide a bicycle push button near the curb on the dependent on the cycle length of the traffic signals minor street approach so that bicyclists can and the spacing. In Salt Lake City, it is necessary call the pedestrian phase or a special bicycle to use relatively long cycle lengths because wide phase. streets require long pedestrian crossing times. In Extension of green time for bicyclists arriving addition, the presence of light rail also tends to after the start of green is possible with certain impact cycle lengths. types of detection. The detection must be capable Establishing a progression speed designed of sensing the bicycle in motion. In the absence specifically for bicyclists also imposes the same of a dedicated bicycle lane, detection must be speed for vehicles. Motorists may perceive this capable of sensing the bicycle in any of the vehicle as adding to congestion and stops. Prioritizing travel lanes. one street for a bicycle green wave may interfere with signal progression on intersecting routes, 6.6.4.2 Leading Bicycle Interval particularly in Salt Lake City's downtown Leading intervals for pedestrians were described grid where signals every block are the norm. previously in Chapter 5. A similar tactic can Implementing a bicycle green wave could prove be used for bicyclists to give them a head start especially challenging where State routes must be into the intersection in advance of cars. Leading crossed. UDOT is willing to work with the City to Bicycle Intervals (LBI) improve visibility of evaluate signal timing changes that do not place bicyclists to right-turning vehicles. This mostly unnecessary delay within a corridor. applies to protected bike lane situations where there is some form of separation between the 6.6.5 Two-Stage Left Turn Queue Boxes bikeway and the space occupied by motor Two-stage left turn queue boxes are designed vehicles. LBI can be implemented very quickly to facilitate left turn maneuvers at locations and easily by programming of the controller where bicyclists have difficulty crossing multiple and has minimal impact on motor vehicle delay. lanes of through traffic to reach a left turn lane. Turning movements that conflict with LBIs To make a two-stage left turn a bicyclist first should be prohibited. proceeds straight through the intersection on the green light and stops in a bicycle box on the far 6.6.4.3 Bicycle Green Waves side of the intersection. The bicyclist then turns Establishing green waves for bicycles is a traffic 90 degrees to the left,waits for a green light in the signal timing technique called "progression" cross street direction, and proceeds through.This that allows bicycles to proceed on a street with combination of movements allows bicyclists to a minimum of stops at red lights. It normally effectively make left turns without being required requires designing the signal timing for the speed to merge across traffic. Care must be taken to of bicycles instead of cars. However, in some place queue boxes in locations that do not unduly congested urban environments, a speed of about interfere with right turning motor vehicles. 98 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLING RECOMMENDATIONS has' ' � , °a _ 11 6.7 Bicycle Paring an Other ,, r mho i , End-of-Trip Facilities I •„ The City has several initiatives relating to end- of-trip facilities for bicyclists. These currently w * I include: _ • City-installed bike racks on the public way by �( ► business or customer request. • Seasonally-installed bicycle corrals (April to November) converting one on-street motor vehicle parking space to parking for io Two-stage left turn queue box at 200 S/Main St bicycles. • Bicycle racks and lockers/secure parking areas Typical two-stage queue box applications include: required in new commercial and residential buildings and significant remodels; quantities • Signalized intersections with high traffic based on use.This ordinance was strengthened volumes and/or multiple lanes of through in 2o13. traffic. Along protected bike lanes. • Additional secure parking areas, showers, • and bike share sponsorship are available • At streetcar or light rail tracks where as developer incentives while reducing the perpendicular crossings are encouraged. amount of motor vehicle parking. • Signalized intersections where left turns for motorists are prohibited but bicyclists may itA 1 d` bepermitted to safelyand legally make a �'. 14.; . ..- f e , .'" g Y ro .� � s � �=: two-stage left turn. T ��>;!5.4 a -, 6.6.6 Bike-Related Signal fi '- rff ` '' Recommendations I ki 1 i • Continue installing radar detection to sense 1*� . - * " ~�, i — bicycles at signals and use bike-specific 1 , ` . ✓ , i� ,4 -, ' _, I . , pavement markings as needed on a case-by- °h ' i< . t ":�1c,,PARKINGr case basis. �=. �' . { '''' tier. 1n • Consider the use of confirmation lights if a i F — Ale suitable test site becomes apparent. • Consider adopting specific warrants for bicycle phases and bicycle signal heads. Bike corral at Bruges Waffles and Frites on 300 S • Review signal timing algorithms to identify whether adjustments need to be made to • Bicycle valet services encouraged through the provide bicyclists with safe minimum green special events permitting process. time lengths. • Bicycle lockers at several transit stations; the • Consider using LBI and green wave timing in Utah Transit Authority has recently added conjunction with protected bike lanes. day-use lockers in addition to lockers to be • Continue to install left turn queue boxes rented annually. where appropriate. • Artistic bike racks commissioned by the Salt Lake City Arts Council. DECEMBER 2015 I 99 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This plan recommends that the City continue Lands has recently gone through a public process these programs. to formalize the user-created I-Street jumps Additionally, the City and the Utah Transit and create a system for bicycle terrain park Authority should develop a program to routinely partnerships with local organizations. Where add bicycle parking at transit stops. Bike SPAS appropriate to watershed concerns, this plan recommends that Parks &Public Lands continue (Secure Parking Areas) should be added at rail to consider the addition of mountain bike parks, transit stops and selected larger bus stops. pump tracks, skateboard and BMX parks, and The City may also wish to reevaluate whether bike polo courts as part of neighborhood-based bicycle valet services should be required for larger parks and open space planning citywide. 