Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/16/2020 Item 4 and 5, Otto Wilbanks, Megan From:Garrett Otto <garrettotto@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, To:Advisory Bodies Cc:Fukushima, Adam; Schwartz, Luke Subject:ATC Meeting Items 4 and 5 Attachments:Quick Builds - ATC 2020-01-16.pdf; 6-4-19_item_11 _quick_build_projects_-_transportation_code_amendment_resolution.p df; Cabridge Quick Build.pdf; Item 31 Rev Robinson.pdf Dear ATC Members, I wanted to send a copy of my presentation and a couple example Quick Build Policies prior to tomorrow meeting so you have an opportunity to digest some of the information. You will notice on the final slide I have made some specific suggestions for policy language with regards to Quick Builds. These are similar to what I have found it other quick build policies, but somewhat tailored to SLO. In addition to the quick build policy language, I have some other policy suggestions to consider including the ATP:  The City shall develop a pilot program for a car free area surrounding schools that prohibits vehicles traffic from drop offs and pickups during school hours, sometimes referred to as a "heat zone". https://www.eltis.org/discover/news/oslo-experiments-car-free-heart-zones-around- schools  All new and resurfaced residential, residential collectors, and streets surrounding schools shall be designed such that vehicle traffic speed shall not exceed 15MPH, through use of speed humps, chicanes, medians, bicycle priority lanes, bulb-outs, traffic circles, or other surface treatments.  The City shall explore amending the Circulation Element to set a maximum speed limit on all City streets to not exceed 35MPH to increase chances of survivability and comfort level for non-auto traffic. I will elaborate more on those tomorrow evening. Thank you, Garrett Otto 1 Quick Build Policies and Strategies Recommendations for the City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan What is Quick Build Policy? •Framework and methodology to build active transportation projects in a quicker and more cost-effective manner than traditional lengthy methods. •Short-Term Action for Long- Term Change •Built within a year of planning. •Used by the public for years. •May undergo changes after installation. •Quick Builds apply to bike, pedestrian, and transit facilities. •Installation happens in middle of public outreach; not after all public outreach Why are Quick Build Policies and Strategies needed. •Quick build projects activate and excite citizens who want change, instead of only those who fear it. What does a quick build policy look like? Define why Quick Build is needed • Circulation Element’s mode split goals • City Adopted Vision Zero • Climate Action Goal • Decrease conflict zones Define the Area of Need • San Francisco - The SFMTA proposes to develop quick-build safety projects for the following corridors on the city’s High-Injury Network… • Berkley - The Bicycle Plan recommends studying protected bike lanes as part of a Complete Street Corridor Study in the Tier 1 Priority list. What does a quick build policy look like? Define the Strategies • San Francisco - Authorize City Traffic Engineer to make decisions to remove parking, travel lanes, add bollards and paint. • Cambridge, Berkley - Required to implement projects during resurfacing projects Define Timeline • Pilot and Interim projects take time to change habits, therefore need a minimum of 12-24 months to effectively see new behavior. • Outreach on project specifics comes after project is build, not before. • Collect data to show effectiveness for permanent installations Strategies to Implement Quick Build Projects A System for Seizing Opportunity Repaving schedule SHALL include implementing ATP elements. But these streets need to be designed before requests for proposals and budgeting. Conceptual design and engineering need to be ready. Project prioritization may need to change quickly to take advantage changing needs. Institutionalize Urgency Cities that make significant change are dedicated to building out the network in a short period of time. 50% of all trips by biking, walking, or transit by 2035 Carbon neutral by 2035 0 Traffic related deaths by 2030 (Vision Zero) Develop a timeline to build core network Reliable Funding Strategy Sales tax measure Bond measures Traffic impact fees Fund projects that can make large impact with fewest dollars Example: Bergen Avenue - Jersey City •Temporary parking protected lane with soft- hit posts. •Volunteers helped install. •Permanent implementation Cost 75k per mile for protected lanes How do we do this quickly and cheaply? •Reconfiguring and stripping a street: •Expensive method: Grinding, re-paving •Cheap and temporary: Roadway marking tape •Delineators •Expensive: Concrete curbs, planter •Cheap and temporary: Cones, soft hit posts, rubber curbs. •Volunteers (reduce labor costs) •Organized volunteer days to install •Love SLO community volunteer event. •Grassroots organization •SLO Streets for All •Bike SLO County •SLO U40 •Corporate organized workday San Luis Obispo Quick Build Policy Recommendations •San Luis Obispo is committed to achieving its Vision Zero safety goal, Circulation Element’s mode share goals, and Climate Action Plan by prioritizing non-private automobile transportation and implementing key elements of Active Transportation Plan. •Use Quick Build strategies to provide separated and protected (Class IV) bikeways to complete the core bicycle network by 2030. •City Traffic Engineer to approve reversible and/or adjustable parking and traffic modifications such as painted safety zones, bike lanes, adjustments to parking regulations, parking and loading changes, changes to the configuration of traffic lanes and/or other safety improvements to be implemented using materials such as roadway and curb paint, traffic signs, traffic delineators, traffic signal changes, and transit boarding islands. •Quick Build Projects shall remain installed for a 24 months evaluation and to allow enough time for behavior