Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2014-09-09 - AGENDA REPORTS - NON-MOTOROIZED TRANS PLAN (4)
Agenda Item: 4 CITY OF SANTA CLARITA AGENDA REPORT II CONSENT CALENDAR City Manager Approval:O iCiC� Item to be presented by: Andrew Yi DATE: September 9, 2014 SUBJECT: NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE DEPARTMENT: Public Works RECOMMENDED ACTION City Council adopt the updated Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. BACKGROUND The City Council has been provided with a draft copy of the updated Non -Motorized Transportation Plan for their review two weeks prior to this Council meeting. In February 2006, the City awarded a contract to Alta Planning + Design to develop the City of Santa Clarita (City) Non -Motorized Transportation Plan (Plan). The goal of the Plan is to create a framework with policy recommendations that fosters an environment of non -motorized transportation (bicycling and walking) and enhanced recreational bicycle use in the City. The Plan is intended to reduce single -occupancy vehicle use and congestion by promoting bicycling and walking as general means of transportation to increase the quality of life for Santa Clarita residents. The City Council adopted the Plan in June 2008, and since that time the City has experienced a number of successes, including receipt of eight Safe Routes to School grants totaling $3.7 million, receipt of two Bicycle Transportation Account grants totaling approximately $400,000, and participation in the 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013, and 2014 Amgen Tour of California. The Plan provides a mechanism for prioritizing non -motorized transportation projects and implementing them in a phased and systematic fashion. Since adoption of the Plan in 2008, the City has made much progress toward integrating biking and walking into everyday life, adding bicycle lanes to 16th Street, Tournament Road, Decoro Drive, Tourney Road, Centre Pointe A P P 0,10YED Parkway, Rockwell Canyon Road, and through the Valencia Industrial Center. In addition, the City constructed four miles of off-street bicycle paths, including portions of the Newhall Ranch Bike Path and the Santa Clara River Trail. The City now has over 35 miles of off-street paths in residential areas and nearly 30 miles of on -street bicycle lanes and routes on City streets. Pedestrians in the City have benefited from the installation of pedestrian countdown signals at all signalized intersections. Significant Facilities Added to the Plan The recommended bicycle network in the updated Plan has been developed to build upon the network proposed in the 2008 Plan, fill in gaps within the current network, continue the expansion of the existing trail network, formalize existing routes used by cyclists, and improve access between residential neighborhoods and the current bikeway network. The projects reflect the City's existing and future roadway and trail plans, which will be implemented with support of the surrounding communities. Key projects include: • Signing Valley Street, Wiley Canyon Road, and Sierra Highway as bicycle routes • Striping bike lanes on Avenue Tibbitts and Whites Canyon Road, and through the Valencia Town Center • Striping time -restricted bike lanes on Sierra Highway to fill in a network gap • Construction of a Class I Path parallel to Railroad Avenue, between Magic Mountain Parkway and Market Street • Extending the South Fork Trail from Orchard Village Road to Lyons Avenue • Extending the Santa Clara River Trail from Discovery Park/Calla Way to the Five Knolls development • Creating a Class I and paseo connection through the Valencia Town Center • Constructing a Class I path along Bouquet Canyon Creek, paralleling Bouquet Canyon Road Complete Streets A significant addition to the updated Plan is the inclusion of a complete streets chapter. A complete street provides for safe, convenient, and comfortable travel by foot, bicycle, public transit, and personal vehicle. Complete streets are designed for access, mobility, and safety for all users, regardless of travel mode. They provide for automobiles, while enabling and encouraging transit, walking, and biking. Complete streets are an important element in improving bicyclist and pedestrian safety, and making walking and biking easier and more pleasant. Some of the common elements of complete street designs include sidewalks, crosswalks, paseos, bike lanes, bus pull-outs, shelters, and convenient bus stops. There are many benefits of implementing complete streets. By providing walking, biking, and transit facilities, people are encouraged to commute through active transportation, thus increasing physical activity. Complete streets can improve safety by reducing conflicts between users and calming traffic. Providing alternatives to driving can have a profound environmental impact by reducing vehicle emissions. In addition, complete streets have the potential to improve the 2 economy by encouraging residents and visitors to linger in shops and restaurants. Complete streets can provide transportation options for community members who cannot drive: the elderly, students, people with disabilities, and people who cannot afford a car. State and regional agencies are currently developing and adopting complete streets policies and will be requiring that local jurisdictions do the same to qualify for transportation funding grants. In 2008, the California legislature passed the Complete Streets Bill (Assembly Bill 1358). As of January 1, 2011, California cities and counties are required to include provisions for the accommodation of all roadway users when updating the part of a local plan that governs traffic flow, per California Government Code §65302: (2) (A) Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantive revisions of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modem the circulation element to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan. (B) For purposes of this paragraph, `users of streets, roads, and highways' means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors. The goals, policies, and objectives in the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan address the same components typically included in complete streets policies adopted by local jurisdictions. The Circulation Element promotes an integrated, seamless transportation system that meets access needs for all users and transportation modes, including automobiles, local and regional bus service, dial -a -ride, taxis, van pools, car pools, bus pools, bicycling, and walking. It considers the safety and convenience of the traveling public, including pedestrians and cyclists, in the design and development of all transportation systems. The Circulation Element also emphasizes providing right-of-way for non -vehicular transportation modes so walking and bicycling are the easiest, most convenient modes of transportation available for short trips. The complete streets chapter of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan update considers these same factors in one focused document. In 2010, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) published a revised version of Deputy Directive 64, which states that complete streets policies shall be considered in all phases of state-owned roadway planning, design, construction, maintenance, and repair. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is currently developing a complete streets policy to be brought to the Metro Board for consideration in late 2014 or early 2015. By updating the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan and including a complete streets chapter, the City of Santa Clarita will have a course to follow in continuing to create a safe and efficient transportation system that promotes the health and mobility of all Santa Clarita citizens and visitors by providing high-quality pedestrian, bicycling, and transit access to all destinations throughout the City. 3 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS Other direction as determined by the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT No additional resources, beyond those contained within the adopted Fiscal Year 2014-15 City budget, are required for implementation of the recommended action. ATTACHMENTS Non -Motorized Transportation Plan available in the City Clerk's Reading File E 7 1p Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1. Purpose of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan ................................................................................... 1-1 1.2. Biking and Walking in Santa Clarita Today..................................................................................................1-2 1.2.1. Bicycle Facilities.............................................................................................................................................1-2 1.2.2. Sidewalks, Paseos, and Multi -Purpose Trails.......................................................................................1-7 1.3. Bicyclist and Pedestrian Needs ....................................................... ................................................................... 1-8 1.3.1. Bicyclist Needs................................................................................................................................................1-8 1.3.2. Pedestrian Needs...........................................................................................................................................1-8 1.3.3. Public Outreach.............................................................................................................................................1-8 1.4. Recommendations ........................ ......................................................................................................................... 1-9 1.4.1. Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements......................................................................................................1-9 1.4.2. Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements..............................................................................................1-11 1.4.3. Recommended Programs .................................. .......................................................... ............................... 1-11 1.4.4. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking.........................................................................................1-12 1.4.5. Safe Routes to Schools...............................................................................................................................1-13 1.4.6. Complete Streets.........................................................................................................................................1-15 1.5. Funding and Implementing the Plan ...................................................... ........................... ............................. 1-15 1.5.1. Project Prioritization..................................................................................................................................1-15 1.5.2. Cost Estimates.............................................................................................................................................1-15 1.5.3. Implementation............................................................................................................................................1-16 1.6. Contents of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan ..............................................................................1-16 2. Existing Conditions .... ......................................................................................................... .................................... 2-1 2.1. Setting......................................................................................................................................................................2-2 2.2. Progress Made Since Adoption of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan ..................................... 2-3 2.3. Existing Bicycle Facilities..................................................................................................................................2-4 2.3.1. Paved Off -Street Bike Paths.......................................................................................................................2-4 2.3.2. Existing On -Street Bike Lanes and Routes.........................................................................................2-13 2.3.3. Bikeway Signage......................................................................................................................................... 2-14 2.3.4. Bicycle Signal Detection.......................................................................................................................... 2-14 2.3.5. Bicycle Parking........................................................................................................................................... 2-15 2.4. Existing Pedestrian Facilities......................................................................................................................... 2-16 2.4.1. Existing Sidewalks, Paseos and Multi -Purpose Trails.................................................................... 2-16 2.5. Bicycle Facility Maintenance.......................................................................................................................... 2-19 2.6. Past Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Expenditures................................................................................... 2-19 2.7. Encouragement and Education Programs................................................................................................... 2-21 2.8. Multi -Modal Connections...............................................................................................................................2-22 2.8.1. Metrolink... ............................................................................................... I... ................... ..... I ...................... 2-23 2.8.2. City of Santa Clarita Transit..................................................................................................................2-23 3. Planning and Policy Context............................................................... ............ ...................................................... 3-1 3.1. Summary of Existing Plans..................................................................................................................................3-1 3.1.1. Santa Clarita Valley General Plan ..............................................................................................................3-1 3.1.2. Municipal Code............................................................................................................................................ 3-7 3.1.3. Unified Development Code....................................................................................................................... 3-8 3.1.4. Mixed -Use Zones......................................................................................................................................... 3.8 3.1.5. Downtown Newhall Specific Area Plan ................................................................................................3-10 3.1.6. Community Character and Design Guidelines .......... ........................................................ ................. 3-10 3.1.7. Other Specific Plans......................................................................................__..........................................3-10 3.1.8. Santa Clara River Recreation and Water Feature Study................................................................. 3-11 3.1.9. Transportation Development Plan .........................................................................................................3-12 3.1.10. Lyons Corridor Plan ..................................................................................................................................3-12 3.1.11. California High Speed Rail......................................................................................................................3-12 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 3.1.12. Annexations................................................................................................................................................3-13 3.1.13. Climate Action Plan ..................................................................................................................................3-13 3.2. Regional Plans......................................................................................................................................................3-13 3.2.1.2009 Long Range Transportation Plan for Los Angeles County .................... ................................ 3-13 3.2.2. Los Angeles County Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan ...........................................................3 -13 3.2.3. Los Angeles County Bicycle Master Plan............................................................................................ 3-14 3.2.4. Los Angeles County Bicycle Transportation Account Compliance Document ........................3-15 3.2.5. Sustainable Communities Strategy.......................................................................................................3-16 3.3. Major Development Projects............................................................................................................................3-16 3.3.1. Future Capital Improvement Projects...................................................................................................3-16 4. Needs of the Non -Motorized System.................................................................................................................4-1 4.1. Needs and Types of Bicyclists............................................................................................................................4-1 4.1.1. Needs of Casual and Experienced Bicyclists..........................................................................................4-1 4.1.2. Characteristics of Recreational and Utilitarian Trips.......................................................................4-2 4.2. Needs of Pedestrians...........................................................................................................................................4-4 4.3. Non -Motorized Activity Centers....................................................................................................................4-5 4.4. Public Outreach and Surveys............................................................................................................................4-7 4.4.1. Focus Group Findings................................................................................................................................4-7 4.4.2. On -Line Survey............................................................................................................................................4-8 4.4.3. Intercept Surveys.......................................................................................................................................4-10 4.5. Collision Analysis...............................................................................................................................................4-10 4.6. System Usage.......................................................................................................................................................4-12 4.6.1. Census 2010 Bicycle and Pedestrian Commute Counts..................................................................4-12 4.6.2. City of Santa Clarita Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts...................................................................... 4-13 5. Recommended Improvements..............................................................................................................................5-1 5.1. Recommended Bicycle Network.......................................................................................................................5-1 5.2. Recommended Pedestrian Network...............................................................................................................5-5 5.3. Targeted Geographic Improvements..............................................................................................................5-6 5.3.1. Downtown Newhall ....................................................................................................................................5-6 5.3.2. Santa Clarita Metrolink Station............................................................................................................ 5-10 5.3.3. Valencia Industrial Center...................................................................................................................... 5-10 5.3.4. McBean Regional Transit Center.......................................................................................................... 5-12 5.3.5. Valencia Town Center.............................................................................................................................. 5-14 5.4. Design and Programmatic Recommendations........................................................................................... 5-16 5.4.1. Education Programs.................................................................................................................................. 5-16 5.4.2. Encouragement Programs........................................................................................................................5-18 5.4.3. Community Involvement.........................................................................................................................5-20 5.4.4. Citywide and Regional Coordination................................................................................................. 5-21 5.4.5. Pedestrian Facility Improvements........................................................................................................5-22 5.4.6. Bicycle Parking and End -of -Trip Facilities........................................................................................5-23 5.4.7. Maintenance and Operations.................................................................................................................5-24 5.4.8. Signage and Striping.................................................................................................................................5-26 5.4.9. Bicycle Signal Detection.......................................................................................................................... 5-27 5.4.10. Safety and Security ..................................................................................................................................5-28 5.5. Project Sheets......................................................................................................................................................5-29 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking.......................................................................................................6-1 6.1. Design Recommendations...................................................................................................................................6.1 6.1.1. Class I Bike Path.............................................................................................................................................6-1 6.1.2. Class II Bike Lane......................................................................................................................................... 6-3 6.1.3. Class III Bike Route..................................................................................................................................... 6-3 6.1.4. Sidewalks.......................................................................................................................................................6-4 6.1.5. Paseos...............................................................................................................................................................6-4 6.2. Recommended Policy Modifications..............................................................................................................6.4 6.3. Transit Recommendations.................................................................................................................................6-5 Table of Contents 6.4. Travel Demand Management............................................................................................................................6-6 6.4.1. TDM and Non -Motorized Transportation Planner........................................................................... 6-7 6.4.2. District and Regional Coordination....................................................................................................... 6-7 6.4.3. Commute Trip Reduction Program.......................................................................................................6-8 6.4.4. Ridesharing...................................................................................................................................................6-8 6.4.5. Alternative Work Schedules....................................................................................................................6-9 6.4.6. Guaranteed Ride Home.............................................................................................................................6-9 6.4.7. Telecommuting........................................................................................................................................... 6-10 6.4.8. Shuttle Buses............................................................................................................................................... 6-10 6.4.9. Commuter Financial Incentives............................................................................................................ 6-10 6.4.10. Parking Management............................................................................................................................... 6-11 6.4.11. Car -Free Planning ............... ...................................................................................................................... 6-13 6.4.12. Transportation Management Association ........... .............................................................................. 6-13 6.4.13. Evaluating TDM Strategies....................................................................................................................6-13 6.4.14. Funding Transportation Demand Management Strategies......................................................... 6-14 6.5. Land Use Policies to Promote Biking and Walking................................................................................. 6-15 6.5.1. Clustered Development............................................................................................................................ 6-15 6.5.2. Mix of Uses.................................................................................................................................................. 6-15 6.5.3. Connectivity ................................................................................................................................................ 6-16 6.5.4. Transit -Oriented Development............................................................................................................. 6-16 6.5.5. Development Review ............ ..................................................................................................................... 6-17 6.5.6. Sidewalk Requirements............................................................................................................................6-17 7. Funding and Implementation................................................................................................................................7-1 7.1. Implementation Process.......................................................................................................................................7-1 7.2. Project Prioritization...........................................................................................................................................7-2 7.3. Cost Breakdown.....................................................................................................................................................7-7 7.3.1. Cost Summary ................................................................................................................................................7-7 7.3.2. Maintenance Costs.....................................................................................................................................7-12 7.4. Funding....................................................................................................................................................................7-13 7.4.1. Federal Funds...............................................................................................................................................7-13 7.4.2. Statewide Funding Sources.....................................................................................................................7-14 7.4.3. Regional Funding Sources........................................................................................................................7-16 7.4.4. Non -Traditional Funding Sources.........................................................................................................7-17 7.5. Implementation Strategies ................ ..................................................................................................................... 7-19 7.5.1. Strategy 1: Establish Implementation Responsibility .......................................................................7-19 7.5.2. Strategy 2: Strategically Pursue Infrastructure Projects..................................................................7-19 7.5.3. Strategy 3: Regularly Revisit Project Prioritization..........................................................................7-19 7.5.4. Strategy 4: Update the Plan .....................................................................................................................7-19 7.5.5. Strategy 5: Establish Measures of Effectiveness................................................................................7-20 S. Safe Routes to School ................................. ............................................................................................................. 8-1 8.1. Introduction ......................... ................................................................................................................................... 8-1 8.2. Santa Clarita's Safe Routes to School Program............................................................................................8.2 8.2.1. Education and Encouragement Programming..................................................................................... 8-4 8.2.2. Previously Existing Programs..................................................................................................................8.4 8.3. School Prioritization............................................................................................................................................ 8-5 8.4. Elementary School Walk Audit Notes...........................................................................................................8-9 8.4.1. Bridgeport Elementary School.................................................................................................................. 8.9 8.4.2. Helmets Elementary School.................................................................................................................... 8-11 8.4.3. Highlands Elementary School.................................................................................................................8-13 8.4.4. McGrath Elementary School...................................................................................................................8-15 8.4.5. Wiley Canyon Elementary School.........................................................................................................8-17 8.5. Junior High and High School Notes.............................................................................................................. 8-19 8.5.1. Golden Valley High School...................................................................................................................... 8-19 8.5.2. Hart High School....................................................................................................................................... 8-19 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 8.5.3. Valencia High School................................................................................................................................8-20 8.5.4. Arroyo Seco Junior High.......................................................................................................................... B-20 8.5.5. Placenta Junior High................................................................................................................................ B-20 8.5.6. Sierra Vista Junior High...........................................................................................................................8-20 8.6. Nest Steps............................................................................................................................................................ 8-21 9. Complete Streets.......................................................................................................................................................9.1 9.1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................9-1 9.2. Policy Background................................................................................................................................................9-1 1-15 9.3. Objective ................................................................................................................................................................. 9-2 9.4. Street Network/Connectivity ...........................................................................................................................9-2 2-3 9.5. lurisdiction............................................................................................................................................................. 9-2 9.6. Phases ........................ 9.7. Design ........................ 9.8. Context Sensitivity 9.9. Implementation ...... 9.10. Exceptions .............. List of Tables 9-3 Table 1-1: Summary of Progress Made 2008 through 2013.................................................................................1-2 Table 1-2: Existing Class I Bike Paths.....................................................................................................................1-3 Table1-3: Existing Trailheads....................................................................................................................................1-4 Table 1-4: Existing On -Street Bicycle Facilities...................................................................................................1-6 Table 1-5: Santa Clarita Multi -Purpose Trails......................................................................................................1-7 Table 1-6: Recommended Programs........................................................................................................................1-11 Table 1-7: Summary of Infrastructure Improvements.......................................................................................1-13 Table 1-8: Cost Summary of City -Funded Proposed Improvements ........................................ .................... 1-15 Table 1-9: Cost Summary of City -Funded Projects by Project Tier..............................................................1-16 Table 2-1: Summary of Progress Made................................................................................................................... 2-3 Table 2-2: Existing Class I Bike Paths....................................................................................................................2-8 Table2-3: Existing Trailheads..................................................................................................................................2-9 Table 2-4: Existing On -Street Bicycle Facilities.................................................................................................2-13 Table 2-5: Santa Clarita's Existing Bicycle Parking......................................................................................... 2-15 Table 2-6: Santa Clarita Multi -Purpose Trails.................................................................................................. 2-19 Table 2-7: Past Bicycle Expenditures (2006-2011)............................................................................................2-20 Table 3-1: General Plan Guiding Principles that Support Biking and Walking ......................................... 3-2 Table 3-2: Circulation Element Bikeways and Pedestrian Circulation Policies ......................................... 3-3 Table 3-3: Unified Development Code Policies Related to Biking and Walking ....................................... 3-8 Table 3-4: Central Goals of the Los Angeles County Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan ............... 3-14 Table 3-5: Local Gaps in the Countywide Bikeway Network....................................................................... 3-14 Table 3-6: Proposed County Bikeways Adjacent to Santa Clarita................................................................3-15 Table 3-7: Non -Motorized Projects from the CIP..............................................................................................3-16 Table 4-1: Characteristics of Casual and Experienced Bicyclists...................................................................4-2 Table 4-2: Characteristics of Recreational and Utilitarian Trips...................................................................4-3 Table 4-3: Collisions Involving Bicyclists in Santa Clarita, 2006 -2010 .......................................................4 -Il Table 4-4: Collisions Involving Pedestrians in Santa Clarita, 2006 -2010 ..................................................4-12 Table4-5: Journey to Work Data.......................................................................................................................... 4-12 Table5-1: Recommended Bikeways........................................................................................................................ 5-3 Table 5-2: 2008 Project Sheets Carried Over....................................................................................................... 5-5 Table 6-1: Recommended Policy Modifications..................................................................................................6-5 Table 6-2: Recommendations to Improve Biking and Walking Access to Transit ................................... 6-6 Table 6-3: Effectiveness of Selected Travel Demand Management Strategies..........................................6-14 • ry Table of Contents Table 7-1: Project Ranking Criteria......................................................................................................................... 7-3 Table7-2: Projects by Tier.........................................................................................................................................7-4 Table 7-3: Cost Summary of Proposed City -Funded Improvements..............................................................7-7 2-5 Table 7-4: Cost Summary of City -Funded Projects by Project Tier...............................................................7-7 2-11 Table 7-5: Recommended Bicycle Facilities: Planning Level Construction Cost Estimates ................... 7-9 Table 7-6: Recommended Pedestrian Facilities: Planning Level Construction Cost Estimates........... 7-11 Table 7-7: Projects Assocatiated with Future Road Construction, Development or Outside City jurisdiction...................................................................................................................................................................7-12 Table 7-8: Cost Estimates for Recommended Network Ten -Year Operations and Maintenance ......7-13 Table 7-9: Potential Measures of Effectiveness........................................................... ........................................ 7-21 Table 8-1: Summary of Infrastructure Improvements........................................................................................8-2 4-9 Table 8-2: Prioritization Criteria............................................................................................................................. 8-6 Table8-3: Prioritized Schools................................................................................................................................... 8-7 List of Figures Figure 1-1: Existing Bicycle Facilities and Trails..................................................................................................1-5 Figure 1-2: Existing and Proposed Bicycle Facilities and Trails....................................................................1-10 Figure 2-1: Caltrans Bikeway Classifications....................................................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-2: Existing Bicycle Facilities and Trails............................................................................................... 2-11 Figure2-3: Existing Paseos...................................................................................................................................... 2-18 Figure 3-1: Circulation Element Roadway Cross -Sections with Bikeways ................................................. 3-5 Figure 3-2: Proposed County Bikeways Adjacent to Santa Clarita..............................................................3-18 Figure 4-2: Why and Where Do You Bike? ..........................................................................................................4-8 Figure 4-3: Why and Where Do You Walk? ........................................................................................................4-8 Figure 4-4: What Prevents You From Biking More Often?.............................................................................4-9 Figure 4-5: What Prevents You From Walking More Often? .......... .................................. ............................. 4-9 Figure 5-1: Recommended Bicycle Network........................................................................................................ 5-2 Figure 5.2: Downtown Newhall Recommended Improvements....................................................................5-8 Figure 5-3: Downtown Newhall Recommended Bike Boulevard ..... .............................................................. 5-9 Figure 5-4: Santa Clarita Metrolink Station Recommended Improvements ............................................. 5-11 Figure 5-5: Valencia Industrial Center Recommended Improvements.......................................................5-13 Figure 5-6: Valencia Town Center Recommended Improvements...............................................................5-15 Figure 8-1: Bridgeport Elementary School Recommended Improvements ................................................ 