Subsequent to the last report to TWIC on this study in August 2014, there has been an additional stakeholder meeting, and two public meetings (one to discuss details of the alignment options, and one to present the draft study).
In addition to these public meetings, there have been numerous internal meetings to discuss process, design, and engineering issues. The project has received substantial support from the public, both during public meetings and independent, direct communication with staff as well as expressed support from the relevant Regional Transportation Planning Committees (RTPCs).
The subject study is attached, critical issues and steps are highlighted below.
Preferred Alignment
In summary, this study recommends that a "low-stress" facility be constructed in the majority of the corridor. This type of facility is often referred to as a "protected bicycle lane" or "cycle track" (3). This low-stress facility would connect the Lafayette-Moraga Trail (LMT) to the Iron Horse Trail (IHT). This type of facility is critical for several reasons:
- Protected bicycle facilities or cycle tracks have been shown to be one of the best, if not the best, investments you can make to increase the number of people riding bikes (1),
- (related to #1 above) Contra Costa County has the lowest trips-by-bike-bike rate in the Bay Area(2). Investments such as the study's preferred alignment are shown to be extremely effective in increasing the number of people riding bikes(1).
- If Class I facilities could be considered freeways for cyclists, this project would be considered the equivalent of connecting State Route 24 to Interstate 680. Consistent with this analogy, this corridor already experiences substantial demand. However, due to the constrained nature of the current route, users of the corridor are limited to the "Strong & Fearless" type of rider (5). The preferred design would expand corridor users to "Enthused & Confident" and "Interested but Concerned" riders.
- Starting at the termination of the LMT (at the Olympic Blvd Staging Area) in the western end of the corridor,
- the alignment would head east along Olympic Boulevard to California Boulevard,
- south on California Boulevard to Newell Avenue,
- east on Newell Avenue towards the IHT, and
- Connect to the IHT at the eastern end of the corridor at the intersection of S. Broadway & Newell Avenue, near Macy's and Whole Foods.
Comments on the Plan
Comments collected on the plan are detailed in Appendix A. As indicated in the introductory paragraphs to this report, the report had had consistent support with constituents engaged in the process. Staff and the prime consultant on the project, Alta Planning + Design, have been able to respond to the majority of comments and concerns raised during this process. As indicated in the Next Steps section below, this study is starting point and will spawn subsequent, smaller implementation projects. Some concerns, traffic and parking, are going to be best responded to at the time of specific project implementation.
Next Steps
This planning level study is a starting point for more detailed design which includes different projects in different jurisdictions:
Geographically and Jurisdictionally, this project spans the County and two Cities, Lafayette and Walnut Creek.
Regionally, this project is now included in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's TEP.
Sub-regionally, this project spans the SWAT and TRANSPAC RTPCs, both of which have included the project in their TEP project lists.
The recommendations section includes direction to continue coordination and project development with appropriate entities. The agencies and committees listed above would be included in this coordination effort.
Funding
As described in the Funding Sources section of the report on Page 6-7 (page 49 of the .pdf) the project is eligible for numerous federal, state, and local funding sources. The recommendations sections include direct to staff to pursue funding opportunities.
Consistent with the Board of Supervisors position as expressed to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority on the Countywide Transportation Plan in October 2014 (4), staff has been working through the appropriate Regional Transportation Planning Committees, SWAT (Southwest Area Transportation Committee), and TRANSPAC (Transportation and Partnership Committee) to include the subject project in the Transportation Expenditure Plan (TEP). As TWIC has previously discussed, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority is in the process of developing a TEP for a potential transportation sales tax measure in 2016.
(1) In the two U.S. cities that first started building modern protected bike lanes, New York and Washington D.C., bike commuting doubled from 2008 to 2013.
US Census - NYC and DC, protected lane pioneers, just doubled biking rates in 4 years
http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/nyc-and-dc-protected-lane-pioneers-just-doubled-biking-rates-in-4-years
62 percent of people who live near protected lane projects "would be more likely to ride a bicycle if motor vehicles and bicycles were physically separated by a barrier."