6.9 Bicycle Counts & Surveys Bicycle counts demonstrate where bicycling is most popular and where certain trends (e.g. sidewalk riding, helmet use, and percentage of ; - rya e Custom bike racks for the 21st &21st Business District = - events now that the program has been established - for several years on an encouragement basis. Bonneville Shoreline Trail in the Wasatch foothills 6.8 Mountain Biking & BMX adjacent to Salt Lake City While the focus of this plan is on transportation, this plan supports the addition of recreational mountain bike trails on public lands within City female riders) are more or less prevalent. This limits, and recommends they be considered information informs how cities plan infrastructure further as part of an update to the City's 1992 Open and implement programs. Salt Lake City has been Space Plan or in a new recreational trails master conducting bicycle counts since 2011. The City plan. Salt Lake City has been a regional leader in has also used travel survey data from numerous developing the Bonneville Shoreline Trail and the sources to supplement the counts. trail is complete within the City limits. 6.9.1 Data Anomalies The City has several skateboard and BMX areas in City parks. The Division of Parks & Public Situations periodically arise where it is not feasible to conduct counts at specific stations due 100 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SIX: BICYCLING RECOMMENDATIONS to construction or other factors. One method for affordable technologies include active infrared, handling years when one or more count stations inductive loops,and pneumatic tubes that exclude are inoperable is to calculate the percent change motor vehicles in mixed traffic environments. for the valid stations and apply that percentage Automatic counts can greatly expand the amount to the previous year total for the inoperable of data available to the City for trend analysis. stations. Such extrapolations should be noted for transparency. In the following year's count this 6.9.4 Travel Surveys value should be replaced with an average of the Salt Lake City already uses data from various two years on either side of the extrapolated year. travel survey sources such as the National Household Travel Survey, American Community 6.9.2 Rolling Averages Survey, and Utah Travel Survey. One advantage Rolling averages are a statistical method used of these surveys is their statistical significance to smooth out yearly spikes, highlight long-term owing to randomized and broad-reaching sample trends, and make it easier to absorb isolated data sizes. anomalies. For example, a three-year rolling average for 2014 would include data from 2012, 6.9.5 Bicycle Count & Survey 2013, and 2014.At the time this master plan was Recommendations created, Salt Lake City only had four years of • Handle data anomalies according to the bicycle count data collected. A minimum of five process detailed in Section 6.7.i. years is needed before it makes sense for the City • Report three-year rolling averages for bike to use rolling averages for trend analysis. counts instead of individual yearly totals once five years of data has been collected. 6.9.3 Automated Count Technologies • Continue performing manual counts but Salt Lake City's annual bicycle counts currently are supplement them with continuous automatic done manually with the help of citizen volunteers count data. following protocols established by the National • Install permanent counters in important Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project. locations or rotate a limited number of These manual counts are relatively inexpensive automatic counters in a mobile count program. but are subject to significant variability due to • Continue utilizing travel surveys to provide small sample sizes, which makes year-to-year more data points for bicycling trends. comparisons less statistically robust. Manual counts may be supplemented with continuous automatic count data. Increasingly Chapter 6 Sources 1. "Tech Companies Use Bicycling to Attract Top Talent". People for Bikes. http://www. peopleforbikes.org/pages/tech-companies-and-bikes.; "Protected Bike Lanes Mean Business: How list Century Transportation Networks Help New Urban Economies Boom". People for Bikes and Alliance for Biking&Walking.https://www.sfbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2o14/o4/Protected_ Bike_Lanes_Mean_Business.pdf; "Business Innovators Invest in Bicycling". League of American Bicyclists. http://bikeleague.org/content/business-innovators-invest-bicycling. DECEMBER 2015 I 101 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 102 I DECEMBER 2015 r li ,: Education, encouragement, enforcement, and promotional programs enhance the walking and • bicycling experience and can be cost effective complements to infrastructure investments. ` "� These types of programs help people learn how r2_ ' tI to use Salt Lake City's roads safely, whether traveling on foot,by bicycle,or in a car. rpTERThis chapter outlines recommended program }' ' ' VEN investments for Salt Lake City over the next five years. The recommendations were developed and refined through multiple rounds of review including two public open houses, an online survey,the Steering and Stakeholder Committees, PROGRAM and tabling at community events during Summer RECOMMENDATIONS 2013. The following programs and accompanying strategies will help Salt Lake City be a safer, �" " more educated, and more equitable walking and bicycling community where people of all ages and abilities feel comfortable walkingor ridinga , ; AIL bicycle for any trip. The first pages of this chapter summarize each al 1 RI 10 ' program while more detail about funding, partnerships, the City's role, time commitment, reach and impact, community interest, expected I outcomes, priority, and implementation phasing '� for each program is provided in Sections 7.4 and • J 7.5. " :Ili The chapter is broken down into the following (%# 1/ five subsections: `! • Multi-Modal Programs 15.1111 1. • Pedestrian-Specific Programs i tIf, • Bicycling-Specific Programs Program Implementation Schedule ' _ • Program Summary Tables , , , lik, . it_ ,i/ i .. _ / DECEMBER 2015 I 103 / SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 7.1 Multi-Modal Programs , , �z ti;. `° _ Y ,�` Multi-modal programs benefit multiple user ,� > p.,,,r... groups. Some are targeted towards pedestrians , !�—'' �':! -s et i UA• ' and bicyclists only while others may also '.'