8-10 Figure 8-2: Helmer Elementary School Recommended Improvements...................................................... 8-12 Figure 8-3: Highlands Elementary School Recommended Improvements ................................................ B-14 Figure 8-4: McGrath Elementary School Recommended Improvements.................................................. B-16 Figure 8-5: Wiley Canyon Elementary School Recommended Improvements.........................................8-18 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Thin frig inknkanalf� 10 blank • Executive 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Santa (7azita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan guides the furore development of bicycle and pedestrian facrlibirs, paseos, and trails within the City. This Plan is an update to the original Plan adopted in 2008. This Plan focuses on the cityls bicycle and pedestrian network, planning and policies related to bicycling and waIldng, non - motorized connections to transit, safe routes to schools, and complete streets The overarching, long-term goal of this Plan is to provide the cultural, infrastructure and institutional support that will guide the development of a pleasant, safe, and convenient non -motorized transportation network that everyone in Santa Oaria can use for their travel needs The Plan guides Santa Clarita toward the goals of providing bikeways, trails and pasecs for all Santa Onnn residents, increasing the number of people who bike and walk for everyday needs, improving safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, and increasing public awareness and positive attitudes about bilang and walking in Santa Clatitn 1.3.. Purpose of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Identify and prioritize bikeway needs. The Non -Motorized Transportation Plan identifies existing bicycle network needs and recommends projects that will fiuther enhance and improve bicycling conditions in Santa Clarity for all types of riders Provide needed facilities and services. Through the use of surveys conducted as part of the 2008 plan, meetings with local stakeholders, field work, local data on biking and walking, and best engineering practices, this Plan identifies the faclities and services that are needed to improve non -motorized transportation in Santa Clarity Enhance and preserve the quality of life in Santa Cla ita. The development and maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian facilities provides for people -friendly streets, paths, trails, and activity centers available to everyone and supports sustainable community development Bicycling and walking can reduce traffic congestion, vehicle exhaust emissions, noise, and energy consumption by encouraging healthier and more active forms of travel. Improve safety. This Plan seeks to increase safety for bicyclists and pedestrians in Santa on"ta through recommendations in design practices and guidelines, proposed projects and suggested measures of public education and enforcement Maximize funding sources for implementation. A key source of funding for bicycle construction projects is the California Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA). The State of California requires that applicants to the BTA have an adopted bikeways plan that includes a number of specific elements related to bicycle commuting, land uses, multi- modal connections, funding, and public input, and be updated every five years The Santa Clarity Non -Motorized Transportation Plan includes the elements required by the State to qualify for consideration for available funding. 1-1 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Prioritize capital improvements. This Plan provides the City of Santa Ckuita with a prioritized list of bicycle and pedestrian capital improvements Ibis list reflects the input of Santa Clarita residents over the course of the Plan's development, gathered at public meetings, through online public outreach efforts, and during the public comment period Improvements also reflect discussions with City Staff and empirical data such as reported bicycle and pedestrian collisions and bicycle and pedestrian counts 1.2. Biking and Walking in Santa Clarita Today Since adoption of the 2008 Plan, Santa Clarita has made much progress toward integrating hiking and walking into everyday life, which is shown in Table 1-1 below The City has over 35 miles of off-street paths that are used by residents in all neighbothoods A number of Santa Clarita's residential areas are connected by a network of paseos. Nearly 30 miles of on -street bicycle lanes and bike routes have been signed and striped of City streets Table i -i: Summary of Progress Made 2oollthrough 2=3 Class I Bike Paths The City constructed 4.0 miles of bike paths, including portions of the Newhall Ranch Bike Path and Santa Clara River Trail. Class II Bike Lanes The City striped 11.4 miles of bike lanes, including facilities on 26" Street, Tournament Road, Decoro Drive, Tourney Road, Centre Pointe Parkway, Rockwell Canyon, and through the Valencia Industrial Center. Class III Bike Routes The City added 2.9 miles of bike routes on Orchard Village Road and Golden Triangle Road. Multi -Purpose Trails The City expanded its multi-purpose trail network, including a trail south of the Santa Clara River between the Iron Horse and Promenade trailheads. Trailheads The City completed the Iron Horse Trailhead, providing new access to the Santa Clara River Trail. Pedestrian Countdown The City upgraded all of its signals to have pedestrian countdown signals Safe Routes to School The City installed pedestrian improvements at 21 schools between 2008 and 2022. Safe Routes to School The City implemented a Safe Routes to School Program including all 26 elementary schools (Non -Infrastructure) between 2oo8 and 2020. Programs The City continued its Bike to Work Day Challenge and hosted additional events for the Amgen Bike Tour of California. Trail maps were installed at seven existing trailheads through a grant. 1.2.1. Bicycle Facilities Santa Chrita's existing bicycle network is shown in Figure 1-1. The network consists primarily of Class I off-street paths and Class H on -street bike lanes. Class III bike routes are designated on Bouquet Canyon Road, Wiley Canyon 12 Executive Road, Orchard Village Road, Golden Triangle Road, and Newhall Avenue. Bike paths run parallel to the Santa Clara Rivet and its tributaries, and parallel to major roads, including Sokdad Canyon Road and McBean Parkway. The first bike paths built in the City generally followed the Santa Clara River and its tributaries. Newer paths have been developed which connect residential neighborhoods to the river paths The network provides connections to the Santa Cla ita Metrolink Station, several school.5 businesses along Scledad Canyon Road and McBean Parkway, the Valencia Industrial Center, and to recreational opportunities along the Rivers Major paths include the South Fork Trail, along a south tributary of the Santa Clara Rivet; the Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail, along Soleclad Canyon Road; the Santa The South Fork Trail includes a paved bicycle and Clara River Thil, the San Francisquito CrrekTratl, the bike path pedestrian path and a parallel, unpaved multi-purpose trail. along Newhall Ranch Road, and the path along Golden Valley Road Some paths, such as South Fork, are recreational in nature, and are part of a combined pedestr=-equestrian- bicycle trail corridor. Other paths, such as the Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail, are more commuter -oriented and run parallel to major roadways. The Cityls existing bike paths are listed in Table 1-1 Connections to the City bike path network are provided at most major roadway intersections In addition to these connection pointy the City maintains six trailheads, and has plans to develop three more trailheads as additional trails are developed Trailheads are listed below in Table 1- 3. Table 1-i: Existing Class I Bike Paths Auto Center Dr _..__... _..___ _.,.._.._._- �................... ....,......,.... ..o.. 0.5 Trail (N of Cinema Dr) Trail (S of Cinema Dr) Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail Auto Center Dr Trailhead Camp Plenty Road 4.8 Copper Hill Dr Path Rye Canyon Rd Decoro Dr 0.8 Faircliff Rd Path Copper Hill Dr Seco Canyon Rd 0.3 Golden Valley Rd Path 3.9 Golder Valky Rd Path 330' eart of C4-14 Via Pnnnrro 1.0 Golden Valley Rd Path Green Mountain Drive Soledad Bndge 2.9 McBean Pkwy Path Newhall Ranch Rd Santa Clara River 0.5 Newhall Ranch Rd Path 7.0 Newhall Ranch Rd Path I -S Bouquet Canyon Road 4.0 Newhall Ranch Rd Path Saledad Canyon Rd Chuck Pontiur Commuter Rail Trail 2.5 ConnectorW W _ Newhall Ranch Rd 0.5 miler S of Newhall Ranch Rd 0.5 Oak Ridge Dr Arbor Hill Wy Via Princessa 0.1 San Francisquito Creek Trail 6.8 1-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan east ride yp.. L L... Lam. L,..F. I., San Frandrgxrto Cnek Tear!- Copps Hill Dr Santa Clara River 3.7 vert ire Sand Canvon Rd 530'N of Thompson Ranch Dr 270'S of Thomoson Ranch Dr 0.2 Soledad Canyon Rd Santa Clara Ricer 0.2 Santa Gam Rnsr Trail Mc&an Pkwy Boxgxet Canjon Rd 1.7 South Fork Trail 4.9 Saxth Fork Tmrl On -hod Vilkrre Rd MaacMaxxtain Parkway Tnv&ad 2.4 Table i- 3: Existing Trail heads Magic Mountain Iron Horse Trailhead Parkway and Tourney South Fork Trail Road Promenade Trilhead Creekside Rd and South Fork Trail McBean Parkway trailer parking, equestrian staging area, shade structure, information kiosk and ddnkine fountain on site ue parsing, near center and eating Sa Smaa C/z=Tmhta sardPoirig h4pll�.uika�lmdx 397Aame17l2Ol2 SmaaCivoaMmarTndS,yAwM4 2009 ® 1-4 LYL".W,LY.VUUIGU .YU Automobile and horse South Fork Traiilnead between Valencia South Fork Trail trailer parking, picnic tables, Blvd and Railroad drinking fountain Avenue Lost Canyon Trailhead Soledad Canyon Rd at Santa Clara River Trail Automobile parking Lost Canyon Rd Camp Plenty Road Trailhead Soledad Canyon Rd at Chuck Pontius Commuter Automobile parking, Camp Plenty Rd Trail, Santa Ckua River Trail drinking fountain Valencia Blvd at Auto South Fork Trail Off-street parking, drinking Auto Center Trailhead Center Dr Santa Clara River Trail fountains, shade structure, informational kiosk Sa Smaa C/z=Tmhta sardPoirig h4pll�.uika�lmdx 397Aame17l2Ol2 SmaaCivoaMmarTndS,yAwM4 2009 ® 1-4 Figure i- is Existing Bicycle Facilities and Trails 0 �P C. xaa lass' Executive Summary FilsMny Biryde Fasil/Has and Trails Est'" 1Yeas/f (Ire l -"a Mn (W II -Ise U. ®(Ysa. w Ras, M.MA".Po N. 0 Itrrabp p hvaaan rnaew rs c'u Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Existing on -street bicycle facilities are presented below in Table 14. 16th St Table i-4: EAsting On -Street Bicycle Facilities Orchard Village Rd Newhall Ave 0.3 Bike Lanes Avenue Scott Rye Canyon Rd McBean Pkwy 1.2 Bike Lanes Avenue Stanford - Vanderbilt Wy Ave Scott Newhall Ranch Rd 2.0 Bike Lanes Bouquet Canvon Rd Alamoeordo Rd Steve Ton St 2.1 Bike Lanes Bouquet Canvon Rd (EB Onlv) Est)uella Dr Alamogordo Rd 0.7 Bike Lanes Calgrove Blvd Wilev Canvon Rd Creekside Dr 0.7 Bike Lanes Center Pointe Pkwy Golden Triangle Rd Ruether Ave 1.1 Bike Lanes Constellation Rd Hercules St Kelly Johnson Pkwy 0.5 Bike Lanes Copper Hill Dr Seco Canyon Rd Haskell Canyon Rd 1.3 Bike Lanes Decom Dr Copper Hill Dr Vista Delgade Dr 2.0 Bike Lanes Dockweiler Dr Ivy Ln Sierra Hwy 0.5 Bike Lanes Haskell Canvon Rd Hercules St - Kelly Johnson Pkwy Constellation Rd Copper Hill Dr 0.9 Bike Lanes Jason Drive Via Princessa Canyon Park Blvd 0.4 Bike Lanes Rockwell Canyon Rd McBean Pkwy Valencia Blvd 1.0 Bike Lanes Seco Canyon Rd Copper Hill Dr Tupele Ridge Rd 0.2 Bike Lanes Sierra Hwv Vista Ridge Dr Orchard Village Rd 1.1 Bike Lanes Sierra Hay 1600' South of Ryan Lr 550' NE of Linda Vista St 0.4 Bike Loner Soledad Canyon Rd Galeton Rd SRR. 11 (Antelope Valley 3.9 Bike Lanes Tournament Rd Wiley Canyon Rd McBean Pkwy 1.1 Bike Lanes Tourney Rd Magic Mountain Pkwy Valencia Blvd 1.2 Bike Lanes Wiley Canyon Rd Vista Ridge Dr Orchard Village Rd 1.0 Bike Lanes Wiley Canyon Rd Orchard Village Rd Total Bike Lane 24.4 Bike Route Bouquet Canyon Rd Total Bike Route 0.9 Bike Route Bouquet Carryon Rd Bouquet Canyon Rd Espuella Dr 0.2 Bike Ronk Bouguet Carryon Rd (IAB Onl#) Espuella Dr Alamogordo Rd 0.7 Bike Rowe Golden Triangle Rd Golden Oak Rd Rainbow Glen Dr 1.5 Bike Route Newhall Ave Pine St Sierra Hwy 1.3 Bike Route Orchard Village Rd McBean Pkwy Lyons Ave 1.4 Bike Route Wiley Canyon Rd Orchard Village Rd Via Pacifica 0.3 Bike Route Total Bike Route 5.4 TOTAL ON -STREET 29.8 Soune: GeyofSawaGantaGH a 1.6 2.2.2. Sidewalks, Paseos, and Multi -Purpose Trails Santa (Intita's existing pedestrian network is comprised of sidewalks, crosswalks, paseos and rnulti-purpose trails Sidewalks are walkways running parallel to a roadway while paseos are paved walking paths that provide pedestrian links outside of the street network Multi-purpose trails as defined in this Plan refer to unpaved trails that ate suitable for walkers, hilkers, equestrians and mountain bikers, but are not considered bicycle transportation facilities Most of Santa 0mita's major roadways have sidewalks along portions of their length. Recently built sidewalks and sidewalks along some roadways, such as McBean Parkway, are buffered from the vehicle traffic by a planter strip, while sidewalks along older roadways, particularly those constructed by Los Angeles County, are directly adjacent to the vehicle traffic Executive Santa Clarita's paseos provide connections between cul-de-sacs and nearby trails, parks, pools, schools and shopping centers. Sidewalk connectivity within the suburban residential neighborhoods of Santa Clarity is excellent. In many neighborhoods, sidewalks connect to a system of paseos and may even connect to the longer citywide tail network Sidewalks am provided in most neighborhood commercial areas Santa Clarity has increased connectivity by building pedestrian bridges over busy streets and providing sidewalk Eactlities on bridges The Valencia and Saugus neighbotinoods of Santa Clarita have well-developed paseo networks linking residential neighborhoods to each other and to surrounding land uses Paseos provide connections between cul-de-sacs; provide access to schools, neighborhood parks and pools, and to local commercial centers; and in some cases provide access to the citywide trail network. The City of Santa Clarim o-menrly has 33.7 miles of unpaved multi-purpose trails The trails are located in rural or semi -rural areas, and generally in the southern and wxwtem parts of the City. The multi-purpose trail network includes an equestrian path that parallels the South Fork Trail add one that parallels Sand Canyon Road. Other multi use trails are located off Oak Springs Canyon Road, north of Placenta Canyon Road, and south of San Femando Road, parallel to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks The Crty has plans to develop approximately 83 additional miles of multi-purpose trails Santa Clarita's existing multi-purpose trails are listed in Table 1-5. Table 1-5: Santa Clarita Multi-PurposeTrails Placenta Canyon Trail Qwgley Canyon Creekview Park 12 Robinson Ranch Trail Oak Spring Canyon US Forest 1.8 Sand Canyon Trail Valley Ranch Road just north or Warmuth Road 0.5 Santa Clara River Connector Auto Center Trailhead South Fork River 0.3 _South Fork Trail Magic Mountain Parkway Newhall Creek 2.4 Open Space Areas 27.5 Total Total multi-purpose trails 33.7 1-7 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Sa Pin xmiG � S� Jߖ 1.3. Bicyclist and Pedestrian Needs 1.3.1. Bicyclist Needs The needs and preferences of bicyclists vary depending on the skill level of the cyclist and the type of trip the bicyclist is takings Santa Clanta's Non -Motorized Transportation Plan considers these differences in planning a system that serves all user types. Because of its extensive network of trails and bike paths, Santa Clarita offers many good opportunities for casual bicyclists Marry, of the City's trails and paths are accessible from residential mads Many experienced bicyclists, including those who bicycle long distances for exercise or training, also use the multi -use paths within the City. This combination of fast-moving bicyclists on naming rides with slower -moving casual bicyclists and pedestrians may result in user conflicts on the trails The Plan helps Santa (larva trove in the direction of providing more on -street facilities to provide a variety of training and commuting opportunities for cyclists Santa C lanta's trail system also provides access to shopping and employment opportunities within Valencia, Newhall, Saugus, and along Soledad Canyon Road into Canyon Country- --all of whidt are important to the utilitarian rider. Howeve; not all communities have easy bicycle access to the trail system For the casual recreational rider, this may not be a serious deterrent, since they be willing and able to drive their bicycle to the tralhead However, this may not be an option for the experienced recreational rider or the commute; as they generally would like to use their bicycle for the whole trip. Bicycle -friendly connections between the residential arras and the trails will likely increase in the prevalence of bicycle commuting, as well as increase the prevalence of recreational riding. 1.3.2. Pedestrian Needs People walk for many reasons: traveling to work, transit or other multi -modal facilities, school, recreation and entertainment, health and exercise, shopping, social events, personal errands, appointments, and social visits Pedestrian needs for different trip types vary. For example, a commuter may desire a well-connected direct route with efficient signal timing, while a recreational pedestrian may be more concerned about the aesthetics of the surroundings However, all pedestrians have several needs in common, such as safety, connectivity, and accessibility. Pedestrian mobility networks should also consider persons with disabilities The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandates that reasonable accommodation for access should be provided for those who may need sudr assistance Based on field observations and input provided in the public input process, the most critical needs of pedestrians in Santa Clarita include crossing visibility, continuous facilities, uniform design guidelines, reduced traffic speeds, mixed land uses, and direct connections 1.3.3. Public Outreach Public involvement is important to the success of any non -motorized transportation plan An extensive outreadr program was created to solicit input for Santa C larrta's 2008 Non-Motomed Transportation Plan, mdudmg an on-line survey, bi-lingual questionnaires, two community meetings, a project -specific website, and press releases and email . 1-8 Executive announcements Outreach for the 2012 Plan Update was conducted through focus groups for site-specific improvements The Old Town Newhall Association and the Valley Industry Association participated in focus groups in September 2012 to provide input on Downtown Newhall and the Valencia Industrial Center respectively. 1.4. Recommendations The NonMotorizedTransportation Plan outlines a range of recommendations to guide Santa Clarity towed the goals of providing bikeways, trails and paseos for all Santa Claris residents, inaeasutg the number of people who bike and walk for everyday needs, improving safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, and increasing public awareness and positive attitudes about biting and walking in Santa Clarity Recommendations were developed to reflect public input, existing condition; and fume city plans. The recommendations include bicycle and pedestrian inf asmrcuue improvements, safe routes to school program% design and policy recommendations, complete streets policy recommendations, travel demand management strategies, transit access improvements, funding and implementation strategies, education and encouragement program, and supportive land use policies These recommendations are outlined as follows 1.4.2. Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements The recommended bicycle network has been developed to build upon the network proposed in the 2008 plan, to 611 in gaps within the current network, to continue the expansion of the existing trail network, to forrnalize existing route; used by cyclists, and to improve access between residential neighborhoods and the current bikeway network. Recommended bikeways are shown on Fignrre 1-2. The projects reflect the City's existing and future roadway and trail Plans Key Projects include: • Signing Valley Street, Wiley Canyon Road and Sierra Highway as bicycle routes • Striping bike lanes on Avenue Tibl itts and Whites Canyon Road, and through the Valencia Town Center • Striping time -restricted bike lanes on Sierra Highway to fill in a network gap • Bicycle Boulevard on Walnut Street • Construction of a Class I Path parallel to Railroad Avenue • Extending the South Fork Trail to Lyons Avenue • Extending the Santa Clara River Trail from River Park/Calla Way • Creating a Class I and paseo connection through the Valencia Town Center • Constructing a Class I path along Bouquet Canyon Creek In addition to these projects, Class I paths are specified in the construction of several roadways, including the Cross - Valley Connector and the Via Pnncessa Extension. 19 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Fiqurei- z: EXlstinq and Proposed Bicycle Facilities and Trails - 1.10 - WAN ��m,y..a no�,•d • ekyde PorUlHn and Tral6 blb(hg 6lkmry �6ru1•Bhbrc <W lx IMAr.X eXbR�perinX — 4�w ��(W I-Mdllhhm •••(WI.ftW ••• (W■-Wlbut YX!lIXp M• Q W N,b, � O,b.nmr ® We f ; - 1.10 - WAN ��m,y..a no�,•d • ekyde PorUlHn and Tral6 blb(hg 6lkmry �6ru1•Bhbrc <W lx IMAr.X eXbR�perinX — 4�w ��(W I-Mdllhhm •••(WI.ftW ••• (W■-Wlbut YX!lIXp M• Q W N,b, � O,b.nmr ® We Executive 1.4.2. Pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements This Plan provides general design guidelines and best practices for developing pedestrian w� recommends a sidewalk gap closure program for the Industrial Centet, a high-visrhhty sidewalk installation program, and identifies pedestrian safety improvements for several key intersections The intersections were chosen as part of the 2008 based on pedestrian collision history, proxtmtty to existing pedestrian networ% and proximity to commuter destinations The intersections identified for improvement are: • McBean Padm ay and Creekside Drive • Lyons Avenue and Peadiland Avenue • Lyons Avenue and Avenida Rotella Ratkaad Avenue and 15th Street (Radmad Avenue Rail with Trail) • Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road • Commuter Way and Scledad Canyon Road • Intersections of Soledad Canyon Road and Golden Oak Reuther Avenue and Rainbow Glen Drive 1.4.3. Recommended Programs In addition w the recommended bicycle and pedestrian f talties, the Plan recommends spedfic programs and policies intended to facilitate planning and designing for tricyclists and pedestrians The recommendations include events, contests and incentives to encourage people to bike and walk, education programs to trach students and adults bicycle safety, and enforcement strategies to promote safer interactions between drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians Policy recommendations focus on modifications and additions that would support the development of a city-wide non - motorized transportation network and would encourage people to bike and walk more Recommended program are highlighted in Table 1-6. Table 1-6: Recommended Programs Education Programs Motorists and Bicyclists dunto a Share the Road Caagnigrt Continue and Expand Bxyde and Pedestrian R&xatim Programs Provide Safety Handbook FAicate Motoasts, City Stam Maintenance and Constnxtm Crews Enmuragenent Progains Facilitate the Development ofFnpluyu Incentive Pxogw[s Develop Sysnsn Identification and Wayfit>dtng Signage Establish aCommunuyBilceway/Wakl yAdopton Curare a Multi -Modal Ams Gude Work with Busitlesses to Develop Inc fives forBrking and Wallong Apply for Higher Ranked Bicycle Friendly Comrmmtty Canvamitylnvohvc[mnt Continue to St>ppott Bike-to,Wodcand Bike-toSdi of Days Contirue to Support Bilw Fans and Races Establish a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory coaunitme Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan to Coordinate with l.os Angeles County, Caltrans and other ARenaes to Desgriated Bilreway Sgns Consider a Pilot Program to Test Parallelyr arning &griiig: Destination Demotors; at Sgp2lized Intersections •. 11 I DetectorsWhere Actuated by to 11 Regilady Calibrate Biryde-Sensieve Loop Detertors •. Panelli Proper Design and MatnterianoeBicycle Count= a Safe Routes to Sehool Program 1.4.4. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking The Non-Mototized Transportation Plan recommends strategies and policies that can be used to promote biking and walking in Sana Clads These strategies include D&= Recommendations: Wider bicycle lanes are recommended on Sana Cla a's major roadways to provide additional separation between bicyclists and motor vehicles The Plan discusses ways to determine whether it is most appropriate to use a parallel bicycle path or on -street bicycle lanes, noting that in cases where numerous crossings exist or destinations are along both sides of the road, on -street bicycle facilit); such as wide Class lI bike lanes, may be more appropriate The Plan outlines special design considerations for parallel paths to minimize conflicts between crossing motor vehicle traffic and path users and between different user groups on the path. The Plan also includes summaries of federal and sate design guidelines for bicycle facilities, and pedestrian Facilities Recommended Policy Modifications: The Plan recommends several general changes to the City's Municipal Code and CArculation Element: Modifications may include siting criteria to the hicyrle padang ordinance, allowing property owner; to substitute bicycle parking for motor vehicle parleing and modifying language in the Circulation Element Street Design Guidelines to clatify appropriate locations for parallel Class I facilities versus Class II facilities YL- \iS•1}I} Y •<11)I, - ' 1i Ili. Y. M.• •}.Y✓. I 1 1" ••Illi"1 • • • I/ 1" 1 i1'1 • •I . • • • IY.I Y iY. 1"111 i I/. 1 • • w w I• • � � • Il Iw 1 1 •"1:. u. 6w 1i. w i!1 1 • u - •• II 1 I •• 1 u •.I . •I 11 1 , 1 1• ♦. 1-12 Regional Bilreway Netwodr Pedestrian Facility Improvctrnt Fstablish a Sidewalk Gap Closure Program Program Establish an Intersection Improvement Program Biryde Padang and End of Trip Incense Public Bxyde Padang Fmilmes Facilities Encourage Provision of Shower and Locker Facilities Encourage Provision ofBiryde Ar Stations Maintenance and Operations Develop a Maintemnce Policy that Addresses the Special Needs ofBicycliss Consider impacts on bkycles whsle per(oaningcroshoction, mainoenance and repair we& or Desgriated Bilreway Sgns Consider a Pilot Program to Test Parallelyr arning &griiig: Destination Demotors; at Sgp2lized Intersections •. 11 I DetectorsWhere Actuated by to 11 Regilady Calibrate Biryde-Sensieve Loop Detertors •. Panelli Proper Design and MatnterianoeBicycle Count= a Safe Routes to Sehool Program 1.4.4. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking The Non-Mototized Transportation Plan recommends strategies and policies that can be used to promote biking and walking in Sana Clads These strategies include D&= Recommendations: Wider bicycle lanes are recommended on Sana Cla a's major roadways to provide additional separation between bicyclists and motor vehicles The Plan discusses ways to determine whether it is most appropriate to use a parallel bicycle path or on -street bicycle lanes, noting that in cases where numerous crossings exist or destinations are along both sides of the road, on -street bicycle facilit); such as wide Class lI bike lanes, may be more appropriate The Plan outlines special design considerations for parallel paths to minimize conflicts between crossing motor vehicle traffic and path users and between different user groups on the path. The Plan also includes summaries of federal and sate design guidelines for bicycle facilities, and pedestrian Facilities Recommended Policy Modifications: The Plan recommends several general changes to the City's Municipal Code and CArculation Element: Modifications may include siting criteria to the hicyrle padang ordinance, allowing property owner; to substitute bicycle parking for motor vehicle parleing and modifying language in the Circulation Element Street Design Guidelines to clatify appropriate locations for parallel Class I facilities versus Class II facilities YL- \iS•1}I} Y •<11)I, - ' 1i Ili. Y. M.• •}.Y✓. I 1 1" ••Illi"1 • • • I/ 1" 1 i1'1 • •I . • • • IY.I Y iY. 1"111 i I/. 1 • • w w I• • � � • Il Iw 1 1 •"1:. u. 6w 1i. w i!1 1 • u - •• II 1 I •• 1 u •.I . •I 11 1 , 1 1• ♦. 1-12 Executive Travel Demand Managanenc The Plan includes policies to reduce congestion, such as alternative work schedule; polices to induce a shift from single -occupancy vehicles to higher occupancy vehicles, such as ride matching programs, and policies to shift trips from driving to biking, walking or transit, such as parking fee programs. Land Use Policies to Promote Biking and Wallang This section offers solutions for increasing bicycle and pedestrian trips through the implementation of land use regulations and policies that encourage pedestrian and bicycle friendly development Policies include clustering development, mixed uses, increasing non -motorized connectivity, transit oriented development, sidewalk construction requirements, and using development review to ensure new construction is well-designed for btlang and walking Santa Clanta has already been using some of these policies 2.4.5. Safe Routes to Schools Safe Routes to School refers to a variety of multi -disciplinary programs aimed at promoting wallmig and bicycling to school, and improvitng traffic safety around school arras through education, incentives, increased law enforcement, and engineering measures. The City of Santa Clanta has been successful in wosiang with school districts and patents to identify, fund, and construct infrastructure improvements and implement education and encouragement programs throughout the city. The City has been working down the prioritized list of schools from the 2008 Plan to apply for grant funding to construct infrastructure improvements Fade grant cycle, three schools are selected --one from each of the three school districts. For six Crossing guard at Seco Canyon Road and Decoro Drive, Santa Clarita School. consecutive years, the City has been awarded State or Federal Safe Routes to School funding to implement the infrastructure improvements. Table 1-7 describes the improvements implemented at each school through funding received This Plan re -prioritizes the remaining schools that have not yet received funding, as well as the middle and high schools so that the Gtv can apply for funding for those schools, as well. Table 1-7: Summary of Infrastructure Improvements W. [UVC Vw1 % cmu ¢n,ol r �u uul � District Canyon Springs Community Sulphur Springs School • • • • School District Cedarcreek Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • • District Emblem Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • • 1-13 C•`, J Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Fair Oaks Ranch Elementary Sulphur Springs School • School District Golden Oak Community Sulphur Springs School School District Helmers Elementary School Saugus Union School • District Highlands Elementary School Saugus Union School • James Foster Elementary Saugus Union School • • i • School District Leona Cox Community School Sulphur Springs School • • • • District McGrath Elementary School Newhall School District Meadows Elementary School Newhall School District Mitchell Community School Sulphur Springs School • . • • District Mountain View Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Newhall Elementary School Newhall School District North Park Elementary School Saugus Union School District Old Orchard Elementary Newhall School District School Peachland Elementary School Newhall School District Pinetree Community School Sulphur Springs School • • • • District Plum Canyon Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Rio Vista Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • . District Rosedell Elementary School Saugus Union School . . • • District Santa Clarita Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Skyblue Mesa Elementary Saugus Union School School District Sulphur Springs Community Sulphur Springs School • Schoolli] District Valencia Valley Elementary Newhall School District School Valley View Community School Sulphur Springs School • • • • District Wiley Canyon Elementary Newhall School District School 1-14 Executive 1.4.6. Complete Streets The Circulation Element, Non Motorized Transportation Plan, and Transportation Development Plan together provide a good fiarnework for establishing complete streets policies This Plan provides recommendations for how the City can fiuther strengthen its commitment to complete streets, such as by officially supporting complete streets through a resolution, by passing a complete streets ordinance, by modifying design standards to give equal weight to the needs of all roadway users, and by implementing internal procedures and checklists to support complete streets. i.5. Funding and Implementing the Plan 1.5,1. Project Prioritization The intent of prioritizing projects is to identify which high- priority bicycle and pedestrian facilities will be constructed first As projects are constructed, lower priority projects should be moved up the list Prioritization criteria were developed to reflect the transportation benefit, regional connectivity benefit, cost, safety benefit and feasibIty of each project The overall score of a project is the sum of individual criteria Projects are placed into three phasing groups: Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3. 1.5.2. Cost Estimates Construction of the recommended bicycle and pedestrian facilities will result in 17.3 miles of new Class I Bike paths, 5.3 miles of new Class II bike lanes, and 15.7 miles of Class III Bike Routes (not including projects that 0 be constructed as part of other development projects). Pedestrian facility recommendations include improvements at nine intersections, a sidewalk installation prograny and a high -visibility crossingprogram. The total cost of constructing the recommended bicycle projects is estimated at $31.4 million dollars and the estimated cost of the pedestrian projects is estimated at $6.8 million dollars.' Table 1- 8: Cost Summary of City -Funded Proposed Improvements Class I Bicycle Path 17.3 $1,400,0002 $30,780,000 Class II Bicycle Lane 6.7 $40,000 $268,000 Class III Bicycle Route - Standard 14.1 $25,000 $392,500 Class III Bicycle Route — Bike 1.6 $30,000 $48,000 Boulevard Pedestrian Improvements not applicable not applicable $6,766,000 Total 39.7 $38,214,500 Nor Ca&m.* 2012 ddlma ' Unless otherwise noted, cost estimates= based m pa -mile averagrs ofWwwey crostmction m CAldhaia. F_stmiatm mchide 15% for sntvey and desW work, 20% for contingency and 20% for crosmrctiat adnmasm". Cost esainaics ate m 2012 doDas. Cast emmat s are planning levy and do not mdade feaabky, mvruarwntal dearanm or aalmacc com. Pmject-spedfic facbm such as grading bndsrapmg mtasecion tt,,difmwq, nghtof- y aalumon, and bridge croswictm may masse the actual cost of wastnrvoq sometimes sgniEmntly. 2 Based m mst to cnsmxt the Iron 11I Trad ® 1-15 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Table 1- 9: Cost Summary ofCity-Funded Projects by ProjectTier Tiet Estimated Cost Tier 1 $1,686,500 Tier 2 $24,068,000 Tier 3 $12,460,000 Total $38,214,500 1.5.3. Implementation The Non -Motorized Transportation Plan provides the long-term vision for the development of a citywide biking and walking network that can be used by all residents for all types of taps. Implementation of the Plan will hake place in small steps over many years This Plan recommends that the City pursue the following strategies to implement the Plan's vision: Establish implementation responsibility by assigning the duties of a non -motorized transportation planner to a City staff person. Strategically, implement infrastructure projects by pursing funding for high-priority projects first, and by constructing projects of all prionties in conjunction with larger construction projects. Regularly revisit project prioritization to ensure that new projects are added to the list, completed projects are removed and the priorities are revised as conditions change. Update the Plan on a regular basis. The bicycle portion of the Plan should be updated every five years to remain eligible for state funding Other elements of the Plan may be reviewed and updated as needed Use measures of effectiveness to determine how well the City is able to implement the Plan. The Plan identifies several measures of effectiveness that the City should consider, i.6. Contents of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan The Non -Motorized Transportation Plan document can be divided into three pars: Chapters 14, Chapters 5-9 and the Appendices. The first four chapters outline the existing bicycling and w-Akng conditions in Santa Clarity The last five chapters present recommendations to guide the future development of bicycling and walking in the City. The Appendices provide supporting information such as design guidelines for bicycle, pedestrian and trail facilities, guidelines for accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians on transit, and state laws related to bicyclists and pedestrians. The Santa Clatita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan contains the following chapters: Chapter 1, Introduction provides an overview of the Plan, the goals and implementation strategies ® 1-16 Executive Summary Chapter 2, Existing Conditions, provides a description of the existing bicycle and pedestrian conditions in Santa Clarity The chapter includes a map of existing bikeways and paseos as well as descriptions of existing bicycle pis Chapter 3, Ban= and Policy Context provides an overview of relevant planning documents from the City of Santa Clarity and adjacent jurisdictions. Chapter 4, Needs of the Non -Motorized &= =is the need for bicycle transportation in Santa Cla ita, including an overview of existing user groups, bicycle comtmute statistics, responses to the Biking and Walldng Survey, and reported bicycle accident data Chapter 5, Recommended hnprovementsI outlines the recommended design guidelines and programs, recommended Bike Route, Bike Lane, Bike Path networks, and intersection improvements, includes a map of existing and recommended bikeways and summary tables of recommended improvements. Chapter 6, Strategies to Promote Biking and presents general policies that the City should consider to encourage biking and walking Chapter 7, Funding and implermentatiory provides a prioritized list of recommended bikeways with basic cost estimates, a list of potential funding sources, and recommended measures of effectiveness. Chapter 8, Safe Routes to Schoo) outlines ways the City, schools, school districts, parents and law enforcement can collaborate to make it easier and safer to bike and walk to school. The chapter also prioritizes elementary, middle, and high schools for funding and improvements Chapter 9, Complete Streets, outlines existing complete streets efforts the City is engaging in, as well as recommendations for how the City can further strengthen its commitment to complete streets 1-17 a'u Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Thupage intentionally left blank . 1-18 2. Existinq Conditions 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS This chapter provides a description of existing non motorized conditions within the City of Santa ClAnta The information provided is based on field visits, the City's existing maps and planning doctunents, and meetings with the City staff The information is divided into the following sections: 21� describes Santa Clanta's location and land uses. (Page 2-2) 22 Summary of Progress Made lists the improvenents the City has made since adoption of the 2007 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. (Page 2-3) 23 Existing Bicycle Facilities lists Santa Clanta's existing on- and off-street bicycle fadlities, describes major off-street paths, and provides a map of these facilities This section also describes support facilities, such as bicycle detection and bicycle pati rug. (Page 2-4) 24 Existing Pedestrian Facilities provides a description and map of the existing pedestrian facilities within the City of Santa Clauta. This section identifies locations with high pedestrian use, describes existing sidewalks and paseos and contains a map of Santa Cladta's pasms. (Page 2-16) 25 Bicyde Facility Maintenance describes how the City of Santa Clarity maintains its bicycle facilities. (Page 2-19) 26 Past Biwde and Pedestrian Facility Exlxr�s sununaizes the Citls invcstment in constructing, improving, and maintaining bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure between 2006 and 2011. (Page 2.19) 27 Encoutagonent and Education Programs describes biking and walling encouragement and education programs currently available in Santa Clarity (Page 2-21) 2.8 Multi -Modal Connections describes how bicycles are supported on Santa Clanta's transit services, including City of Santa (Iarita Transit and Metrolink (Page 2.22) 2-1 a Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 2.1. Setting The City of Santa Clanta was incorporated in 1987 from the communities of Canyon Country, Newhall, Saugus and Valencia. It has expanded through multiple annexations and now encompasses over 60 square miles in area and, as of 2013, is home to over 200,000 residents.' It is 35 miles north of downtown Los Angeles and bounded generally on the west by Interstate 5 and the east by State Route 14 (SR -14). Located in the Santa Clara River Valley, the Cyty is bounded by the Sierra Pelona Mountain Range to the north and the Santa Susanna and San Gabriel mountain ranges to the south The City is located just north of the San Femando Valley, and is bordered by unincorporated Los Angeles County, including the unincorporated communities of Acton, Agua Duke, Caswq and Stevenson Ranch In 2003, the City of Santa Clama was the fastest growing city in Los Angeles County, with a growth rate of three percent Santa Clantals population grew by 17.9% from 2000 to 2007—wice the growth experienced in all of Los Angeles County. Population growth was the result of new housing construction in the City as well as annexations of surrounding areas into the city limits This high growth rate, combined with high growth in the surrounding communities and the large area of the City, has placed increasing transportation pressures on the community. The growth of the City provides opportunities for expanding the existing bicycle and pedestrian network. Development in Santa Clarity is generally suburban in character, with most development occurring on the valley floor and louver canyons The City is mostly residential, with low-density single- family residential areas located throughout, commercial areas located along major arterials, business parks located primarily gong Interstate 5 and along Soledad Canyon Road, and neighborhood cotmnercial centers scattered throughout the City. The Santa Clara River provides open space for the residents of Santa Clarita. The City continues to grow Recent development includes residential units, as well as community facilities, such as the Old Town Newhall Library and Canyon Country Community Center Parks and open spaces are interspersed throughout the city. The four communities (Canyon Country, Newhall, Saugus and Valencia) which were joined together to form Santa Clama still have distinct characteristics, and land uses for each community, are described below Canyon Country contains a variety of housing types, including latge-lot single-family custom homes, single-family tract homes, and multi -family development and mobile home parks Neighborhood serving commercial areas are concentrated along Soledad Canyon Road and Sierra I-Iighway. Sand Canyon, a sub -community of Canyon Country, is located south of SR -14 and consists of very low-density single-fanvly homes and estates The comnnmity is rural, and dharactetized by lager lot sizes Most streets in the neighborhood do not have sidewalks. The ncobodhood is home to several horse ranches, and equestrian use is common. 