changes. A report will be provided at the conclusion of the evaluation period with findings and future recommendations. •Improvements and resurfacing projects shall comply with the Active Transportation Plan. •Quick Build Projects are not defined as a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS RESOLUTION No. 190604-063 WHEREAS, The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency is committed to achieving its Vision Zero goal of eliminating transportation related fatalities; and, WHEREAS, The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency is committed to making San Francisco a Transit First city that prioritizes non-private automobile transportation; and, WHEREAS, Mayor London Breed wrote a letter to the SFMTA Board of Directors on March 19, 2019, stressing the urgency of transportation safety, and asking the Board to “develop a strong and comprehensive policy around near-term safety projects”; and, WHEREAS, A quick-build project is defined to include only reversible and/or adjustable project installations and parking and traffic modifications, such as painted safety zones, bike lanes, adjustments to parking regulations, parking and loading changes, changes to the configuration of traffic lanes and/or other safety improvements to be implemented using materials such as roadway and curb paint, traffic signs, traffic delineators, traffic signal changes, and transit boarding islands; and, WHEREAS, Implementing quick-build transportation safety projects on San Francisco’s High Injury Network, the 13 percent of San Francisco streets where 75 percent of severe and fatal collisions occur, will help eliminate transportation related fatalities; and, WHEREAS, A quick-build project shall include a thorough and transparent evaluation, including soliciting stakeholder feedback, collecting and analyzing safety and performance data, and posting evaluation results on the SFMTA website; and, WHEREAS, The evaluation duration of a quick-build project is for 24 months starting June 4, 2019, and an informational report will be provided to the SFMTA Board of Directors at the conclusion of that period with findings and any future recommendations; and, WHEREAS, The Transportation Code establishes the position of City Traffic Engineer as an employee of the SFMTA licensed with the State of California as a Civil or Traffic Engineer and designated by the Director of Transportation to exercise certain powers; and, WHEREAS, The proposed Transportation Code legislation authorizes the City Traffic Engineer to approve certain parking and traffic modifications that currently require approval by the SFMTA Board of Directors including: designating blue zones, intersections at which right, left or U turns are prohibited; intersections at which turns against a red or stop sign are prohibited; intersections at which one direction of traffic shall be required to yield to the other; intersections at which traffic shall be required to stop, or where a required stop is eliminated; and establishing multiple turn lanes where Page 2 vehicles can make right or left turns from more than one lane; and, WHEREAS, The proposed Transportation Code legislation authorizes the City Traffic Engineer to reclassify existing Class II bike lanes or bikeways to Class IV cycle tracks or protected bikeways based upon a determination of public convenience and necessity including, but not limited to, the alleviation of traffic congestion and public safety following a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, The SFMTA proposes to develop quick-build safety projects for the following corridors on the city’s High-Injury Network:  7th Street between Folsom Street and 16th Street  Alemany Boulevard between Congdon Street and Putnam Street  California Street between Arguello Boulevard and 18th Avenue  Golden Gate Avenue between Polk Street and Market Street  Howard Street between The Embarcadero and 3rd Street  Leavenworth Street between McAllister Street and O’Farrell Street  Valencia Street between 19th Street and Cesar Chavez Avenue; and, WHEREAS, To implement these quick-build projects on a timely basis, the SFMTA Board authorizes the City Traffic Engineer to determine locations to install tow–away zones on the following four corridors where bike lanes currently exist and may be re-classified, based upon a determination of public convenience and necessity including, but not limited to, the alleviation of traffic congestion and public safety:  7th Street between Folsom Street and 16th Street  Golden Gate Avenue between Polk Street and Market Street  Howard Street between The Embarcadero and 3rd Street  Valencia Street between 19th Street and Cesar Chavez Avenue; and, WHEREAS, On May 22, 2019, the SFMTA, under authority delegated by the Planning Department, determined that the above-mentioned amendments to Transportation Code, Division II, to delegate authority to the City Traffic Engineer to approve certain parking and traffic modifications following a Public Hearing, is not defined as a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Sections 15060(c) and 15378(b); and, WHEREAS, Authorizing the City Traffic Engineer does not commit the SFMTA to a definite course of action in carrying out any individual proposal or tow-away zone; any projects proposed as “quick-build” projects that would result in a direct or indirect physical change to the environment will undergo environmental review before project approval; and, WHEREAS, A copy of the CEQA determination is on file with the Secretary to the SFMTA Board of Directors, and is incorporated herein by reference; and, Page 3 RESOLVED, That the SFMTA Board of Directors amends the Transportation Code, Division II, Section 201 to delegate authority to the City Traffic Engineer to approve certain parking and traffic modifications following a Public Hearing including, among other things; designate blue zones, intersections at which right, left or U turns are prohibited; intersections at which turns against a red or stop sign are prohibited; intersections