�'` - �' �,,�,;�� f �,•i encompass transit riders,drivers,or other groups. , r. ,__ . '� ' s The programs typically have an education, 1 encouragement, or enforcement focus. iv .iii _______ ______ _____ -Q Pedestrians cross 200 S/State St as a bus passes Beginning Driver Education Improving driver awareness of pedestrians Target Audience: Beginning drivers and bicyclists and increasing knowledge of Sample Programs: Illinois' Driver Education pedestrian and bicycle rights, responsibilities, Video and Curriculum; Wisconsin's Share & Be and common behaviors helps to make a safer and more comfortable road environment for all users. Aware Driver Education Program These courses can also increase public acceptance of enforcement actions. Salt Lake City can help support the safety of all road users by supporting efforts to require pedestrian and bicycle-related training within local,private,and statewide driver education courses. °ia° Media Campaign XePD Salt Lake City should partner with other groups to 16 develop regional campaigns that address unsafe t and illegal behaviors of motorists, pedestrians, - -- .and bicyclists while encouraging mutual respect i _ . . - *- ''� among all road users and encouraging active �` �~ ;�� transportation. 'kJ a... - �'�' �' Target Audience: All road users; may be more - um*41.1,r, a ' , specific for targeted campaigns I - i, Sample Programs:Bikes Belong Safety Campaign ' 40 Jr' Best Practices; Road Respect (Utah); How We Road Respect is a statewide program that promotes Roll (Columbus, OH); Coexist Campaign (San cooperation and respect between all road users (Photo: UDOT) Francisco, CA); Heads Up Boulder: Mind the Crosswalk(Boulder, CO) 104 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS °alivQ Open Streets Event On Saturday May 4, 2o13, Salt Lake City hosted an Open Streets event to engage people in 5='> , . walking, bicycling, and physical activity. The ' event temporarily opened a route of City streets exclusively to walking, biking, and other forms ; _ lu of human-powered transportation, as well as supporting activities such as exercise classes, dance classes, music, food, games, and other attractions. The event took place along the iconic downtown corridor of 30o South/Broadway —4, between the Main Library and the Intermodal Hub. The Transportation Division led route selection, A child and his dog at the May 2013 Open Streets permitting, traffic control, and public funding, while Bike Utah led promotion, programming, Target Audience: General public and private sponsorship. A volunteer Event Chairperson assisted with all aspects of planning, Sample Programs: Open Streets Project/Open and the Salt Lake City Volunteer Coordinator led Streets Guide; Cyclovia Tucson (Tucson,AZ) volunteer recruitment and management. Police Training Strengthening the walking and bicycling - • information in police education courses and training will help officers improve public safety and enforce existing laws more effectively. Police • - iMin training will enhance many other educational and W enforcement programs. 10 c Target Audience: All SLCPD officers, including ' r i bike and foot patrols 1 Sample Programs: Traffic Enforcement for / I n Bicyclist Safety Training Video (Chicago, IL) Police education training at the Public Safety Building DECEMBER 2015 I 105 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 'salia Multi-Modal Crash Analysis and Reduction A multi-modal approach to crash reduction is Police Department from the bike light giveaway a comprehensive safety program that includes program. Enforcement initiatives should focus on establishing measurable goals for reducing behaviors known to be the most dangerous from incidents and collisions for all modes of travel. both local and national data, such as motorists By developing a system for routine analysis for not yielding to pedestrians and/or bicyclists when pedestrian and bicycle-related crashes, other required to do so by law and bicyclists not using cities have been able to implement safety-driven, lights at night. multi-modal enforcement programs along with strategic infrastructure changes. Target Audience: All transportation mode users Successful and balanced enforcement comes from Sample Programs: NYC's Vision Zero (New York a strong, communicative relationship between City, NY); Targeted Multi-Modal Enforcement transportation staff and local law enforcement. (Tucson,AZ);Tucson police are available to speak with other law enforcement departments to offer The Salt Lake City Transportation Division can build on their successful partnership with the insight and advice SmartTrips This is a neighborhood-based program that r'" e encourages public and active transportation - _ through free bike/walk/transit kits, coupons to ,- local businesses, educational newsletters, and collaborative communityevents. The program Yn. - �- p g i seeks to educate interested people on how to find ,., �N a safe route to work,to the store,to ride,walk, or Ai' take transit with their children to school, and to r Q. M tar-, �� - reach other destinations without using a car.The a. _3_ Salt Lake City program is modeled after one that - __ . .--j was started in Portland(OR).Other communities that have implemented SmartTrips programs , have all successfully reduced the number of ; l vehicle trips.Between 2012 and 2oi4,SmartTrips '' 0 t i R, ;'" in Salt Lake City engaged the East Liberty Park, ,.. imp. Rose Park, Wasatch Hollow, Sugar House, and 'N• 1' Fairpark neighborhoods. The SmartTrips team rides the S-Line Streetcar Target Audience: Residents of targeted neighborhoods Sample Programs: SmartTrips Program (St. Paul, MN); SmartTrips Program (Portland, OR) 106 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS moat,QI Traffic Citation Diversion XeRe Other than one-time drivers education courses, - r Y : . % ,,.,;: ;y yf there are few formal opportunities for motorists and/or bicyclists to learn the legal rights and a responsibilities specific to bicycling and walking. - * If 3 '„1 The Salt Lake City Transportation Division can r ! - �` work with the Police Department and other i. appropriate divisions to developtraffic ' , _ Citykitt... 