12010 U.S. Census 2-2 2. Existino Conditions Newhall was developed in 1876 in conjunction with the construction of the Southern Pacific Railroad. As the oldest permanent settlement in the City, Newhall's circulation pattern and land use are conducive to walking and biking. The area east of Newhall Avenue and north of Lyons Avenue has a grid network of streets and highdeusity single and multi family residential units South of Lyons Avenue, the neighborhood is less dense Downtown Newhall is governed by a specific plan, which is discussed in the next chapter Since adoption of the Downtown Newhall Specific Area Plan, the City has converted San Fernando Road into Main Street (Lyons Avenue to 5th Street) into a pedesmanoriented downtown street The City reduced the number of travel lanes on Main Street (San Femando Road) to two and installed angled on -street parking, curb extensions, and street trees. The Specific Plan proposes redeveloping Downtown Newhall as a transitonented mixed-use district and the City has begun efforts toward achieving this goal Placenta Canyon, located m the northeast of downtown Newhall, is a Waal sub -community of Newhall, and is home to several equesinanonented residential areas. Saugus is primarily smgle-fim* residential and home to several newer residential developments Smaller cormntmity commercial and neighborhood serving commercial areas are dispersed throughout Saugus was developed in the 1970s and 1980s with typical auto -oriented neighborhoods Valencia was developed as a planned community starting in the 1960's and 70's It includes single-family residential neighborhoods supported by local recreational amenities and community shopping centers A system of off-street pedestrian pathways (weos) links the residential, recreational and commercial areas Pedestrian bridges cross major arterials Key destinations include Santa Clanta City Hall, Valencia Town Center shopping mall, the Henry Mayo Newhall Hospital, College of the Canyons and California Institute of the Arts Magic Mountain theme park, a regional recreational destination, is located adjacent in an area of Valencia that is in unincorporated Los Angeles County. 2.2. Progress Made Since Adoption of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan The City of Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan was adopted on June 24, 2008. Since adoption, the City has worked diligently to implement recommendations from the Plan. Table 2-1 provides a summary of the progress the City has made since Plan adoption. Table 2-i: Path and Santa Clara RiverTrail. Class II Bike Lanes The City striped 22.4 miles of bike lanes, including facilities on 26,h Street, Tournament Road, Decoro Drive, Tourney Road, Centre Pointe Parkway, Rockwell Canyon, and through Multi -Purpose Trails The City expanded its multi-purpose trail network, including a trail south of the Santa Clara River between the Iron Horse and Promenade trailheads. Trailheads The City completed the Iron Horse Trailhead, providing new access to the Santa Clara River Trail. Pedestrian Countdown The City upgraded all of its signals to have pedestrian countdown signals 2-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transoortation Plan Safe Routes to School The City installed pedestrian improvements at 23. schools between 2oo8 and 203.2. (Infrastructure) Safe Routes to School The City implemented a Safe Routesto School Program including all 26 elementary schools (Non -Infrastructure) between 2oo8 and 203.0. Programs The City continued its Bike to Work Day Challenge and hosted additional events forthe Amgen Bike Tour of California. Trail maps were installed at six existing trailheads through a grant. 2.3. Existing Bicycle Facilities The City of Santa Clarita's existing bikeway network consists of approximately 36.4 mites of off-street bicycle paths 24.4 miles of bike lanes, and 5.4 miles of bike routes This Plan refers to bikeways using Caltrans standard designations The three types of bilwways identified by Caltrans in Chapter 1000 of the highway Design Manual are defined below Figure 2-1 illustrates the three types of bikeways Class I Bikeway Typically called a "bike path," a Class I Bikeway provides bicycle travel on a paved rightof- way completely separated from any street or highw2y.2 Class II Bikewat Often referred to as a 'Uw lane," a Class B Bikeway provides a striped and stenciled lane for one-way travel on a street or highway. (lass III Bikeway. Generally referred to as a "bike route," a Class Ill Bikeway provides for shared use with pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic and is identified only by signing. Additional shared lane ma&ngs can be used to supplement Class III Bikeways to further highlight the presence of bicyclists to motorists. Santa Clanta's existing bicycle network is shown in Figure 2-2 (see page 2-11). The network consists primarily of Class I off-street paths and Class II on -street bike lanes Class III bike routes are designated on Bouquet Canyon Road, Wiley Canyon Road, Orchard Village Road, Golden Triangle Road, and Newhall Avenue Bike paths run parallel to the Santa Mara River and its tributaries, and parallel to major roads, including Soledad Canyon Road and McBean Padcway. 2.3.1. Paved Off -Street Bike Paths The City of Santa Clanta has an extensive network of paved, off-street hike paths and trails These paved bike paths should not be confused with the city's unpaved "multi-purpose trails" (discussed in Section 23) which are not considered bicycle transportation facilities according to Caltrans. This section refers only to paved bike paths that meet the Caltrans definition of a Class I bike facility. 2 Multi -use paths are generally not recommended for use by electronic bicycles due to the speed differential between electronic bicycles and non -motorized users. © 24 CLASS Multi -Use Path Provides a completely separated right of way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with crossfiow minimized. SHARED USE PATH NO MOTOR VEHICLES OR MOTORIZED BICYCLES CLASS II Bike Lane Provides a striped lane for Bike lane one-way bike travel on a street or sign highway. 1 2'horizontal clearance 10'vertical clearance) 2. Conditions B'min. required paved width 2'clear, graded shoulders required 12'min. total width recommended 3'-5'honzontal Bike lane clearance sign 7'vertical ! clearance °b Parking and bike lane 1 Travel Lane Travel Lane Bike lane 11' min. with rolled curb 4' min. without gutter 12' min. with vertical curb 5' min. with gutter 6" solid 6" solid white stripe white stripe CLASS III Bike Route Signed Shared Roadway Provides for shared use with pedestrian or Bike route optional Bike route motor vehicle traffic, typically on lower sign f Shared Lane Marking sign volume roadways. j 11' (min) center to curb 1 5idewal Shared use travel lane Shared use travel lane 14'min. recommended 14'min. recommended Figure i -i: Caltrans Bi keway Classif icat ions Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan The first bike paths built in the City generally followed the Santa Clara River and its tributaries Newer paths have been developed that connect residential neighborhoods to the river paths The network provides connections to the Santa Clarity Metrolink Station, several schools, businesses along Soledad Canyon Road and McBean Parkway, and to recreational opportunities along the rivers The City typically provides grade -separated undercrossings where a Class I bike path acuses a major highway. Major paths include the South Fork Trail, along a south tributary of the Santa Clara Rives the Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail, along Soledad Canyon Road; the Santa Clara River Trail; the San Francisquito Creek Trail; the bike path along Newhall Ranch Road; and the path along Golden Valley Road Some paths, such as South Fork, are recreational in nature, and are part of a combined pedestrian -equestrian -bicycle trail corridor. Other paths, such as the Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail, are more commuteronented and run parallel to major roadways. Descriptions of the major path segments follows Shorter paths are not described, but are shown on the map of existing bikeways and included in the mileage count South Fork Trail The South Fork Trail is a bike path that parallels the south fork of the Santa Clara River for over five miles For most of its length, the bike path parallels a fenced, unpaved equestrian trail. The hike path runs north from Orchard Village Road and connects to trails along the Santa Clara River and San Francisquito Creek as well as the Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail There are several access points to the trail from the Valencia paseos and an official trailhead at Magic Mountain Parkway. Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail The Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail parallels Soledad Canyon Road from Magic Mountain Parkway to just east of the Santa Clara River at Camp Plenty Road It is approximately five miles long It serves the Santa Clarity Metrolink Station The trail connects the eastern and westem portions of the Santa Clara River Trail and essentially serves as the Santa Clara River Trail through the center of the City. The western portion of the path runs to the north of Soledad Canyon Road; the path crosses at Golden Oak Road and continues on the south side of Soledad Canyon Road For part of its length, the bike path is paralleled by separate pedestrian facilities Santa Clara River Trail The Santa Clara River Trail, when fully built, wall parallel the entire length of the Santa Clara River as it runs through the City of Santa CJarita Currently, three sections are built: McBean Parkway to Bouquet Canyon Road (two miles), Canyon View 0 2-6 The South Fork Trail includes a paved bicycle and pedestrianpath and a parallel, unpaved multi-purpose trail. Santa Clarita has over 30 miles of bike paths. Access to Lost Canyon Road (three miles), and Tree Farm to The OI adoption of the 2006 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. Undercrossings and access points to the road are provided where the trail crosses major roadways San Francisquito Creek Trail San Francisquito Creek Trail parallels both sides of the San Francisquito Creek, a tributary of the Santa Clara Rivet On the west bank, the trail runs 3.7 miles from the Santa Clara River Trail north to Copper Hill Drive On the east bank, die trail runs 3.1 miles from the Santa data River Trail to Copper Hill Drive. Since the 2006 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan, the City has constructed an additional access point to the trail on the west bank at Decoro Drive Newhall Ranch Road Bike Path This bike path runs along the north side of Newhall Ranch road from just east of the I-5 to Soledad Canyon Road The existing path runs for seven miles Pedestrians are separated from the hike path by striping This path was extended with the construction of the Cross Valley Connector, which was completed in 2010. Golden Valley Road Bike Path This bike path runs along Golden Valley Road between Soledad Canyon Road and east of Highway 14, connecting with multi- use paths in the Golden Valley Open Space It is located on the east side of Golden Valley Road There is a section of proposed pathway across Highway 14 that has not yet been implemented. In total there are over three miles of paved pathway. The route includes a long, steep hill. The Citys existing lake paths are listed in Table 24 Connections to the Gty bike path network are provided at most major roadway intersections In addition to these connection points, the City maintains six trailheads, and has plans to develop three more trailheads as additional trails are developed Trailheads are listed below in Table 2-3. 2-7 2. Ddstinq Conditions The Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail runs parallel to Soledad Canyon Road. The Santa Clara River Trail connects to adjacent subdivisions with short pathways. A bike path with separate pedestrian way parallels Newhall Ranch Road and provides connections to the San Francisquito Creek. Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Table 2-2: 1 Class I Bike Paths Auto Center Dr Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail 0.5 _ Trail (N of Cinema Dr) Trail (S of Cinema Dr) TChuck Pontius Commuter Rail Auto Center Dr Trailhead Camp Plenty Road 4.8 Copper Hill Dr Path Rye Canyon Rd Decoro Dr 0.8 Faircliff Rd Path Conner Hill Dr Seco Canvon Rd 0.3 Golden Valley Rd Path 3,9 Golden Valley Rd Path 330' east ofSR-14 Via Priverssa 1.0 Gmen Mountain Dope McBean Pkwv Path Newhall Ranch Rd Path I-5 Bouquet Canyon Road 4.0 Newhall Ranch Rd Path Soledad Canyon Rd Chuck Pontius Commuter Roil Trail 25 Newhall Ranch Rd Path Newhall Ranch Rd 0.5 miler S of Newhall Ranch Rd 0.5 Connector Oak Ridge Dr Arbor Hill Wy Via Princessa 0.1 San Frencisquito Creek Trail 6.8 San Franasquito Creek Trail - Copper Hill Dr Santa Clara Riper 3.1 east side San Franarquito Creek Trail - C Hill Dr Santa Clara Riper 3.7 «.,.e .:d, oPPm _ Sand Canyon Rd 530'N of Thompson Ranch Dr 270'S of Thompson Ranch Dr 0.2 Santa Clara River Trail 5.6 Connector _ ... _ Soledad Canyon Rd Santa Clara Riper 0.2 up Santa Clara Riper Trail McBean Pkwy Bouauet Canvon Rd 1.7 South Fork Trail Connector 3 oath Fork I rail Orchard Village Rd Mgec Mountain Parkway Trailhead 2.4 Via Princessa Path Via Pacifica Claiboume Ln 1.0 TOTAL MILES 36.4 Son SanlaClmdaPankr,Rwa,&naid/CwiummySaevarDpvvaaa,Jwr2012. 0 2-8 2. Existing Conditions Table 2-3: Existing Trail heads Magic Mountain trailer parking, equestrian Iron Horse Trailhead Parkway and Tourney South Fork Trail staging area, shade structure, Road information kiosk and drinking fountain on site Creekside Rd and Automobile parking, near Promenade Trailhead McBean Parkway South Fork Trail shopping center and eating establishments Magic Mountain Blvd Automobile and horse South Fork Trailhead between Valencia South Fork Trail trailer parking, picnic tables, Blvd and Railroad Automobile parking, Avenue drinking fountain Lost Canyon Trailhead Soledad Canyon Rd at Santa Clara River Trail Automobile parking Lost Canyon Rd Camp Plenty Road Tradhead Soledad Canyon Rd at Chuck Pontius Commuter Automobile parking, Camp Plenty Rd Trail, Santa Clang River Trail drinking fountain Valencia Blvd at Auto South Fork Trail Off-street parking, drinking Auto Center Trailhead Center Dr Santa Clara River Trail fountains, shade structure, informational kiosk Sm SmSaGovaT=hu*adPmkig,l*//vwwJm&Va7garmlm*xa 397A=ui7/2912 Sm9n Gbr.MaMrTiu/SymmM4p 2009 2-9 e Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Tbirpage left blank intentrand4 ® 2-10 07 n vuraua�v (u'bv f N — I Figure z -z: Existing Bicycle Facilities and Trails on W -1.002P P n m 2. Existina Conditions Ex aMq Skyde f«illurs and halls Falltllq Blkwar ®CLMIMURUe YaiA it (LMIIIXelm (4a10-4 p.. MUXi-0npfeiM N. ® HeYMLnq QQ hMieM4n4 2. EAstinq Conditions ThispaSe left blank intenkana4 ® 2-12 2. Existino Conditions 2.3.2. Existing On -Street Bike Lanes and Routes Several of Santa Clartta's major roadways are striped with Class H bike lanes. There are also three signed Class III bike routes within the City. Emsting on -street bigde facilities are presented below in Table 2-4. Table z -q: Exist ina On -Street Bicycle Facil it ies 16th St Orchard Village Rd Newhall Ave 0.3 Bike Lanes Avenue Scott Rye Canyon Rd McBean Pkwy 1.2 Bike Lanes Avenue Stanford - Vanderbilt Wy Ave Scott Newhall Ranch Rd 2.0 Bike Lanes Bouquet Canyon Rd Alamogordo Rd Steve Jon St 2.1 Bike Lanes Bouquet Canyon Rd (EB Only) Espuella Dr Alamogordo Rd 0.7 Bike Lanes Calgrove Blvd Wiley Canyon Rd Creekside Dr 0.7 Bike Lanes Center Pointe Pkwy Golden Triangle Rd Ruether Ave 1.1 Bike Lanes Constellation Rd Hercules St Kelly Johnson Pkwy 0.5 Bike Lanes Copper Hill Dr Seco Canyon Rd Haskell Canyon Rd 1.3 Bike Lanes Decom Dr Copper Hill Dr Vista Delgade Dr 2.0 Bike Lanes Dockweiler Dr Ivy Ln Sierra Hwy 0.5 Bike Lanes Haskell Canyon Rd Copper Hill Dr Bouquet Canyon Rd 1.2 Bike Lanes Hercules St - Kelly Johnson Pkwy Constellation Rd Copper Hill Dr 0.9 Bike Lanes Jason Drive Via Princessa Canyon Park Blvd 0.4 Bike Lanes Rockwell Canyon Rd McBean Pkwy Valencia Blvd 1.0 Bike Lanes Seco Canyon Rd Copper Hill Dr Tupele Ridge Rd 0.2 Bike Lanes Sierra Hwy Bouquet Canyon Rd Esbuella Dr 1.1 Bike Lanes Sierra Hwy Fnendly Valley Pkwy Vista Del Canon 0.5 Bike Innes Siema Huy 1600' South of Ryan Ln 550' NE of Linda Vista St 0.4 Bike Inner Soledad Canyon Rd Galeton Rd SR y14 (Antelope Valley 3 9 Bike Lanes Tournament Rd Wiley Canyon Rd McBean Pkwy 1.1 Bike Lanes Tourney Rd Magic Mountain Pkwy Valencia Blvd 1.2 Bike Lanes Wiley Canyon Rd Vista Ridge Dr Orchard Village Rd 1.0 Bike Lanes Total Me Lane 24.4 Bouquet Canyon Rd 0.9 Bike Route Bouquet Canyon Rd Bouquet Canyon Rd Esbuella Dr 0.2 Bike Route Bouquet Canyon Rd (WB Only) Esfiuella Dr Alamogordo Rd 0.7 Bike Route Golden Triangle Rd Golden Oak Rd Rainbow Glen Dr 1.5 Bike Route Newhall Ave Pine St Sierra Hwy 1.3 Bike Route Orchard Village Rd McBean Pkwy Lyons Ave 1.4 Bike Route Wiley Canyon Rd Orchard Village Rd Via Pacifica 0.3 Bike Route Total Bike Route 5.4 TOTAL ON -STREET 29.8 Soma. CrtyofSaataCora GIS 2-13 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 23.3• Bikeway Signage Bikeway signage includes signs identifying a bike route, lane or path to cyclists and drivers (eg `Bike Lane" signs posted along a roadway with a bike lane), signs providing regulations or warnings to cyclists or drivers (eg hirycle- sized "STOP" signs on trails) and signs providing wayfinding to cyclists (eg. tratlhead signage or bike route numbering). In Santa Clmta, most on -street facilities have standard Caltrans bikeway signage, and some trail facilities have entrance monuments Off-street bike paths have standard regulatory signage. Though regulatory signage is well provided on Santa Clazita's bikeways, there is currently no directional signage provided on on -street facilities or off-street nails. Warning signage for motorists at bikeway -roadway crossings is rare Most local street connections, continuous bikeway routes and destinations are not identified. Wayfinding can be challenging on tails that do not parallel roads, since cross streets and fismiliar landmarks cannot be used as reference points. In 2009, the City received a grant to develop wayfinding signage for its trails. The project is expected to begin in 2014. 2.3.4• Bicycle Signal Detection Santa Clarita's bike paths are well -signed with standard regulatory signs, such as this one instructing cyclists to yield to others on the trail. The City of Santa Cla ita currently uses a combination of video detection and in -pavement loop detectors to activate traffic signals Video detection and loop detectors are calibrated to detect bicyclists. Loop detectors are inpavement wite sensors that activate traffic signals when a vehicle is positioned over the loop. They work by sensing the metal in the vehicle Several types of loop detectors can be adjusted to be sensitive enough to sense when a bicycle has stopped over the loop, and thus allow a bicyclist to activate a traffic signal As of September 2009, Caltrans policy directive 09-06 requires jurisdictions tc provide bicycle detection on all new and modified approaches to traffic - actuated signals in the state of California. Since heavy vehide traffic and road construction can damage pavement and loop detectors, the City has installed video detection at intersections with high volumes of traffic Currently, 58 locations in the City use video detection. A vehicle is detected when it enters a preset detection boundary within the camera's view Video detection systems can be modified to identify bicyclists as well as motor vehicles. The City plans to continue to use a combination of loop - detector and video detection systems. 0 2-14 2. Existina Conditions 2.3.5• Bicycle Parking Santa CJarita provides bicycle racks and lockers at major transit stops, parks and at City Hall. Several major employers also provide bicycle parting for employees Bicycle parsing is required for office, commercial, industrial and multi - Eanuly residential uses through the Unified Development Code. A list of major bicycle paging locations are provided in Table 2-6.. Table 2-5: Santa Clarita's Existing Bicycle Santa Clarity Metrolink Station 34 lockers aces 26 rented Via Princessa Metrolink Station 10 locker spaces 3 rented Jan Heidt (Newhall) Metrolink Station 22 locker spaces 6 rented City Hall 6 locker spaces/bike racks 5 rented McBeanRegional Transit Center 10 bike lockers TOMal: 82 locker spacer 46 ended Newhall Community Center Bike racks Santa Clarity Sports Complex Bike racks City parks Bike racks at all parks except Chesebrough Park Six Flags Magic Mountain Bike racks provides changing facilities Valencia Town Center Bike racks College of the Canyons Bike racks California Institute of the Arts Bike racks The Master's College Bike racks provides changing facilities Transit Maintenance Faciliry Bike racks Sem: C�ismcw*pbtne may ofsadac s =,vr v*bpy, jw 2012 2-15 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 2.4. Existing Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian facilities support the safe and convenient travel of people walking, as well as those using wheekhaits, scooters, and segways This section presents existing pedestrian facilities in Santa Claris. z.4.i. Existing Sidewalks, Paseos and Multi - Purpose Trails Santa Clarita's existing pedesttiatt network is comprised of sidewalks, crosswalks, paseos and multi-purpose trails. Sidewalks are defined as walkways rttnnrrg parallel to a roadway while paseos are paved walking paths that provide pedestrian links outside of the street network. Crosswalks are considered an extension of the sidewalk across the roadway. Multi-purpose trails as defined in this Plan refer to unpaved trails that are suitable for walkers, hikeq equestrians and mountain bikers, but are not considered bicycle transportation facilities according to the Caltrans definition (see Section 2.3). Sidewalks in older areas may be adjacent to vehicle traffic. Sidewalk Design Most of Santa Clanta's major roadways have sidewalks along portions of their length. Recently built sidewalks and sidewalks along some roadways, such as McBean Parkway, are buffered from the vehicle traffic by a planter strip, while sidewalks along other roadways, such as Soledad Canyon Road, are directly adjacent to the vehicle traffic In some cases, sidewalk facilities are adjacent to Class I bike paths and either separated from the bike paths by striping (as on Newhall Ranch Road and McBean Padtway) or are separated by landscaping (as on sections of Soledad Canyon Road). Sidewalk Connectivity Sidewalk connectivity within the suburban residential neighborhoods neighborhoods, sidewalks connect to a system of paseos and may even connect to the longer citywide trail network Sidewalks are provided in most neighborhood commercial areas. Santa Clatita has increased connectivity by balding Pedestrian bridges over busy streets and providing sidewalk facilities on bridges However, there are some gaps in the network, particularly in areas that were annexed from unincorporated Los Angeles County Sidewalks may not be provided along some arterial streets and in general, the industrial area and rural roads do not include sidewalks. 0 2-16 of Santa Clatita is excellent In many Sidewalks in newer developments have planter strips to buffer pedestrians from traffic. 2. Existing Conditions Crosswalks and Intersections Crosswalk markings provide gwdance for pedestrians who are crossing roadways by defining and delineating paths across intersections or other crossing points. In Santa Cla ita, major intersections are stuped with standard "transverse„ crosswalks (two parallel lines). Signalized intersections have pedestrian push buttons to actuate walk signals At intersections, the walk signal must be actuated by a pedestrian to tum on. Every signalized intersection in the City has countdown pedestrian signals to inform the pedestrian the time remaining to cross the street Santa Clarita's paseos provide connections between cul-de-sacs and nearby trails, parks, pools, schools and shopping centers. Paseos The Valencia neighborhood of Santa Ckuita has well- developed paseo networks linking residential neighborhoods to each other and to surrounding land uses A map of paseos can be seen in Figure 2-3. Paseos provide connections between cul-de-sacs; provide access to schools, neighborhood parks and pools, and to local commercial centers; and in some cases provide access to the atywxk trail network. The paseos are wen landscaped, quiet, paved paths that wind from street to street Residential yards are separated firom the paseos by walls Most paseos have lighting Signage on some paseos identifies nearby streets Access to nearby major streets is limited in some paseo networks In some cases, a development that has a paseo system will not have sidewalks on adjacent major mads. 2-17 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Figure 2.3: Existing Paseos + s p tt ....E°d * ��♦"'4^ , , ♦ r + .... ^ •� � `'"'�f`r.°• i �.•� .r d�< � mss' °♦ Lp ti O • "J E ia4ix n F 1 `. f 1+ \yl�n✓`.f,° ,., w e r [x" X31 .I. s e i +1 a a° a > ♦ aR r^'^ r a ✓`. ....f w+, .+'� ( . w....... a '-+•...a ( r" go$& :.c 5 .._.. 4 OC LEGEND PASEO 2. Existina Conditions Multi -Purpose Trails The City of Santa Clarita currently has 33.7 miles of multi-putpose trails. These trails are unpaved and are intended for hilang and horseback riding The trails are located in rural or semi rural areas, and generally in the southern and western parts of the Qty. The multi-purpose trail network includes an equestrian path that parallels the South Fork Trail and one that parallels Sand Canyon Road Other multi -use trails are located off Oak Springs Canyon Road, north of Placenta Canyon Road, south of Newhall Avenue (parallel to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks), and in open space areas The City has plans to develop appmxanately 8.3 additional miles of multi-purpose trails. Santa Clanta's existing multi-purpose trails are listed in Table 24 and shown in Figure 2.2 Table z-6: Santa Pla citta Canyon Trail Quigley Can on Creekview Park 1.2 Robinson Ranch Trail Oak Spring Canyon US Forest 1.8 Sand Canyon Trail Valley Ranch Road just north or Warmuth Road 0.5 Santa Clara River Connector Auto Center Trailhead South Fork River 0.3 South Fork Trail Magic Mountain Parkway Newhall Creek 2.4 Open Space Areas 27.5 Total Total multi-numose trails 33.7 Sw P.*,,Fmft. mdGmwz5vSeadcerDpxftw4J42076 2.5. Bicycle Facility Maintenance Santa Clarita's on -street bikeways are maintained as part of regular street maintenance activities by the Fmvimnmental Services Division of the Public Works Deparhneut Streets are swept weekly; bi-weekly, or monthly depending on location and time of yeas Off-street trails are maintained by the Packs, Recreational and Conununity Services Department The Parks department is responsible for safety, collecting trash, maintaining landscaping, irrigation, dtanaremovrog graffiti, repairing fence, asphalt, and any vandalized items The Public Works department is responsible for sweeping nails and tree maintenance Residents may also volunteer with the City to help with the upkeep of the trail system 2.6. Past Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Expenditures Between 2005 and 2011, the City of Sand Clanta spent approximately $5.6 million on projects which include bicycle facilities. These are listed in Table 2-8, Past Bicycle Expenditures (2006-2011). 2-19 a Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Table 2-7 Past Bicycle Expenditures(2oo6-2012) 2012 Bike Facilities Design and construction of Tourney Rd, Orchard Village Road, 2012 $244,000 Class 11 bicycle lanes and Class Golden Tris * Road, and Centre Pointe III bicycle routes Parkway Industrial Center Bike Design and construction of VarderUt Way, Avenue Sanford, and 2010- $175,000 Lanes Class 11 bicycle lams Avenue Scott 2011 Decom Dove Bile Design and construction of Decoro Drive from McBean Parkway to 2009- $50,000 Isms Class II bicyv lanes Vista Delgado Dave 2010 161 StreetBils Lanes Design and construction of 16" Street from Orolrard Village Road to 2009- $25,000 Class B bicycle lanes. NewhaRAvenue 2010 TwmarrrentRoad Design and construction of ToumametrtRoad fromMcBean PadmW MW $35,000 Bike lanes Class B bicycle lanes to Wiley Canyon Road 2009 Ro&wd Canyon Design and construction of Rodmmn Canyon Road from Valencia 2008- $50,000 Road Bilre Lanes Class B bicycle lanes Blvd to McBean Parkway 2009 NewhA Ranch Road Construction of Class I bicycle Vanderbilt Way to Didwm Drive 2006 $213001000 Class I Bike Path path 2007 Lost Canyon River Devclolxrent oftatllead Santa Clara River Trail 2005 $337,171 Park arTrovenena at existing 2006 temtinus of Santa Clatita River trail. Sand Canyon Tail Design and construction of trail Sand Canyon Road fornLim Oak Springs 2005 $168,000 PH II along Sand Canyon Road. Road north to Roadrunner Street 2006 Canyon Vew Design and construction of the From Camp Plenty Road to the future 2005 $782,069 Regional Trail Sana Clara River Trail. aver park site 2006 Access/Sana Clan River Tal Golden Valley Road Design of a bicycle tale Along Golden Valley Road font Sports 2005 $16,622 BicycleTrad CanpkxtoSoledadCanyon Road 2006 Golden Valley Road Construct a badge over rhe Golden Valley Road -Cross Valley 2005 $988,371 Badge over Sana Sana Clea River. Connector 2006 Clea aver Impmvenents include a Class I hqrle Path Newhall Modifyrmediansand tafFic Newhall Avenue b�Railroad 2005 $78M�330 Avenue/Siem Hwy signal system, remove existing Avenue. and Sierra FLghwey 2006 Ckulation sniping and re -stupe roadways Irigtroveatents with new lane con6gumnon. Propctwas espanded rci mdude bicycle 6aknes. Sana Clea River Design and construction of Temrinus of Fairways Dave to Intestate 5 2005- $402,776 CornmuterTal Segment I of the Santa Clan 2006 SegmemtI RiverTaiL TOTAL. $5,8(13,33'9 Q 2-20 2.7. Encouragement and Education Programs The City of Santa Gama has been supporting education and encouragement programs for several years and was designated in 2007 by the League of American Bicyclists as a Bicycle Friendly Comminuty at the Bronze level. In 2006-2007, as part of the development of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan, the City of Santa Clanta worked with patents and teachers at four elementary schools to identify infrastructure improvements that could improve walking and biking conditions. The City then received a federal grant to develop a pilot education and encouragement program at four pilot schools, and to conduct walk audits at all of the City's 26 elementary schools. That program was implemented between 2008 and 2011. As a result of the work conducted, the City has 2. Existinq Conditions Santa Clarita has sponsored bicycle education classes for over a decade. been successful in getting stare and federal grant funds to construct infrastructure improvements at 21 schools. More detail on the Safe Routes to School program is provided in Chapter 8. The City has sponsored a flee bicyclist safety program since 1996. The program includes videos and a presentation on the general rules of the road, and tips on how bicyclists and motor vehicles can safely share the road. The program is available by request to businesses, schools and other organizations. The City also supports an annual Bike to Work Day in May, with city -sponsored pit stops for cyclists that include refreshments, information, and giveaways City of Santa Clatita Transit provides flee bus rides to bicyclists on Bike - to -Work Day. In 2012, the City held its ninth annual Bike to Work Day Challenge, in which businesses with the highest number of employees hiking to work receive prizes The City also maintains a trails network website. The website includes: • Map of trails and paseos • Bicycle safety and use of trails • Description of trail classifications • Trail dosure notices • Phone numbers for trail maintenance, volunteering and emergency numbers • Trail etiquette • A list of trailheads with location maps and car parking availability • Phone number for bike locker rental at Metrolink 2-21 eyrrarrr� •—.—•_...—. Santa Clarita's Trails Website provides valuable up-to-date information about City trails. Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan The Non -motorized Transportation Plan website was developed within the City is website to keep the public informed of the Plan development and to solicit suggestions and comments from the public It includes: • A list of current projects • Safe Routes to Schools Pilot program information • Meeting announcements and summaries • Survey results • Documents and Maps • Related links SherifFs Department In 2002, the City, the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (which serves as local law enforcement for Santa Clanta) and the local school districts established School Valet Programs at most elementary schools in Santa Clarity The program uses the 5th and 6th grade students as valets to open the car doors of arriving students in a specially designed drop- off area. The drop-off area allows 10 to 15 cars at a time to enter, drop off and leave in as little as 55 seconds Fourth grade students assist as escorts or walkers These students walk the younger ones to that classroom or a line up area so the parents do not have to park and escort their dvldren onto the campus The program has dramatically reduced traffic School Valet Program at Fair Oaks Ranch congestion around the sclnools, and improved safety for Community School. students who choose to walk and bicycle to schools Though this program is focused on improving drop-off conditions, it is necessary to have an orderly drop-off so that parents will fed comfortable allowing their children to walk or bicycle to sdiooL Amgen Bike Tour of California In 2007, 2005, 2009, 2011, and 2013 the City of Santa Clarita hosted a segment of the Amgen Bike Tour of California. As part of these events, the City has hosted additional spectral events, including pre -race criteria, school assemblies, fundraising events, kids tides, kids parades, galas, essay contests, convnunity cycling fait; keynote cycling speaking engagements and bicycle safety classes Local Bicycle Community Santa Clanta has an active local bicycle community that sponsors tides, races and other bicycle -related events, suds as the Chuck Pontius Criterium and the Santa Clanta Century. Groups include Santa Clatita Vdo and the local branch of the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition. 2.8. Multi -Modal Connections Multi -modal refers to the use of two of more modes of transportation in a single trip, (ie., bicycling and riding the bus or train). This section describes bicycle -transit connections. linking bicycles with Santa Clanta's mass transit 2-22 2. EAstina Conditions effectively increases the distance cyclists can travel, provides options in the event of a bicycle breakdown or collision, and gives cyclists alternatives to riding at night of in hot or inclement weather. Malting an effective mtilti-modal connection consists of three key elements: • providing bicycle patlang facilities at transit stops and bike racks or storage on trains and buses • improving bikeways that link with transit facilities and stops • encouraging the use of bicycles on transit through education and encouragement programs 2.8.i. Metrolink Santa Clarita is served by MetrolinMs Antelope Valley Line, which provides commuter rail service to the San Fernando Valley, downtown Los Angeles and Palmdale/Lancaster. Metrolink has space for two bicycles per rail car. Bicycles are allowed on trains at all times, however, a conductor may require a bicyclist to relocate to another car or wait for another train due to crowding. Three Metrolink stations are within the City of Santa Clarita Jan Heidt Newhall Station, Santa Clarita Station and Via Princessa Station. Bicycle locker with space for 10 to 34 bicycles are provided at all three Metrolink stations, as detailed in Table 2-4 Bicycle connections to the Santa Clarity station are provided by the Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail, which parallels Soledad Canyon Road Jan Heidt Newhall Station is close to the South Fork Trail, and access between the trail and the station is possible along a on Railrroad Avenue and other low traffic residential streets. The Via Pnncessa Station does not have direct bicycle access, though there are bike lanes on Sierra Highway approaching the station from the south and the Santa Clara River Trail is to the north of the station 2.8.2. City of Santa Clarita Transit City of Santa Clarita Transit uses pamphlets to promote using bicycles with transit. City of Santa Clarita Transit operates eight local bus lines, two weekday -only station link lines that connect to the Metrolink Stations and seven commuter lines that serve commuters in Santa Clarita and residents commuting from Santa Clarita to Warner Center, San Fernando Valley, West Los Angeles and Downtown Los Angeles Additional local and commuter routes are planned as noted in the Transportation Development Plan. As of July 2006, all local buses are equipped with bicycle racks that hold two of three bicycles. The Caty sponsors a public outreach carnpaign that includes video instructions for loading bicycles on the racks, and provides buses with racks at city -sponsored events to allow people to practice loading bicycles on bus racks. Commuter buses have under- bus nderbus storage that holds bicycles Bicycle racks, lockers and restrooms are provided at the McBean Regional Transit CenteS located at the comer of McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard Bicycle lockets are available at the Via Princessa Metrolink Station, the Jan Heidt Newhall Metrolink Station and the Santa Clarita Metrolink Station. Bicycle racks are not available at local bus stops. 2-23 2. Existina Conditions Tbupage left blank intentionally 2-24 3. Plannina and Policv Context 3. PLANNING AND POLICY CONTEXT This chapter provides a summary of planting and policy documents from Santa Clarita that are relevant to the development of the City of Santa Clarita's Nan -Motorized Transportation Plan Plans and policies are considered relevant if they directly address non -motorized transportation facilities, or if they address land -use patterns that affect non -motorized transportation The chapter consists of the following sections: 3.1. Sgamary of Existng Plans summarizes relevant Santa Clarita plans, and provides specific policies related to biking and walking in the City. (Page 3-1) 3.2. Regional Plans summarizes the regional plans that are relevant to the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. (Page 313) 3.3. Major Development Projects provides an overview of development projects and land use plans that are relevant to biking and walking in the City. (Page 3-16) 3.1. Summary of Existing Plans In 1992, the City of Santa Clarita adopted Resolution 92-102, reaffirming that the City `vigorously support[s] bicycle use within the City limits on both roads and off road bikeways." Since that resolution, many of the City�s plans and policies have addressed bicycle planning. 3.1.1. Santa Clarita Valley General Plan The City of Santa Clatita has joined with the County of Los Angeles to prepare a unified General Plan for the Santa Clarita Valley. The General Plan aims to provide guidelines for future growth and preservation of natural resources in the Valley, by updating the General Plans of Santa Clarita and the County of Los Angeles' unincorporated areas together. The project began in 2001 with a series of workshops and community events intended to gather input from the public regarding the plan. The City completed the General Plan in 2011. 