Monsere, C., et al., 2014 - Lessons from the Green Lanes (National Institute for Transportation and Communities)
http://trec.pdx.edu/research/project/583/Lessons_from_the_Green_Lanes:_Evaluating_Protected_Bike_Lanes_in_the_U.S._
The average protected bike lane sees bike counts increase 75 percent in its first year alone.
Monsere, C., et al., 2014 - Lessons from the Green Lanes (National Institute for Transportation and Communities)
http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/everywhere-they-appear-protected-bike-lanes-seem-to-attract-riders
NYC's Prospect Park West protected bike lane saw a 190 percent increase in weekday ridership, with 32 percent of those biking under age 12.
NYC DOT, 2012 - Prospect Park West: Traffic Calming & Bicycle Path
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2012_ppw_trb2012.pdf
After a protected bike lane was installed on Chicago's Kinzie Street: Bicycle ridership on increased 55 percent, according to morning rush hour counts; Forty-one percent of respondents changed their usual route to take advantage of the new lane; Bicyclists accounted for a majority of all eastbound traffic (53 percent) and more than one third (34 percent) of total street traffic during a CDOT traffic count conducted during morning rush hour in August 2011.
Chicago DOT, 2011 - Initial Findings: Kinzie Street Protected Bike Lane
http://www.chicagobikes.org/pdf/Kinzie_Initial_Findings.pdf
(2) Regional Bicycle Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area - 2009 Update
Table 3.3: Average Bay Area total weekly bicycle trips (weekdays+weekends; 2000)
Contra Costa County % of all trips by bicycle = 0.6%, next highest is Solano and Sonoma at 1.0%, the highest is San Francisco at 2.1%.
http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/MTC_Regional_Bicycle_Plan_Update_FINAL.pdf#page=22
(3) From the National Association of City Transportation Official's Urban Bikeway Design Guide:
http://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/cycle-tracks/
A cycle track is an exclusive bike facility that combines the user experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of a conventional bike lane. A cycle track is physically separated from motor traffic and distinct from the sidewalk. Cycle tracks have different forms but all share common elements—they provide space that is intended to be exclusively or primarily used for bicycles, and are separated from motor vehicle travel lanes, parking lanes, and sidewalks. In situations where on-street parking is allowed cycle tracks are located to the curb-side of the parking (in contrast to bike lanes).
Cycle tracks may be one-way or two-way, and may be at street level, at sidewalk level, or at an intermediate level. If at sidewalk level, a curb or median separates them from motor traffic, while different pavement color/texture separates the cycle track from the sidewalk. If at street level, they can be separated from motor traffic by raised medians, on-street parking, or bollards. By separating cyclists from motor traffic, cycle tracks can offer a higher level of security than bike lanes and are attractive to a wider spectrum of the public.
(4) October 21, 2014 Letter from the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority re: the 2014 Countywide Transportation Plan
"Major Projects & Emerging Planning Initiatives
A comprehensive response on project priorities can be seen in the attached list. This list includes the Board of Supervisor's high priority projects including, but not limited to,
TriLink (SR239), North Richmond Truck Route, I-680 HOV Gap Closure, Iron Horse/Lafayette-Moraga Trail Connector, Kirker Pass Road Truck Climbing Lane, Vasco Road Safety Improvements, and Northern Waterfront Goods Movement Infrastructure Projects."
(5) From: FOUR TYPES OF CYCLISTS? Testing a Typology to Better Understand Bicycling Behavior and Potential. Jennifer Dill, Ph.D, NAthan McNeil, Portland State University August 2012:
Strong & Fearless: Very comfortable without bike lanes
Enthused & Confident: Very comfortable with bike lanes
Interested but Concerned: Not very comfortable, interested in biking more. Not very comfortable, currently cycling for transportation but not interested in biking more
No Way No How: Physically unable. Very uncomfortable on paths. Not very comfortable, not interested, not currently cycling for transportation
http://web.pdx.edu/~jdill/Types_of_Cyclists_PSUWorkingPaper.pdf#page=9
|