at which one direction of traffic shall be required to yield to the other; intersections at which traffic shall be required to stop, or where a required stop is eliminated; establish multiple turn lanes where vehicles can make right or left turns from more than one lane; and, be it further, RESOLVED, That the SFMTA Board of Directors amends Division II, Section 201 of the Transportation Code to authorize the City Traffic Engineer to reclassify existing Class II bike lanes or bikeways to Class IV cycle tracks or protected bikeways, as provided in the Transportation Code legislation, based upon a determination of public convenience and necessity including, but not limited to, the alleviation of traffic congestion and public safety following a public hearing; and, be it further, RESOLVED, That the SFMTA Board of Directors approves the seven corridors on the city’s High-Injury Network listed above on which the SFMTA can install reversible and/or adjustable project installations and parking and traffic modifications such as roadway and curb paint, traffic signs, traffic delineators, traffic signal changes, transit boarding islands, and parking and loading changes which can also include painted safety zones, bike lanes, adjustments to parking regulations, changes to the configuration of traffic lanes and other safety improvements designated as “quick-build projects” in order to expedite these safety improvements; and, RESOLVED, That the SFMTA Board of Directors authorizes the City Traffic Engineer to install tow–away zones on the following four corridors where bike lanes currently exist and may be re- classified, based upon a determination of public convenience and necessity including, but not limited to, the alleviation of traffic congestion and public safety:  7th Street between Folsom Street and 16th Street  Golden Gate Avenue between Polk Street and Market Street  Howard Street between The Embarcadero and 3rd Street  Valencia Street between 19th Street and Cesar Chavez Avenue; and, be it further, RESOLVED, That SFMTA staff shall make a report to the SFMTA Board of Directors at the conclusion of any quick-build project, including evaluation findings and recommendations. I certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors at its meeting of June 4, 2019. ______________________________________ Secretary to the Board of Directors San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx RESOLUTION NO. 190604-063 [Transportation Code - City Traffic Engineer Approval of Certain Parking and Traffic Controls] Resolution amending Division II of the Transportation Code to grant the City Traffic Engineer authority to approve certain parking and traffic controls after a public hearing. NOTE: Additions are single-underline Times New Roman; deletions are strike-through Times New Roman. The Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors of the City and County of San Francisco enacts the following regulations: Section 1. Article 200 of Division II of the Transportation Code is hereby amended by revising Section 201, to read as follows: SEC. 201. PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING PARKING AND TRAFFIC CONTROLS. (a) Office of City Traffic Engineer. The position of City Traffic Engineer is established. The City Traffic Engineer shall be an employee of the SFMTA licensed with the State of California as a Civil or Traffic Engineer and designated by the Director of Transportation to exercise the powers and perform the duties of City Traffic Engineer established by this Code. The City Traffic Engineer shall have the authority to: (1) Identify, study and implement measures to improve traffic conditions and increase the safety of vehicles and pedestrians in furtherance of the C ity's Transit First Policy. (2) Review and investigate requests to install, modify, or remove Traffic Control Devices. SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx (3) Install color curb markings, including painting red zones not to exceed 20 (continuous) feet in length where needed to ensure public safety, proper Parking Meter spacing, or vehicular access to private or public driveways and Streets. (4) Design, install, operate, and maintain Traffic Control Devices as necessary to guide, warn, and control moving vehicular and pedestrian traffic. (5) Install or remove any temporary Traffic Control Devices on any Street for the purpose of controlling Parking or traffic during emergencies, special conditions or events, construction work, short-term testing, or when necessary for the protection of public health and safety. Such temporary Traffic Control Devices shall be removed when they are no longer required following the emergency, condition, or event. (6) Implement Parking and traffic control measures approved by the SFMTA Board of Directors. (7) Determine the hours and days during which any Traffic Control Device shall be in operation except where such hours or days are established by law or by resolution of the SFMTA Board of Directors. (8) Conduct engineering and traffic surveys necessary to establish and maintain appropriate speed limits. (9) Regulate or prohibit obstructions on Streets and grant or deny Special Traffic Permits. (10) Mark center lines, lane lines, crosswalks, the boundaries of Parking Spaces associated with Parking Meters, and other distinctive markings upon the surface of any Street, or place any signs to indicate the course to be traveled by vehicles or pedestrians. SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx (11) Take other actions to regulate Parking and traffic or prohibit Obstructions to Traffic which do not require public hearing or approval of the SFMTA Board of Directors as described in subsections (b) and (c) of this Section 201. (12) To remove without notice any unauthorized Traffic Control Device, including color curb markings or other markings that regulate Parking and traffic. (13) Indicate by signs or red curb markings where Parking is prohibited by five feet on each side of any low pressure fire hydrant, and by seven