1� citation diversion classes so that road users (pedestrians, bicyclists, and/or motorists) who ,_ �� z commit offenses known to endanger pedestrians • and bicyclists can, at the discretion of the officer, be invited to take a safety and diversion class in Salt Lake City police officers enforcing traffic lieu of paying fines. violations near the State Capitol Building Target Audience: Road users (pedestrians, Sample Programs: Share the Road Safety Class bicyclists,and/or motorists)who commit offenses (Portland, OR); Bicycle Diversion Course (Pima known to endanger pedestrians and bicyclists County/City of Tucson,AZ) •iii°Ri Bus Driver Training XecIe Bus driver training programs ensure that drivers know about laws related to walking and bicycling, 4 understand safe vehicle operation around I pedestrians and bicyclists. The Salt Lake City I I a I 1 Transportation Division should continue to I t I I encourage UTA and the Salt Lake City School District to train their bus drivers about how to _� - safety drive near pedestrians and bicyclists. ,� _ • Target Audience: UTA and School District bus \\ , drivers _ = Sample Programs: Bus Operator Education UTA bus driver (Photo: UTA) (Portland, OR); Frequent Driver Education (San Francisco, CA) DECEMBER 2015 I 107 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 7.2 Pedestrian-Specific ,,t,,,`1„ `. , _T y Programs ©``, . - 4. .i , -.111 0--li These programs primarily benefit pedestrians and il are focused on this group in particular. Summaries �� 1 of the recommended pedestrian-specific programs ,,j - , ,• _ - , are shown below. , L ; 4 _ 0Pedestrian Wayfinding Pedestrians cross 1300 S at 600 E Liberty Park Well-designed pedestrian wayfinding is one of downtown area and Sugar House where some the most fundamental elements of a welcoming, pedestrian wayfinding is already present, with pleasant walking environment. Wayfinding possible expansion to other areas in following schemes should include destinations, sign types, years. travel time and/or distance where possible, Target Audience: Residents and visitors and a plan for implementation. A cohesive and conspicuous pedestrian wayfinding network Sample Programs: Legible London (London, will help pedestrians identify the best routes England) to destinations. Efforts should begin in the 0 Walking School Bus The rate of children walking to school is at an all-time low and parents have become wary of - allowing children to walk alone, primarily due 4 , '' to traffic concerns. Walking School Buses help = i r; + - alleviate the fear — and the time constraints for _ ''_ I parents — associated with children walking to I +` `' school. They may be stand-alone efforts or part '' ' -' ,`j' 1. ,4-''� . of a broader Safe Routes to School program. +...,1. ,;� Parents can take turns leading the "bus", which ` ... i follows the same route every time and picks up children from their homes or designated "bus 1 stops"at designated times.A Walking School Bus Walking school bus in Columbia (MO) can be as informal as a few parents alternating to walk their children to and from school, but often Target Audience: Students and their parents it is a well-organized effort led by the PTA or a local agency or organization. Some schools such Sample Programs: Walking School Bus Program as Uintah Elementary have already organized (Columbia, MO) walking school buses. 108 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS O Park(ing) Day Park(ing) Day is an annual event that happens around the world where neighborhood residents, artists, business owners, cities, counties, and _„ ,r ,� — 3- others collaborate to temporarily transform _ parking spaces into small arklets as temporary ' ``` ,, c p g P p p r ` public places for the day. Several businesses in Salt Lake City already participate in this event. r,,. '�' y Target Audience: Neighborhood residents, - business owners, shoppers Sample Programs: Official Park(ing) Day 2013 Park(ing) Day at the 21st & 21st Business District (Photo: Architectural Nexus) O Targeted Crosswalk Enforcement Motorists who routinely fail to yield the right- enforcement often results in citations,the greater of-way to pedestrians, as required by law, are impact comes through media publicity of the unlikely to change their behavior if they perceive event to reinforce the importance of obeying that there are no consequences to their actions. pedestrian crossing laws. Hundreds of communities around the U.S. implement targeted crosswalk enforcement. In Target Audience: Drivers and bicyclists Las Vegas, for example, crossing decoys often Sample Programs: Back-to-School Crosswalk wear seasonal costumes (such as a turkey at Stings (Shoreline,WA; Roseburg, OR; Plymouth, Thanksgiving, or a leprechaun in March) to earn MN; and other locations) greater media attention.While targeted crosswalk O Mid-Block Walkway Programming An effort to reclaim and utilize mid-block Target Audience: General public, property walkways as public space requires a concerted developers,land owners, SLC RDA effort among many stakeholders, including local government, businesses and business groups, Sample Programs:Privately Owned Public Space advocacy organizations, and volunteers. These (New York, NY); Alley Network Project (Seattle, efforts increase vibrancy in hidden public spaces. WA);Alley Network Project Guide Salt Lake City's Mid-Block Walkway Design Guidelines provide direction on the design and use of these spaces. DECEMBER 2015 I 109 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 7.3 Bicycling-Specific Programs These programs support efforts to educate and encourage people who bicycle,as well as gather information to quantify bikeway use. ortie Annual Bicycle User Counts Ongoing bicycle user counts provide important 11111WIN information used to approximate use and demand for facilities and programs. The National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project(NBPDP), a nationwide effort to provide a consistent model _F of data collection and ongoing data, states that "without accurate and consistent demand and usage figures,it is difficult to measure the positive _ benefits of investments in [bicycling], especially - ;407 when compared to other transportation options such as the private automobile."Since September Bicycle count volunteers and bicyclists participate in a supplementary survey 2010, Salt Lake City has utilized the NBPDP data collection model in each of its annual bicycle Target Audience: Volunteers and City staff user counts. Implementation of automated data collection methods would augment the (analysts) volunteer-based data and allow for much more Sample Programs: National Bicycle and trend analysis. Pedestrian Documentation Project Classroom and On-Bike Training Bicycle safety and skills education in elementary and middle/junior high schools can be an effective way to teach youth about bicycling safety and how to ride in a predictable, safe manner. These programs educate younger students about bicycling and other non-motorized transportation options that may go a long way in affecting their ; ;; �`: decision to choose bicycling for transportation and recreation later in life. - __ Target Audience: Elementary and middle/junior high school students Sample Programs: The