3.1.1.1. Circulation Element The Circulation Element of the General Plan addresses mobility within Santa Clanta and connections to the surrounding areas The I mm� GENERP The General Plan provides a vision for the future growth of the Santa Clarita Valley. Circulation Element has been developed in conformance with regional transportation programs, including those of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans); the Regional Mobility Plan prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG); the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authonty's (MTA or 3-1 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Metro) Congestion Mmagement Program and bikeway strategic plan; Santa Claim Transigs Transportation Development Plan (TDP); and Los Angeles County's Airport land Use Plan. Because of the expected growth within the Santa Clatita Valley (estimated by the Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County) and the growing concern about traffic congestion, a major component of the Circulation Element is promotion of non -motorized travel modes, including bikeways and walkways Promoting safe non - motorized transportation will lead to the development of a healthy and safe circulation system for the Valley Tmis and bikeways are also addressed in the Conservation and Open Space Element The Circulation Element lists the following needs related to non -motorized transportation that led to the development of goals and policies: • Reduce congestion and vehicle miles traveled by managing transportation systems and travel demand • Plan for and implement a regional bikeway nemx* to meet both recreational and non - motorized travel needs • Make the Santa Clanta Valley a walkable community, by retrofitting pedestrian connections and facilities into existing development where needed, and by promoting healthy streets in new development Contribute to a regional reduction in greenhouse gas emissions through land use planning and transportation strategies Many goals, objectives, and policies within the Circulation Element highlight the importance of bicycling and waling Table 31 presents the broad themes of these goals, objectives, and policies Table 3.1 and mixed-use projects next to existing Encourage neighborhood -stale development that includes mixed density of housing units consistentwith community draracten Create a sense of neighborhood in urbanized areas by promoting walkability and developing neighborhood activity centers such as schools, parks, multi - Land Use purpose facilities, convenience centers and neighborhood commercial centers Minimize the dependence on, and prominence and area dedicated to the automobile. Include pedestrian linkages, landscaped parkways and green corridors, and separated tnuls where appropriate and feasible © 3-2 3. Planning and Policy Context and pedestrian paths within Santa Clarita Valley and to regional activity centers Provide a continuous bikeway network to provide circulation within each community, to connect each community, and to provide access to Recreation Recognize that trails are an important recreational asset to the regional transportation smem, can improve mot Develop a continuous and unified hung and equestrian trail network with unified design standards to unify the Santa Clarita Valley Communities Policies that are directly related to bicycling and walking are listed in Table 3.1 Table 3-z Circulation Element Bikeways and Pedestrian Circulation Pol ivies Policy C 6.L1 For recreational riders, continue to develop Class I bike paths, separated from the right- of-way, lirilflng neighborhoods to open space and activity areas Policy C 6.12 For long-distance riders and those who bicycle to work of services, provide stoped Class II bike lanes within the nghtof-way, with adequate delineation and signage, where feasible and appropriate Policy C 6.13 Continue to acquire or reserve tight -of way and/or easements needed to complete the bicycle circulation system as development occurs Policy C 6.L4 Where inadequate right-of-way exists for Class I or 1I bikeways, provide signage for Class III bike mutes or designate alternative mutes as appropriate Poky C 6.L5 Plan for continuous bikeways to serve major destinations, including but not limited to regional shopping areas, college campuses, public bwldings, pants, and employment centers. Policy C 621 Require bicycle paddng, which can include bicycle lodwrs and sheltered areas at commercial sites and multi -family housing complexes for use by employees and residents, as well as customers and visitors Policy C 6.2.2 Provide bicycle radts on transit vehicles to give bila—and-ode commuters the ability to transport their blcydm Policy C 623 Promote the inclusion of services for bicycle commuters, such as showers and changing roans, as part of the development review process for new development or substantial alterations of existing commercial or industrial uses, where appropriate Policy C 7.L1 In reviewing new development proposals, consider pedestrian connections wither and between developments as an integral component of the site design, which may include seating, shading, lighting, directional signage, accesstiv7ity, and convenience 3-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized neighborhoods to transit and services through public education and by facilitating retrofitted improvements where feasible Policy C 7.13 Where feasible and practical, consider grade separated &&ties to provide pedestrian connections across arterial streets, flood control channels, utility easements, and other barriers. Policy C 7.14 Identify and develop an improvement program to connect existing walkways and paseos to transit and services, where needed and appropriate Policy C 7.15 In new commercial development provide for direct, clearly delineated, and preferably landscaped pedestrian walkways from transit stops and parking areas to building entries, and avoid placement of uses (such as drive-through facilities) in locations that would obstruct pedestrian pathways Policy C 7.16 Encourage placement of budding entries in locations accessible to public sidewalks and transit Policy C 7.1.7 Utilize pedestrian -oriented scale and design features in areas intended for pedestrian use. Policy C 7.1.8 Upgrade streets that are not pedestrian-fiiendly due to lack of sidewalk connections, safe street crossing points, vehide sight distance, or other design deficiencies Policy C 7.19 Promote pedestrian -oriented street design through traffic calming measures where appropriate, which may include but are not limited to bulb -outs or chokers at intersections, raised crosswalks, refuge islands, striping, and landscaping Policy C 7.110 Continue to expand and improve the Valley's multi -use trail system to provide additional routes for pedestrian travel. Policy C 2213 should be noted as it favors the rural character of some neighborhoods ova pedestrian safety. The policy states: "Protect the community character of rural area by requiting use of rural street standards, which may include reduced pavement width, reduced street lighting to protect night skies, rolled curbs or no curbs and no sidewalks.,, Bikeway Planning The Circulation element presents cross-sections of roadways with bikeway and trail facilities, shown in Figure 3-1 On any street carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day at speeds of 30 mph or higher, striped bike lanes are recommended over bike routes In selecting routes for bikeways that share the right -of -Amy with vehicles, design criteria include connectivity, traffic volumes, speeds, curb width, intersection protection, and the number of commercial driveways In planning for bikeways, consideration should also be given to the differing needs of experienced cyclists versus casual riders, and to utilitarian cyclists versus recreational riders ® 34 _ 3. Planning and Policy Context Figure 3-i Circulation Element Roadway Cross -Sections with Bikeways Major Highway with Bike Trail Detail Three Lanes n Eaa1 Deeoa With Rawl Landscape Median, No On Strwt Parkng Major Highway with Bike Lane Detail A s e x m a 3 g a 118' 10I_S— __L1T 14 _�17'T11 J a 16T 11T 11 13T11,12'_F T12'_F14 11 —11T17-61 11T17 T13'Te'-1 gg N m m ? 6' 10 � t 13r T 2 �12T11T1I'�14 11t�7Tlt'T11'�--17� �12'T11 U Three Lanes n Eaa1 Deeoa With Rawl Landscape Median, No On Strwt Parkng Major Highway with Bike Lane Detail Than Lars 4 Ea Dmobon WO Raaad Lando Medan. No On -Stoat Pehap Major Highway 8 -Lane Alternative with Bike Trail Detail A 4� yyJ N m 0 a 118' 10I_S— __L1T 14 _�17'T11 J 10 16T 11T 11 13T11,12'_F T12'_F14 11 —11T17-61 11T17 T13'Te'-1 J Ir Than Lars 4 Ea Dmobon WO Raaad Lando Medan. No On -Stoat Pehap Major Highway 8 -Lane Alternative with Bike Trail Detail Four Lanes n Earn Oir m Wah RaiW LarM M Wd4n. No On4I PWum Major Highway 8 -Lane Alternative with Bike Lane Detail ;R F a E 10 __L1T J 10 16T 11T 11 T11 T12'_F14 11 —11T17-61 11T17 J � t 13r 11t�7Tlt'T11'�--17� U a 10, �1i T I1'r 11'T Ir 1'L-1 �e}S Four Lanes n Earn Oir m Wah RaiW LarM M Wd4n. No On4I PWum Major Highway 8 -Lane Alternative with Bike Lane Detail Four Lanes n Ea Dr Wah Pawl LWdaape L M , No Onao Pwkrt 3-5 ;R F lb' 10 __L1T 10 16T 11T 11 T11 T12'_F14 11 —11T17-61 11T17 -6110 Four Lanes n Ea Dr Wah Pawl LWdaape L M , No Onao Pwkrt 3-5 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Urban Secondary Highway with Bike Trail Detail Y vT { 0 m N Two Loh. in Each Or 1,i With Twp Way LO Tum LuhNo On-St"t PaM1inq Urban Secondary Highway with Bike Lane Detail Two Lane. in Each Owclon With Two Way Lot Tum Lana. No On -Street Parking Sub -Urban Secondary Highway with Bike Trail Detail 9r 0 td 8❑ 12 12' 12 12' T. S' Two Lime. in Each Oaecton WO Paeee Laneacaae Meeian. No Ofgntei Palkng Sub -Urban Secondary Highway with Bike Lane Detail s E S � 92 10 T "I, —L_,2' 6 1 12_F4 T12 TI ,o' T,o� I T6� ,2—r„—r—,2'T„'T-,3' -Fe' I Two Lane. in Each Owclon With Two Way Lot Tum Lana. No On -Street Parking Sub -Urban Secondary Highway with Bike Trail Detail 9r 0 td 8❑ 12 12' 12 12' T. S' Two Lime. in Each Oaecton WO Paeee Laneacaae Meeian. No Ofgntei Palkng Sub -Urban Secondary Highway with Bike Lane Detail T. L. m E dhcihn With Rai L.nd.uaa Li 0 3-6 s E 92 10 T "I, —L_,2' 6 1 12_F4 T12 TI T. L. m E dhcihn With Rai L.nd.uaa Li 0 3-6 3. Planning and Policy Context Pedestrian Planning A fundamental goal of the General Plan is to create walkable communities and neighbothoods widen the Santa Clanta Valley. In order to achieve des objective, pedestrian access must be considered in all phases of development pluuilng, including site design, subdivision design, and public improvement projects The basic needs for pedestrian travel are safety, connectivity, and accessibility for all, including the disabled 3.1.1.2. Land Use Element The Land Use Element of the General Plan addresses existing development patterns in the Sana Clarita Valley planning area and establishes a framework for focusing future growth in a logical and ordedy manner, The map and policies of the Land Use Element were designed to encourage reduction of vehicle tops and use of other transportation modes, including public transit, bicycling, and walking This goal is promoted through inclusion of mixed-use districts, whidn allow supportive services to be located in proximity to residential neighborhoods; inclusion of a master plan for trails into the Circulation Element; and designation of higher residential densities in areas served by public transit In addition, limited commercial service centers will be allowed within residential neighborhoods, and will be accessible by walling, bicycling, and bus transit Multiple-fazndy residential uses will be allowed in regional and community commercial arras. More residences will be allowed within waIldng distance to rail transit stations to facilitate rail commuting to employment outside of the Santa Clanta Valley: Mixed residential densities wiIl be allowed, to permit housing alternatives at all income levels and age preferences in proximity to transit, jobs, and services. 3.1.2. Municipal Code Municipal Code Chapter 12 (Vehicles and Traffic) details standards for roads, sidewalks and bicycle facilities. The Municipal Code allows the Director to: • Mack crosswalks if markings will. improve traffic conditions. • Restrict bicycle of pedestrian crossings if "traffic complications would exist if pedestrians or bicyclists were permitted to cross.,, • Sign and stripe bicycle lanes if roadway width and traffic can accommodate a separate bicycle lane Motor vehicles are prohibited from driving in a bicycle lane- Place anePlace signs prohibiting pedestrians from using bicycle lanes if "sidewalks or other suitable area is available for pedestrian use" In 2009, City Council adopted an ordinance to add chapter 12.96 to the Munidpal Code Chapter 12.96 permits bicyclists to ride on sidewalks in Santa Clanta, except for on sidewalks in business districts and sidewalks located adjacent to an on -street bike lane The City may also designate certain portions of the sidewalk as prohibited for bicycle use and will place appropriate signage and markings for clarification The Code also requires building owners or occupants to keep the sidewalk in front of their preruses "in a dean and neat condition, free of offensive matter of any kind or nature" 3-7 S Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation 3.1.3. Unified Development Code The City of Santa Clarity's Unified Development Code (UDC.) regulates all development within the City. Chapters 16 (Subdivisions) and 17 (Zoning) oudme the allowable uses and standards for Santa Clarity Chapter 17 contains several special standards districts, or overlay zones, which are applied to areas of the City with special characteristics or circumstances, such as Downtown Newhall or Sand Canyon. The UDC regulates the development of pedestrian facilities, such as sidewalks, includes a bicycle parting ordinance, and enables the City to exact trail dedications, and other such concessions which may be used in the development of non - motorized finalities Table 3-3 summarizes the UDC's non motorized policies. 3.1.4. Mixed -Use Zones The Unified Development Code requires developers to build enhanced pedestrian crossings near schools, parks and other facilities used by children. The Santa Clama Unified Development Code also identifies Mixed -Use Zones in Section 17.16.065. Nfixed-Use Zones are used to encourage pedestrian -oriented development along unproved transportation comdom Mimed -Use Zones, as defined in the UDC, "encourage a mix of residential, commercial, employment and institutional opportunities within identified centers of activity along identified transportation corridors" The mixed use (MU) zone provides a medoatvsm to revitalize older commercial corridors and properties, increases opportunities for infill development and encourages "pedestrian -oriented neighborhoods where local residents have services, shops, jobs and access to transit within w-Zw g distance of their homes" Table 3-3 Unified Development Code Policies Related to Biking and Walking 16.11.130 ... a transverse pedestrian way of adequate width may be required through the Pedestrian Ways approximate middle of each block having a length of more than seven hundred (700) feet 16.17.050 Developments shall incorporate and be designed to encourage access by public transit Transit and Non- and non -motorized modes of travel. This shall be accomplished by the incorporation of Motorized Access appropriate on-site bicycle and pedestrian amenities, and convenient connections to the City s transit and non -motorized facilities 16.2L070.E. Developers shall install enhanced pedestrian crossing treatments adjacent to schools, Road Improvements parts, and facilities frequented by children, senior citizens, and/or disabled persons At the discretion of the City, in lieu of providing said improvements, the developer shall pay a fee equal to the City's cost of constructing the improvements. 3-8 3. Planning and Policy Context 16.21.170 ...the subdivider shall install sidewalks not less than five (5) feet wide: Sidewallcs—Required A. On both ides of entrance and collector streets within the division of land; B. On both sides of loopy interior and cul-de-sac streets; C. Along one side of service roads adjacent to abutting lots; D. Along highways shown on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways where no service toad is provided, and lots in the division of land take direct access to the highway; and E. Along highways shown on the Master Plan of Arterial Highways where necessary in order to provide for the safety and c --i— of pedestrians 16.2L180 The construction of sidewalks is not required where: Sidewalks—Not A, All lots in the division of land are 15,000 square feet or have an average width greater Required than 100 feet; except if sidewalks are required to maintain the continuity of an existing sidewalk network H The construction of sidewalks would be impractical because of topographical conditions or because of other physical obstacles; C Sidewalks will not be in keeping with the neighborhood pattern; D Sidewalks are not needed in, and will not benefit the area 17.18.105 Every use shall provide on-site bicycle paddng facilities to accommodate the required On -Site Bicycle number of bicycle packing spaces All bicycle padarhg shad be evenly dispersed Padang Requnement throughout the project site to provide convenient bicycle padding. Parking is to be provided at the following ratios: Retail/Commercial Uses 1 space per each 25 vehicle parking stalls Office Uses 1 space per each 30 vehicle parking stalls Industrial Uses 1 space per each 40 vehicle padang stills Multifamily Residential Uses 1 space per each 5 residential units 17.16.065 "Mese regulations encourage a mix of residential, commercial, employment and MU- taxied Use Zone insatutional opportunities within identified centers of activity along identified transportation corridors" See section 3.1.5 in this document Mixed -Use Zones have a minimurn residential density of 11-20 dwelling units per acre, providing the population needed to support pedestrian -oriented businesses and transit' The Mixed Use Zone also includes Design Standards that encourage bicycle and pedestrian activity. Urban design standards require buildings to be designed with pedestrian needs in mind, including encouraging ground -floor retail uses along major pedestrian corridors Santa CJaata's Existing Mixed -Use Overlay Zones are located at the following locations: 1. Soledad Canyon Road horn Bouquet Canyon Road to Solamint Canyon Road; Z Sims Highway from Newhall Avenue to Golden Valley Road; 3. Newhall Avenue from State Route 14 Freeway to Pine Street and 4. Portions of Lyons Avenue from Newhall Avenue to Interstate 5. ' Seven dwelling units per acre are typically the threshold above which transit use increases sharply. Pushkarev and Zupan, Public Transportation and Land Use Policy. 1977. 3-9 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized 3.1.5. Downtown Newhall Specific Area Plan In December 2005, the City of Santa Clanta adopted a Specific Plan for the historic community of Newhall, located within the City of Santa Clarita along the Lyons Avenue and Main Street/Newhall Avenue corridors The Specific Plan provides guidelines for the redevelopment of the communiy including design guidelines, implementation strategies and development requirements The Downtown Newhall Specific Plan proposes to amend the area's zoning to become subject to form -based rather than the existing use -based zoning In 2008, the City made several amendments to the development code, none of whidt negatively impact bicycling and walking in Downtown Newhall. In addition to the shift to form -based code, the Specific Plan redesignated San Iyer ando Road as a pedestrian - oriented Main Street, which the Crty has since implemented A new library has been completed and a major streetscape project has been completed The Specific Platt provides other recommendations for pedestrian -oriented development, including housing near a commuter rad station and a mix of uses to serve a vibrant urban village. 3.1.6. Community Character and Design Guidelines The purpose of the Santa Clarity Community Character and Design Guidelines (CCDG) document is to guide the creation of new residential and non-residential developments and give dear direction for the renovation and redevelopment of built areas The intent of the guidelines is to retain and encourage andnitecttual variety, promote quality development, and address both existing and new development that • Is compatible in size, scale, and appearance with the character of Santa Clanta • Is attractive and an asset to the community • Preserves and enhances natural features on site • Incorporates quality articulation, comma ity character features, multiple building forms, desirable building details, and other elements that display excellence • Provide pedestrianortented design to enndn the pedestrian experience 3.1.7. Other Specific Plans A significant portion of the land in the City of Santa Clarita is part of a Specific Plan. According to the General Plan, the City of Santa Clarity has four approved Specific Plans: the North Valencia Specific Plan, the North Valencia II Specific Plan, the Vista Canyon Specific Plan, and the Porta Bella Specific Plan Specific plans for the unincorporated areas surrounding the City of Santa Clanta are approved by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors North Valencia Specific Plan The North Valencia I Specific Plan area is located south of Newhall Rands Road, west of Bouquet Canyon Road and Valencia Boulevard, and north of Magic Mountain Parkway. Approved in January 1998 by the City Council, it allows for a maximum of 2,000 residential units including 1,250 multi -family units The Plan includes 636,000 square feet of commercial space, 167,000 square feet of industrial uses, and 355.6 aces of open space ® 3-10 3. Planninq and Policy Context North Valencia II Specific Plan The North Valencia II Specific Plan area encompasses approximately 596 acres. The planning area is located north of Newhall Ranch Road, south of Copper Hill Drive, east of the San Francisquito Creek, and west of McBean Padavey. Approved in January 2000, The North Valencia II Specific Plan allows for 1,900 dwelling units and up to a maximum of 150,000 square feet of commercial space Porta Bella Specific Plan (Whittaker-Bermite Property) The Porta Bella Specific Plan provides a comprehensive land use plan for the 988 -acre V uttaker-Bemrite site in the center of the City, which was used for 80 years for the manufacturing of military explosives This mixed-use project includes 1,244 single-fimvly residential units and 1,677 multi -funny residential units It also includes 96 acres of commercial and office uses and over 400 acres of open space Due to contamination, the development of this site includes environmental clean-up and state EPA cenification prior to reuse Vista Canyon Specific Plan On May 10, 2011 the City Council adopted the Vista Canyon Specific Plan subject to annexation to the City. This Project; which is in the Canyon Country area, includes a significant employment cutter and town center for the eastern Santa Clanta Valley. Vista Canyon Ranch also proposes the development of 1,100 dwelling units and 950,000 square feet of commercial floor area, together with related infrastructure, including a new Mind- Modal Transportation Station (Metrolink Station and Bus Transfer Station) and water reclamation plant (which would provide recycled water for irrigation use on- and off-site). The project would add another 21 acres of parks/recreation facilities The developers are proposing a new City park—the ten -acre Oak Palk Other recreational amenities include a Town Green, a Commmnity Garden, the River Education/Commatuty Center and project trails, including significant extensions of the Santa Clara River Trail Up to six private recreational facilities would be constructed throughout the project 3.1.8. Santa Clara River Recreation and Water Feature Study The Sante Clara Rive Recreation and Water Feature Study was adopted by the City of Santa Cladta in 1991. This document is the City's Gist step in planning for recreational use of the Santa Clara River within the City limits and is the document that spurred the development of the Santa Clara River Trail. The Plan envisions a river corridor that encompasses active and passive packs, natural areas, river front community centers and retail establishments, all linked by formal paseos and a multi -use trail system The Plan emphasizes the need for a multi -use nail system, stating that: "The success of the River Corridor Plan relies greatly on establishing a continuous trail system that connects recreational features along the river corridor; as The Santa Clara River Trail was envisioned in the "Santa Clara River Recreation and Water Feature Study". well as local and regional destination points' (pg 10). In addition to recommending the creation of a multi -use [inti system, the Plan recommends removing fences and barriers, as appropriate, along the rive to provide public access to 3-11 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized the rivet and river trail. Additional transportation recommendations presented in the Plan include planning bicycle routes and pedestrian walkways from residential neighborhoods to the river, developing common signage plans for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists, and pmacttvely planning for non -motorized connections between communities north of the Cross Valley Connector and the river to the south of the Cross Valley Connector The Plan introduces the goal of working with jurisdictions along the Santa Clara River to develop a trail network that runs along the Santa Clara River from the San Gabriel Mountains to the Pacific Ocean Trail design guidelines are included in the Plan for three types of trails: hard surface trails, equestrian trails and soft surface hiking trails The Plan also outlines guidelines for pedestrian bridges and access and connection points. 3.i.g. Transportation Development Plan The Transportation Development Plan was adopted by the City of Santa Clarita in November 2006. The Plan summarizes the transit environment in Santa Clanta, including opportunities and constraints; provides recommendations for future route and service modifications; and establishes a finandal plan through 2015. Transit ridership on City of Santa Cladta Transit tripled between 1996 and 2006, and due to projected increases in population growth, will continue to increase The Plan makes several recommendations to improve pedestrian access to transit stops, including retrofitting sidewalks and paseos to provide connectivity to bus stops, providing directional signage on pasem, and improving Pedestrian crossing opportunities across flood channels and arterials. Pedestrian specific recommendations in the Transportation Development Plan have been incorporated into the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan and are presented as recommendations in Section 6.3 Transit Recommendations. The City is cuaendy updating its Transportation Development Plan, wiluch is forecasted to be complete in 2013 and will establish a pian through 2023. 3.i.io. Lyons Corridor Plan In order to make the CVs code consistent with the General plan, the City of Santa Clamn is curtendy in the process of updating its planning and zoning regulations by developing a series of corridor plans. These plans will take on a form -based code type approach to address the relationship between the buildings themselves and public spaces for the entire community In May of 2011, City staff began the platuvng and public outreach process for the Lyons Corridor Development Code, the first of the corridor plans The Lyons Corridor Development code, further referred to as the Lyons Corridor Plan, spans Lyons Avenue between Interstate 5 and Newhall Avenue and was completed in 2013. This update provides an opportunity for the City to establish poftaes that orate a more bicycle- and pedestrian - friendly envirorunent More information regarding the corridor plans can be found at: http://santadantacomdorplancom/ 3.2.21. California High Speed Rail The California High -Speed Rail Authority has proposed high-speed train service for intercity travel in California between the major metropolitan centers of the San Francisco Bay Area and Sacramento in the north, through the Central Valley, to Los Angeles and San Diego in the south The proposed alignment will travel through the City of Santa Clarita adjacent to existing Metrolink rail lines in the vicinity of Sand Canyon and eastern Canyon Cowuty through the mountains and into Palmdale There is no station planned for Santa Clwta, though the project well create impacts and changes to the City's existing infrastructure and developments ® 3-12 3. Planning and Policv Context 3.1.12. Annexations The City has completed several annexations since the 2008 plan: Cooperstone, Elsmere Canyon, Soledad Commons, North Copper Hill, South Sand Canyon, Nod" Vista Canyon Rands, and North Saugus With these annexations, Santa Clatita is now third largest city in Los Angeles County. 3.1.13. Climate Action Plan In August 2012, the City of Santa Clazita approved its Climate Action Plan (CAP). The purpose of the CAP is to measure the amount of greenhouse gas emissions generated within the City and to develop strategies to reduce the emissions in the future The CAP includes a set of strategies the City can use to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced in the community by the year 2020 in compliance with California Assembly Bill M The CAP is part of the General Plan process and as such will serve as a component of the General Plan document for the City to address Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. A large portion of the GHG reductions would be achieved by the decrease in vehicle miles traveled in the City via changes in land use patters and a greater emphasis of transit and alternative transportation programs. 3.2. Regional Plans 3.2.1. Zoog Long Range Transportation Plan for Los Angeles County The 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan for Los Angles County, adopted in October 2009 by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board, guides countywide transportation development through 2040. The three goals of the Plan are 1) improving mobility of people and goods, 2) improving air quality by reducing mobile source emissions, and 3) increasing access to economic, educational, social, medical, cultural, recreational and governmental resources in Los Angeles County. The Plan relies on four key strategies to meet these goals: maintaining the existing transportation system, maximizing system efficiency, increasing system capacity, and managing demand The Non -Motorized Transportation Plan for Santa Clanta includes demand management sttategies drat are supported by the Countyls Long Range Transportation Plan. The transportation demand management strategies recommended by the Long Range Transportation Plan include rideshare programs, outreach to employers to encourage employee travel alternatives, programs that reward employees for trying an alternative to the drive alone commute, smart growth strategies to take advantage of transit, working with employers to promote tdework opportunities, and using madcet strategies that generate revenue from auto use 3.2.2. Los Angeles County Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan The Metro Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan was adopted in June 2006 by the Los Angeles County Mettnpolitan Transportation Authority Board to promote bicycle use throughout the County The Plan's vision is to make bicycling an integral part of travel choice in the region and promote the linkage between bicycling and the countywide transit network The Plan identifies 167 "bike -transit" hubs and provides resources for cities to evaluate and improve bicycle access at their transit hubs. The document identifies Santa Clanta's three Metrolink Commuter Rail Stations and the McBean lbegional Transit Center as bike -transit hubs within the City of Santa On ita The Plan also identifies gaps in the countywide bicycle trail network and recommends bestpracticedesign measures for bicycle facilities The goals of the County Plan are listed below in Table 34. 3-13 a Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Table 3-4 access Bicycle Parking Encourage high quality end -of trip facilities at commercial, employment, residential and transit locations Bila' -to -Transit Improve bicycle access to transit systems Bike to Work Promote and increase employer bicycle incentives use as a legitimate and healthy means of role Education & Safei The Metro Bicycle Tiansporration Strategic Plan identifies gaps in the County's bicycle network and encourages cities to plan projects to fill these gaps Two of the gaps are located in or adjacent to Santa Clarita, one in unincorporated Los Angeles County along the San Francisquito Creek between Santa Claris and Castaic Lake, and the other along the Sierra Highway between The Old Road and the Soledad Canyon Bike Path. In addition to these gaps located within the City of Santa Claota, the Plan identifies gaps located in unincorporated Los Angeles County It should be noted that the Los Angeles County Plan focuses on gaps in the regional bikeway network, and is not a comprehensive list of all bikeway gaps in the County. Please see Table 3-5 below Table 3.5 Castaic/ Santa Castaic Creek, San Connector between Santa Clarita & San Francisquito Clarita/LA Francisquito Creek, Golden Castaic Lake Creek County State Freeway Sierra Highway Santa Sierra Highway Connection between The Old Road & Clarita/LA Soledad Canyon Bike Path County The Old Road IA County The Old Road Adjacent to Connection between Valencia/Santa Golden State Freeway Clarita & Railroad Avenue -Newhall Avenue Metrolink ROW Bike Path in the San Fernando Valley Route 126 LA County NW LA County Connection between Santa Clarita and Unincoroorated Ventura Countv Line Sme Ic Axdeks Courcy &cycle S&,,eW T-mpd* rP6m, Tcdk 7. NdeA119P6Wclonearedeludedaredb GhuHwCks19uvbpautbkmnom,&dwmmad a&mwg 3.2.3. Los Angeles County Bicycle Master Plan The County of Los Angeles adopted its Bicycle Master Plan in March of 2012 The Plan proposes approximately 831 miles of new bikeways throughout unincorporated areas of the County and recommends various bicycle friendly policies and programs to promote bicycle ridership amongst users of all ages and skill sets As shown in Figure 3-2, © 3-14 3. Planninq and Policy Context the Bicycle Master Plan proposes 16.5 miles of bicycle paths, 33.4 miles of bicycle lanes, and 108.5 mites of bicycle routes in the Santa Clarita Valley Planning Area, many of whidi are intersect the city's boundary. Table 3-6 outlines which County -proposed facilities connect with bikeways shown in the 2006 Santa Clarita Non - Motorized Transportation Plan. Approximately 50 percent of County -proposed bikeways intersect with a bikeway proposed by the City of Santa Clarity Table 3-6 2 Siena Highway bike route to Santa Clarita irYlel- �:,ice... ...,.-..:.1 Trail 13 Plum Canyon Road bike lanes Plum Canyon Road proposed bike lanes 14 Boquet Canyon Road bike route Boquet Canyon Road existing bike lanes/path, Copper Hill Drive proposed bke lanes, 15 Soledad Canyon Road bike route Soledad Canyon Road existing bike lanes 19 Santa Clara River Trail Santa Clara River Trail existing segments, 20 Oak Springs Canyon Road bike path Oak Springs Canyon Road proposed bike path, Soledad Canyon existing bike lanes 21 Via Princessa Road bike lanes Sierra Highway existing bike lanes 22 Canyon Park Boulevard bike lanes Sierra Highway proposed bike route 23 Henry Mayo Road bike lanes Avenue Stanford existing bike lanes 28 Sand Canyon Road bike route Soledad Canyon Road existing bike lanes 30 Placenta Canyon Road bike route Sierra Highway proposed bike route 3.2.4. Los Angeles County Bicycle Transportation Account Compliance Document The Bicycle Transportation Account Compliance Document is a companion to the Metro Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan The purpose of the Document is to help local agencies establish funding eligibility for the State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) program In 2006-2007, the BTA program awarded over $9 million to cities to help improve their bicycle facilities. The Document also includes an inventory of all existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the County, an estimate of ridership and future local needs Santa Clanta's Non -Motorized Transportation Plan includes the required elements to establish BTA funding eligibility. 3-15 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized 3.2.5• Sustainable Communities Strategy SB 375 sets out a path for establishing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets for the transportation sector (cars and light trucks) using an incentive based, regional approach. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) will set these reduction tagets and Metropolitan Planning Ogarvzations (1v1POs) will develop plans to achieve them The 14 subregions of the Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG), the MPO representing six southern Calf mia counties, inducting Los Angeles County, will need to work together to create a regional plan, called a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The SCS will identify how regions will meet the emissions targets established by CARR CARB will review the SCS and has approval authority. 3.3• Major Development Projects 3.3.1• Future Capital Improvement Projects Santa Clarita's Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) identifies and prioritizes capital improvement projects for fiscal years 2013-17. Capital improvement projects add to or improve the Cityls infiastruciure and may include projects such as bridge widening trail and bike lane construction, installation of sidewalks, intersection itnpmvetneuts and development of public facilities such as the Sports Complex Center or Metrolink stations. The currant CII' identifies $47 million in improvements and projects, of which approximately $34 million is dedicated to projects that include a non -motorized component Table 3-7 describes each project with a nor -motorized component, as well as the estimated cost of implementation. Bikeway projects were taken from the 2006 NonMotorizedTransportation Plan. Table 3-7 Non -Motorized Proiects from the CIP Tournament Road Streetscape Improvements may include a decomposed granite $135,000 ff� tF4TP3.at'W-%n address structural distress Sidewalk Repair Program Repairs to City sidewalks damaged by tree mots and $344,000 Del Monte and Fl to City sidewalks damaged by tree roots and $1,540,000 Jan Heidt and Via Princessa Replace worn out truncated dome ales at Jan Heidt $110,000 Mettolink Repairs station, replace wom out truncated dome tiles on wheekihair ramps at Via Princessa station School Area Signage Removal and Remove and replace school area signage, refurbish $150,100 Replacement pavement madangs, and modify existing crosswalks at 12 elementary schools 0 3-16 Pacific Crest Park 3. Planninq and Policy Context construction of a sidewalk on the north side of the bridge, and a shared sidewalk and bike oath on the south side Lost Canyon Road Bridge Widening Project includes a multi -use path on the northern side $1,201,292 of the bridge ME the River connecting McBean Parkway and the Santa Clara River Trail Newhall Ranch Road Bridge Project would include a multi -use path $20,000 Widening Over San Francisquito Creek —Feasil Access Ramp Project will construct access ramps in hi areas of the City including near schools Class II and III Bikeway Restaping Tourney Road froth Valencia Boulevard to $272,205 Construction Magic Mountain Parkway, Orchard Village Road from McBean Parkway to Lyons Avenue, Centre Point Parkway frortr Golden Valley Road to Golden Triangle Road, and Golden Triangle Road from Centre Point Parkwav to Rainbow Glen Drive McBean Transit Center Regional Project includes bicycle lockets $5,641,213 Park -and -Ride Newhall Avenue Pedestrian Facilities Construction of a signalized pedestrian crossing over $1,548,115 and Sidewalk PH II the SCRAA tracks at Railroad Avenue and Newhall Avenue to Third Street Safe Routes to School VII Construction of pedestrian improvements near Sky $587,200 Blue Mesa, Pinettee, and fames Foster Elementary Schools; may include widening sidewalks, paving, striping, signage, and construction of roadway bulb - outs Santa CJarita Transit Bus Stop Street fumiture, such as bus benches, bus shelter, trash $161,739 Amenities receptacles, and lighting; infrastructure improvements to improve accessibility for disabled residents Valley Road Bike Path - North Canyon Road to Valley Center Drive, connecting from the Golden Valley Road Class I bike path to die Soledad existing trail TOTAL COST $33,761,635 3-17 0 3. Planninq and Policy Context Figure 3-z Proposed County Bikeways Adjacent to Santa Clarita zQ 1 3-18 a 3. Planning and Policv Context Tbis jade left blank intenteamO4 ® 3-19 4. Needs 4. NEEDS OF THE NON -MOTORIZED SYSTEM This chapter presents an overview of the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians in the City of Santa Clatita. The intention of this chapter is to provide a framework for understanding the needs of Santa Claritals bicyclists and pedestrians 4.1. Needs and Types of Bicyclistsprovides general information about bicyclists (Page 41) 42. Needs of Pedestrians, provides general information about pedestrians (Page 44) 4.3. Non -Motorized Activity Centers, describes areas in Santa Cladta with high bicycle and pedestrian activity (Page 45) 4.4. Public O utreadn and Surveys, summarizes outreach campaigns via internet, transit riders, schools, and public meetings. (Page 47) 4 5. Collision Analysis, presents a summary and analysis of bicycle and pedestrian related collisions. (Page 4100) 4.6. System Usage summarizes Santa Clantals billing and walling rates. (Page 412) 4.1. Needs and Types of Bicyclists It is important to understand that the needs and preferences of bicyclists vary depending on the skill level of the cyclist and the type of trip the cyclist is taking. For example, bicyclists who bicycle for recreational purposes may prefer scenic, winding, off-street [tails, while bicyclists who bicycle to work or for errands may prefer more direct on - street bicycle facilities A bicycle plan should consider these differences when planning a system that serves all user types The following sections deseube the different types of bicyclists, the different reasons for bicycling, and the respective needs of these categories of bicyclists 4.i.i. Needs of Casual and Experienced Bicyclists For the purposes of this Plan, bicyclists are separated into two skill levels: casual and experienced Casual bicyclists include youth and adults who are intermittent riders. Some casual bicyclists, such as youth under driving age, may be unfant[ar with operating a vehicle on toads and related laws. F.xpedeuced bicyclists include commuters, long- distance road bicyclists, racers, and those who use their bicycle as a primary means of transportation. A summary of the needs of the different types of bicyclists is provided below in Table 4 -t 4-1 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Table 4-1 Characteristics of Casual and Experienced Bicyclists RidersCasual Prefer off-street bike paths or bike lanes along low- Prefer on -street or bicycle -only facilities to multi -use paths. volume, low -speed streets May have difficulty gauging traffic and may be unfamiliar Comfortable riding with vehicles on streets. Negotiates with Hiles of the road. May walk bike across streets like a motor vehicle, including "taking the lane" and intersections. using left -tum pockets May use less direct route to avoid arterials with heavy May prefer a more direct route. traffic volumes. May ride on sidewalks and ride the wrong way on streets Avoids riding on sidewalks or on multi -use paths. Rides with and sidewalks. I the flow of traffic on streets. May ride at speeds comparable to walking, or slightly Rides at speeds up to 20 mph on flat ground, up to 40 mph faster than walking. on steep descents. Cycles shorter distances: up to 2 miles I May cle longer distances, sometimes more than 100 miles. The casual bicyclist will benefit froth route markers, multi -use paths, bike lanes on lower -volume streets, traffic calming, and educational programs Casual bicyclists may also benefit from a connected network of marked routes that lead to parks, schools, shopping areas, and other destinations To encourage youth to ride, routes must be safe enough for their parents to allow them to ride- The ide The experienced bicyclist will benefit from a connected network of bike lanes on higher-vohrne arterials, wider curb lanes and loop detectors at signals The experienced bicyclist who is primarily interested in exercise will benefit from loop routes that lead back to the point of origin Because of its extensive network of trails and bike paths, Santa Clanta offers many good opportunities for casual bicyclists Many of these trails and paths are accessible from residential roads Many experienced bicyclists, including those who bicycle long distances for exercise or training, also use the multi -use paths within the City. It is common for these bicyclists to make a 30 -mile loop around the City, primarily on the trail system This combination of fast- moving bicyclists on training rides wash slower moving casual bicyclists and pedestrians may result in user conflicts Santa Clarita is moving in the direction of providing more on -street facilities to provide a variety of training and commuting opportunities for cyclists 4.1.2. Characteristics of Recreational and Utilitarian Trips For the purpose of this Plan, bicycle gips are separated into two trip types: recreational and utilituim Recreational trips can range from a 54tnile weekend group rides along Sierra Highway to a fancily outing along the Santa Clara River Trail, and all levels in between. Utilitarian trips include commuter bicyclists, which are a primary focus of state and federal bicycle fiurdreg as well as bicyclists going to school, shopping or running other errands Please see Table 4 -2 on the following page 0 42 4. Needs Table 4-z Characteristics of Recreational and Util itarianTrips Recreational Trips Utilitarian Trips Directness of route not as important as visual interest, Directness of route and connected, continuous facilities shade, protection from wind more important than visual interest, etc. Loop trips may be preferred to backtracking Trips generally travel from residential to shopping or work areas