and one -half feet on each side of any high pressure fire hydrant. (14) Carry out all functions of the City Traffic Engineer consistent with all laws, regulations, generally accepted traffic engineering standards, and SFMTA policies. (15) Install signs giving notice of the days and hours that Parking is prohibited in order to allow street cleaning as requested by the Department of Public Works. (b) Public Hearings. The following Parking and traffic measures may be implemented following a public hearing: (1) Locate and install Traffic Calming Devices. (2) Designate the location of Stands, the types of vehicles authorized to use such Stands, and the days and hours in which Parking restrictions shall be enforced at any Stand. (3) With the exception of blue zones for the exclusive use of persons with disabilities designated in accordance with Vehicle Code § 21458(a)(5), dDetermine the locations for Parking restrictions designated by painted curb colors in accordance with Vehicle Code Section 21458 and the times that Parking is prohibited in such locations. (4) Determine the locations of Truck Loading Zones and the times that Parking is prohibited in that Zone. SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx (5) Designate motorcycle Parking Spaces. (6) Designate on-street bicycle Parking Spaces for the installation and use of Bicycle Racks and Bicycle Sharing Stations, or to grant a permit for a Stationless Bicycle Share Program. In the event that a temporary relocation of a bicycle parking space, bicycl e rack, or bicycle sharing station is necessary to improve safety or traffic operations, or to accommodate construction or roadway maintenance, the Director of Transportation has the authority to temporarily relocate a bicycle parking space, bicycle rack, or bicycle sharing station prior to holding a public hearing. If the bicycle parking space, bicycle rack, or bicycle sharing station will be temporarily relocated for less than ninety days, no public hearing is required. If the temporary relocation is for ninety days or longer, a public hearing must be held within ninety days following the temporary relocation. (7) Designate intersections at which right, left, or U turns are prohibited. (8) Designate intersections at which turns against a red or stop signal are prohibited. (9) Establish multiple turn lanes where vehicles can make right or left turns from more than one lane. (10) Designate intersections at which one direction of traffic shall be required to yield to the other. (11) Designate intersections at which traffic shall be required to stop, or where a required stop is eliminated. (12) Re-classify existing Class II bike lanes or bikeways to Class IV cycle tracks or bikeway based upon a determination of public convenience and necessity including, but not limited to, the alleviation of traffic congestion and public safety. SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx (c) SFMTA Board of Directors' Action Required. The following Parking and traffic measures may not be implemented without a public hearing and prior approval of the SFMTA Board of Directors, taking into consideration the recommendation of the City Traffic Engineer: (1) Designate Parking Meter Zones and Streets on which Parking Meters are to be installed in each Parking Meter Zone. (2) Designate blue zone Parking Spaces for the exclusive use of persons with disabilities in accordance with Vehicle Code § 21458(a)(5). (32) Establish, modify, or eliminate preferential Parking programs in accordance with Vehicle Code §§ 22507 and 22507.1, including the applicable geographical area(s) and the days and hours of applicable Parking restrictions. (43) Install or remove bicycle lanes. The City Traffic Engineer shall have the authority to re-classify existing Class II bike lanes or bikeways to Class IV cycle tracks or bikeways, following a public hearing, based upon a determination of public convenience and necessity including, but not limited to, the alleviation of traffic congestion and public safety. (5) Implement the following changes within the bicycle route network, as defined in the most recent update of the Transportation Element of the San Francisco General Plan: (A) The narrowing of right-hand travel lanes with Parking, including turn lanes to less than 22 feet or the narrowing of right-hand travel lanes without Parking, including turn lanes to less than 14 feet; (B) The narrowing or elimination of any bicycle lanes, bicycle paths, or bicycle routes; (C) The addition of traffic lanes, except where such lanes consist of left-turn or right-turn pockets. SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx (D) Subsections (c)(5)(A) through (c)(5)(C) shall not apply to construction zones involving temporary changes to lane widths or lane configurations. (6) Designate intersections at which right, left, or U turns are prohibited. (7) Designate intersections at which turns against a red or stop signal are prohibited. (8) Establish multiple turn lanes where vehicles can make right or left turns from more than one lane. (94) Designate one-way Streets. (10) Designate intersections at which one direction of traffic shall be required to yield to the other. (11) Designate intersections at which traffic shall be required to stop, or where a required stop is eliminated. (125) Designate the location of all bus zones for the use of public transit vehicles. (136) Set time limits for, and the days and hours of enforcement of, any Parking restriction except for street cleaning Parking restrictions. (147) Establish or close a crosswalk. (158) Establish a tow-away zone. (169) Designate the angle or direction in which vehicles are required to Park on the Street. (1710) Designate locations where Parking by vehicles over 6 feet high is restricted within 100 feet of an intersection. (1811) Establish bus, truck, and weight restrictions on Streets. (1920) Establish transit only lane regulations. (2021) Establish speed limits on Streets. SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx (2122) Establish on-street Car Share Vehicle Parking Spaces. (2223) Designate locations where Parking by vehicles over twenty-two feet in length or seven feet in height, or camp trailers, fifth-wheel travel trailers, house cars, trailer coaches, mobile homes, recreational vehicles, or semi-trailers are prohibited from parking between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m. (2324) Close a street to vehicular traffic for non-ISCOTT permitted events authorized by Division I, Article 6. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective 31 days after enactment. Enactment occurs when the San Francisco Municipal Transpor tation Agency Board of Directors approves this ordinance. Section 3. Scope of Ordinance. In enacting this ordinance, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors intends to amend only those words, phrases, paragraphs, subsections, sections, articles, numbers, letters, punctuation marks, charts, diagrams, or any other constituent parts of the Transportation Code that are explicitly shown in this ordinance as additions or deletions in accordance with the "Note" that appears under the official title of the ordinance. APPROVED AS TO FORM: DENNIS J. HERRERA, City Attorney By: JOHN I. KENNEDY Deputy City Attorney n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx I certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors at its meeting of June 4, 2019 ______________________________ Secretary to the Board of Directors San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency SFMTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS 6/5/2019 n:\legana\as2019\1900597\01362743.docx CITY OF CAMBRIDGE In the Year Two Thousand and Nineteen AN ORDINANCE In amendment to the Ordinance entitled “Cambridge Municipal Code.” That the Municipal Code of the City of Cambridge be amended by adding in Title Twelve entitled “Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places” a new Chapter 12.22 entitled “Cycling Safety Ordinance,” which reads as follows: Chapter 12.22 Cycling Safety Ordinance Section 12.22.010 Short Title This Chapter may be cited as the "Cycling Safety Ordinance" of the City of Cambridge. Section 12.22.020 Purpose This Chapter seeks to eliminate fatalities and injuries on City streets in accordance with the City's Vision Zero goals through safety improvements and the construction of a connected network of permanent separated bicycle lanes across the City. Section 12.22.030 Definitions A. “Adequate Directionality” shall mean (1) a two-way street with a separated bicycle lane or lanes that allow bicycle travel in both directions, or (2) a one-way street with a separated bicycle lane or lanes that allow bicycle travel either in the direction of the flow of vehicular traffic or in both directions. B. “Connectivity” shall mean the provision of a Permanent Separated Bicycle Lane system that reflects desired routes between all major origins and destinations in the city. C. “Cambridge Bicycle Plan” shall mean the plan adopted by the City of Cambridge in October 2015 to create a framework for developing a network of complete streets, and which is entitled “Cambridge Bicycle Plan: Toward a Bikeable Future”. D. “Five-Year Sidewalk and Street Reconstruction Plan” shall mean the City of Cambridge Department of Public Works’ five-year work plan of May 1, 2018, as it may be amended from time to time. E. “Improvements” shall mean the construction of new City-owned streets, or the reconstruction of an existing City-owned street, including but not limited to full depth reconstruction, expansion, and/or alteration of a roadway or intersection. Improvements shall not include routine maintenance, repairs, restriping of the road surface, or emergency repairs to the surface of a roadway (collectively “Maintenance”), provided that existing bicycle lanes will be restored to existing conditions or better. F. “Permanent Separated Bicycle Lane” shall mean a bicycle lane separated from motor vehicle traffic by a permanent vertical barrier that shall remain in place year-round, including but not limited to granite or concrete barriers and raised curbs, provided, however, that the bicycle lane need not be separated from motor vehicle traffic by a permanent vertical barrier for short stretches to accommodate crosswalks, curb cuts, accessible parking, intersections, and public transportation, and provided further, that existing bicycle lanes may be temporarily removed during construction of Improvements or Maintenance, so long as they are restored to existing conditions or better. G. “Separated Network” shall mean the proposed set of bicycle facilities identified in the Cambridge Bicycle Plan (Figure 5.14), or any plan superseding it, provided, however, that any such plan shall maintain Connectivity.
 Section 12.22.040 Requirements A. Whenever Improvements are made to a City-owned street under the City’s Five-Year Sidewalk and Street Reconstruction Plan, the City Manager shall cause such Improvements to comply with the Cambridge Bicycle Plan, or any plan superseding it; provided, that if Improvements are made to a segment of the Separated Network, a Permanent Separated Bicycle Lane with Adequate Directionality shall be installed along that segment. B. Full compliance with the provisions of Subsection A above is not required where the City Manager can demonstrate through a written alternatives analysis, to be made public, why it is impractical to comply with the provisions of Subsection A above, and where there will be a loss of Connectivity if the provisions of Subsection A are not complied with, how Connectivity could be otherwise advanced, if possible. Full compliance with the provisions of Subsection A above will be considered impracticable only in those rare circumstances where the City Manager determines that the characteristics of the physical features or usage of a street, or financial constraints of full compliance prevent the incorporation of a Permanent Separated Bicycle Lane with Adequate Directionality. Rigel Robinson Councilmember District 7 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.XXXX TDD: 510.981.6903 Fax: 510.981.XXXX E-Mail: xxxxx@CityofBerkeley.info REVISED AGENDA MATERIAL Meeting Date: October 29 Item Number: 31 Item Description: Referral: Develop a Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy Submitted by: Councilmember Rigel Robinson Addition of language establishing a paving pilot program. Addition of Bicycle Plan and Vision Zero street network maps as attachments. Correction to repaving budget data. Minor clarifications to language. ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Councilmember Robinson, Councilmember Droste, Mayor Arreguin, and Councilmember Harrison Subject: Referral: Develop a Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy RECOMMENDATION 1. Refer to the City Manager to develop a comprehensive ordinance with input from the Public Works & Transportation Commissions governing a Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy that would:  Require simultaneous implementation of recommendations in the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans when City streets are repaved, if one or more of the following conditions are met:  Bicycle Plan recommendations can be implemented using quick-build strategies that accommodate transit operations.  Pedestrian Plan recommendations can be implemented using quick-build strategies that accommodate transit operations.  The Bicycle Plan recommends studying protected bike lanes as part of a Complete Street Corridor Study in the Tier 1 Priority list.1  Improvements are necessary to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Prioritize bikeways and Vision Zero high-fatality, high-collision streets under the five-year Paving Plan by requiring that 50 percent of the repaving budget go towards such streets, sunsetting this requirement once these streets meet a minimum surface standard established with input from the Public Works and Transportation Commissions. Such a policy should not impact or displace existing streets identified for repaving in the current five-year Paving Plan.  Bikeways are defined as the street network that the Bicycle Plan recommends for bicycle infrastructure.  Encourage the use of quick builds by expediting quick-build projects under $1 million.  “Quick-build” is defined as projects that a) require non-permanent features such as bollards/paint/bus boarding islands, b) make up less than 25 percent of the total repaving cost for that street segment, and c) can be a component of a Complete Street Corridor Study that includes evaluation after installation. 1 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_-_Transportation/Berkeley- Bicycle-Plan-2017_AppendixE_Project%20Recs%20Priorities(1).pdf Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019  Require staff to report progress back to Council every two years. 2. Refer to the City Manager to establish a paving pilot program to prioritize bikeways and Vision Zero pedestrian high-injury streets by allocating at least 50 percent of the repaving budget towards such streets, to be implemented from 2022 to 2025 and earlier when feasible. Staff should evaluate the program’s success and report back to Council. In developing the program, staff should prioritize improving both safety and the pavement condition index (PCI) city-wide and on bikeways and pedestrian high-injury streets. Moreover, to advance equity, staff should use the project priorities outlined in the Bicycle Plan2 and forthcoming Pedestrian Plan, together with pavement quality information, to identify the highest-priority bikeways and high-injury street sections for repaving. Both plans incorporate equity factors to prioritize projects.  Bikeways are defined as the street network that the Bicycle Plan recommends for bicycle infrastructure. A map of this street network is shown in Attachment 2.  Vision Zero pedestrian high-injury streets are defined as the streets where a high proportion of severe and fatal pedestrian injuries occur. These streets will be identified in the Pedestrian Master Plan, which staff are currently updating. A draft map of these streets is shown in Attachment 3. 3. FurthermoreFinally, refer to the City Manager to draft a revised version of the City’s Complete Streets Policy that would clarify that the presence of an existing or planned bikeway parallel to an arterial does not exempt projects along said arterial from bicycle and micromobility improvements under the Policy. BACKGROUND Bicycle lanes decrease conflict between different modes of transportation, promoting safe streets for both motorists and bicyclists. A 2012 study found that protected bike lanes are the strongest indicator of lower fatality and injury rates. Where bike lanes were most abundant, fatal crash rates dropped by 44 percent and injury rates dropped by 50 percent.3 Another study showed that bike lanes improve safety for motorists because drivers who pass bicyclists on unmarked roads tend to veer farther into the next lane of traffic. Similarly, bicyclists on unmarked roads tend to hug the curb, increasing their risk of injury.4 Recently, the Cities of Cambridge and San Francisco have implemented policies that streamline the process of adding bike lanes to their streets. Cambridge’s new ordinance, passed in April 2019, requires that any streets undergoing improvement per the City’s paving plan must also be upgraded per the City’s bike plan.5 This law ensures 2 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_-_Transportation/Berkeley-Bicycle- Plan-2017-Ch6_Implementation.pdf 3 https://www.citylab.com /transportation/2019/06/protected-bike-lanes-safe-street-design-bicycle-road- safety/590722/ 4 https://bicycleuniverse.com/bicycle-lanes-no-brainer/ 5 http://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=4&ID=5905&highlightTerms=cycling%20saf ety%20ordinance Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 that new, protected bicycle lanes get built regularly, and furthers the City’s goal of improving accessibility and safety for bicyclists. In June 