Florida Traffic and Bike Rodeo organized by the Salt Lake City Police Bicycle Safety Education Program Department 110 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS Bicycle Friendly Businesses and Business Areas Bicycle Friendly Business programs raise the A Bicycle Benefits program in the City encourages profile of and show support for bicycling in a businesses to offer discounts to customers who community,while also promoting local businesses arrive by bicycle. As of 2014, there were about and building a sense of community. As of Spring 6o Salt Lake City businesses participating in that 2013, Salt Lake City has six businesses registered program. with the League of American Bicyclists' "Bicycle Friendly Business" designation. In May 2013,the Target Audience: Current and potential bicyclists City hosted a bicycle-friendly business workshop and the business community that included participation from a group of Sample Programs: Bicycle Friendly Business business owners,Neighborhood Business District Program (Long Beach, CA) representatives, transportation planners, and students. The workshop presented about how Bicycle Friendly Business Districts can support both bicycling and local business. Bike Map The Salt Lake City Bikeways Map has been 2 013-14 published and distributed periodically since the 198os. In spring 2013, an updated map was published and free copies are available throughout B I K E the City or via online download. Public feedback during the Salt Lake City Bicycle/Pedestrian 'NAYS Master Plan Update planning process showed strong support for a smartphone-based SLC bike map app. Rather than creating a stand-alone app, M A P Salt Lake City should consider submitting GIS data to online map providers in order to improve the accuracy of bike layers and promote the online map app as a free source for turn-by-turn bicycle directions. Salt Lake City should continueeStib to produce the hardcopy and digital copy of the citywide bikeways map approximately every other year. free Target Audience: Current and potential bicyclists T.annV�+ Uwawn `�)-� Sample Programs: Chicago (IL) CTA a b The cover of the 2013-14 Salt Lake City Bikeways Map DECEMBER 2015 I 111 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN O Monthly Social Rides Ongoing group bike rides can target many groups of people and cover countless topics or themes.In most cases, however, the purpose is the same: to provide a safe, comfortable, and social setting for - bicycling. New riders experience riding safely in . . a group while learning bicycling skills and rules of the road, and all riders have the opportunity to OP-!! meet neighbors,share in a feeling of camaraderie, • i and build community. 11111L ;. Target Audience: Current and potential bicyclists Sample Programs: San Jose Bike Party (San Family attending the Super Hero themed SLC Bike Party ride, June 2013 (Photo: SLC Bike Party Jose, CA); Kidical Mass (Eugene, OR, and many Facebook) other locations) s3 Recreational Bike Routes This program seeks to develop and promote Salt Lake City's recreational bicycle facilities for residents and tourists alike, highlighting great 4 views, enjoyable rides, and the City's unique and intimate connection to the mountains, canyons, and the Great Salt Lake. It expands on the "Cycle the City" route created by the City and Visit Salt Lake in 2012-2013.A key route to be formalized is the Great Salt Lake Marina bike route, using the Airport Bike Path and I-8o Frontage Road west Great Salt Lake Marina bike route (Photo: Dave Iltis) of the International Center as part of a unique, low traffic experience appropriate for faster road/ eventually route signs. Route signs,with the route recreational riders. This route is important for name and identifying logo, may include simple several bike races. signs to mark the route, destination wayfinding signs, and/or signs themed around hill climbs or Additional named routes would be created canyon route grades.Recreational bike routes may and geared toward recreational cyclists. Some include casual family bicycling, fast road/racing routes would be either loop or out-and-back cycling, and mountain biking opportunities. rides designed to be completed within one day, although regional opportunities maybe identified Target Audience: Residents and tourists to include multi-day trips. The routes would be Sample Programs: Explore Maine by Bike; New developed with printed publications, online York State Bike Routes; Denmark National Cycle resources (including mobile devices), and Routes 112 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS School Bike Trains School bike trains offer a safe,fun way to ride as a secondary education, the need for oversight and group to school and can be part of a broader Safe companionship on rides to and from school may Routes to School program.Although the national decrease. Safe Routes to School program suggests that they are usually best suited for older elementary Target Audience: Elementary school children school children, they may be applicable for Sample Programs: SRTS Guide; Atlanta Walk a wider age range. As children age and enter and Roll to School Day(Atlanta, GA) Ortre Women's Bicycling Programs Women are often less comfortable with bicycling . (particularly in traffic)than men, and user counts .:,a in the City confirm this trend. Because many i + potential bicyclists are women, encouraging, ,.•,.c,.•,•••:.;.:•.:__. educating, and enabling women to ride a bicycle more often will attract a greater percentage of that group. By partnering with local organizations and bike shops to offer women-only clinics, workshops, and rides designed to be welcoming and supportive for participants at any stage of E 1 comfort, the City can promote and encourage t 1 ' women to ride. J1pi Target Audience: Women who are current or � r- bicyclists I �, potentialY 1�; , Sample Programs: Women on Bikes Program (Portland, OR) Bicyclist riding in Liberty Park OrlD Bicycle Theft Prevention As the desirability of bicycling increases in a Target Audience: Current and potential bicyclists community, there is often a corresponding increase in bicycle theft. Salt Lake City should Sample Programs: Sacramento Bait Bike develop a program to address bicycle theft, Program (Sacramento, CA); Aspen Police Bait including consideration of registration options, Bike Program (Aspen, CO); BART Bike Theft lock promotions (coupons), and additional Prevention Program (San Francisco Bay Area, secured bicycle parking. CA) DECEMBER 2015 I 113 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Winter Bicycling Programs Winter weather is a pervasive barrier to bicycling `1 •'T for transportation. For many people, daily ;,' transportation choices are habitual and feeling as �'�!