and back Tris may range from under a mile to over 50 axles Tris generally are 1-5 miles in length Short-term bicycle parking should be provided at Short-term and long-term bicycle parking should be recreational sires, parks, trailheads and other recreational provided at stores, transit stations, schools, workplaces activity centers Varied topography may be desired, depending on the Flat topography is desired skill level of the cyclist May be riding in a group Often ride alone May drive with their bicycles to the starring point of a Use bicycle as primary transportation mode for the trip; may ride transfer to public transportation; may or may not have access to a car for the tri Trips typically occur on the weekend or on weekdays Trips typically occur during morning and evening commute before morning commute hours or after evening hours (commute to school and work). Shopping trips also commute hours occur on weekends. Type of facility varies, depending on the skill level of Generally use on -street facilities, may use pathways if they I cyclist provide easier access to destinations than on-stmet facilities Recreational bicyclists' needs vary depending on their stall level. Road bicyclists out fora 100 -mile weekend ride may prefer well-maintained toads with wide shoulders and few intrrsectirms, and few stop signs or stop lights Casual bicyclists out for a family trip may refer a quiet bike path with adjacent parks, benches, and water fountains. Utilitarian bicyclists have needs that are more straightforward Key commuter needs are summarized below • Commuter routes should to be direct, continuous, and connected. • Protected intersection crossing locations are needed for safe and efficient bicycle commuting • Bicycle commuters must have secure places to store their bicycles at their destinations. • Bicycle facilities should be provided on arterials. As mentioned in the previous section, Santa Clarita's nail system provides excellent opportunities for the casual tec rmtional rider. The trail system also provides access to shopping and employment opportunities within Valencia, Newhall, Saugus, and along Soledad Canyon Road into Canyon Country—ell of which are important to the utilitarian rider However, not all communities have easy bicycle access to the trail system For the casual recreational ride; this may not be a serious deterrent, since they be willing and able to drive their bicycle to the trailhead. However; this may not be an option for the experienced recreational rider or the commuter, as they generally would like to use dim bicycle for the whole tap. Bicycle -friendly connections between the residential areas and the nails wall likely increase m the prevalence of bicycle commuting as well as increase the prevalence of recreational riding 4-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation 4.2. Needs of Pedestrians People walk for many reasons: traveling to wort, transit or other multimodal facilities, school, recreation and entertaimnent, health and exercise, shopping, social events, personal euands, appointments, and social visits. Pedestrian needs for different trip types vary. For example, a commuter may desire a well-connected direct mute with efficient signal timing, whsle a recreational pedestrian may be more concerned about the aesthetics of the surroundings. However, all pedestrians have several needs in common, such as safety, connectivity, and accessibility. Pedestrian mobility networks should also consider persons with disabilities The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandates that reasonable accommodation for access should be provided for those who may need such assistance Based on field observations and input provided in the public input process, the most critical needs of pedestrians in Santa Clanta include: • Crossing visrbi&ty. Crossing facilities, including crosswalks and signage, should alert both motorists and pedestrians to the presence of the facility. Crosswalk design can aid in increasing visibility through the use of specific striping patterns and lights • Continuous f w ities. Sidewalk gaps, missing sidewalks and worn crosswalks are all barriers to safe pedestrian travel. Continuous facilities allow pedestrians m choose the safest and most efficient pads to and from their destination, encouraging them to choose walking as their mode of transportation • Common design guidelines. Narrow sidewalks, sidewalks that are directly adjacent to heavy-vohime roadways without vegetation or parking buffer, and sidewalks with utility boxes or lighting poles in the walkway detract from the wallang enviromneut and can make it difficult of impossible for the mobility - impaired to use the sidewalk A retrofitting program to bring existing sidewalks up to code can improve the walldng ernvironment • Slow traffic speeds. The larger the roadway or naming rade at intersections, the faster vehicles will proceed through the area Where appropriate, constraining roadway width with bulbouts and tightening right tams at intersections can slow vehicles as they approach areas with high pedestrian volumes • Muted land uses. Segregated land uses generally increase the distance between different destinations, and make it difficult for residents to walk to employment, shopping, schools and recreational faa nes from their homes Nfixed land uses make it easier to build housing, employment, shopping, schools, and recreational amenities within walking distance of each other • Direct connections. Pedestrians must sometimes walk long distances to access adjacent destinations when the street network is developed in a nongtid street pattern with cul-de-sacs and limited collector streets that connect to the arterial network. Pedestrian cut-dhroughs between cul-de-sacs and paseo networks that create direct connections reduce walking distances The Valencia neighborhood of Santa Clarita already have well-developed paseo networks, which should be used as a model for future developments 0 4-4 4. Needs 4.3• Non -Motorized Activity Centers There are several major destinations within Santa Clama that ate expected to have high bicycle and pedestrian use They are described below and shown in Figure 2-2, Existing Bicycle Facilities, Trails and Destinations in Chapter 2 Valencia Town Center The Valencia Town Center is a pedestrian-fiiendly shopping and entertainment area with 292 stores and a movie theater The Center is located approximately two miles east of Magic Mountain on Valencia Boulevard near City Hall, County offices, the police station and library. It is accessible by six public transit routes The Valencia Town Center provides pedestrian access through sidewalks and overpasses, and has a wide variety of pedestrian amenities within the shopping area. The Center has high-quality bicycle racks, but lades bikeways through the parking lot to access the shops The Center sponsors the flee Westfield Walkers Group, an exercise club with monthly health c.: inats, and hosts a summer concert series on Friday evenings City and County Offices Many of the Catyls governmental buildings are located on Valencia Boulevard between McBean Parkway and Magic Mountain Parkway and are widen walking distance of several destinations, including Valenta Town Center and other retail establishments. Downtown Newhall Downtown Newhall is a historic district located along the Lyons Avenue and Main Street/Newhall Avenue corridors The area was established as a redevelopment area in 1997 to encourage economic revitalization, though as of 2012 redevelopment areas no longer exist with the abolishment of Community Redevelopment Agencies In December 2005, the City adopted the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, with the purpose of developing a pedestrian-fiiendly commercial and cultural district The Downtown Newhall area is served by the Jan Heidt Newhall Metrolink station Since adoption of the specific plan, Downtown Newhall has undergone several redevelopment projects, including construction of the new lbrary at the intersection of Main Street and Lyons Avenue The Downtown Newhall Specific Plan is described in more detail in Chapter 3. Metrolink Stations and Transit Transfer Centers The City has three Metrolink stations — Santa Clarn4n, located on Soledad Canyon Road near Bouquet Canyon Road, Jan Heidt Newhall, on Market Street and Railroad Avenue, and Via Pnncessa, located on Via Princessa between Sierra Highway and Whites Canyon Road. Each Metrolink station provides secure bicycle lockers The McBean Regional Transit CenteS located at the comer of McBean Padm-ay and Valencia Boulevard, provides bicycle racks, lockers and restrooms. The City is in the process of expanding the transit center to add six new bus bays, passenger loading areas, and a new park and ride lot with approximately 300 spaces. All new bus routes will go through this transfer station. With the development of the Vista Canyon specific Plan, the Via Princessa Station will eventually be relocated east of Sierra Highway to become part of a multi modal transportation station More details on the Vista Canyon Specific Plan are provided in Chapter 3. 4-5 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital The Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital is a 217 -bed not-for-profit community hospital and trauma center, which opened in 1975. The Hospital is located at 23845 McBean Padm ay in Valencia. The Hospital is also one of Santa Clantals largest employers, with 860 employees. Colleges Santa Clarity is home to four colleges College of the Canyons is a comtrair ity college serving approximately 15,000 smdents.t The 153 -ace campus is located east of I-5 off Valencia Boulevard. The Canyon Country Campus of College of the Canyons is located on Sierra Highway north of Soledad Canyon Road The administrative offices are located at 26455 Rockwell Canyon Road The Valencia campus is linked to the surrounding areas through the City's network of paseos The California Institute of the Arts is a private institution, which offers undergraduate and graduate degrees in visual and performing arts. The campus is located at 74700 McBean Pa&my to the east of I-5. The Institute enrolls approximately 1,400 students per yeat2 The Masters College is a private liberal arts college located near the intersection of Placenta Canyon Road and Newhall Avenue The Masters College enrolls approximately 1,000 students. Finally, the California Design College (CDC) has a campus in Canyon Country. Magic Mountain The Six Flags/Magic Maintain amusement park is Santa Clarity's second-largest employee and a major draw of visitors. It is located west of Interstate 5 in Los Angeles County. It is the City's policy to locate supporting services, including hotels and shopping areas within close proximity to the Magic Mountain Parr. The Industrial Center The 1,117 -aye Valencia Industrial Center is home to over 700 businesses and approximately 17,400 employees Several of Santa Clarity's largest employers are located in the Valencia Industrial Center. This area is currently served by two of Santa Clarita Transit's busiest lines, though the Valencia Industrial Center. Overall, the area lacks sidewalks and pedestrian ametrues. The City has recently installed like lanes that run through sections of the Industrial Center The Center is also located adjacent to several of the City's existing bike paths, with a few access points connecting businesses to the bicycle network. There is opportunity to expand on -street and off-street hikeways in this location. Bicycle Commute Routes Many people travel through Santa Clarita from Castaic and neighborhoods in the north of the City to access the Metrolink Stations or continue on to employment in the San Femando Valley or Ventura County. Key bicycle commuter routes include The Old Road (County junsdicuon), Bouquet Canyon Road and Sand Canyon Road F,nhanang regional commuting routes will requite collaboration between the City, Los Angeles County and Calt ams Parks and Regional Open Space Santa Clantals 26 City parks are key activity centers Many are linked by Santa Clarity's extensive hails system The City parks provide areas for child play, picnics, badx qms and otguvzed sports such as basketball, baseball, soccer and tennis Regional destinations include Castaic Lake Recreation Area, Towsley Canyon Park, Midiael D Antonovidh http://www.canyons.edu/offices/instdev/ProfileSheets/Fa112011 FactSheet.pdf z http://calarts.edu/admissions/FAQ 0 4-6 4. Needs Open Space, Placenta Canyon Open Space, Whitney Canyon Park and the Los Angeles National Forest Many of the regional parks permit mountain brkkng on trails. 4.4• Public Outreach and Surveys Public involvement is important to the success of any non -motorized transportation plan. An extensive outreach program was created to solicit input for Santa Clanta's 2008 Non-Mororized Transportation Plan, including an on-line survey, bi-lingual questionnaires, two community meetings, a projectspecificwebsite, and press releases and email announcements Outreach for the 2012 Plan Update was conducted through focus groups for site-specific improvements This section fist summarizes the findings from the focus groups held for the 2012 update Then, it summarizes the results of the on-line survey held during the development of the fist Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 4.4.1• Focus Group Findings As part of the public outreach process for the 2008 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan, the City hell two focus groups The fist focus group was with the Old Town Newhall Association, a group of business owners in Newhall, to ask for input regarding bicycle and pedestrian improvements in Downtown Newhall The meeting was conducted as part of the association's regular meeting on September 19, 2012 at 9:00 am and including approximately 20 participants Feedback received from the group includes: • Install bike racks (support for artistic racks) in on -street no parking zones rather than on the sidewalks to give more flexibility for business owns to use the sidewalks for other purposes • Install signage and increase education efforts to address bicyclists riding on the sidewalks • Enforce bicyclists riding on the sidewalks • A bike path from Master's College to Downtown Newhall is a priority to increase business The second focus group was with the Valley Industry Association, a group representing business owners in the Valencia Industrial Center The meeting was conducted as part of the association's regularly scheduled meeting on September 27, 2012 at 7:30 am and including approximately 15 participants Feedback received from the group includes: • Install sidewalks throughout the Valencia Industrial Center • Employers would like pathways for their employees to walk on to get to work • There is a lack of on -scree pairing so people have to walk long distances in the street to mach their destinations: Convert parallel paddng to angled parking on wide streets 4-7 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized 4.4.2. On -Line Survey Dining the development of the 2008 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan tbtrunturity members were invited to respond to an online survey about vAiipg and btkinp Response was high; 352 survey responses were received A summary of responses is provided below; and response charts are provided in Figures 4-2 through 4-5 on the next two pages. AR results are from 2006. Figure 4-2: Why and Where Do You Bike? source: On-line Bking 8 Walking Stoney. City of Santa Clone 2006. Total responses 352. 80% tote: Pbspondentemuld select more 70% —_ then one answer. Percentages reflect the number of respondents who selected an enei 60% 68% 72% 0) C 'O 50% C Oa y 40% --- - C y� 30% — a 20% 9 14% t4'& 10% 0% To get to work To get to the bus To get to the To get to school f r shmppingl For pleasure ror emras I don t bike shop in., station errands Figure 4-3: Why and Where Do You Walk? Source: On-line Ming 8 Walking Stuvey. City of Santa Clanta, 2006 Total responses 352. Q 4-8 90% Not iSspondantecould allied more 92% 80% than one anti Pbrcental reflect the number of respondents who selected an 75% ansver. 70% --- m c sox d 40% c 9 a 30% 27% 20% 10% 0% To 6M to waM To get to the bue To get to the them To gat to ed.ol For For plass. for metras Sop station sh oppinglerraoEs Q 4-8 Figure 4-4: What Prevents You From &king More Often? Source On-line Biking & Walking Sri City of Same Giants. 2006. Total responses 352. 60% 54% FIMI 50% - C 40% D 20% MENE 4. Needs Note: fkapondents mule seleH more than — one answer. Porcentages reflect the number of respondents who selected an shaver. 0% — — —I —I —I— —I— —r- Too many Nobikepaths Bikepathswe Ramsaretoo Notenough Ihevetocarry Itravelwith Idon'towna Idon'thave carNrgsdrive lalesorbike In poor faraway lighting things at children bicycle enough time too fast routes condition Figure 4-5: What Prevents You From Walking More Often? Source. On-line Biking & Walking Survey, City of Santa Clarita, 2006. Total responses'. 352 4-9 40% Note: Respondents could shed more than one answer. Porcentages 35% reflect the number of respondents - - 34% 31% 30% 27% 27% C C 25" pO y 20% 20% 20% -- C 15% 10 1 10% ]IS 5% Lei 1% 111111w 0% OR___w Too many Drivers don't Too hard tO NO LOew Olki No f rb Rawe are too Not MOugh I neM t0 Carry travel with I tlan t he. cars wrs Sop for aria the the %<e slk ramps faraway Ilghrmg things anal children enough time drivetoofae pedestrians sleet sopa 4-9 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized The majority of respondents lake and walk for pleasure or for exercise (B&ng: 68% for pleasure, 72% for exerme, Wdarig 75% for pleasure, 821/6 for exercise). Nineteen percent of respondents did not bicycle, 149/o used their bicycle to get to work or for errands and shopping Only five percent of respondents walked to work, but a significant percentage (27%) walked to run errands or go shopping These results suggest that recreational bilang and walling is high in Santa Clartta, and that many residents are already wallang to run emnds. When asked what prevents them from hiking more often, 54% cited "too many cars/cars drive too fase' and 50% ated `ho bike paths, lanes, or routes" This suggests that budding new bicycle facilities and impraving bicycle connections between residential areas and the existing network of bicycle paths and lanes may increase the number of trips that are taken by bicycle, and may increase the number of bicyclists in Santa Clanta. When asked what prevents them from walling more often, respondents chose a variety of reasons. The top three reasons are `hot enough time:' "too many cars/cars drive too fast: "places too far away," and "duvets don't stop for pedestrians" These results suggest that residents can be encouraged to walk more by reducing distances between residential and shopping employment and entertainment arras In the short-term, this can be accomplished by creating paseo-style connections within and between neighborhoods and in the long term by encouraging mixed-use development Residential traffic calming programs and citywide education measures may help improve the walling environment by increasing driver yielding behavior. Residents cited traffic speeds and volumes as a common deterrent for bicycling and walking, Facilities that reduce the effect of traffic on bicyclists and pedestrians can alleviate some of this conoem. These may include providing buffers between roadways and padres, grade -separated crossings, and on street facilities that provide bicyclists with their own space, such as bicycle lanes These concerns can also be addressed by programs that reduce traffic speeds in residential neighborhoods; intersection controls, signage and striping that enhance pedestrian and bicyclist safety and visibility; and citywide educational programs 4.43• Intercept Surveys As part of the 2008 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan, the Los Angeles Bicycle Coalition conducted intercept surveys at the intersection of McBean Parkway and Newhall Ranch Road and at the three Metrolink Stations Respondents were asked questions similar to the on-line survey. In general die survey responses were similar to those of the on-line survey. A total of 31 people responded. The typical respondent was a male long-distance cyclist who rode over 150 miles per week who rode for exercise Respondents were asked to rank their preference for bike paths, bike lanes, bicycle boulevards, and dirt trails On average, respondents rated bike paths highest, followed by bike lanes, bicycle boulevards and dirt trails Many of the respondents wanted to have easier access from their home to bicycle paths, shopping centers, or parks Many of the respondents ated traffic speeds and volumes as deterrents to bicycling more frequently. 4.5• Collision Analysis Safety is a major concern for pedestrians and bicyclists For those who omnently ride a bicycle or walk, safety is typically an on-going concern For those who do not, it is one of the most compelling reasons not to walk or bicycle. 0 4-10 4. Needs Nationwxle, the total number of reported cyclist fatalities has dropped dramatically since 1994, with 802 fatalities repotted in 1994 and 618 fatalities reported in 2010, an approximately 23n/o reduction3 The same study shows that in 2010, of all California traffic fatalities 3.6% were cyclist fatalities (99 fatalities). This is higher than the nationwide average of 1.90/o, but does not take into account the higher rates of cycling found in California Bicyclist fatalities in California represent a fatality rate of one per 265 per million people According to a 1990 study of 3,000 bicycle crashes, the most common type of bicycle -vehicle crash was one where the motorist failed to yield right-of-way at a junction (21.7% of all crashes).4 More than a third of these involved a motorist violating the sign or signal and driving into the crosswak or intersection and staking the bicyclist The next most common types of vehicle -bicycle crash were where the bicyclist fatted to yield right-of-way at an intersection (16.81/6), a motorist turning or merging into the path of a cyclist (121016) and a bicyclist failing to yield right-of-way at a midblock location These data suggest that a bicycle safety plan should address intersection improvements and education about the rights and responsibilities of cyclists and motorists, especially regarding tight -of -way laws Intersection improvements are especl l tmportant where driveways and roadways cross parallel bicycle paths Specific design recommendations for pathway intersections are discussed in Chapter 6, Section 6.1 Design Recommendations Data for reported pedestrian and bicycle collisions in Santa Clava were collected from the Transportation Injury Mapping System (ffiv6) for the years 2006-2010,5 and are presented in Table 4-3 and Table 44. In this period, these were 127 total bicycle collisions The number of bicycle collisions varied from year to year; as well as the percentage of total collisions involving bicyclists Santa Clarita had no fatal bicycle sashes in this time period as compared to an average of 0.6 bicyclist fatalities per year from 2002,2005. The average bicyclist fatality rate expected for a city of comparable size is 0.5 per year. Santa Clarita experienced 177 pedestrian collisions in this time period, six of which resulted in fatalities Half of the fatal pedestrian collisions occurred in 2010, while total pedestrian collision collisions dropped Overall, pedestrian collisions have decreased between 2006 and 2D10. Table 4-3 Col lisions Involving Bicyclists in Santa Clarita, 2oo6-2oio 2006 7 10 0 0 17 609 2.8% 2007 13 12 0 0 25 635 3.9% 2008 8 15 2 0 25 563 4.4% 2009 13 22 2 0 37 598 6.20/a 2010 10 12 1 0 23 652 3.5% Traffic Safety Facts, 2010 Dam" 2010 BICYCLISTS & OTHER CYCLISTS Traffic Safety Fact Sheet" NHTSA, DOT 811624 4 Pedestrian and Bicycle Crash Types of the Early 199Vs, Publication No. FHWA-RD-95-163, W.H. Hunter, J.C. Stum, W.E. Pein, and CL Co; Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, June, 1996. 5 TWS dam does not include non -injury co8isions. Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWIRS) was not available. 4-11 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Table 4-4 Col I isions Involving Pedestrians in Santa Clarita, 2oo6-2o10 2007 10 22 4 0 36 635 5.7% 2008 13 17 2 2 34 563 6.0% 2009 14 23 4 1 42 598 7.0% 2010 13 9 3 3 28 652 4.3% 4.6. System Usage 4.6.1. Census 2oio Bicycle and Pedestrian Commute Counts A primary data source for estimating bilking and walking rates is the U.S. Census Journey m wort data was obtained from the American Community Survey for Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California, and the United States Journey to work data are shown in Table 4-5. Table 4-5 Journey to Work Data c2q-d 9.70/n 11.50/6 10.8% 13.00/. 10,919 Pubk Tnovt 4.9"/u 52% 7.2% 4.1% 3,448 Od= 550/. 64% 6.2% 6.0% 5,017 TOTAL 1001/. 1001/6 100%/a 100% 84,018 Sora¢.Amr» roe Cmrmaa,aySraeeyS-YwDaa2766-cT111 As shown, approximately 0.4% of Santa Clarita journey -to -work tops are made by bicycle and 1.5% of trips are made by foot, as compared to 0.4% of nips made by bicycle and 1.3% of trips made by foot in 2000. As shown, bicycling mode share has remained constant while walking has increased. It is certain that more people bicycle and walk in Santa Clarita than Census data suggests The Biking and Walldng Survey discussed earlier in this chapter shows that people are five times more likely to bike for pleasure than bike to work and 16 tithes more likely to walk for pleasure than walk to work Census data does not include the number of people who walk or bicycle for recreation or for utilitarian purposes, students traveling to school, or commuters who travel from outside Santa Clarita Census data is also limited in that it reflects only a person§ dominant commute mode and does not count non -motorized trips that are part of another nip, for example, a person who walks or bicycles to a transit statiorL 0 4-12 4. Needs 4.6.2. City of Santa Clarita Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts The City conducted limited bicycle and pedestrian counts at three locations in summer 2006. Counts were taken at Camp Plenty Trailhead, at the intersection of McBean parkway and Magic Mountain Parkway and along the South Fork Trail The one count at McBean Parkway and Magic Mountain Parkway was taken during afternoon commute hours (4:00 to 5:00 pm) and shows 10 bicyclists, five pedestrians and five people using other non -motorised means (eg skateboards). Counts were taken at Camp Plenty Tiailhead and at the South Fork Trail during morning commute hours (approximately 7:30 to 8:30 am), midday mid -week (1215 pm to 1:15 pm) and on the weekend morning (9:00 to 10:00 am). Weekend hourly trail use was higher than weekday hourly trail use for both count locations. Eighteen bicyclists and 15 pedestrians were counted at Camp Plenty during the weekday momasg, while 48 bicyclists and 12 pedestrians were counted during the weekend morning At South Fork Trail, 23 bicyclists and five pedestrians were counted dining the weekday moming, whsle trail use increased to 84 bicyclists and 36 pedestrians during the weekend morning It is clear from these numbers that people are actively using Santa Clanta's trail system, with especially high use on the weekends It should be noted that these counts are limited, and may not reflect actual bicycle and pedestrian use Weekend use, in particular, may be higher than these ntnnbers indicate, as weekend use typically peaks between noon and 200 pm Camp Plenty Hourly Trail Counts S0ur0e: CM d Serle Glares Trei Couma. Summer 2008. weekday morning weekday midday weekend morning South Fork Troll Hourly Counts Spume: Ciy d Serb Coda Tai C .Summer 2008. weekday morning weekday midday weekend morning 4-13 a 4. Needs Thin page left blank intentional4 4-14 5. Recommended 5. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS This chapter presents recommended bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs for the City of Santa Clanta, including improvements identified in the 2008 Non-Motonzed Transportation Plan that have not yet been completed and new recommendations for several targeted geographic regions in the city. Geographic regions included are: • Downtown Newhall • Santa Clanta Metrolink Station • Valencia Industrial Center • McBean Regional Transit Center • Town Center The chapter is divided into the following sections: 5.1 Recommended Bicycle Network presents proposed bikeways, including those that have not been completed from the 2008 plan (Page 5-1) 5.2 Recommended Pedestrian Network describes the recommended improvements to make Santa Clartta more pedestrian-fiiendly. (Page 5-5) 5.3 Tableted CkggWhic Improvements provides recommended design concepts for the areas identified above. (Page 5-f)i 5.4 Designandand P�maa mmatic Recommendations presents design guidelines for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and educational and encouragement paograrns to promote biking and walking in Santa Clarity (Page 5-16) 5.5 Project Sheets presents projects from the 2008 plan that have not been completed (Page 5-29) 5.i. Recommended Bicycle Network The bicycle network is intended to define routes that provide a superior level of service for bicyclists The network serves as a tool that allows the City to focus and prioritize facility implementation efforts to provide the greatest benefit to bicyclists and the community at large- The arge The recommended bicycle network has been developed to build upon the network proposed in the 2008 plan, to fill in gaps within the current network, to continue the expansion of the Basting trail network, to formalize existing routes used by cyclists, and to improve access between residential neighborhoods and the current bikeway network Please see Figure 5-1 The projects reflect the Cityls existing and future roadway and trail plans. 5-1 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Figure 5-1: Recommended Bicycle Network ��}F� ; - .lam"••p � • � • •y a.••.•. •tip•\ 4b�� . � �p .f Wt.. miu• • _ • +r .7 ... ,� ^'n•... , � • .III �♦ i ® 5-2 EF6nrq •ndWopos•d SkyeAo FOEiNfI•s aM Dolls WWA1 maft.." Puvv m � @81LA♦•b!t �(paNlEe Aemf MWtlJ•ryoMPrvA - Aem Aw\♦A.e uAnrm • • • • (pa LMW4W Paq • • • • !pall �BCPA•Ae •^• flaalA-Bae Anon MWn-0eepie>alA Q' BbPeflmg Q kuaMon ® tti>reaE a.O�•.R 1l s. 5. Recommended The City of Santa Cl=ta has implemented many projects since adopting the 2008 plan (see Chapter 2). Recommended bikeways in this plan include projects from the 2008 plan that the City has not yet completed, as well as three additional bikeways: • Bike lanes on Avenue Tibbitts (Newhall Ranch Road to Santa Clea River Tmtl) • Bike boulevard on Walnut StreetMainStreet (South Pork Trail to 6th Street) • Bikeway connection through the Valencia Town Center (Class II or Class M)i Bikeways are presented in Table Sl and indude bilceways from the previous plan that have not yet been constructed. Of the projects identified in the 2008 plan that have not yet been completed, most of them are long Class I bike paths. These projects have been segmented into smaIler sections that will be easier to fund and construct Table 5-z: Recommended 9 Class I Bike Paths Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Espuella Drive Bouquet Canyon Road 0.4 Trail — South Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Bouquet Canyon Road Haskell Canyon Road 0.9 Trail — Center Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Haskell Canyon Road City Limits 1.8 Trail —North Golden Valley Road Existing Path (South of Valley Soledad Canyon Road 0.2 Center Drive) Golden Valley Road Green Mountain Road CA -14 0.3 Magic Mountain Parkway South Fork Trail (west side) Via Princessa (Planned 2.4 (Planned Extension) extension) McBean Road Bridge Upgrade Santa Clara River Trail South Fork Trail o.s Newhall Creek Market Street Sierra Hiqhway 1.6 Newhall Ranch Road Avenue Tibbitts San Francisquito Creek (east 0.3 side) Roadway Extension (Planned) Plum Canyon Road Newhall Ranch Road 2.1 Sand Canyon Road City Limits Soledad Canyon Road o.6 Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail Via Princessa Market Street 2.3 Santa Clara River Trail (west) Existinq Path Golden Valley Road 1.6 Santa Clara River Trail (west- Golden Valley Road Canyon View Drive/ Existing 1.5 Santa Clara River Trail (center) Soledad Canyon Road Bentgrass Way 0.5 Santa Clara River Trail Soledad Canyon Road Sand Canyon Road 3.5 ' Listed as Class II 5-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transoortation Plan Santa Clara River Trail Lost Canyon Road Trailhead City Limits (Oak Spring Canyon 2.5 (northeast) Road) (east side)— Magic Mountain Parkway Via Princessa (Planned 2.3 connection to existing path (Planned Extension) Extension) South Fork Trail Extension Orchard Village Road Lyons Avenue 0.7 Valencia Town Center North- Magic Mountain Parkway Valencia Boulevard 0.4 South Connector Railroad Avenue Sierra Highway 2.3 Via Princessa (Planned Claiborne Road Golden Valley Road 2.7 Extension) (west) Via Princessa (Planned Golden Valley Road Sheldon Avenue 0.9 Extension) (east) Newhall Creek Bike Path Newhall Avenue Sierra Highway 1.9 Total Mileage End of Road 0.5 Valley Street 26.5 Class II Bike Lanes Placerita Canyon Road Railroad Avenue Sierra Highway 2.3 Avenue Tibbitts Newhall Ranch Road Santa Clara River Trail 0.9 Copper Hill Drive McBean Parkway Seco Canyon Road 0.9 Copper Hill Drive Haskell Canyon Road David Way 2.3 Plum Canyon Road Bouquet Canyon Road City Limits 0.5 Whites Canyon Road City Limits Soledad Canyon Road 2.9 Dockweiler Drive Extension Lyons Avenue Existing Bike Lanes 2.4 Rye Canyon Road Newhall Ranch Road Avenue Scott 0.3 Shadow Pines Boulevard City Limits Soledad Canyon Road 0.9 Sierra Highway Soledad Canyon Road Existing Bike Lanes 2.7 Valencia Town Center North- South Connector Magic Mountain Parkway Valencia Boulevard 0.4 Via Princessa Golden Valley Road Lost Canyon Road 0.5 Lost Canyon Road Via Princessa Medley Ridge Drive 0.9 Total Mileage 22.6 Class III Bike Route Espuella Drive Bouquet Canyon Road End of Road 0.5 Valley Street Lyons Avenue Calgrove Boulevard 2.0 Placerita Canyon Road Railroad Avenue Sierra Highway 2.3 Sand Canyon Road Soledad Canyon Road South City Limits 3.3 Sierra Highway City Limits Friendly Valley Parkway 4.9 Sierra Highway Via Princessa Soledad Canyon Road 0.9 Walnut Street - Main Street South Fork Trail 61Street 2.6 Bike Boulevard wuey Lanyon Koaa vista Kiage unve Caigrove Boulevard 2.2 25.7 5-4 5. Recommended In addition to an overall bikeway network, the 2008 plan recommended more detailed improvements to a series of locations. Projects that have not yet been completed are presented in Table 5-2 below In some cases, a portion of the recommendations in the projects below have been completed. These projects are identified with asterisks Project sheets for these projects can be found in section 5.5 at the end of this chapter. Table 5-2: 2oo8 Project Sheets Carried Over Clue I Bike Paths Railroad Avenue Rail -with -Trail Valencia Town Center North-South Connector South Fork Trail Extension to Lyons Avenue River Trail Extension Bouquet Canyon Creek Trail Class II Bike Lames Sierra Highway Bikeway (potential Class III) Hillsborough/Grandview Class III Bike Route Valley Street Wiley Canyon Sand Canyon Road Intersection Improvements McBean Parkway and Creekside Drive* Lyons Avenue and Peachland Avenue* Lyons Avenue and Avenida Rotella Railroad Avenue Rail -with -Trail Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road Commuter Way and Soledad Canyon Road* Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail Golden Oak Road and Soledad Canyon Road High Visibility Crosswalk Installation* Other Industrial Center Sidewalk Gap Closure It should be noted that establishment of a bikeway network does not imply that bicycles should not be accommodated on streets outside of the network. Bicyclists are legally allowed on all City streets and roads regardless of whether the roads are a part of the designated bikeway network or not 5.2. Recommended Pedestrian Network This plan provides general design guidelines and best practices for developing pedestrian walkways, recommends a sidewalk gap dosure program for the Industrial Center, recons rends a highvisibilitysidewalk installation program, and identifies pedestrian safety improvements for seven key intersections. The intersections were chosen based on Pedestrian collision history, proximity to existing pedestrian networks, and proximity to commuter destinations. The intersections identified for improvement are: • McBean Parkway and Creekside Drive • Lyons Avenue and Peaddand Avenue 5-5 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan • Lyons Avenue and Avenida Rotella • Railroad Avenue and 151h Sweet (Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail) • Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road Commute Way and Soledad Canyon Road • Intersections of Sokdad Canyon Road and Golden Oak, Reuther Avenue and Rainbow Glen Drive Detailed improvement guidelines are provided at the end of this chapter in Section 5.4.5. Programmatic recommendations to improve sidewalks, paseos and the pedestrian environment are inducted later in this chapter. 5.3• Targeted Geographic Improvements 5.3.1• Downtown Newhall Downtown Newhall is located in the southwestern portion of Santa Clarta, near the intersection of the 5 and 14 fireways. In keeping with the Downtown Newhall Specific Phan, the City has implemented a series of pedestrian improvements to enhance Main Street and has completed construction of the new main branch of the public library on Lyons Avenue Pedestrian improvements include curb extensions, high visibility crosswalks, and the transformation of Main Street into a peciestrim-friendly environment Though Main Street in its current state provides a pleasant walking environment, the Downtown lacks pedestrian and biryde connections to Masters CORege The lack of facilities reduces access to the Downtown Newhall lacks a pedestrian connection to Masters College shops and other new businesses in Downtown Newhall, the South Fork Trail, and the new community library. Placenta Canyon and 13th Street do not have sidewalks, and the intersection of 1311, Street and Railroad Avenue lacks an ADA -compliant crossing-over the railroad ticks. Crosswalks across Railroad Avenue at Lyons Avenue are transverse and thus do not highlight pedestrians in the intersection. In addition, the Downtown lacks bicycle corrections to the South Fork Trail and the Newhah Metrolink Station and has no existing bicy a padang outside of the Metrolink Station and the public hbrary. Opportunities to irnprove connectivity and non -motorized circulation in Downtown Newhall are shown inFigure S 2 and Figure 5-3 and are described in detail below These improvements reflect proposed plans for the Master's College expansion. In the short-term, sidewalks or unpaved pathways along Placenta Canyon in the public tight -of -way and 13th Street, as well as a pedestrian crossing treatment over the tram tiadks, will improve safety for people who wish to walk between the Downtown and the roIlege. The City may need to work with property owners and the UPRR to install improvements. In addition, improvements at Railroad Avenue and Lyons Avenue would guide pedestrians into Downtown Newhall. High visibility crosswalks would 5-6 There is opportunity to install bike racks in "no parking" zones 5. Recommended Improvements increase driver awareness of pedestrians in the intersection and a leading pedestrian interval could be installed if pedestrian volumes warrent In the long-tettr, the constructim of a planned pedestrian bridge aver Newhall Creep as identified in the college's Master Plan, would allow pedestrians a more direct linkage to the Downtown via an access point at Market Street The City's 2008 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan proposes a Class III bike route on Placedta Canyon, which would provide the missing link to Masters College The City could install shared lane markings to enhance the bike route by increasing driver awareness of bicyclists and educating bicyclists on proper lane positioning Alike boulevard on Main Street and Walnut Street would provide a connection to the South Fmk Trail suitable for all bicyclist levels Shared lane markings, wayfindtng signage, and traffic calming measures would fiirther enhance the bicycling environment A crossing improvement on Market Street at Railroad Avenue would improve connectivity between the Downtown and the train station. The City has the opportunity to install bicycle racks in the public right-of-way on sidewalks and in under-utilized striped "no -parking' zones There is also demand for increased bike racks at the =in station. 5-7 Ac low , r 01 . Y aY`v` Ir • M• ,II 1 f �i ,r •�� a '"� ��, •1 L 1• ii.1+ •.. i10 u Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 5.3.2. Santa Clarita Metrolink Station The Santa Clarita Metrolink Station is located on Soledad Canyon Road at Commuter Way. Bicyclists can access the station from the existing Chuck Pontius Commuter -Rail Trail, which is a paved asphalt bile path along the north side of Soledad Canyon Road There is a curb cut at the crosswalk across Scledad Canyon Road at Commuter Way for bicyclists m cross and access the Metrolink Station Sidewalks on either side of Soledad Canyon Road with curb tamps, as well as transverse crosswalks, provide pedestrian access to the station Most transverse crosswalks are faded There is a multi use path along the west side of Commuter Way that directs bicyclists and pedestrians up to the train platform The path is accompanied by bike lane signage (R81 CA) and yield to pedestrian signage (W11-2), though signs ate not consistently placed on the same post and on the same side of the path. There is also do not enter signage (RS -1) directing motorists to not drive up to the platform; this signage is placed to the right of the pathway, creating potential confusion for bicyclists. At the top of the incline, there are a series of bike lockers with capacity for approximately 18 bicycles Two post and ring style bike racks are located near the disabled parking at the bottom of the main staircase to the platform Motorcyclists use the bike racks to park their motorcycles A "DO NOT ENTER" sign is placed to the right of the pathway Motorcyclists park at the bi ke racks Figure 5-4 presents recommended bicycle and pedestrian improvements within the Metrolink Station There is a need for improved signage and wayfinding for pathway users throughout the station, such as ditectnig users m bicycle parking locations and to the Chuck Pontius Commuter -Rad Trail. Additional signage should be installed at the top of the pathway reminding bicyclists to dismount; as the path terttvnates on the platform where bicycling is not permitted Striping enhancernents are needed along the pathway centerline and crosswalks should be upgraded to high visibility crosswalks The City should consider allowing bicyclists to cross from the Chuck Pontius Comtnutec Rail Trail along the west leg and install a leading pedestrian interval In the long-term, the Ctty should also provide a bicycle path through parting lot to station entrance 5.3.3• Valencia Industrial Center The Valencia Industrial Center is located in northwestern Santa Clarita between Interstate 5 and Highway 126. It is home to over 700 businesses and approximately 17,400 employees Most roadways within the Valencia Industrial Center lack sidewalks Pedestrians must walk in the street to reach their destinations and public transit riders must wait in the street for buses. The Newhall Ranch Road bike path runs adjacent to the Industrial Center, though there are infrequent connections m the pathway. The Santa Clara River Trail along the southern edge of the Industrial Center has adequate access points, but lacks wayfinding signage to and from those points, as well as path branding The City striped bike lanes on Avenue Scott and Avenue Stanford, though the Industrial Center has a need for increased on - street bilteways 5-10 c ''u 0�4 lv� !Q1,W x Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Figure 5-5 highlights proposed bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the Valencia Industrial Center To enhance pedestrian safety, the City should prioritize improvements along transit routes and streets that connect to the existing network outside the Industrial Center. Improvements could include sidewalks, pathways, or wide striped shoulders. Sidewalk projects should include ADA -accessible curb ramps, driveway reconstruction, tree removal and replanting, landscaping and irrigation, signal modification, and relocation of fire hydrants, traffic signs, and dry utility and water structures. Priority sidewalk installation areas include: • Avenue Stanford from Newhall Randa Road to Rye Canyon Road (transit route); Most streets in the Valencia Industrial Center are missing sidewalks • Rye Canyon Road from Interstate 5 Overpass to Newhall Ranch Road (transit route); • Avenue Scott from Rye Canyon Road to bridge over San Francisgruto Creek (transit route); • Avenue Ttbbitts from Avenue Scott to Newhall Rands Road (transit route); • Anza Drive from Avenue Scott to the south end (priority connection). To improve bicycle access, the City should implement bike lanes on Avenue Tibbitts to connect with the Santa Clara Riva Trail access point The City should work with property owners to discuss the feasibility of providing access points to the Newhall Rands Road bike path on private property. Wayfindtng signage at existing and future pathway access points and intersecting bikeways would help non -motorized users navigate die network through the Valencia Industrial Center In addition to infrastructure improvements, the City could work with businesses to implement programmatic improvements, such as a bicycling user group, to encourage employees to commute by biking or walking• 5.3.4• McBean Regional Transit Center The McBean Regional Transit Center is at the intersection of McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard Sidewalks, indudmg a direct pathway behind the gas station, provide pedestrian access to the transit center There are no existing or proposed bikeways in this location. The City recently expanded the transit center and included better access for bicyclists and pedestrians The station has 10 bike lockers and bike racks. I 5-12 There is a pathway behind the gas station providing direct access to the transit center 4WI ° do �' ♦ ♦. Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan The City should work with the FTA to keep the existing bike lockets Because the transit center is a regional transfer center, providing long-term storage for bicycles would benefit cor unutes. 5.3.5. Valencia Town Center The Valencia Town Center is located in western Santa Claata near Intestate 5. As part of Phase L the developer extended the mall to include `The Patios" by expanding the development (which now includes Macy's and other large retailers) to the south Phase 11 will involve an additional padmig structure in the southeastern portion of the property and Phase III will involve an additional five -floor parking structure and anchor retail building in the northeastern portion of the property. Two paseos terminate at the mall. The southern pasco terminates at the Valencia Boulevard Pedestrian Bridge and the northem paseo terminates at the Magic Mountain Parkway Pedestrian Bridge However, there is no paseo connection from one side to the other This is the only gap in the City's north to south paseo network The Town Center also lacks a biloway connection from one side to the other. Because the Valencia Town Center is a key destination, it needs non motorized fadlittes on the property and improved bicycle and pedestrian access Figure 5.6 displays recommended improvements at the mall. The City should work with the property owner and developers to develop a continuous, safe, well-defined bike connection through the mall parking lot This may be feasible as a condition from the mall during future buildout of Phase II or III. Several elements are key in creating a functional bikeway through apadanglot i iducling a Separationfromvehides a Lighting at night a Well-rnadwd intersections and crossings a Clear wayfinding for bicyclists There are several examples of successful bikeways designed through parlang lots nationwide Palo Alto, for example, has a two-way on -street bikeway through a one-way padwig lot adjacentwith angled padang Similarly, Marina del Rey provides a striped two-way bikeway The Town Center could use similar approaches around the perimeter of the parking lot if the property owner wished to limit bicyclists sharing the road with motorists. In contrast, the 29th Street mall/Taget padung lot in Boulder, CO has traditional Class II bike lanes There may be sufficient width to stripe bike lanes along Ring Road a 5-14 Palo Alto, CA Marina del Rey, CA Boulder, CO -C. Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan The City should also wotk with the property developer to construct an off-street pedestrian connection across or around the mall in the form of a paseo or multi -use path This would fill in the remaining gap in the north -south paseo netwmrk and create continuous off-street pedestrian facilities from the South Fork Trail to Wiley Canyon Road, approximately two miles. 5.4• Design and Programmatic Recommendations This section outlines recommended programs and general design guidelines to make biking and walking in Santa Clarita easier and more enjoyable Topics addressed include • Education Programs (Page 5-16) • Encouragement Programs (Page 5-18) • Community Involvement (Page 5-20) • Citywide and Regional Coordination (Page 5-21) • Pedestrian Facility Improvements (Page 5-22) • Bicycle Padrtng and End -of -Trip Facilities (Page 5-23) • Maintenance and Operations (Page 5-24) • Signage and Striping (Page 5-2� • Bicycle Signal Detection (Page 5-27) • Safety and Security (Page 5-28) 5.4.1• Education Programs It is important to complement bikeway and pedestrian facilities with effective education and encouragement programs to promote biking and walking Education programs ensure that bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists know how to travel safely and understand the regulations that govern these modes of transportation. Encouragement programs provide fun and creative opportunities for people to "try" bhang and walking Education and encouragement program also increase the public awareness of bicycling and wzlk ng as means of transportation and increase public support for policies that promote bhang and walling Current educational efforts are provided by the City of Santa Clarita and interested residents. Implementation of the following recommendations will require cooperative efforts among the City of Santa Clarita, the Los Angeles County Sheriff; local school districts Los Angeles County, local bicycle groups such as the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition and Santa Clarita Vela Recommendations Educate Motorists and Bicyclists through a Share the Road Campaign A Share the Road campaign is intended to educate motorists bicyclists and pedestrians about their legal rights and xesponstivlities on the toad and the need to increase courtesy and cooperation to improve safety The campaign targets not just youth, but all residents and visitors to a community. The City of Santa Clarita should work with the 5-16 5. Recommended Sheriff's Department, the Los Angeles Bicycle Coalition and other partners to develop a Share the Road Campaign.2 To establish a Share the Road campaign, the City of Santa Clanta should • Develop Share the Roil flyers, one tatgeting bicyclists and pedestrians and one tatgeting motorists, which outline safe and courteous behavior, collision repotting procedures and local bicycling resources and hotlines • Create public service announcements on radio and TV to promote the Share the Road campaign, including publicity about the Share the Road checkpoints Promote the campaign through the City's e -Notify service and on the City's website • Develop public PowerPoint presentations with the Share the Road message for presentation to the public • Develop adult bicycle safety classes and hold them at regular intervals Continue and Expand Bicycle and Pedestrian Education Programs The City of Santa Clarita currently sponsors a bicycle safety class through its recreation program. The City should consider developing a similar educational program for pedestrians and working with the school districts to incorporate this type of safety class into the school curriculum, Typical school-based bicycle and pedestrian education programs educate students about the rules of the road, proper use of bicycle equipment, biking shills, street crossing skills, and the benefits of biking and walling. Education programs can be part of a Safe Routes to School program, and in Santa Clanta, could use the Suggested Routes to School Maps that are developed each year. These types of education programs are usually sponsored by a joint City/school district committee that includes appointed parents, teachers, student representatives, administrators, police, active bicyclists and engineering department staff Bicycle Safety Class in Saugus School. Education need not be limited to younger children The City's current bicycle safety classes are available for adults as well as children. The City may consider worming with the Sheriff's Department to utilize adult bicycle education programs as a "bicycle traffic school" in lieu of fines for bicycle or pedestrian -related traffic violations These courses could be geared toward motorists as well as bicyclists and pedestrians. Provide Safety Handbook Safety handbooks are genetally developed as part of a school-based bicycle and pedestrian safety program. Handbooks and educational programs for adults are also available from League of American Bicyclists; and bicycle 2 Other partners may include local hospitals, schools, or regional and state agencies. For example, the Marin County Bicycle Coalition has partnered with Marin General Hospital, Marin County Law Enforcement and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to develop its Shut the Road Campaign. Marin County Bicycle Coalition's Share the Road Campaign can be found at www.muinbike.org/Campaigns/ShmencRoad/Index.shtml The City of San Jose Street Smarts Program is available at: http://www.getsteetsmarts.org/ 3 The League of American Bicyclists provides online tips for better bicycling at http;//www.bikeleague.org/resources/betta/index.php 5-17 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan coalitions around the country. Handbooks may include a circulation map of the campus and immediate neighborhood showing the preferred circulation and parking patterns, suggested routes to school, locations of crosswalks, crossing guards and signalized intersections, instructions for bicycle maintenance and use, instructions for fitting and wearing a helmet, instructions for crossing the street, and lists of etnetgency and school numbers A general handbook can be published by the City and used by each school in conjunction with the school -specific map. Educate Motorists, City Staff, Maintenance and Construction Crews Bicycle and pedestrian related education should be targeted to motorists, City staff; developers and others who directly or indirectly affect the biking and walking environment Information regarding the rights of bicyclists and pedestrians and the rules of the road are especially important Many motorists mistakenly believe, for example, that bicyclists do not have a right to ride in Navel lanes or that bicyclists should only ride on sidewalks Fducation about the rights and responsibilities of pedestrians and tricyclists can include: • Incorporating bicycle and pedestrian safety into traffic school curriculurn. • Producing a brochure on bicycle and pedestrian safety and laws for public distribution • Enforcing traffic laws for bicyclists. • Providing training for bicycle and pedestrian planning for all Qty planners • Working with contractors, subcontractors, and Qty maintenance and utility crews to ensure they understand the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians and follow standard procedures when working on or adjacent to roadways and walkways 5.4.2• Encouragement Programs Strategies for commurrity involvement in bicycle and pedestrian improvements will. be important to ensure broad- based support to help secure financial resources Involvernent by the private sector in raising awareness of the benefits of bicycling can range from small incremental activities by non-profit groups, to efforts by the largest employes in the City. Specific programs are described below Recommendations Facilitate the Development of Employer incentive Programs Facilitate employer incentive progruns to encourage employees to try bicyclntg and walking to work and include strategies such as providing bicycle lockers and shower facilities, offering more flesible arrival and departure times, and fun incentives such as entry into monthly raffle contests The Qty may offer incentives to employers to institute these improvements through air quality credits, lowered padoug requirements, reduced traffic mitigation fees, or other means A trailhead marker for the Santa Clara River Trail. 5. Recommended System Identification (Wayfinding) System identification orates greater awareness of the bicycle and pedestrian network and provides wayfinding assistance for cyclists and walkers. System identification usually begins by identification of a series of bicycle and pedestrian routes, development of a unique logo and facility signage, development of a network map and publicity. Signage may also include informational kiosks, directional signage pointing out destinations, and mileage indicators System identification plans are usually implemented and maintained by the City Community Bikeway/Walkway Adoption Community Bikeway/WA-my Adoption programs are similar to the widely instituted Adopt- a- Highway programs throughout the country. These programs identify local individuals, organizations, or businesses that would be interested in "adopting" a bikeway. Adopting a bikeway would mean that person or group would be responsible for maintenance of the bikeway either through direct action or as the source of funding for the City's maintenance of that bikeway. For example, members of a local recreation group may volunteer every other weekend to sweep a bikeway and identify and address larger maintenance needs Alternatively, a local bike shop may adopt a bikeway by providing funding for the maintenance costs. The managers of an adopted bikeway may be aRowed to post their name on bikeway signs throughout the bikeway in order to display their commitment to bicycling in Santa Clanta. Create a Multi -Modal Access Guide A multi -modal access guide provides concise customized information on how to access specific destinations with emphasis on biking, wallang and transit Access guides can be as simple as a map printed on the back as a business card or as complex as a multi -page packet distributed to employees. Some items commonly included in access guides are: • A map of the area with rail and bus stops, recommended walking and brlang routes, nearby landmarks, facilities such as restrooms and drinking fountains, locations of bicycle and vehicle parking and major roads • Information on transit service including: faequency, fares, accepted methods of payment, first and last runs, schedules, phone numbers and websites of transit service providers and taxis. • Information on how long it takes to walk or bike from a transit station to a destination. • Accessibility information for people with d isabIties Best practices include using graphics, providing specific step-by-step travel directions, providing parking locations and pricing information, and providing information about the benefits of walling and biking High-quality access guides should be concise and accurate and should incorporate input from key stakeholders, including public transportation operators, public officials, employees, staff who will be distributing the access guide, and those with disabilities. Access guides are usually developed by facility managers, employers or Transportation Management Associations Work with Businesses to Develop Incentives for Biking and Walking Incentive programs to encourage biking and walking to local businesses can be developed in coordination with individual businesses, the Chamber of Commerce, the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition and Santa Clarity vela Such efforts may include: 5-19 a Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan • Creating promotional events such as `Bicycle to the Grocery Store" days, when bicyclists get vouchers for, or discounts on items in the store, or `Bicycle to the Video Store" days, when bicyclists receive free popcorn or a discount on a movie rentaL • Holding an annual community evert to encourage residents to replace one car trip a week with a bicycle trip. • Developing, promoting and publicizing bicycle commuter services, such as bike shops selling commute gear, bike -on -transit po&des, and regular escorted commute rides • Creating an annual commuter challenge for area businesses Atrailside bicycle rental and cafe on the Katy Trail in Missouri. • Encouraging and facilitating the development of small satellite business services near bicycle trailheads such as mobile cafes and stands that sell amenities suds as snacks, sunscreen, Band-Aids, and ttad maps • Encouraging and facilitating the development of lunditime amenities, such as outdoor lunch areas and satellite or mobile food stations in the Industrial Center Continue to improve Upon Bicycle Friendly Community Award The League of American Bicyclists sponsors an awards program that recognizes cities and counties that actively support bicycling. According to the League, a Bicycle Friendly Community is one that "provides safe accommodation for cycling and encourages its residents to bike for transportation and recreation." The league recognizes four tiers of bicycle friendly communities: bronze, silver, gold and platinum The application process for being considered as a Bicycle Friendly Community involves an audit of the engineering, education, Bicycle riendly Community Santa Clarita is eligible to apply for the national Bicycle Friendly Community award program. encouragement, enforcement, evaluation and planning efforts for bicycling The League reviews the application and solicits feedback from bicyclists in the community to determine if Bicycle Friendly Status should be awarded. The League provides technical assistance and other information for cities working toward Bicycle Friendly Community status at: wwwhicydefiierndlycormnunnyotg The League awarded Santa Clarita the designation of bronze bicycle friendly community in 2007. The City of Santa Clarita should develop an action plan to meet the League of American Cyclist's roTim menta to become a Over, gold, and eventudy platinum Bicycle Friendly Community. 5.4.3• Community Involvement Involving the community in visioning, planning and promoting the non -motorized system can ensure that the community's needs are addressed, can foster support for bilking and waRang, and can result in a better, more frequently used non -motorized transportation network Projects with a broad base of support among citizens, staff and elected officials will likely be more easily funded and implemented City of Santa Clatita residents and employees . 5-20 5. Recommended can be involved in the development and promotion of the non -motorized network through the following recommendations Recommendations Continue to Support Bike -to -Work and Bike -to -School Days The City of Santa Clanta. should continue its participation in the annual Bike -to -Work day in May, in conjunction with the Los Angeles County and California bike -to -,work week activities City staff should be present at "energizer" stations along the route Local Bike -and -Walk -to -School days can be held annually in conjunction with bicycle education programs. Continue to Support Bike Fairs and Races Hosting brke fairs and races in Santa Clanta, such as the Amgen Bike Tour of California that the City hosted in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, and 2013, can raise the profile of bicycling in the area and provide entertainment for all ages Bike furs and races provide an opportunity to educate and encourage clurent and potential bicyclists These events can also bring visitors to Santa Clarita that may contubute to the local economy. These events could be sponsored and implemented through collaboration between City and local employers Establish a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Establishing .a contimunity-based bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee allows community members to become directly invoked in the process of developing and Amgen Hike Tour of improving the existing bicycle and pedestrian networids. As regular users of Santa Clanta's California, 2oo7. bicycle and pedestrian network members of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee are in a unique position to highlight areas of concern that the City may not have identified 5.4.4• Citywide and Regional Coordination Bicycle and pedestrian planning, facility construction, and pr* ge +nmi g in Santa Clanta are currently conducted by many differmit entities Santa Clarita has an extensive trail and paseo network, and has plans to develop this network through City funded improvements, mad extension protects, and developer funded efforts The City is an active participant in Bike -to -Work Day events, and City of Santa Clarita Transit recently upgraded its bus fleet with bike racks, The Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition is actively involved in monitoring the bicycling environment in Santa Clarita and recommending improvements. Segments of some streets are located within the County of Los Angeles, while other streets are under Caltrans jurisdiction. There is a need for coordination between these different entities 5-21 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Recommendations Fund a City Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Coordinator To take full advantage of bicycle and pedestrian planning efforts in Santa Clanta, and to assist with implementation of the many projects and program recommended in this Plan, the City of Santa Clarita may wish to consider hiring or designating a Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Coordinator. This position could be a new full or part-time staff person, or the duties of a bicycle and pedestrian coordinator could be assigned to an existing staff person on a part- time basis The job duties for flits staff person may include monitoring the design and construction of bikeways, trails and paseos including those constricted in conjunction with private development projects, ensuing bicycle and pedestrian facilities identified in specific plans and as mitigation measures are designed appropriately and constructed excpedieritdy, coordinating the implementation of the recommended projects and programs listed in this Plan, identifying new projects, and creating and staffing a city bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee- Continue ommittee Continue to Coordinate with Los Angeles County, Caltrans and other Agencies to Expand the Regional Bikeway Network Pxpanding and enhancing the regional bikeway network is an important part of making bicycling a viable commute mode Santa Clarita's employes attract employees from outside the City limits, while some City residents are commuting to jobs in San Femando Valley and Los Angeles. The City of Santa Clarita should actively encourage and facilitate the construction and improvement of bikeway facilities on regionally important routes The City should place a high priority on Sling in gaps in the regional network as identified in the Los Angeles County Bicycle Master Plan Regionally important bikeway facilities include, but are not limited to the extension of San Ftancisquito Creek Trail north to Castaic Lake, extension of the Santa Clara River Trail, The Old Road and Sierra Highway. 5.4.5• Pedestrian Facility Improvements A complete, connected and safe pedestrian network creates a pleasant walking environment and is important in encouraging more people to walk for everyday trips. A sidewalk gap closure program and intersection improvement program will enhance the safety and aesthetics of Santa Clanta's pedestrian network. Recommendations Establish a 51dewaik Gap Closure Program Though most of Santa Clanta's roadways have adjacent sidewalks, sonic areas lack complete sidewalk networks Far example, sidewalks are not present in the industrial area, along some major roadways in Newhall, and, in keeping with Waal design standards, are not required along rural residential roads The City should develop a program that identifies gaps in the existing sidewalk network, creates a list of prioritized gap closure projects, and constructs a certain number of projects annually. The City should work with the communities to develop sidewalk designs that are conte rt sensitive and appropriate for each area. The City should work with residents of rural roadways on a case-by- case basis to provide sidewalks to schools and transit stops The City may want to consider alternative surface treatments for sidewalks in rural areas. Sidewalk construction should be prioritized to increase access to schools, packs shopping areas and transit stops 5-22 5. Recommended Establish an Intersection Improvement Program An intersection improvement program can be used to identify and prioritize intersections that warrant improved signage, sloping and signal timing Intersections may be prioritized based on pedestrian volumes, collision history, public input, and proximity to schools, trails, pants and shopping center The improvement program should identify uniform crossing design standards n) be used throughout the city at locations where trails cross roadways and driveways Establishing a unified standard will alert motorists to the presence of pedestrians and bicyclists 5.4.6. Bicycle Parking and End -of -Trip Facilities Bicycle panting includes standard bike racks, covered lockets, and corrals. Bicycle parsing should be installed on public property, or available to private entities on an it -cost basis. Showers and lockers are essential end -of tap facilities, providing comfort and greater security for commuters, and encourage more people to bicyde to work. A systematic program to improve the quality and increase the quantity of bicycle end -of -trip facilities should be implemented in Santa Clarity Recommendations Increase Public Bicycle Parking Facilities Santa Clanta's three Metrolink Stations, City Hall, and the McBean Regional Transit Center already provide bicycle lodters and racks Bike racks and lockers should be provided at other public destinations, including community centers, parks, schools and shopping centers. All bicycle parking should be in a safe, secure area visible to passersby. Commuter locations should provide secure indoor parting, covered bicycle corrals, or Class I bicycle lockers Bicycle parting on sidewalks in commercial areas should be provided according to specific design criteria, reviewed by merchants and the public; and installed as demand war ant& Generally, `U' type racks bolted into the sidewalk are preferred and should be located intermittently or in front of key destinations. Bicycle racks should be installed to meet ADA standards and not block pedestrian through traffic U- locks with shelter installed near a building entrance. The City may want to consider custom racks that can serve not only as bike racks, but also public artwork or as advertising for a specific business. The "post and ting' style rack is an attractive alternative to the standard inverted -U, whirr requires only a single mounting point and can be customized to have the city name or emblem stamped inn) the rings These racks can also be easily retrofitted onto existing street posts, such as parking meter posts While custom racks can add a decorative element and relate to a neighborhood theme, the tack function should not be overlooked All racks should adhere to the basic functional requirement of supporting the bicycle by the fin me (not only the wheel) and accepting a U -lock. 5-23 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan At City -sponsored events, bicycle valet parking should be provided- The City may be able to partner with a local group, such as the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition, to provide free, secure bicycle and stroller valet panting. Encourage Provision of Shower and Locker Facilities Possible alternatives to the inverted -IJ bike rack include the simple post -and -ring style (left), or a custom artistic rack such as the heartshaped rack (middle) orthe abstract rack (right). All styles allow the bicycle to be secured by the frame with a U -lock. Encouraging employers to provide shower and locker facilities for employees should be a component of all commute and traffic demand management programs as these facilities provide for current commuters and may encourage more commuters to ride their bicycles Several cities require shower and locket facilities as a condition of development approval Bicyclists are not the only employees that may benefit from shower and locker facilities; these facilities are useful for employees who wish to run or exercise on a work break The City should also consider providing shower and dhaV% facilities at City Hall for employees Encourage Provision of Bicycle Air Stations Ensuring that bicycle tires are properly inflated is one of the most important maintenance items for a bicyclist Whi% gas stations typically provide air compressors, providing publicly accessible air stations at major bicycling destinations can help is a way of enhancing the bikeway network public bicycle air stations are already in use in popular cycling cities such as Davis, California, and they have been found to be well -used by cyclists, vandal -resistant and low -maintenance. In Santa Clarta, lVcal locations for public bicycle air stations include trailbeads along the Santa Clara River Trail, and at the major transit stops Major local employers should also be encouraged to provide bicycle air stations along with their secure bicycle parking facilities 5.4.7• Maintenance and Operations Public bicycle pump in Davis, California. Photo: Matt Jurach Both on -street and off-street bikeways need regular maintenance Santa Clatites on -street bikeways are maintained as part of regular street maintenance activities by the Environmental. Services Division and off-street trails are maintained Jointly by the parks Department and the public Works Department The City also repairs bikeways as they are notified of issues, and is very responsive to requests On -street bikeways require specialized maintenance and, in general, greater attention to detail. Bicycles are more susceptible than motor vehides to roadway irregularities such as potholes and loose gravel For example, after 5-24 5. Recommended repaving, a roadway lip between a gutter pan and asphalt does not affect a motor vehicle, but can easily catch a bicycle fire and possibly result in a bicyclist losing control of the bicycle Construction activities in Santa Cla ita present additional maintenance requirements Construction affects bicyclists through increased roadway wear due to heavy vehicle ttiffic and increased debris such as sand and gravel from construction equipment In addition to maintenance issues, construction activities may also hinder bicyclists if Class II lanes are dosed off or obstructed due to road maintenance, landscaping or other construction activities Special accommodations may be made to provide for cyclists during construction periods Recommendations Develop a Maintenance Policy that Addresses the Special Needs of Bicyclists The City of Santa Clanta should evaluate its current street maintenance and repair policies to ensure that they reflect the needs of bicyclists. Specific measures to review include: Street sweeping As motor vehicles navel along the roadway, debris is pushed to the outside lanes and shoulder. Debris also collects at the center of intersections Rands striped with bike lanes or designated as bicycle routes should be swept more &equendy than roads without designated bikeways. Street sweeping on these roadways should include removing debris on the shoulder and at intersections Minor repairs and improvements. Potholes and cracks along the shoulder of roadways primarily affect bicyclists and should be completed within a timely manner. All repairs should be flush to the existing pavement surface Street resurfacing When streets with bikeways are resurfaced, utility covers, grates and other instreetitems should be brought up to the new level of pavement Similarly, the new asphalt should be tapered to meet the gutter edge and provide a smooth transition between the roadway and the gutter pan. Proactive identification of and response to maintenance needs. The City currently uses the eService Online Request System to identify needed repairs to roadways and bikeways. The City should promote this hotline In addition to this hodine, the City should proactively identify locations in need of maintenance Maintenance needs should include street sweeping, minor repairs and improvements, identification of hazards suds as sunken utility covets or drainage grates with openings parallel to the roadway, and identification of bikeway Eaalities in need of restriping or resigning. Calibrate bicycle bop detectors. As part of general maintenance, the City should test and calibrate bicyde-sensitive loop detectors to ensure that they are working properly. Loop detectors are described in more detail below Actively coordinate with maintenance workers. The City should ensure that maintenance workers are aware of new bicycle related maintenance policies Maintenance workers should be involved in the development of bicycle related maintetxance policies in order to ensure that City staff and maintenance workers understand eadi other's needs and limitations After establishing policies, the City should follow up with the maintenance staff to verify compliance and to modify polities or provide additional support, if necessary, to ensure future compliance 5-25 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Consider impacts on bicycles while performing construction, maintenance and repair work on roadways and trails. Construction and maintenance activities present dtancnges for cyclists; even the most experienced cyclists may feel anxiety when the bike lane is unexpededly blocked by construction activites and they are forced out into travel lanes with vehicles that may be traveling in excess of 45 mph. While cyclists are permitted by the California Vehicle Code to leave the bike lane if it is obstructed, motorists may not be expecting them to merge left into the travel lane For construction activities: If feasible, avoid parking construction or maintenance vehicles in bicycle lanes or on designated bicycle routes Provide suitable construction wanting signs for any activities that involve work in a designated bkeway. Signage should wam bicyclists well in advance of any location where the bicycle lane is closed for construction or maintenance activities If possible, maintain a coned -off area between the construction zone and vehide lane for bicycle travel. A 5' area is optimal, but even a 3' area would provide cyclists room to maneuver past the construction activities without forcing them into the travel lane. • Where necessary, provide detour routes around areas undergoing construction. • The city should sign and enforce reduced speed limits around construction zones to ensure that motorists passing these arras are traveling at a safe speed 5.4.8• Signage and Striping All bikeway signage and striping on public roadways in Santa Clarita should conform to the signage identified in the 2012 California MCTI CD These documents give specific information on the type and location of signing for biryde facilities in California. The foflavang recommendations are for signage that goes beyond basic MCTI'CD requirements Recommendations Designated Bikeway Signs The installation of bikeway signs on all designated bicycle facilities is important to heighten motorist awareness of cyclists and help cyclists find their way. The City should ensure that all bikeways are signed per the 2012 California M= Destination Signage Destination signage makes it easier for pedestrians and bicyclists to use the trail and on - street bikeway network as an effective transportation system Destination signs typically display distance, direction and in some cases, estimated travel time information. The City should design and install custom destination signage on major nails and on -street bikeways and paseos A signage plan should be developed to ensure that destination signage is complete, coherent and does not result in sign duttm Destination signage in Santa Chrita could direct nail users to destinations such as the Valencia Town Center, Jan Heidt Newhall Metrolink Station, Bouquet Canyon Bicycle Lanes, or shopping 5-26 Santa Clarita may consider using customized bikeway signage. centers, packs and schools located around the City Destination signage may include mile tr>adcers, road identification at undetaossing% and informational kiosks Consider a Pilot Program to Test Parallel Path Warning Signage When paths are located parallel and adjacent to roadways, vehicles turning into and out of streets and driveways must cross the path Conflicts between bicyclists and pedestrians and fuming motorists are common at these types of intersections Turning motor vehciles do not expect to see bicyclists or pedestrians coming in the oppposite direction of traffic Stating in the early 1990's, the City of Detwe>; Colorado began using experimental warning signage at its parallel paths The signage is modified from the standard MUI'CD railroad warning signage The City of Santa Clarity should consider a pilot program to test the effectiveness of experimental warning signage alerting motorists to the presence of bicyclists and pedestrians on parallel paths This would involve the City Working with the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC) through their process for implementing and testing "experimental" signage. 5.4.9• Bicycle Signal Detection The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) adopted Traffic Operations policy Directive 09-06, which requires that new and modified signal detectors provide bicyclist detection if they are to remain in operation. Further, the standard states that new and modified bicycle path approaches to signalized intersections provide bicyclist detection or a bicyclist pushbutton if detection is required Santa Clarity uses in -pavement loop detectors and video detection at signalized intersections to trigger traffic lights Video detection systems and certain loop detectors can be calibrated to respond to the presence of a bicycle The following recommendations are intended to improve bicycle detection at signalized intersections 5. Recommended Recommendations Continue to Install Bicycle -Sensitive Detection at Signalized Intersections The City has been installing hicycle-sensitive detection in bike lanes at signalized intersections over the past several years. The City should continue to install bicycle -sensitive detection at intersections during roadway construction. Since many people do not know how loop 5-27 An example of Denver's parallel path warning signage in context (top) and the complement of warning signs (bottom). ■.m Caltrans approved bicycle detection marking. Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan detector word if the City chooses to use this mediad of detection it may be necessary at some locations to marc a pavement stencil that shows cyclists where to stop to activate the loop Stencils should be repainted when needed As opportunities arise, loop detector stencils should be installed in coordination with striping maintenance of resurfacing projects. Standard bicycle detection marangs should be applied so that bicyclists can be detected in the limit line detection zone as per Caltrans Policy Directive 09-06. The State standard bicycle detection madung appears on Caltrans Standard Plan A24C. To increase understanding about how to use biryde loop detectors, the Crty may want to include information about how to activate a bicycle loop detector in its bicycle educational materials. Regularly Calibrate Bicycle -Sensitive Detection While bicycle -sensitive detection facilitates faster and more convenient bicycle trips, if it is not calibrated properly, or stops functioning, it can frustrate bicyclists waiting for signals to change, unaware that the detection is not wurang The City should ensure that all bicycle -sensitive detection is tested, calibrated, and operable as part of routine signal maintenance 5.4.10. Safety and Security The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department should continue to perform enforcement of applicable laws on bike paths, depending on available resources and priorities. Enforcement of vehicle statutes relating to bicycle operation will be enforced on Class II and Class III bikeways as part of the departments normal operations Recommendations Increase Safety and Security through Proper Design and Maintenance The following recommendations emphasize safety and security through design and maintenance efforts These actions should be incorporated into the planning and development process of all bicycle facilities • Adhere to the established Federal and State design, operation, and maintenance standards (See Appendices C, D and E for an overview of these standards) • Supplement these standards with the sound judgment of professional planners, public safety officials and • Maintain adequate recording and response mechanisms for reported safety and maintenance probl ans • Provide regular police patrols to the extent needed • Continue to support the Sheriff's existing bicycle registration program and training for proper lodang techniques • Thoroughly research the causes of each reported collision within the City of Santa Clanta's bicycle and pedestrian network Respond to accident investigations with appropriate design of operation improvements . 