2019, San Francisco passed a quick-build policy allowing the City Traffic Engineer to approve reversible and/or adjustable parking and traffic modification s that previously required approval by the SFMTA Board of Directors.6 This policy encompasses bike lanes, in addition to street improvements such as painted safety zones, changes to the configuration of traffic lanes, and roadway and curb paint. In September 2019, the City of Seattle passed an ordinance mandating that when a paving project over $1 million is slated for a street that is meant to be upgraded to a protected bike lane per the City’s Bicycle Master Plan, the two projects must be done simultaneously.7 This policy is a hybrid of the San Francisco and Cam bridge models.8 According to the City of Berkeley’s Bicycle Plan, Berkeley has the fourth highest bicycle commute mode share in America, at 8.5 percent. Nearly one in ten residents rides a bicycle to work as their primary mode of transportation. As a result of Berkeley’s high bicycle mode share and the City’s insufficient bike infrastructure, there were 133 bicycle collisions in 2018.9 Fear of injury is a significant deterrent to bicycling. A record 90 percent of Berkeley residents would consider bicycling under the right roadway conditions, demonstrating how important bikeway improvements are for increasing Berkeley’s bicycle mode share.10 Additionally, as the City prepares for the introduction of shared electric scooters, it is appropriate and necessary to prioritize bike lane and pedestrian upgrades. Micromobility plays an important role in the future of transportation. Our approach to street improvements should reflect the growing population that uses alternative methods of transportation to get around our city. Improving Berkeley’s bike and pedestrian infrastructure is also an effective way to combat climate change. The City’s Climate Action Plan calls for sustainable mobility modes, such as cycling, to become the primary means of transportation for Ber keley residents and visitors.11 Adding new cycling facilities gives residents a safe alternative to driving, which reduces car usage and greenhouse gas emissions.12 6 https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-documents/2019/06/6-4- 19_item_11_quick_build_projects_-_transportation_code_amendment_resolution.docx_.pdf 7 https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/seattle-city-council-approves-new-bike-lane- requirements-calls-for-more-bike-lane-funding/ 8 http://seattle.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4078670&GUID=2AE8E905 -1F17-4ED2-B9C2- 3207591B92F6 9 https://tims.berkeley.edu/login.php?next=/tools/query/summary.php 10 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_-_Transportation/Berkeley- Bicycle-Plan-2017-Executive%20Summary.pdf 11 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_- _Energy_and_Sustainable_Development/BCAP%20Exec%20Summary4.9.09.pdf 12 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136192091630270X Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 Currently, the five-year Paving Plan takes bikeways into account when drafting the preliminary list of streets to be repaved, but does not prioritize such streets or allocate a set percentage of funding towards them. Staff then uses several criteria to narrow down the list, including contiguous blocks, equity, subcommittee and commission input, and heavy street use. However, “heavy street use” only encompasses traffic counts and AC Transit bus routes, which leaves out bicycle and other micromobility traffic. As a result, the City is not making as much substantive progress towards implementing the Bicycle Plan’s low-stress bicycle network as we could be. The current policy can be improved to create paving priorities that align with our Bicycle Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Vision Zero Action Plan. This ordinance would prioritize bikeways and Vision Zero streets in the Paving Plan. Analysis of Berkeley’s draft 2020-2024 Paving Plan shows that 3623 percent of the repaving budget and 36 percent of street miles currently go towards streets that include bikeways. Upgrading bikeways and pedestrian high-injuryhigh-fatality, high-collision streets, as defined in the forthcoming Vision Zero Action Plan, is consistent with the City’s Vision Zero goal of eliminating traffic deaths in Berkeley. In July 2019, Council adopted Resolution No. 68,371 “In Support of Vision Zero,” which created a City policy to prioritize high-collision streets as the City develops work plans and carries out infrastructure improvements. Adopting a quick-build policy and requiring simultaneous street upgrades would reduce delays, ensuring the timely implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans. This item also directs the City Manager to draft a revised version of the City’s Complete Streets Policy, which currently provides an exemption from the Policy for when a “reasonable and equivalent project along the same corridor is already programed to provide facilities exempted from the project at hand.”13 This language serves as a potential obstacle to adding bike infrastructure along arterials that run parallel to existing bikeways. This item, a referral to Develop a Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy, has also been referred to as the Berkeley Initiative to Build Improvements for Mobility, Bicycles, and Pedestrians (BIBIMBAP). ACTIONS/ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The Council could choose to maintain the current structure for repaving streets which takes bikeways into consideration, but does not prioritize such streets. Berkeley’s current bike plan recommends “complete street corridor studies” to determine how to add protected bike lanes on major streets. The Council could also choose to follow Seattle’s model, which would require that when repaving is done on streets that are slated for full protected bike lanes (as opposed to any upgrades per the Bicycle Plan), the two improvements happen together. 