� :l� though you cannot bike in winter makes bicycling P ;;' ' a less viable option throughout the entire year. 4 • s ider„ • �, _ =- w During cold, snowy winters, people may also be ,, ,. r .v. less active, so encouraging winter biking is good ` ^' - �`�, � `"� ' � -A AN for a community's public health and physical activity levels. Salt Lake City can encourage .4111 bicycling year-round by linking the community to winter cycling resources and hosting classes and • 0-.a�x....` events like Winter Bike to Work Day,Winter Bike Lack of encouragement, education, and/or gear deters some from riding when it is cold and wet Fest (indoor event with clothing and equipment demonstrations), and improving maintenance of facilities during the winter. Target Audience: Current and potential bicyclists Sample Programs: Bike Winter(Chicago, IL) Orle Bicycle Wayfinding As the City develops a low-stress bikeway network, including neighborhood byways, it 'tt) \ SE PDg1LAND will become appropriate to sign key corridors as L N7R,=6 the preferred way to connect key destinations, - • such as downtown, University of Utah, key --_ neighborhoods, and transit stations. Bicycle - •. wayfinding should address preferred routes, >.' )IO distance, and expected bicycling time. Time 1 ? j411141k1 estimates should take into account both gradei 4/ /.W•a and intersections. Recreational bicycle routes will . -_,> " `� include a wayfinding sign element as well; these - -a programs are complementary. Bicycle wayfinding, such as this route sign in Portland (OR), usually provides both distance and time Target Audience: Current and potential bicyclists estimates Sample Programs: Design Guidelines for Bicycle Wayfinding Signage, Oakland Public Works (Oakland,CA);Portland Bureau of Transportation Bike Boulevard Wayfinding Signs (Portland, OR) 114 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS 7.4 Program Implementation Schedule Table 7-1 shows a general schedule for implementing the recommended programs. Priorities may appropriately change in coming years but this summary provides an outlook for where the City currently intends to invest its time and resources in future programs.Some programs such as enhancements to driver education may require significant lead time even though they are deemed to be high priorities. 7.5 Program Summary Tables Tables 7-2 and 7-3 summarize key information for each of the recommended programs. They contain brief information about cost (both in money and time), expected outcomes, and priority. The Community Interest column is reflective of the level of support received through the public process. A value of "N/A" in that column means that the program idea surfaced as part of the public feedback and was thus not part of the open house and survey materials presented to the public. The column for Priority weighs factors such as cost, potential impact, feasibility, and public preferences. DECEMBER 2015 115 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Table 7-1 Program Implementation Schedule 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Multi-Modal Programs Multi-Modal Crash Analysis and Reduction Open Streets Event ----- Police Training ---- Media Campaign --- Beginning Driver Education SmartTrips MI.-MIN Traffic Citation Diversion Bus Driver Training ----- Pedestrian-Specific Programs Targeted Crosswalk Enforcement ---- Pedestrian Wayfinding ---- Mid-Block Walkway Programming Walking School Bus Park(ing) Day ----- Bicycling-Specific Programs Annual Bicycle User Counts ----- Classroom and On-Bike Training ----- Bike Map Bicycle Friendly Businesses and Business Areas Recreational Bike Routes ---- Bicycle Theft Prevention ---- Monthly Social Rides --- Bicycle Wayfinding --- School Bike Trains Women's Bicycling Programs Winter Bicycling Programs Priority High Medium Low 116 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS Table 7-2 Multi-Modal Programs Summary Expected Outcomes d Cost Staff and Number of d °' c >G o .o > en o E- y d o Estimate Volunteer T ime People Community o a,. a:5 A o c 2 E Program City Role** Likely Partners (Annual) Commitment Reached Interest 4 ira ° A i�' 3 w°' E A w°' w cj 4 CO cy Priority Multi-Modal Programs Multi-Modal Crash Analysis Lead SLC Transportation; and Reduction (SLCPD)/Partner Bicycle Advisory I • I I ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ • Committee;Media Lead(SLC Police Dept.;Health Open Streets Event* Events)/Partner Dept.;Advocates; • • • • ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ • Volunteers;Media Police Training Lead(SLCPD) SLC Transportation; I I I N/A ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ • Advocates;UDOT Lead(SLC Advocates;SLCPD; Media Campaign* Transportation)/ Business Groups; I/• I/• • I ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ • Partner Media SLC Transportation; Beginning Driver Education Lead Advocates;Other 0 0 I I ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ • (SLCPD)/Partner Agencies SmartTrips* Lead(Agency SLC Transportation; • • • 1 ✓+ ✓+ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1 TBD) UTA SLC Transportation; Traffic Citation Diversion Lead Medical Community; • • 0 • ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ ✓+ ✓ ✓ 1 (SLCPD)/Partner Legal Community; Advocates Partner(Likely SLC School Dist; Bus Driver Training* led to (Li SLCPD;U of U; O/I I I N/A ✓ ✓ ✓+ 0 byAdvocates;UTA 0=Low I=Medium •=High N/A=Feedback Not Available ✓+=Primary Outcome ✓=Secondary Outcome *Existing program **Lead=City instigates and carries out. Cost Estimate Key **Lead/Partner=City instigates but partners help out with doing a lot of the work. Low $o-$i000 **Partner=someone else instigates and the City helps in a lesser supporting role. Medium $1,000-$5,000 High $5,000+ SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 118 I DECEMBER 2015 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN&BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER SEVEN: PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS Table 7-3 Pedestrian & Bicycle Programs Summary Expected Outcomes ro 4' Cost Staff and Number of c d o c 4:5 o 5 o c r✓ 0 7 2 d E Estimate Volunteer Time People Community o �, a 6,;;t a , ,z a 5 w s o.. O ,a c E; Program City Role** Likely Partners (Annual) Commitment Reached Interest ,c ila 3 u w3 E 3 a,t E q a w v w ',A)6 Priority Pedestrian-Specific Programs Targeted Crosswalk Lead(SLCPD) SLC Transportation; I O/1 0 I ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓+ • Enforcement* Advocates;Media Pedestrian Wayfinding* Lead(SLC Designers;Media;SLC • I • • V+ ✓ ✓ v • Transportation) Urban Design Mid-Block Walkway Lead(SLC Urban SLC RDA;Volunteers; Programming* Design) Media;Business&Property 1/• 0/I I N/A ✓+ V ✓+ •(-4- 1 Owners Walking School Bus Lead(SLC School SLC Transportation;PTA 1 0/1 O/1 • ✓+ ✓ ✓ ✓+ 1 Dist) Groups SLC Transportation; Park(ing)Day* Partner Advocates;Small Business 0 0/1 0 N/A ✓ ✓+ ✓ ✓ ✓+ V+ 0 Districts;SLC Urban Design Bicycle-Specific Programs Annual Bicycle User Counts* Lead(SLC SLC Bicycle Collective; O • I I ✓+ ✓ ✓ • Transportation) U of U Classroom and On-Bike Lead(SLC School SLC Transportation;Police Training Dist) Department;After School I 0/I • N/A ✓+ V+ • Programs Bike Map* Lead(SLC Bike Shops;Online • • • • ✓+ ✓+ ✓ • Transportation) Mapping Services Bicycle Friendly Businesses and Lead(SLC Econ SLC Transportation; Business Areas Dev)/Partner Business groups;Advocates; 0/I 0/I 1 N/A V+ ✓+ ✓ • Media Lead(SLC State Agencies(UDOT, Recreational Bike Routes Transportation)/ Outdoor Recreation); • • I N/A V+ ✓ ✓+ 1 Partner Adventure Cycling Assoc.; Visit Salt Lake Lead(SLC SLCPD;SLC Bicycle Bicycle Theft Prevention Transportation)/ Collective;U of U; I I • • ✓ ✓ ✓ 1 Partner Advocates Monthly Social Rides Partner Advocates;Volunteers;Bike O O I N/A ✓+ ✓ V+ 1 Shops;Media Bicycle Wayfinding Lead(SLC UDOT;U of U;UTA 0 I • I ✓ V+ V+ 1 Transportation) School Bike Trains Lead(SLC School SLC Transportation;PTA O O/I • N/A ✓+ ✓+ V V 1 Dist) Groups Women's Bicycling Programs Partner Advocates;Health Dept.; I O/I O/I I ✓+ ✓ ✓ V+ 1 Bike Shops;Spoke Stoke Lead(SLC Advocates;Health Dept.; Winter Bicycling Programs Transportation)/ SmartTrips;Bicycle 0 0 0 I ✓+ V ✓ ✓ ✓+ 0 Partner Ambassadors O=Low I=Medium •=High N/A=Feedback Not Available ✓+=Primary Outcome ✓=Secondary Outcome *Existing program **Lead=City instigates and carries out. Cost Estimate Key **Lead/Partner=City instigates but partners help out with doing a lot of the work. Low $0-$100o **Partner=someone else instigates and the City helps in a lesser supporting role. Medium $1,000-$5,000 High $5,000+ SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This page left intentionally blank 120 I DECEMBER 2015 • •�♦ ,•• ... y. Cost estimates are crucial elements of the • f �� City's ability to plan for future investments in If*'" 16, ,. -�ww ' a A infrastructure and supporting programs. The j .-. estimate ranges provided in this chapter should s' 4e' AV' • " ' , '' 4` be understood as high-level planning estimates ' '•��;f that are subject to change due to variable ' .4'20" ' ` construction costs, changes in design standards, - ! and other factors that can introduce price ``; .1• ' volatility. Nevertheless, the estimates give the ' ,:a� City reasonable targets for the funding amounts fis 111511E that must be secured through City budget 1 appropriations, partnering with other agencies, :° _ t' or grants in order to bring this plan to fruition. , i'; Main sections of this chapter are as follows: I � li • Spot Improvements • Linear Bikeways • Implementation NI A \ h M :, �. S TO µ =_ sr _ _ r 1 I ei CHAPTER EIGHT COST ESTIMATES & IMPLEMENTATION DECEMBER 2015 I 121 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 8.1 Spot Improvements The values in Table 8-1 prorate pedestrian and This section outlines cost ranges for the bicycle costs in the case of projects that typically pedestrian and bicycle spot improvements involve other work elements unrelated to walking outlined in Chapters 5 and 6, respectively. Some and bicycling. For example, if bike lanes are of the improvements serve both pedestrians added as part of a routine repaving project only and bicyclists, so the ranges are grouped by the additional cost of bike lane striping and improvement type rather than user group. pavement markings are included. Unlike the bikeway recommendations, the spot In keeping with this plan's recommendations improvements were not divided into phases. to considerably improve east-west connections Costs are assumed to occur over a 20-year period. across freeways and railroad tracks, Table 8-1 incorporates a major structure improvements 8.1.1 Capital Costs category. This reflects the higher costs associated with longer tunnels or bridges, similar to the Capital costs represent the amount of money Parley's Trail tunnel under 130o East or an needed to construct new improvements. Table overpass over a multi-track rail line. 8-1 shows per-project spot improvement capital cost ranges. The Accelerated Repaving projects 8.1.2 Maintenance Costs shown in Chapter 6 are not included in this table because their costs are assumed to already be Maintenance costs represent the effort associated included in the City's budget as part of normal with caring for capital improvements and keeping paving maintenance. These projects entail the them in good working condition.Typical examples City advancing repaving on some streets to earlier of maintenance activities include sweeping, snow years while delaying repaving on others, so there removal, landscaping (mostly for multi-use paths), and replacement of paint striping and is no net cost difference. pavement markings. Table 8-1 Spot Improvement Capital Cost Ranges Awareness of maintenance costs and a commitment to proper upkeep are Improvement Type Est. Cost Range important factors to consider before Enhanced Crossings $50,000-$250,000 investing in capital improvements. Table Intersections, Signals, &Signage $1,000-$200,000 8-2 shows estimated annual maintenance New Pavement&Curb Cuts $1,000-$200,00o costs for the spot improvements. Structure Improvements $250,000-$1 million Major Structures $1 million-$7 million 8.2 Linear Bikeways Linear bikeways encompass all bicycle Table 8-2 Spot Improvement Annual Maintenance Cost Ranges facilities that have a beginning and ending point, whereas spot improvements Improvement Type Est. Cost Range represent upgrades to crossings or other Enhanced Crossings $2,000-$12,000 locations that can better be represented on Intersections, Signals, &Signage $50-$13,000 a map as a single point. New Pavement&Curb Cuts $50-$13,000 Structures (including major) $io,000-$60,000 122 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER EIGHT: COST ESTIMATES & IMPLEMENTATION 8.2.1 Capital Costs Maintenance costs should always be considered Table 8-3 shows approximate per-mile cost in project scoping. Projects that are constructed ranges and assumed average values for the types to lesser quality may trigger greater long-term of bikeways proposed in this plan. It also shows