5-28 5. Recommended Bicycle Patrol Unit The City of Santa CJarim may want to work with the Sheriff's Department, business districts and neighborhood groups to establish local Bicycle Patrol Units A Bicycle Patrol Unit may be an official law enforcement unit, a private security guard patrol, or a volunteer network Bicycles are an excellent community -policing tool, as officers on bikes are often viewed as more approadiable, thus improving trust and relations between the citizens and police Bicycle patrol units can work closely with citizens to address concerns before they become problems Bicycle patrol units can have a direct impact on bicycle safety by enforcing bicycle traffic laws (eg. wrong -way riding, sidewalk riding, obeying traffic controls, children wearing helmets), and providing bicycle safety education In addition to developing a bicycle patrol unit, the Sheriff's Department officers should become familiar with the trail nemcdt, including uailheads and trail locations With the implementation of a mile -marker system recommended in the "Destination Signage" recommendation above, it will be easier for trail users to report their location to the Sheriffs Department in the event of an emergency. It is recommended that the Sheriffs Department proactively enforce bicycle and pedestrian related violations at high - crash areas This spot enforcement should be higlily visible, and publicly advertised It may take the form of crosswalk stings, handing out informational sheets to motorists, cyclists and pedestrians, or enforcing speed limits and nghtof-way at trail -roadway intersections. Continue a Safe Routes to School Program In 2008, the City of Santa Clanta began the process of developing its citywide program, funded by the State of California Safe Routes to Schools grant money. The project serves as a comprehensive program coveting education, encouragement, enforcement, engineering and evaluation, and involved reaching out to all of the Citys 27 elementary schools The City should continue the program by implementing improvements at all elementary schools and expanding the program to include middle/junior high and high schools (discussed in Chapter 8). 5.5• Project Sheets The following pages present projects from the 2008 plan that have not yet been completed These projects are also identified in Table 5-2 5-29 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Class I Bike Path: Railroad Avenue Rail With Trail Construct paved multi -use path on east side of Railroad Avenue between road and Union Pacific rad line from 13th Street to Magic Mountain Parkway. May require grade separated crossing at Via Princessa, enhanced at -grade crossings at Oak Ridge Drive, and Drayton Street. Connection to South Fork Trail to be provided at Magic Mountain Parkway would require grade separated crossing. If possible, extend along railroad to Metrolink Station or to proposed Soledad Canyon Road Commuter Trail South. Look'na North on Railroad Avenue. Issues: • Limited right of way between tracks and roadway. • Right of way will need to be secured from Metrolink. Crossing Oak Ridge Drive and Drayton Street. Businesses located in ROW will need to be relocated. Existing bridge over Placenta Creek is narrow. A High traffic speeds and volumes along Railroad Avenue. Access to trail requires crossing Railroad Avenue, Improvement Options: Study feasibility of widening bridge over Placenta Creek. High visibility crosswalks at roadway crossings. A Warning signage at intersections. Install bicycle loop detectors at signals that are traffic actuated. Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. ® 5-30 5. Recommended Class I Bike Path: South Fork Trail Extension to Lyons Avenue uonstruct pavea mutn-use pam on soum sure of nooa controi channel between Orchard Village Road and Lyons Avenue (outside of City's right-of-way). The connection between the existing South Fork Trail and the extension across Orchard Village Road could be done at midblock or path users could be directed to the fight at 16th Street. Service road along /food control channeL Issues: • Crossing Orchard Village Road. • Narrow bridge over Flood Control channel. • Right of Way may need to be secured from Orchard Village II HOA and Edison for connection to 10 Street crossing. Improvement Options: New trail undercrossing at Orchard Village, requiring coordination with County Public Works. • In short-term, trail users could cross Orchard Village by routing to use nearby existing signalized crossing at 16th Street. If so, sidewalks should be widened to allow bicycle access. • Warning signage at intersections. • Directional signage for trail users. Total estimated cost: $980,000 Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-31 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Class I Bike Path: Valencia Town Center North-South Connector Construct a continuous, safe, well-defined bike connection through the mall parking lot or an off-street pedestrian connection across or . . around the mall in the form of a paseo or multi -use path. This iiH,y project is one of two that would fill a gap in the north -south paseo network that runs from Lyons Avenue to Copper Hill Drive. � Project may be feasible to develop as a condition from the mall during future buildout. ` JN' BLVD3 A Doth could be D(aced outside Darkina lot Issues: A Future development plans may restrict options. User conflicts between pedestrians and mall traffic. On private property. Improvement Options: • Install paseo or path along shopping center perimeter road, approximately 0.4 miles in length. • High -visibility crosswalks. Warning signage for motorists. A Provide wayfinding signage. Work with developers to incorporate pathway into future mall expansion plans. 5-32 5. Recommended Class I Bike Path: River Trail Extension Construct Class I path from end of the trail at Discovery River Park to the end of existing development. The City will construct this segment of the River Trail. Future segments of the River Trail extending to Bouquet Canyon Road will be developed as part of future developer -funded projects. vd Issues: • Flooding risk. • Future development of Park. Improvement Options: • Construct trail along existing flood maintenance road. • Coordinate trail construction with future developments, River Village and Keystone. Existing spur o(ihe Santa Clara River Trail tuns from Soledad Canyon Road to Calla Way I otal estimated Cost: ZWJJ,VUV Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-33 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Class I Bike Path: Bouquet Canyon Creek Trail Construct paved multi -use path along the south side of Bouquet Canyon Creek from North City Limits to intersection of Alamogordo Road and Bouquet Canyon Road. Trail to be extended to Central Park Crossings are required at Benz Road (at grade), Urbandale Ave (at grade), Haskell Canyon Road (grade separated), Centurion Way (at grade), Los Angeles Aqueduct and Bouquet Canyon Road (grade separated). Second Phase of the project involves extension of trail through Central Park, south of existing residential and commercial development to connect with proposed Newhall Ranch Road bike path and Santa Clara River Trail, Phase II may be implemented by connecting through Espuella Drive (develop as bike route or bicycle boulevard), constructing a multi -use path to the south of the commercial area at Bouquet Canyon Road and Newhall Ranch Road or may be implemented by constructing a multi -use path on the existing unpaved maintenance mad south of the existing development. It may be feasible for future development to fund and construct Phase II of this trail. Creek. Fhoto taken at Urbandale Atenue crossing. Issues: Multiple road crossings. Crossing of Los Angeles Aqueduct. Crossing of tributary. Lack of right-of-way between Central Park and Santa Clara River Road. Maintenance road ends south of Los Angeles Aqueduct. Privacy concerns of adjacent property owners. Improvement Options: A Construct Class I path along existing maintenance trail on north bank of Bouquet Canyon Creek. A Construct high -visibility at -grade trail crossings at Benz Road, Urbandale Avenue, and Centurion Way. A Construct undercrossing at Haskell Canyon Road. A Construct bridge over Aqueduct, or consider bringing trail out to Bouquet Canyon to cross aqueduct. A Construct undercrossing of Bouquet Canyon Road. Total estimated cost: -Phase I to Park: $2,520,000 -Phase It to Espuella: $280,000 -Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. ® 5-34 5. Recommended Class I Bike Path: McBean Bridge Upgrade The McBean Bridge crosses over the Santa Clara River, the South Fork Trail and the Santa Clara River Trail. Tht bridge presently accommodates eight vehicle lanes and a sidewalk on the east side. This project is currently under construction. 'lire McBean Bridge is an important connection between the South Fork Trail and the Santa Clara River Trod 'otat estimated cost: Bridge widening 590'x26' at $300/sf $4,602,000 construction 15% contingency 15% design 15% construction management $6,700,000 TOTAL Issues: a. Limited right-of-way width. a. Heavy motor vehicle volumes on McBean Parkway • Existing pedestrian facility not sufficient to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians • Provides access to Santa Clara River Trail and South Fork Trail Improvement Options: A, Widen McBean Bridge to accommodate a 10 foot bicycle path with 42 inch railing between bikeway and motor vehicle lanes A Improvement option is planned as part of widening McBean Bridge from 6Imes to 8 lanes 5-35 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Class II or Class III Bicycle Facility: Sierra Highway Bikeway Sierra Highway provides the primary north -south bicycle route between Newhall and Canyon Country and is currently used by road cyclists. The roadway is identified as a regionally important bikeway in the Los Angeles County Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan. Sierra Highway currently has wide shoulders and a wide center tum lane from the south City limits to Friendly Valley Parkway, with on -street parking allowed on some segments. Approximately half a mile of time - restricted bike lanes exist on Sierra Highway between Friendly Valley Parkway and just south of Vista Del Canon (near Via Princessa). Between Vista Del Canon and Soledad Canyon Road, Sierra Highway runs through a commercial area and is striped for three lanes of traffic in both directions with no shoulder, making it a challenging riding environment. North of Soledad Canyon Road, lanes drop to two through lanes in both directions, with a wide outside lane. Issues: A Future plans to add a third travel lane to sections with 2 lanes in either direction. � Gap between Via Princessa and Soledad Canyon Road. Improvement Options: Short -Term: Sign Sierra Highway between The Old Road and existing bike lanes as Bike Route, Cyclists can use existing shoulder areas for riding. Stripe bicycle lanes on Sierra Highway north of Soledad Canyon Road to County's proposed bike lanes on Vasquez Canyon Road. Portions of these roads are in unincorporated County and will require implementation by the County. Siena Highway in Canyon Country! a Long -Term: If the City determines in the future it is necessary to stupe an additional vehicle travel lane in each direction on Sierra Highway, study bikeway options at the time the restriping project is to take place. Two main options exist: 1) Keep roadway as a bike route, using narrow lane widths (e.g. 11 foot lanes) to provide as much shoulder as possible with the restriping. A minimum 34 foot striped shoulder may provide cyclists with sufficient room on this segment. Or 2) Stripe "Time of Day" bike lanes, in which the 3'a Travel lane is designated as a Bike Lane during off-peak hours, and functions as a vehicle travel lane during commute hours. While this has the advantage of a full bike lane during the non -peak periods, the disadvantage is that it provides no bikeway on the roadway during the commute period, which is the most likely period for bicyclists heading toward the San Fernando Valley to be using Sierra Highway. Total estimated cost: $145,000 (bike route —signage only) $68,000 (1.7 miles of time -restricted bike lanes) Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. The roadway between Via Princessa and Soledad Canyon Road is physically constrained and will require additional study and work to bring up to bike route standards. Additional work not included in cost. ® 5-36 Class III Bike Route: Valley Street Bike Route Vmnarn Village ttoaa ana Valley street serve Henry Mayo Newnan Memortat Hospital, William S. Hart High School and Newhall Park, and connect to Valencia paseos and the South Fork Trail. Orchard Village Road, which lies north of Lyons Avenue, was signed as a bike route by the City since the adoption of the 2008 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. South of Lyons Avenue, the roadway continues as Valley Street, a wide two-lane residential street. Valley Street connects to existing bicycle lanes on Calgrove Boulevard. Sidewalks are not provided along most of the length of these two roadways. Cyclists, including families with younger children, currently use this route. Orchard Village Road is designated as a major arterial in the City General Plan and is indicated as eventually having 6 lanes, which would eliminate the existing wide shoulder. 5. Recommended I ♦ Librbp( LYON v Newi Metrolin Station ■ti 1 ■ B<V • J T, ALJ Issues: � Future road widening to three lanes in each direction. A Narrow bridge at South Fork River Bridge. � McBean Parkway does not have bicycle facilities. A Crossing Lyons Avenue. Improvement Options: Orchard Village Road Overcrossing at South Fork: Existing bridge may be too narrow to accommodate cyclists. Consider options for accommodation, including using sidepath or widening bridge. A Valley Street South of Lyons Avenue: Sign as Class III bike route. Locked Gate at Valley Street Install signs stating bikes and Valley Street pedestrians are permitted. A Orchard Village Road and Mill Valley Road: Provide wayfinding signage from roadway to Valencia pmeo network. Orchard Village Road and South Fork Trail: Provide wayfinding signage to South Fork Trail. Design future road widening to maintain bicycle accommodations. Install high -visibility crosswalks at Lyons Avenue crossing. Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-37 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Class III Bike Route: Wiley Canyon Bicycle Route travels along the edge of a residential area. The road provides a major commute route for bicyclists traveling from Valencia to San Fernando Valley via The Old Road. The roadway narrows south of Foud Road, widens at Canerwell Stmt, and connects to the bicycle lanes on Calgrove Boulevard. Improvement Options: Wiley Canyon Road from Lyons Avenue to Calgrove Boulevard: Stripe wide shoulders and sign as bike route. Include warning signage where road narrows. Study feasibility of striping and signing bicycle lanes. Evaluate methods to reduce vehicle speeds. "'Mnal view of Wiley Canyon Road, showing varying width. Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. ® 5-38 5. Recommended Class III Bike Route: Sand Canyon Road Bicycle Route Sand Canyon Road is an extremely popular bicycle mute, especia riding the Sand Canyon - Placerita Canyon loop ride. Given the this route with local cyclists, it is recommended that this roadway as a Class III Bike Route, and signed accordingly. Sand Canyon Photo ;ts e of i ed •r• •r. 1. r�I� � ■ ryas r { s i ■ . 1Y— L • �I z.1 Issues: ♦ Heavily used recreational bike route. ♦ Lack of shoulder width to accommodate bike lanes. Improvement Options: • Class III signed bike route. ♦ Install "Share the Road' signs along route. • Connect to proposed bike mute along Placenta Canyon Road (County jurisdiction). Total estimated cost: $82,500 Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-39 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Intersection Improvement: McBean Parkway and Creekside Drive The intersection of McBean Parkway and Creekside Drive is a busy intersection that has a US Post Office on the northeast comer, a Target store on the southeast comer, and a shopping plaza driveway that serves as the intersection's western leg. Bus stops are located nearby, as is the Santa Clara River Trail. Pedestrians crossings are prohibited on the north leg of the intersection across McBean. i. 1ffYlf: High traffic volumes and speeds. High turning movement volumes. W06— Improvement Options: Install high -visibility, crosswalks. • Install "Right Tum Yield to Pedestrians" signs. • Consider Leading Pedestrian Interval timing across McBean. Consider removing pedestrian crossing restriction across north leg. MN� I y �a 1 Aerial view of Creekside Drive and McBean Parkway Total estimated cost: $15,000 Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. ® 5-40 5. Recommended Intersection Improvements: Lyons Avenue and Peachland Avenue Lyons Avenue and Peachland Avenue form a T - intersection adjacent to Old Orchard Park. Residents that five south of Lyons Avenue must cross at this intersection to access the park. Peachland Avenue also serves an elementary school, and so this intersection sees a lot of school -related vehicle and pedestrian traffic. Currently pedestrians are not allowed to cross the west leg of the intersection across Lyons Avenue. The intersection is bordered by a bank and a small shopping center. Issues: • High traffic volumes and speeds. • High turning movement volumes. Improvement Options: ♦ Install high -visibility crosswalk striping. • Install Countdown signal heads. • Install "Right Tum Yield to Pedestrians" signs on Peachland Avenue. ♦ Install left tum arrow on south leg. • Install advance stop lines at crosswalks, with left turn lane stop line farther back than the stop bar for right - tuning vehicles (on Peachland Avenue). • Consider advance pedestrian signal for pedestrians crossing Lyons Avenue. • Consider removing pedestrian crossing restrictions. Aenol Hew of Lyons Avenue and Peorhland Avenue. Total estimated cost: $10,000 Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-41 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Intersection Improvements: Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail residents will have to cross Railroad Avenue to access the trail As part of the development of the Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail, the City should consider intersection improvements at all access points along the trail. The improvements ) identified for the intersection of 15th Street and Railroad Avenue will generally be applicable at all T -intersections along the trail. Railroad Avenue and 15th Street intersect at a T near Downtown Newhall. The intersection is signalized. Pedestrians are not allowed to cross on the north leg of the intersection (across Railroad Avenue.). A bus stop is located to the north of the intersection, on the east side of Railroad Avenue. Railroad Avenue will become a six - lane arterial in the near future. Looking across Railroad Avenue at 15' Street Issues: High traffic volumes and speeds. Curb ramp lacking on east side of crosswalk. No sidewalk connecting adjacent bus stop pad not connected to crosswalk. Improvement Options: Install high -visibility crosswalks. Install advance stop lines at crosswalks. Install "Right Tum Yield to Pedestrians" signs on 15a Avenue. Install curb ramp on east side of Railroad Avenue. Construct sidewalk between crosswalk and existing bus stop. Consider Leading Pedestrian Interval timing for crossing Railroad Avenue. ♦ Consider removing pedestrian crossing restrictions. Total estimated cost: $16,000 Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. r. 4 L 5. Recommended Improvements Intersection Improvements: Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road come — together at a signalized T intersection. Both roadways have significant traffic volumes and speeds. Pedestrians are not allowed to cross the west leg of the intersection (Bouquet Canyon Road). Double left tum lanes funnel vehicles from Bouquet Canyon Road to Seco Canyon C Wo Road and double right tum lanes funnel vehicles from &)k ,Z Seco Canyon Road to Bouquet Canyon Road. The southbound bicycle lanes on Bouquet Canyon Road end just north of this intersection. The northbound bicycle • 8 lanes narrow but continue. rC -r Issues: ♦ High traffic volumes and speeds. • Pedestrians restricted from crossing the west leg of intersection. Curb cuts not provided on south side of intersection. Improvement Options: Install high -visibility crosswalks. • Install advance pedestrian signal for pedestrians. • Install "Left Tum Yield to Pedestrians" signs for eastbound Bouquet Canyon traffic. • Install curb cuts on south side of intersection. Aerial view of Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road 'Total estimated cost: $14,00U Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-43 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Intersection Improvements: Commuter Way and Soledad Canyon Road At the Santa Clanta Metrolink Station, Commuter Way intersects Soledad Canyon Road at a signalized T intersection. Bicyclists and pedestrians using the bicycle path that runs along the north side of Soledad Canyon Road must cross at this intersection to access the train station which is south of Soledad Canyon Road. Pedestrian crossing is not permitted on the west leg of the intersection. Trail users are directed to use the east leg of the intersection. A bicycle path parallels commuter way on the west side and leads behind the train station to bicycle lockers. Intersection of Soledad Canyon Road and Commuter Way. Sao Santa Clarita f • s Metrolink Station • Issues: Relatively high bicycle and pedestrian volumes, accessing Metrolink Station from bike path. Pedestrians restricted from crossing the west leg of intersection. High vehicle turning volumes. � Pedestrian and bicycle bridge proposed as part of River Village development. Improvement Options: Install high -visibility crosswalks. � Install perpendicular curb ramps on southeast comer to better facilitate pedestrian/bike access onto walkway. 4 Consider allowing cyclists to cross west leg of intersection and providing leading pedestrian interval. Improve signage on pathway and platform Restripe pathway centerline striping Long-term: Provide bicycle path through puking lot to station entrance. Total estimated cost: $30,000 (Pedestrian and bicycle bridge not included in cost Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. ® 5-44 5. Recommended Intersection Improvement: Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail Road for much of its length. The trail is intersected by several % roadways. This project will improve the trail -roadway interface at _ two of these intersections: Ruther Avenue, Rainbow Glen Drive. (Recommendations for improving the intersection of Soledad �• Canyon Road and Golden Oak Road are on a separate project sheet). �\ iports Curnplex and Aquatic Center AW -e e VU P0.L*tss. Soledad Canwn and Rainbow Glen Dove Soledad Cancan and ReutlterAvenue. � Trail crossing of multi -lane roadway, with multiple tum lanes, at signalized intersection. A Parallel railroad line. Improvement Options: Install advance stop lines at least 5 feet back of crosswalk at trail crossing. • Prohibit right tum on red on northbound Reuther Avenue and Rainbow Glen Drive. • Stripe high visibility crosswalk across Reuther Avenue and Rainbow Glen Drive. • Install trail warning signs indicating trail crossing on eastbound Soledad Canyon Road, for right turns. • Install signs on trail warning trail users to watch for turning motor vehicles. • Work with Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department to conduct spot enforcement at these intersections. Total estimated cost: $10,000 per intersection Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-45 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transoortation Plan Intersection Improvements: Golden Oak Road and Soledad Canyon Road At the intersection of Golden Oak Road and Soledad Canyon Road, the Soledad Canyon Road Bike Path crosses from the north side to the south side of Soledad Canyon Road. The north leg of the four-way signalized intersection is an entrance into a shopping center. The 1 shopping center entrance currently has two entry lanes and three exit lanes (two right tum lanes and one through and left tum lane). Pedestrians are restricted from crossing the west leg of the intersection. Bus stops are located on Soledad Canyon Road in each direction, on the ;ansa Clari to far side of the intersection. Santa Clarita Lanes Bowling aronnk Station Alley is located in the shopping plaza north of Soledad. The railroad tracks parallel the trail to the south. i Intersection of Golden Oak Road and Soledad Canyon Road / �a San r PN% Issues: Current crossing configuration is confusing to trail users. Potential conflicts between trail users and turning vehicles. A Trail continuation on north side of Soledad is not dear from intersection. Improvement Options: Install high -visibility crosswalks. Narrow entrance to Santa Clarita Innes. Install directional signage for trail users at intersection. Develop landscaping in front of Santa Clarita Lanes to provide visual indication that trail continues. Create pavement treatment on sidewalk in front of Santa Clarita Lanes to delineate trail from sidewalk. Total estimated cost: $51,000 Cost estimates me preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. ® 5-46 5. Recommended Intersection Improvement: High Visibility Crosswalk Installation In order to enhance pedestrian conditions at the city's major arterial -arterial intersections, it is recommended that high visibility crosswalks and advance stop lines be installed at all locations. There are approxhnately30 arterial -arterial intersections in Santa Clarks. Highest priority locations would be those with free right mm lanes, where striping high - visibility ladder crosswalk striping across the free right lanes would serve to enhance pedestrian visibility. Stop bars set back of the crosswalk on the through lanes would help to discourage encroachment of vehicles into the crosswalk area. Issues: A Free tight tum lanes at many arterial intersections. A Vehicles encroach into crosswalk area when waiting 1 at traffic signals. Improvement Options: Install high visibility crosswalk marking across all legs of arterial -arterial intersections. Highest priority locations are those with free right tum lanes. Install advance stop bars a minimum of 4 feet back from crosswalks at all non -yielding traffic lanes. Total estimated coat: $300,000 Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. 5-47 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Sidewalk Gap Closure: Industrial Center Sidewalks are not present on most roadways within the Industrial Center. This project recommends developing a program to install connecting sidewalks within the Industrial Center. The project will include construction of ADA - accessible curb ramps, driveway reconstruction, tree removal and replanting, landscaping and irrigation, signal modification, and relocation of fire hydrants, traffic signs, and dry utility and water structures. Sidewalk installation will most likely be phased in over several years, with priority given to sidewalks that connect to the existing network outside the Industrial Center and sidewalks that provide access to bus stops. When possible, sidewalks should be provided on both sides of the street. Some sidewalk installation may require right-of-way acquisition or easements, though most should be able to be completed within City tight -of -way. Roadway segments proposed for sidewalk installation are: A Avenue Stanford from Newhall Ranch Road to Rye Canyon Road (transit route); A Rye Canyon Road from Interstate 5 Overpass to Newhall Ranch Road (transit route); A Avenue Scott from Rye Canyon Road to bridge over San Francisquito Creek (transit route); A Avenue Tibbitts from Avenue Scott to Newhall Ranch Road (transit route); A Anna Drive from Avenue Scott to the south end (priority connection). Bus stop in industrial center. Issues: A Most roadways in Industrial Center lack sidewalks. A Bus stops are not accessible via sidewalks. Improvement Options: A Prioritize roadways for sidewalk installation based on connectivity to existing sidewalk network, and access to bus stops. A Phase sidewalk construction over several years. A Tie sidewalk construction to development within the Industrial Center. A Use sidewalk design guidelines presented in this document to ensure sidewalks are buffered from vehicle traffic and ADA -compliant. Total estimated cost: Phase 1, Avenue Scott: $2.0 million Phase 2, Rye Canyon: $1.4 million Phase 3, Avenue Stanford: $1.1 million Phase 4, Anza Drive and Avenue Tibbitts: $1.8 million Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to change upon further field review. . 5-48 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking 6. STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE BIKING AND WALKING This chapter provides polity, planning and program strategies that serve to encourage hiking and walking as an everyday means of transportation in Santa Clarity The chapter consists of the following key sections: 6.11 Lk§igz Recommendations presents design recommendations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities that address the Cityls unique needs. These recommendations supplement the design guidelines provided in Appendices C through D (Page 6 -Error' Bookmark not defined.) 6.2 Recommended Policy Modifications provides recommendations for modifying the City's adopted policies to better reflect the needs of non -motorized users (Page 6-4) 6.3. Transit Recommendations describes best practices that City of Santa Transit can use to integrate transit, biking and walking (Page 6-5) 6.4. Travel Demand Management introduces the concept of Travel Demand Management (TDM), describes how the City is currently practicing TDM and lists specific TDM strategies for City of Santa Clanta's consideration. (Page 6-6) 6.5. Land Use Policies to Promote Biking and ng offers solutions for increasing bicycle and pedestrian trips through the implementation of land use regulations and polices that encourage pedestrian and bicycle firiendly development (Page 6-15) 6.1. Design Recommendations Well-designed bicycle and pedestrian facilities are vital to encouraging biking and walking Basic design guidelines are determined by Caltrans' Highway Design Manual and the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act guidelines This section highlights specific design recommendations that will address the unique needs of Santa ©aorta's non - motorized users The recommendations presented here are intended to supplement the design guidelines presented in Appendices C through D and the requirements presented in the Highway Design Manual and Federal ADA gr iMmes 6.i.i. Class Bike Path Santa (]aorta's bike paths include those completely away from roadways (eg the South Fork Tran and those that run parallel to adjacent roadways (eg. Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail -Thad along Soledad Canyon Road) Santa Clarity's bicycle paths are heavily used by pedestrians and cyclists, requiring special attention to designs that minimme user conflicts. Bicycle paths adjacent to parallel streets are not appropriate in all situations, particularly where there are numerous cross -streets or driveways Parallel paths also only serve only one side of the roadway, reducing their functionality on roadways with destinations on both sides of the road in cases where numerous crossings east or 6-1 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan destinations are along both sides of the road, and on -street bicycle facility, such as wide Class II bike lanes, may be more appropriate. Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 generally discourages bike paths immediately adjacent to roadways: "Bike paths immediately adjacent to streets and highways are not recommended They should not be considered a substitute for the street, because many bicyclists will find it less convenient to ride on these types of fackties as compand with the streets, particularly for utility trips" (1003.1 (5)) Where it has been determined that a parallel bicycle path is the most appropriate facility, special design considerations are needed that minimize conflicts between crossing motor vehicle traffic and path users and between different user groups on the path. Recommendations To enhance the enjoyment and safety of Santa Cla ites bicycle paths, it is recommended that the city: • Ensure that all newly constructed bike paths meet or exceed design standards outlined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000. Where feasible, make every effort to retrofit existing bicycle paths to meet or exceed design standards outlined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 10000. • Construct, wherever feasible, separated bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Design combined pedestrian -bicycle facilities to a minimum of 12', with wider widths if feasible. • Where width allows, on combined facilities install signage and pavement stencils designating separate areas on the path for bicycles and pedestrians to reduce conflicts between different user groups • On steep wades, construct bicycle paths to a higher design speed, with additional width provided to accommodate faster moving bicyclists traveling downhill • Design new trails with a minimum 2' graded area adjacent to the path to provide clearance fiom trees, poles, walks, guardrails or other obstacles. Where feasible, retrofit existing trails to meet the 2' clearance requirement. • Minimize planned driveways and roadway crossings of existing and proposed bicycle path alignments. • Design crossings with driveways and roadways to ensure the safety and convenience of non -motorized trail users, including but not limited tq constructing perpendicular curb ramps with truncated donees on the ramp surface, installing bicycle -accessible push buttons, waming signs indicating to watch for bicyclists, and high -visibility crosswalk treatments. • Re-evaluate the use of "Stop Walk Bike" signage on bike path intersections with driveways and roadways. Consider establishing high -visibility multi use trail crossing markings and signage that permit bicyclists to ride through the crossing after stopping at the intersection. • At signalized intersections that serve bicycle paths, consider modifying the pedestrian walk signal so that it is automatic instead of actuated, if traffic conditions allow. 6-2 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking Provide a minium 5' separation between bicycle paths and adjacent parallel roadways, with a wider separation if feasible At locations without a 5' separation, provide a physical barrier at least 42" high, with T clearance from the roadway. 6.1.2. Class II Bike Lane Often referred to as a "bike lane," a Class II bikeway provides a sniped and stenciled lane for one-way travel on either side of a street or highway. Many of Santa Clama's major roadways are multi -lane with posted speed limits of 45 mph Most signalized intersections include free tight tum lanes Wider bicycle lanes are recommended on Santa Clarata's major roadways to provide additional separation between briryclists and motor vehicles. To provide bike lanes along corridors where insufficient space is currently available, extra room can be provided by removing a traffic lane, narrowing traffic lanes, or narrowing the median. Recommendations • Ensure that newly constructed bicycle lanes meet or exceed design standards outlined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000. Where feasible, make every effort to retrofit existing bicycle lanes to meet or exceed design standards outlined in Caltrans highway Design Manual Chapter 10000. • Where feasible, provide 6' wide bicycle lanes, as measured from the curb face, 4' measured from the gutter pan seam. • Where feasible, provide bicyde pockets to the left of single right tum lanes along roadways that are striped with bicycle lanes • Calibrate signal detection devices (loop detectors, video detection) to actuate a signal if a bicycle is present 6.1.3. Class III Bike Route Generally referred to as a "bike route," a Class III bikeway provides routes through areas not served by Class I or II facilities and is used to connect discontinuous segments of a bikeway. Class III facilities are identified only by signing However, when encouraging bicyclists to travel along selected routes, traffic speed and volume, parking, traffic control devices, and surface quality should be acceptable for bicycle travel A wide outside traffic lane (at least 14) is preferable to enable cars to pass bicyclists safely without crossing the centerline Recommendations • Ensure that newly designated bile routes meet or exceed design standards outlined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000. Where feasible, make every effort to improve existing bike routes to meet or exceed design standards outlined in Caltrans highway Design Manual Chapter 10000. • Whenever possible, especially on multi lane roadways, provide a mintmarn 15' outside lane an designated bicycle routes. • On roadways designated as bike routes, ensure that traffic speed and volume, parsing traffic control devices and surface quality are acceptable for bicycle travel • Consider traffic calming devices to reduce or slow traffic on minor roadways designated as bicycle routes 6-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Consider where appropriate (eg on streets with parallel padang), installation of shared lane madangs 6.1.4. Sidewalks The sidewalk should be viewed as one component of the larger sidewalk corradot SxkNvAlk corridors should contain zones dedicated to different uses, such as wallang, furnishings, utilities (lighting), landscaping and so forth Sidewalk corridors that include pedestrian -scale amenities are attractive and encourage wallong It is recommended that the area dedicated to wandng be a minimum of 5 feet wide with 6 feet or more of area provided when possible It is recommended that a buffer of at least 2 feet should be provided between the edge of the sidewalk and the adjacent roadway, except where there is insuffident right -of way This buffer should be landscaped and should be at least five feet wide where possible 6.1.5. Paseos Santa Clanta's paseo network serves residential neighborhoods of Valencia The paseo network provides pedestrian and bicycle connectivity that is separate firoin the roadways, and provides more direct routes than traveling on the roadway. Paseos should be designed to provide pedestrian and bicycle access between cul-de-sacs and from the neighborhood to adjacent commercial and retail centers, between adjacent neighborhoods, and between residential auras and trails, sidewalks, roadways and transit stops A vayfinding system, such as street identification and destination signs should be provided ro allow residents and visitors to navigate the network Paseos should be well lit, well maintained, and have attractive landscaping. 6.2. Recommended Policy Modifications The Santa Clarita Munidpal Code and Circulation Element of the General Plan include sections that are relevant to non -motorized transportation, including policies for constructing bikeways, a bicycle padang ordinance, and street and sidewalk design guidelines These sections are sumanam Yl in Chapter 3, Planning and Policy Conten. Please see Table 6.1 below This Plan recommends that the City review the relevant sections of the Municipal Code and Circulation Element and consider adopting the following general changes, whidh are designed to enhance the safety and enjoyment of Santa Clauta% non -motorized transportation system. 6-4 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking Table 6->: Recommended Policy Modifications Designaodsioing andderelxlsitingcriteria. Bicycle Padang Consider allowing some property owners to substitute bicycle packing for motor vehicle puling. For example, Padang the City of Santa Cruz allows new and preexisting developments to convert up to 10% of their automobile Substitution spaces to non -required addmonal bicycle padangif the spaces are located near an entrance. Consider modifyingbnguage in the Circulation Elernent Street Design Guidelines to cladfyappropriate locations for parallel Class I &ntities versus Claes 1Ifacilities. Reline broad language stating that "Class I Paths Street Design are preferred over Class B Bike Lanes" and replace with mote specific cdteua indicatingwhen parallel Class I Guidelines bicycle paths may be appropriate (tngh speed/volume roadwtys with minimal crossings) and when Class II Bicycle Lanes may be more appropriate (numerous crossings, destinanci ss on both sides) and stating that the appropriate facility should be decided on a case-by-case basis. Crosswalk Municipal Cade §12.52.020 allows for crosswalks to be installed at intersections if "such maddrigs will improve Installation traffic conditions." Consider revising to allow crosswalks "if such mulangs will iagx rm traffic conditions and Municipal Code §1252030 allows for bicyclists and pedestrians to be prohibited from crossing at certain Crossing locations if it would mm "traffic compkcations". The City should consider revising this section to¢9ectthat Restactions bicyclists riding in the roadway are considered vehicles by California vehicle Code, and nay not be restricted fiorn crossing inovesnerus that other vehicles are allowed. Bicyclists w aIldng their bicycles in crosswalla are considered pedestrians, and may be restricted fiom crossing movements. 6.3. Transit Recommendations Public transit and bicycle and pedestrian facilities complement each other Transit increases the length and variety of possible bicycle and pedestrian trips, making it possible for people to choose brinng and walking as their transportation mode more frequently. In tum, transit users access stations and stops by bicyde and on foot, so there is great need for good bicycle and pedestrian design at these locations. The following recommendations for developing bxyde and pedestrian fiiendly transit are based on reconunendations found in Santa Clarita's Transportation Development Plan Some recommendations provided below may require Santa Clarita. to modify its Unified Development Code, and may be difficult to implement in already established developments Newer developments, however, and developments governed by the Mixed Use Overlay Zone, may be able to take advantage of most of these recommendations Specific recommendations for improving transit access are provided in Table 6-2 6-5 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Table 6-2: Recommendations to Improve Biking and Walking Access to Transit Develop coordinated plans for land use, circulation and transit with City and County depemnents to concentrate high density housing, employment and canmaaal arras close m trusit corridors. ' Recommend amending the City's General Plan to designate larger areas near the Town Center and near rail Land Use stations for high and moderate density residential use. 2 Work with City and County departnents to require rights ofway in new development forwallong, bcychob, and access to tarsi- This ink through public streets, sideaalla, bicycle parts, design of intersections for easy pedes uan crossings, and linkages between paseos and arterial streets. r Provide sidewalks, of sufficient width, on all streets leading to bus stop and assure that sidewalk are wide enough and clear enough for nus stops. •. I . .'.�n2 � .lJ •! �.'• a �.. Ir . t�r� �r • .. • �, nn�-. positionsfrovicle improved pasco sigriage to direct people to transit Stops. Construct paved v� pads; in sak lolgical ri that dii: bus waseng pid is ADA accessible. Retrofit pedestrian access to artwals where cul-d�sacii "stab up�'or nin along boundary vmlls, provided dim is neighborhood support Fitsure that new developments litild pedestrian access points to anenals at every Provide cka5 direct transit stops and shopping center Padang lots entrances. Encourage new development to place shop buildings closer to the street and street comers to reduce the distance pedestrians must walk to access transit stops. Place auto packing at the side and bads of buildings. 