13 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_- _Transportation/Berkeley%20Complete%20Street%20Resolution%2012%2011%2012.pdf Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Staff time and costs associated with implementation of recommendations in the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY Transportation accounts for 60 percent of Berkeley’s community-wide GHG emissions. Improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure promotes sustainable, zero-emission methods of transportation, which is key to reaching the City’s target of reducing GHG emissions by 80 percent below 2000 levels by 2050. The actions outlined in the referral are in line with the City’s Climate Action Plan, which envisions “public transit, walking, cycling, and other sustainability modes” as the “primary means of transportation for Berkeley residents and visitors.”14 CONTACT PERSON Councilmember Rigel Robinson, (510) 981-7170 Attachments: 1: City of Cambridge Ordinance Language 2: Recommended Bikeway Network Map (from Figure 5-3: Recommended Network Improvements, from the 2017 Berkeley Bicycle Plan) 3: Pedestrian High-Injury Streets Map (Draft Presented to Transportation Commission October 2019) 14 https://www.cityofberkeley.info/climate/ Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 In the Year Two Thousand and Nineteen AN ORDINANCE In amendment to the Ordinance entitled “Cambridge Municipal Code.” That the Municipal Code of the City of Cambridge be amended by adding in Title Twelve entitled “Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places” a new Chapter 12.22 entitled “Cycling Safety Ordinance,” which reads as follows: Chapter 12.22 Cycling Safety Ordinance Section 12.22.010 Short Title This Chapter may be cited as the "Cycling Safety Ordinance" of the City of Cambridge. Section 12.22.020 Purpose This Chapter seeks to eliminate fatalities and injuries on City streets in accordance with the City's Vision Zero goals through safety improvements and the construction of a connected network of permanent separated bicycle lanes across the City. Section 12.22.030 Definitions A. “Adequate Directionality” shall mean (1) a two-way street with a separated bicycle lane or lanes that allow bicycle travel in both directions, or (2) a one -way street with a separated bicycle lane or lanes that allow bicycle travel either in the direction of the flow of vehicular traffic or in both directions. B. “Connectivity” shall mean the provision of a Permanent Separated Bicycle Lane system that reflects desired routes between all major origins and destinations in the city. C. “Cambridge Bicycle Plan” shall mean the plan adopted by the City of Cambridge in October 2015 to create a framework for developing a network of complete streets, and which is entitled “Cambridge Bicycle Plan: Toward a Bikeable Future”. D. “Five-Year Sidewalk and Street Reconstruction Plan” shall mean the City of Cambridge Department of Public Works’ five-year work plan of May 1, 2018, as it may be amended from time to time. E. “Improvements” shall mean the construction of new City-owned streets, or the reconstruction of an existing City-owned street, including but not limited to full depth reconstruction, expansion, and/or alteration of a roadway or intersection. Improvements shall not include routine maintenance, repairs, restriping of the road surface, or emergency repairs to the surface of a roadway (collectively “Maintenance”), provided that existing bicycle lanes will be restored to existing conditions or better. F. “Permanent Separated Bicycle Lane” shall mean a bicycle lane separated from motor vehicle traffic by a permanent vertical barrier that shall remain in place year-round, Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 including but not limited to granite or concrete barriers and raised curbs, provided, however, that the bicycle lane need not be separated from motor vehicle traffic by a permanent vertical barrier for short stretches to accommodate crosswalks, curb cuts, accessible parking, intersections, and public transportation, and provided further, that existing bicycle lanes may be temporarily removed during construction of Improvements or Maintenance, so long as they are restored to existing conditions or better. G. “Separated Network” shall mean the proposed set of bicycle facilities identified in the Cambridge Bicycle Plan (Figure 5.14), or any plan superseding it, provided, however, that any such plan shall maintain Connectivity. Section 12.22.040 Requirements A. Whenever Improvements are made to a City-owned street under the City’s Five-Year Sidewalk and Street Reconstruction Plan, the City Manager shall cause such Improvements to comply with the Cambridge Bicycle Plan, or any plan superseding it; provided, that if Improvements are made to a segment of the Separated Network, a Permanent Separated Bicycle Lane with Adequate Directionality shall be installed along that segment. B. Full compliance with the provisions of Subsection A above is not required where the City Manager can demonstrate through a written alternatives analysis, to be made public, why it is impractical to comply with the provisions of Subsection A above, and where there will be a loss of Connectivity if the provisions of Subsection A are not complied with, how Connectivity could be otherwise advanced, if possible. Full compliance with the provisions of Subsection A above will be considered impracticable only in those rare circumstances where the City Manager determines that the characteristics of the physical features or usage of a street, or financial constraints of full compliance prevent the incorporation of a Permanent Sep arated Bicycle Lane with Adequate Directionality. Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 Recommended Bikeway Network Map (from Figure 5-3: Recommended Network Improvements, from the 2017 Berkeley Bicycle Plan) Bicycle Lane and Pedestrian Street Improvements Policy ACTION CALENDAR October 29, 2019 Pedestrian High-Injury Streets Map (Draft Presented to Transportation Commission October 2019)