maintenance. mileage ranges to reflect approximate total The cost ranges shown in Table 8-3 represent 220 lengths of each bikeway type as shown in Figure miles of bikeways at approximately $330,000 6-6. per mile. Off-street multi-use pathways would Ranges are shown because facilities can be account for roughly more than half of the total constructed at various levels of quality.Costs also cost even though they represent only about 20% depend heavily on local context and construction of the mileage. When multi-use pathways are materials. taken out of the equation,the remaining on-street bikeways could be constructed for approximately New multi-use paths may require right-of-way $193,00o per mile.As a comparison,the recently acquisition while other bikeway types generally completed I-15 freeway reconstruction project do not.The cost ranges in Table 8-3 do not include in Utah County cost approximately $55 million right-of-way because land costs fluctuate greatly per mile.The entire spectrum of 20-year bikeway depending on location and right-of-way needs recommendations could be built for the same are difficult to predict at this advanced stage. Table 8-3 Per-Mile Capital Cost Estimate Ranges Bikeway Type Mileage Range Cost/mi Low High Assumed Average Multi-Use Path 40-50 $575,000 $2,600,000 $800,000 Protected Bike Lane 20-25 $40,000 $3,000,000 $600,000 Buffered Bike Lane 35-45 $17,500 $135,000 $25,000 Neighborhood Byway 45-55 $200,000 $1,300,000 $350,000 Conventional Bike Lane 25-35 $12,000 $72,000 $20,000 Shared Lane Markings 15-25 $1,200 $17,000 $3,000 Signed Shared Roadway 1-5 $4,000 $5,200 $4,500 ■ I. Same _p ri —.ii '' 1 , . ______-----2----,-_ __ . i ,,,..,....,,,,,. . _ ,-,e- _-_ . \ ,....,,,- -_-... • __,_ r- _ -......-_-4-..... _ , . x __ __ _ • , --44% : . \_\.. i - _ - - . _.., ,,,,,, Costs vary widely according to construction quality; inexpensive protected bike lane on 300 E (left) and more expensive protected bike lane on Grant Ave in Ogden (right; Photo: Ogden Bikes Facebook). DECEMBER 2015 I 123 SALT LAKE CITY PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN amount of money as widening 1.3 miles of freeway. Council (WFRC), and UDOT. Some common All of the on-street bikeway recommendations in funding programs administered by these agencies this plan could be built for the cost of widening include the Regional Bikeway Commuter 0.6 miles of freeway. Grant Program, Recreational Trails Program, Transportation Alternatives Program,Congestion 8.2.2 Maintenance Costs Mitigation Air Quality Program, and the Safe Table 8-4 shows the annual estimated per- Sidewalk Program. mile maintenance cost ranges. Future facility City staff will need to remain vigilant in keeping replacement (i.e. life cycle cost) is not included up with the latest bicycle and pedestrian related in the ranges.As Salt Lake City's bikeway system program developments because local, state, and matures, expenditures are likely to transition federal funding programs often change from year gradually from an initial emphasis on capital to year. Common methods for doing so include improvements to a situation where the City maintaining close relationships with local, state, constructs fewer new facilities and uses a larger and federal agencies, membership in related share of funding to repair or replace aging professional organizations, and attendance at facilities. local or national bicycle and pedestrian design and planning conferences or webinars. 8.3 Funding Implementation There are multiple ways funding can be secured 8.4 Performance Measures for the implementation of bicycle and pedestrian As Salt Lake Cityimplementsthe recommendations related infrastructure projects in Salt Lake City. of this plan, some key indicators should be used Internally administered City funding sources may to measure success and track progress. While include the Capital Improvement Project (CIP), the city already informally monitors many of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA), and Community metrics below, the plan now recommends that Development Block Grant(CDBG) programs. formal annual analysis and associated reporting Local, state, and federal funding is also available be conducted on a series of indicators. Indicators through programs administered by Salt Lake will seek to monitor key outcomes related to County, State of Utah Department of Natural participation and safety and may include: Resources (DNR), Wasatch Front Regional Table 8-4 Per-Mile Annual Maintenance Cost Estimate Ranges Bikeway Type Mileage Range Cost/mi Low High Assumed Average Multi-Use Path 40-50 $3,000 $8,500 $5,000 Protected Bike Lane 20-25 $1,200 $2,500 $2,000 Buffered Bike Lane 35-45 $5,000 $12,000 $7,000 Neighborhood Byway 45-55 $2,000 $8,000 $3,000 Conventional Bike Lane 25-35 $2,000 $5,000 $3,000 Shared Lane Markings 15-25 $1,000 $2,500 $1,500 Signed Shared Roadway 1-5 -- $500 $250 124 I DECEMBER 2015 CHAPTER EIGHT: COST ESTIMATES & IMPLEMENTATION • Participation data - commuting and trip reporting as available through the American Community Survey (annual, U.S. Census Bureau); Utah Household Travel Survey (io years); and local counts including the City's annual bike count and any counts available through automated counters. • Reported crashes - both pedestrian- and bicycle-involved crashed, with special attention to patterns in severe or fatal crashes. Crashes should be indexed compared to participation rates in walking and bicycling. While not all crashes are reported, police reports represent the most accurate records of crashes currently available. • Bicycle theft, indexed compared to participation in bicycling, based on police reports.As not all bicycle thefts are reported, this metric may experience data irregularities if, for example, the City actively encourages bicyclists to report bike theft more than has occurred in the past. By way of measuring the City's work,the following outputs could be tracked: • Implementation of facilities - including pedestrian safety signals/improvements and miles of trails, bike lanes, protected bike lanes, and neighborhood byways. Landmark additions such as bridges and underpasses should be highlighted as significant investments beyond the corridor or spot improvement approach. • Implementation of programs - tracking measures may be appropriate for specific programs that are implemented. • Infractions related to walking/biking safety concerns - tracked by tickets issued for violations such as speeding, failure to yield to pedestrians in crosswalks, red-light running,bicycle-related tickets, and walking- related tickets. DECEMBER 2015 I 125