6.4. Travel Demand Management Travel Demand Management (I'D4 can be defined as "strategies that result in more efficient nue of transportation resources!"' This view recognizes that people travel not as an end in itself but rather as a means to an end People travel to wank, to socialize, to run errands, to attend medical appointments and to access recreational facilities TDM strategies seek to make it easier for people to get where they are going either by moving them more efficiently of by designing land uses so that they do not need to travel very Ear to access the destinations they want to reach. Travel Demand Marragenent jndudes policies to reduce congestion, such as alternative work schedules, polices to induce a shift from single -occupancy vehicles to higher occupancy vehicles, such as ride marching programs, and I Goal 5, Objective A from Transportation Development Plan. r Goal 5, Objective C from Transportation Development Plan. 3 Goal 5, Objective D from Transportation Development Plan. 4 Victoria Transport Institute, Online TDM Encyclopedia, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/,Jme 2006. Many of the policies outlined in this document are discussed in further detail on their website. 6-6 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking policies to shift trips from driving to biking, walking or [rani; such as parking fee programs TDM also encompasses long-term strategies to reduce the need to travel in the fust place These induce land use patterns that mix and duster residential, office, commercial and recreational uses, development of a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network, and incentives for developer to build less auto -vented developments, and incentives to assist homeowners who purchase homes that are dose to transit, retail and other amenities Most Travel Demand Management sees vehide-related travel problems as caused by market distortions that price driving much lower than it should be compared to alternative modes. Though drives pay for gas, instuanc; the vehicle, and in some cases padang, many of the costs that driving imposes— air, noise, water pollution, congestion, and land dedicated to padang--are not borne directly by the driver but are borne by society. Strategies that include these externalities in the cost of driving and strategies that make altemative modes more attractive than driving can alleviate this market distortion, reduce the total amount of driving, and reduce overall congestion. This section outlines Santa Clarita's emsting Travd Demand Management strategies and makes recommendations for additional TDM strategies the City may want to consider Recommendations have been selected based on their applicability to the City of Santa Claiita and their alnlq to meet the City's goal of trip reduction. However; some policies may be logistically challenging to implement, and may require significant diariges to Santa Clarita's current development standards 6.4.1. TDM and Non -Motorized Transportation Planner Transportation Demand Matragement strategies are complementary, and wort best if implemented consistently on a district or citywide scale Local implementation may not yield the same benefits in trip reduction Recommendations To support city-wide implementation, it is recommended that the City encourage the development of an entity to design, implement and enforce a citywide TDM program. Consider establishing a TDM and non motorized transportation planner position. This position could oversee die development of a Transportation Demand Management program, oversee the development of the bikeway, trails, paseo and sidewalk network, evaluate developer proposals, wank with City of Santa Clarita Transit and Metrolink to ensure the accessibility of transit, coordinate safe routes to schools programs and coordinate citywide education, encouragement and incentive programs to promote biking and walking 6.4.2. District and Regional Coordination Transportation Demand Management strategies are most effective if they are coordinated at the district or regional level Santa Claris may consider coordinating Transportation Demand Management by neighborhood, citywide or Valley -wide Coordination is typically overseen by a TDM program within a City government, by an independent goverment agency, or by a public-private partnership. A TDM Program serves to ensure that all land use and transportation policies are consistent in meeting the TDM goals A program may coordinate planning, evaluation and data collection, market the TDM program and respond to 6-7 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transoortation Plan concerns, provide ride matching and alternative transportation promotion, provide padang brokerage services, and provide special event transportation services In Los Angeles County, information about many of these services is provided by Metro and is accessible at W WuzCotnmuteSmartinfa The website provides numerous resources for cities and employers to use to promote and implement ridesharing, alternative commute incentives and support programs. The website also contains a regional ride matching service for all of Southern California and rewards and gift certificates for employees who rideshare, take transit, wall[ or bicycle. Recommendation Utilize and promote the regional commuter resources provided by Metro on the CommuteSmartinfo website 6.4.3. Commute Trip Reduction Program Commute Trip Reduction Programs are a combination of TDM strategies that employers implement to encourage employees to use alternatives to the single -occupancy vehicle for some or all of their commute trips Trip Reduction Programs include incentives for employees to carpool, take transit, bicycle or walk A comprehensive Trip Reduction Program can reduce trips at worksites by 5 to 200/6.5 Recommendations Encourage the Cityls largest employers to develop Trip Reduction Program that incorporate the following policies, as recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency: • A guaranteed ride home- 0 ome• At least $30 per employee per month in transit vouchers, or the full cost of transit for employees who take transit • At least $30 per employee per month in vanpool vouchers, or the full cost of travel, for employees who use a vanpool. • A telecommute policy that reduces trips by 6% or greater. • At least $30 per month, in lieu of free or subsidized padang, for employees who choose to leave their cats at home 6.4.4. Ridesharing Ridesbating includes carpooling and vanpooling. Most ridesharing programs consist of nde matching services (online, bulletin boards) and supporting policies such as preferential padang, marketing and vouchers The City of Santa Clanta's Transportation Development Plan supports ridesharing and recommends that die city consider s Comsis Corporation, Implementing Effeerim Tmml Demand Management Measurer. Imrntory ofMearms and Symbeci ofExperience, USDOT (http://nd.bts.gov/DOCS/474.htnil) and Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org), 1993. Tom Rye, "Travel Plans: Do They Work?," Tmnsport Po6'ry, Vol. 9, No. 4 (w .elsevieccom/locate/tranpol), Oct. 2002, pp. 287-298. Philip Winters and Daniel Rudge, CommateAUeneativer Edaea6ona10A*=h, National Urban Transit Institute, Center, or Urban 1=01faw Rzarcb. University of South Florida (Pampa; w .cutr.eng.usfedu), 1995. . 6-8 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking subsidizing vanpools and experimenting with new multi -occupant services such as shared-nde taxis, vanpools and bus pool Recommendations Promote Los Angeles Countys existing ridesharing service and/or develop a City -sponsored ridesharing program in combination with local businesses, and neighboring communities. The City of Santa Clanta should take advantage of the ridesharing services provided by the regional website CommuteSmartinf x This website provides ride -matching services for employees, transit trip pLuuners, traffic information, guaranteed ride home information, and information on bicycling to work. 6.4.5. Alternative Work Schedules Alternative work schedules reduce the number of commuters that are on the road during peak travel times Alternative work schedules include flex hours, in winch employees may stagger their work hours, compressed work weeks, in which employees work fewer days but longer hours, and staggered shifts, in which the stat of each shift is staggered Flextime and staggered shifts reduces peak hour congestion by shifting some trips off peak hours Compressed workweeks reduce total vehicle travel by reducing the number of days employees go to work. The City of Santa Clatita currently uses a 9/80 compressed work week City employees work 9 hours a day, with alternate Fridays off The work Friday is an eight hour day. Recommendations Continue a compressed work week schedule for City employees Encourage Santa Clarita's major employers to adopt Alternative Work Schedules such as flex hours, compressed work weeks of staggered shifts, as appropriate. 6.4.6. Guaranteed Ride Home Guaranteed Ride Home programs complement TDM programs that promote biking walling, ridesharing and public transit Through the program, employees who use an alternative mode to get to work may use the program to get home in an emergency or if they must stay at work late in Los Angeles County, CommuteSmartinfo provides information about a guaranteed ride home service for employees who commute to work by bicycle, walking or transit "Ihe program provides employees of participating Emu a fire taxi ride home (up to 75 miles) in the event of an emergency at home, illness, unexpected overtime, or if a vanshare or carpool driver has to leave early. Recommendations Consider participating in the regional guaranteed ride home program and develop and promote a guaranteed ride home policy for City employees 6-9 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Determine the feasibility of providing guaranteed ride home services through City of Santa Transjt's on -demand shuttle service Encourage employers to complement existing TDM programs with a guaranteed ride home program 6.4.7. Telecommuting Telecommuting refers to working from home whsle connected to work via the internet, phone and fax. Telecommuting can significantly reduce peak hour congestion, but may not reduce overall trips, since telecommuters may make additional trips to run errands that would otherwise be done as part of the commute trip, other family members can use the telecommuters car, or employees may move farther from their worksite Recommendations Consider adopting a telecommuting policy and support programs for its employees. Using regional resources available on CommuteSmartinfo provide information to employers that wish to establish telecommuting policies 6.4.8. Shuttle Buses Shuttle bus service can reduce the number of trips a driver makes (eg. replacing a lundnune drive to the mall to eat) or can replace driving entirely (eg providing a service to a transit station). Shuttles can also encourage employees to use alternative modes of transportation for the commute by ensuring that they will be able to get hunch or rum errands on their lunch break without the need for a vehicle. The City of Santa Clanta's TDP recommends "Wotk[r d with Santa Clatua employers to develop shuttle services to workplaces from Metrolink and/or transit centers"6 Recommendation Work with Santa Clarita employers to develop shuttle services to workplaces from Metrolink and/ or transit centers 6.4.9. Commuter Financial Incentives Employers can provide numerous financial incentives to encourage employees to commute by alternative [nodes. Two incentives are described below[ Employers who provide these transportation hinge benefits may be eligible for tax breaks under the "Commuter Choice" program in the federal tae code t Parking Cash Out Employers may provide up to $200 in parking cash -outs per employee per month as pre-tax commuter benefits. Employees who drive still receive subsidies in the form of free parking while those who choose another mode receive 6 Goal 6, Objective C, Santa Clarita Transportation Development Plan, adopted December 2006. t See http://www.commuteamarrinfo/employe[services/commuterchoice.asp for more information. . 6-10 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking the equivalent in cash. Parting cash out has been shown to reduce tops by 17% at suburban and urban worimtes in California." Transit Benefits The national Commuter Check program allows employers to provide up to $105 per employee per month in pre-tax transit vouchers A study of 1,110 Los Angeles commute trip reduction programs found that financial incentives were the most effective in reducing drive alone mode share. The implementation transit subsidies in the Los Angeles area resulted in a reduction of dove alone mode share by 3.1%9 In the City of Santa Clatita, employees may use their city identification badge to ride City of Santa Clarita Transit for fiee Recommendation If feasible, establish a parking cash -out policy for City employees who choose not to drive to -An& Provide Commuter Checks to employees who take transit other than City of City of Santa Transit Using regional resources, promote parting cash -out and transit voucher policies to local employers 6.4.10. Parking Management Padang management refers to strategies that encourage efficient use of padaug spaces, and as a result, more efficient travel A district or city-wide parking management strategy, including, in some instances, provisions to allow businesses to share parking, parking pricing, and unbundling parking from building rents, can reduce automobile trips by 10-30%. Santa Clarita is best poised to take advantage of the following parking management strategies: • Shared Parking allows motorists or businesses to share parting spats Shared paddng works best with employees that have differing peak hours For example, a restaurant and a business park may share parking This type of shared parking can reduce the total amount of parking by 40-60%.10 • The price of parting is often included in the price of leasing, renting or buying a building In Santa Clarita, budding owners are required to own or lease (for a tette of at least 20 years) the parking spaces required for their premises. (§17.18.04 A) The cost of owning or leasing this parking is then passed on to building tenants Unbundling parking from the cost of the unit and selling or renting it separately allows tenants to purchase or lease only the required number of parking spaces. • Priced parking can be used to reduce parking problems in a particular area, to reduce vehicle traffic in a particular area, to recover the costs of building a parking facility, or to generate avenue for non -parting related purposes. Pricing commuter parking and higher pricing during peak hours is effective in reducing peak use- Regulated seRegulated parking can encourage more efficient use. Generally, this strategy relies on reserving nearby parting for high-value users Examples of regulation include reserving spaces for disabled persons a Donald Shoup, "Evaluating the Effects of California's Puking Cash -out Law: Fight Case Studies," Tran port Pod"g, Vol. 4, No. 4, 1997, pp. 201-216. 9 Cambridge Systematics available at lhttp://www.vtpLorg/tdm/tdm8.h=j accessed 11 October, 2007. 10 Thomas P. Smith, Fdxible Parking Requirements, PAS Report 377, American Planning Association (Chicago; www.planning.org) 1981 6-11 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan (required by federal law), rideshating vehicles or encouraging employees to use less convenient panting spaces aRowing customers to use more proximate spaces. Public parking can be relied upon to meet paddng needs for multiple sires. It has been estimated that 100 public parking spaces can serve 150-250 private parbng space& n Santa Clarita is not cutrendy developed to take advantage of this strategy, since most padring is provided by private off-street lots and street standards prohibit or restrict on -street padring. However, some newer specific plans, most notably the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan, allow for on -street parking and public lots. The City of Santa Clarita already has some policies that reflect paddng management "best practices": The Citys Unified Development Code allows developments in commercial and industrial zones to apply for a conditional use permit to share more than 209/6 of padring (§17.18.140 C) Shared panting is allowed if business operations are not conducted during the same hours, and if a panting analysis shows that there will not be substantial conflict during peak periods of operation. Additionally; the Unified Development Code allows public and private park developments to apply for a reduction in paddng without a public hearing if the Director of Parks and Recreation determines the need for parking to be less than the standard requirements, that the reduced parking will not result in increased congestion or excess off-site parking, that no written protest has been received and that sufficient land area has been reserved to provide additional parting in the future, if needed 617.18.130 A). The Santa Clarita TDP supports parking management strategies and recommends that the city "permit a higher floor area ratio and lower parting requirements for commercial developments that provide transit facilities and subsidize shared -ride programs' And "Work with the Cuy and County to establish manDnnun panting limits for major development that is located on routes with frequent transit service' The City of Santa Clarita currently requires padting provisions for loading and unloading zones and for disabled persons. 617.18.120 and §17.18.080, respectively). Recommendations Consider developurg specific shared Ping policy for land uses in addition to commercial and industrial zoned areas For example, mixed use districts, Community Convnercial and Business part zoning designations may be able to take advantage of shared paddngwithout adversely affecting on -street vehicle flow or spilling we into adjacent panting Research the feasibility of unbundling parking costs from building rents and leases, in conjunction with a shared parting policy and development- based panting brokerage system Consider establishing public parlang lots and on -street metered padking, as appropriate, in employment, commercial and retail areas with high parting demand Community support is more likely if padring fees are implemented at appropriate locations, and if some or the entire fee is used to fund local public improvements. A packing pricing strategy should be accompanied by an outreach effort that describes alternative ways of getting to the destination and describes how local businesses and residents win benefit from the parting fees n Donald C. Shoup, "In Lieu of Required Puking," Journal of Planning Edumkon and Research, Vol. 1 S, 1999b, pp. 307-320. 6-12 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking Consider reserving preferential paddng spaces at city -aimed buildings for carpool, vanpool and other ndeshating vehicles. Encourage employers to provide reserved padung spaces 6.4.11. Car -Free Planning Car -free platrning refers to orating specific area to minimize vehicle use Examples include pedestrianonented commercial streets where driving is limited or prohibited and mixed-use downtown or residential neighborhoods where personal automobiles are unnecessary and automobile traffic is restricted The City of Santa Clarity has the opportunity to establish Car -Free sections thttwgh its Mixed -Use Overlay Zone and Special Plan Districts. Recommendations Work with residents and developers to use the Mired -Use Overlay Zone and Special Plan Districts to establish pedestimotiented communities, which provide all basic amenities within walking or hiking distance and which limit personal automobile traffic Develop a "Best Practices" pamphlet to distribute to developers who are interested in developing pedestrian -oriented communities 6.4.12. Transportation Management Association Another method of coordinating TDM strategies is through a Transportation Management Association (TMA). TMAs are private, non-profit, member- controlled organizations that provide and coordinate transportation services in a smaller area, such as a business park or a commercial district They are typically formed by neighboring businesses, and allow smaller employers to provide Commute Trip Reduction strategies similar to those offered by larger employers. TMAs are appropriate where multiple businesses are located close to each other TMA's can be funded by public dollars, revenues from padang meters or commission from selling transit passes Recommendation Work with business padc% retail centers, industrial and cotnmencial areas to support existing Transportation Managernent Associations and provide assistance in developing new TMA& 6.4.13. Evaluating TDM Strategies It is important to measure the effectiveness of TDM strategies Traditional transportation evaluation measurements, which rely on vehide-based data, may not take into account the experience of the individual consumer of the transportation system. For example, though streets in high-density areas may have lower LOS service levels, residents of these arras may have reduced overall travel times because they have closer destinations and more travel options. The City should consider alternative measurements that include factors in addition to Level of Service or delay per vehide to measure the effectiveness of TDM strategies Table 6-3 represents the overall impacts and benefits of TDM programs presented above The travel impact score reflects how well the program reduces daily and peakperiodtraffic This includes shifting traffic to off-peak commute times and to alternative modes of transportation such as public transit, bicycling, walking, as well as 6-13 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan increases tideshanng and telecommuting. The overall benefit score includes larger, societal objectives such as reducing congestion, passing on savings to roads, parlang, and consumers, increasing transportation choices, improving safety and creating more livable communities As Table &3 shows, the Transportation Demand Management strategies with the greatest impacts and societal benefits are financial incentives, trip reduction programs and parking management. Table 6-3: Effectiveness of Selected Travel Demand Management Strategies Commuter Financial Incentives Impact 0 OvetA Benefit Commute Trip Reduction Program 0 0 Parking Management (including Unbundling Parking) 9 O Shuttle Buses 0 0 Guaranteed Ride Home O O Pricing 0 0 Car -Free Planning* 0 0 Ridesharing O 0 Telecommuting O O Alternative Work Schedules O O Shared Parking** O O O = Low, O = Medium -Low, O= Medium -High, 0 = High *in a large area ** Depends on parking cost and land use impacts 6.4.14. Funding Transportation Demand Management Strategies Transportation Demand Management strategies can be funded from a variety of sources. In some cases, such as Padang fees, the strategies are self -funding Some funding mechanisms mdude: • Price paddng. Parlang revenues can be used to fund other TDM strategies, or to provide improvements to a business district that has agreed to price parking. • Transportation impact Sees. Developers may be required to pay for the transportation costs imposed by their projects. Fees can be used for public padang facilities, roadway improvements nails and sidewalks12 • Special property taxes. Neighborhoods or jurisdictions may agree to special property taxes that pay for non -motorized transportation improvements and services. • Vehicle impact mitigation fees. This is a per -vehicle registration fee that can be used to pay for non - motorized transportation facilities and TDM projects. 11 The City currently collects Bridge and Thoroughfare fees and Transit Impact fees from developers to pay for transportation infrastructure and transit improvements. s 6-14 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking Business or employee assessments. Special assessments on businesses can be used to pay for Transportation Management Associations or Commute Trip Reduction programs Fees can be based on floor area, revenues or number of employees 6.5. Land Use Policies to Promote Biking and Walking The provision of safe sidewalks and bicycle Eealities alone may not be sufficient to increase non motorized transportation mode share Land use patterns and policies, which encourage cite accommodation of bicyclists and pedestrians, are also important People are motivated to walk and bicycle for transportation when their destinations are dose by, routes of travel are interesting, safe and comfortable, and a mix of uses allows for the combination of trips for maximum convenience This section offers solutions for increasing bicycle and pedestrian trips through the implementation of land use regulations and policies, which encourage pedestrian and bicycle friendly development Santa Clarita has a vaned mix of development patterns; some encourage biking and walking, and some present challenges to these modes It can be difficult to retrofit existing development and change existing land uses to better support non motorized nansportation modes To better accommodate all transportation modes in Santa Clatita, the following strategies should be emphasized in new developments, and in selected existing neighborhood centers 6.5.3L. Clustered Development The City of Santa Clarita's General Plan currently encourages clustered development Specifically, the General Platt encourages the identification of "a primary town center and other centers which encourage pedestrian orientation and can accommodate a clustered mix of commercial, entertainment, recreation, town square/mecung place(s), multi -use completes, and multimodal transportation activity opportunities."t} Clustering higher density development in activity nodes curates a land use pattern, which supports transit and non motorized transportation because it allows infrastructure to be tied to land use development Infrastructure such as transit facilities, and on -street or off -sheet bicycle facilities can serve a high number of users traveling between or along dusters of higher -density development Clustering development into areas served by transit, bicycle and pedestrian &&ties encourages people to use these modes and serves a larger number of users Recommendation Continue to support clustered development in fugue development projects. Focus sudh development at key tra nst stops and corridor, and provide pedestrian and bicycle connections from clustered development to existing transit stops, blteways and orals. 6.5.2. Mix of Uses Santa Clatita's Municipal Code currently includes a mixed-use overlay zone designation, discussed in the previous dtaprec Within the overlay zone, pedestrian -centered mixed-use development is encouraged. Santa Clarity is also proposing a form -based (rather than use -based) zoning code for its Downtown Newhall Specific Plan. This type of zoning ordinance can be effective in encouraging pedestrianfriendlyurban design in an area without requiring a specific type of use rh City of Santa Claris General Plan Land Use Element, Policy 3.3 6-15 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transoortation Plan Encouraging new developments to mix land use types to, include housing, office and commercial uses can greatly increase the number of people who choose to walk or bicycle People tend to walk to destinations within a one- quarter mile area and bicycle to destinations within a half -mile Traditional zoning segregates land uses based on their type, creating much longer distances between taps and encouraging people to drive instead Land use mixing can be horizontal, with different types of uses located in very dose proximity, or vertical, with more than one use in the same budding An example of vertical mixing is ground floor retail with office or residential on the floors above Recommendation Continue to work with developers and residents to create new mixed-use overlay zones within the City Promote such zones at locations that are wall -served by transit, and non -motorized connections such as bikeways, paseos, sidewalks and trails 6.5.3. Connectivity In new residential developments, creating a continuous network of streets is important to increase the convenience of walking or bicycling Cul-de-sacs and street closures create barriers to people who wish to make trips by foot or bicycle- Recommendation icycle Recommendation Ensure a pedestrian and bicycle connectivity by permtttuhg cuWe-sacs only where there is no feasible connection with an adjacent street Require developers to improve and dedicate to the public accessways that connect to cul-de-sac streets, to pass through oddly shaped or unusually long blocks, to provide for networks or public paths creating access to schools, parks, shopping centers, mass transportation stops or other community services 14 6.5.4. Transit -Oriented Development The Qty of Santa Clanta has encouraged the development of transit -oriented development at the Jan Heidi Newhall Metrolink Station. Transit -oriented development concentrates high-density, mixed-use development near transit stations in order to encourage transit use Some cities have established density "thresholds," whidt specify the minimum allowable density of new development around transit stations. Other cities encourage, but do not require, higher density land uses near transit stations Because every transit oder is a pedestrian at some point during a trip, pedestrian access is essential to support transit -oriented development Recommendations Continue to support mixed-use development at the City's three Metrolink Stations, and consider expanding transit- onented development to major bus corridors and transfer points Consider establishing a Transit -Oriented District Overlay Zone- 14 one 1° Adapted from "Making Better Communities: Linking Land Use and "transportation," Association of Bay Area Governments. ® 6-16 6. Strategies to Promote Biking and Walking 6.5.5. Development Review Incorporating bicycle and pedestrian needs during development project review can ensure that all new development reflects the needs of non -motorized transportation uses Development review can be used to ensure that developers comply with non -motorized transportation requirements and recommendations, such as the City of Santa Clarita's bicycle parking ordinance which, requires bicycle parking in all new developments, and the Transportation Development Plan's recommendation that pedestrian connections to transit stops be incorporated into new developments.15 Recommendations Establish a consistent methodology for analyzing traffic impacts that evaluates the quality of the required or proposed transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities Require that Level of Service evaluations consider the impacts on bicyclists and pedestrians Require incorporation of Transportation Demand Management measures as part of project approval for large developments Within large, single parcel, commercial developments require that developers provide an on-site circulation system that minimizes the conflicts between pedestrians, bicyclists and traffic at all points of pedestrian and bicycle access to on-site paridng and building entrances 6.5.6. Sidewalk Requirements The City of Santa Clarita has several requirements for the provision of sidewalks and pedestrian walkways: The City of Santa Clatita's Unified Development Code requites the construction of midblock pedestrian ways in blocks longer than 700 feet 616.11.130). This section of code provides the City with the ability to require the dedication of pedestrian pathways connecting long blocks to surrounding roadways Providing pedestrians with shorter distances and more direct routes to destinations encourages wallbng Unified Development Code (516.17.050) requires developers to consider the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users when designing new subdivisions In order to enforce this code section uniformly, developers may be required to submit a transit and non motorized access plan with their development application. Section 17.15.060 provides minimum specifications for sidewalks and reiterates that all road improvements shall comply with the City Standards. The code dictates a minimum of 4 feet in width for all sidewalks, unless the "available portion of the highway or street is less, in which case they shall be the width specified by the City Engineer" The minimum standard of 4 feet meets the minimum requirements for the State of California. Howevet, pedestrian safety and enjoyment while using sidewalk facilities is not only contingent on the width of sidewalks Sidewalks should also provide separation and refuge fiom traffic, places to stop and rest, safe crossings, which connect to other pedestrian facilities and destinations, good visibility of oncoming traffic and wayfinding signage helprrmg pedestrians navigate to their destinations, particularly to other transportation connections, such as transit stations 15 City of Santa Cluita Unified Development Code, Section 17.03.050 6-17 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Recommendations New Development Ensure that all new developments within the City meet or exceed the Cityls requirements for sidewalk provision and non -motorized access. Work with the County of Los Angeles to ensure that future developments within unincorporated arras of the county meet or exceed Santa Clarita's requilrements for sidewalk provision. Consider adding to Section 16.17.050 of the Unified Development Code to provide more specific guidance on how developers must consider the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users Specific guidance may include orating clear, direct and pleasant pedestrian and bicycle connections between internal street networks and nearby bus stops and arterials, providing mtemal wayfinding signage to nearby trans, bikeways and transit stops, developing, printing and distributing to residents and/or employees a hiking and walling map that includes connections to the citywide bicycle and pedestrian network, and creating dear, direct and pleasant connections to surrounding paseo and sidewalk networks Retrofitting Establish a policy requiring installation of sidewalks a requirement of major modifications to existing developments. Work with developers and the County of Los Angeles to retrofit sidewalks in areas that were developed before Santa Clanta's incorporation . 6-18 7. Funding and Implementation 7. FUNDING AND IMPLEMENTATION This diapter identifies steps towards implementation of the proposed facilities of this Plan, the estimated costs for the proposed facilities and maintenance, and strategies on funding and financing Cost estimates provided in this chapter do not reflect costs of recommended programs and support facilities suds as signage, kiosks and bike parking. Planning level cost estimates for this type of work are difficult to accurately estimate and need to be developed in context with a selected location. This diapter includes the following sections: 7.1. Implementation Process provides general information about the steps needed to implement a project (Page 7-1) 7.3. Cost Breakdown presents cost estimates for individual recommended projects and maintenance (Page 7-7) 7 4 F�dinQ lists funding sources available for planning, designing and constructing recommended projects. (Page 7-13) 7.5. ImFkamentation S=wgies provides recommendations for implementing the projects identified in this Plan and outlines criteria that can be used to measure how effective the Cityls efforts are at promoting the Plans vision. (Page 7-19) 7.1. Implementation Process The City has a Capital Improvement Plan (CIIthat provides funding for capital improvements including new bicycle and pedestrian facilities as well as rehabilitation of existing facilities. The CIP is valid for a period of five years The CIP is updated every free years to address the deletion of projects that have been completed and the addition of new projects as well as dranges to budgets designated for particular improvements Bicycle and Pedestrian projects are usually funded by a combination of sources including funds from the City that is designated through the CIP process The steps required to implement the projects identified in this Plan will vary by project Many signing and striping projects can be completed by the City of Santa Clarity Department of Public Works and are exempt from CEQA requirements. Sudi projects can be implemented using City or grant funds with project level review by the Planning Commission and City Council, if required due to the visibility or importance of the project More complex projects with greater associated impacts typically include the following steps: 7-1 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 1. Preparation of a feasibility study itrvolving a conceptual design (with consideration of possible alternatives and environmental issues) and cost estimate for individual projects as needed 2. Secure, as necessary, outside funding and any applicable environmental approvals 3. Approval of the project by the City Council 4. Completion of final plans, specifications and estimates, advertising for bids, receipt of bids and award of contract(s). 5. Construction of project 7.2. Project Prioritization The intent of prioritizing projects is to identify which high-priority bicycle and pedestrian &&ties will be constructed first As projects are constructed, lower priority projects should be moved up the list The project list and individual projects outlined in Santa (lama's Non -Motorized Transportation Plan are flexible concepts that serve as implementation guidelines The high-priority project list, and perhaps the overall system and segments themselves, may change over time as a result of changing bicycling patterns, land use pattems, and implementation constraints and opportunities Santa Clarita City Staff in conjunction with community members, should review the project list at regular intervals to ensure that it reflects the most current priorities, needs, and opportunities for implementing the bicycle and pedestrian network in a logical and efficient manner. Prioritization criteria were developed to reflect the transportation benefit, regional connectivity benefit, cost, safety, benefit and feasibility of each project The ranking criteria are described in Table 7-1 The overall score of a project is the sum of individual criteria Projects are placed into three phasing groups: Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3. • >47 Points: Tier 1 projects are the highest potential bicycle and pedestrian projects and intended for near-term project implementation within 1-5 years 38-47 Points: Tier 2 projects are moderately challenging projects that can be developed within 6-10 years <38 Points: Tier 3 projects are projects that are not currently ready to be implemented, but are included as longterm potential projects over the nest 11-20 yeas A list of projects prioritized by Tiers is provided in Table 7-2. Prioritized projects do not include those projects that will be constructed as part of other development projects or are outside the City's jurisdiction (see Table 7-7). © 72 7. Funding and Implementation Table 7-i Ranking Criteria Increases use of non -motorized travel by providing access to the following destinations within 1/2 mile of the proposed project Access to Schools: 5 Access to Major Destinations: 5 Access to Parks & Recreation: 5 Access to Transit: 5 Connectivity Provides an essential link in the proposed network or provides a regional link: 10 20 This link is important as a `stand alone project, but not critical to 10 the overall system 5 This is a long-term element and potential future link 0 Cost Project can be implemented for: < $50,000 (10) 10 $50,000 - $1,000,000 (5) > $1,000,000 (0) Safety Project is expected to improve non -motorized safety greatly (10) Project is expected to improve non -motorized safety somewhat (5) 10 Proiect is expected to improve non -motorized safetv minimallv (2) Project requires further study but is likely to be advanced (5) 10 Project is feasible and ready for implementation (10) Multiple Use Bicyclists: 8 Pedestrians / Runners: 8 20 Equestrian: 4 Maximum score 80 7-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Table 7-z Projects byTier Road Improvements L V .11 1 V 1 V J L V V 1 L1GL 1 Rye Canyon Road Class II Bike Lanes 10 10 10 10 10 8 58 Tier 1 Avenue Tibbitts Class II Bike Lanes 10 5 10 10 10 8 53 Tier I Plum Canyon Road Class II Bike Lanes 10 5 10 10 10 8 53 Tier I Sierra Highway Class III Bike Route 15 10 10 10 0 8 53 Tier 1 Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Intersection 10 5 8 48 Tier 1 Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail Intersection 15 Road Improvements 10 10 10 10 5 8 53 Tier 1 Valley St Class III Bike Route 15 10 5 5 10 8 53 Tier 1 Newhall Ranch Road Class I Bike Path 10 10 5 5 5 16 51 Tier 1 Commuter Way and Soledad Canyon Road Intersection 5 5 10 10 5 16 51 Tier 1 20 Improvements 10 5 8 48 Tier 1 Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail Intersection 15 Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail Intersection 5 5 10 10 5 16 51 Tier 1 Improvements Walnut Street — Main Street Bike Boulevard Class III Bike Route 15 5 10 2 10 8 50 Tier 1 Whites Canyon Road Class II Bike Lanes 10 5 5 10 10 8 48 Tier 1 Sierra Highway Class III Bike Route 15 10 5 10 0 8 48 Tier 1 Sidewalk Gap Closure Industrial Center Pedestrian Program 10 10 0 10 10 8 48 Tier 1 High Visibility Crosswalk Installation Pedestrian Program 20 0 5 10 5 8 48 Tier 1 Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail Intersection 15 0 10 2 5 16 48 Tier 1 Via Princessa (Golden Valley Road to Lost Class II Bike Lanes 10 10 10 5 5 8 48 Tier 1 0 7-4 7. Funding and Implementation Canyon Road) Lost Canyon Road (Via Princessa to Class II Bike Lanes 10 10 10 5 5 8 48 Tier 1 Golden Valley Road (Green Mountain Class I Bike Path 10 5 0 5 5 16 41 Tier 2 South Fork Trail Extension (Orchard Village Road to Lyons Avenue) Class I Bike Path 5 10 0 10 5 16 46 Tier 2 Road to east of CA -14) Class III Bike Route 5 5 10 2 10 8 40 Tier 2 Espuella Drive Class III Bike Route 10 5 10 2 10 8 45 Tier 2 Placerita Canyon Road Class III Bike Route 10 10 5 2 10 8 45 Tier 2 Sierra Highway Class II Bike Lanes 10 10 5 10 0 8 43 Tier 2 Lyons Avenue/PeachLtnd Avenue Intersection 10 0 10 10 5 8 43 Tier 2 Lyons Avenue/Avenue Rotella Intersection 10 0 10 10 5 8 43 Tier 2 Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail Class I Bike Path 10 5 0 5 5 16 41 Tier 2 South Fork Trail Extension (Orchard Village Road to Lyons Avenue) Class I Bike Path 10 5 5 5 0 16 41 Tier 2 Wiley Canyon Road Class III Bike Route 5 5 10 2 10 8 40 Tier 2 Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Trail - South Class I Bike Path 5 5 5 2 5 16 38 Tier 2 Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Trail - Center Class I Bike Path 10 5 0 2 5 16 38 Tier 2 Santa Clara River Trail (Existing path to Golden Valley Road) Class I Bike Path 5 10 0 2 5 16 38 Tier 2 McBean Parkway/Creekside Drive Intersection Improvements 10 0 10 5 5 8 38 Tier 2 aanta I,tara Mver Irau (south sloe of river, Class I Bike Path 10 5 0 5 0 16 36 Tier 3 excludine Vista Canvon imnrovements) aanta vara tuver f ran kuotaen vaney Class I Bike Path 5 5 0 2 5 16 33 Tier 3 Road to Canyon View Drive) 7-5 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Sand Canyon Road Class III Bike Route 0 5 10 5 5 8 33 Tier 3 Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Trail - North Class I Bike Path 5 5 0 2 5 16 33 Ties 3 Newhall Creek (Market Street to Sietta Class I Bike Path 15 0 0 2 0 16 33 Tier 3 Highway) Newhall Creek Bike Path (Newhall Avenue Class I Bike Path 5 0 0 2 5 16 28 Tier 3 to Sierra Highway) South Fork Trail (east side) — connection to existing path (Magic Mountain Parkway Class I Bike Path 5 0 0 2 0 16 23 Tier 3 planned extension to Via Princessa planned extension) Q 7-6 7. Fundina and 7.3. Cost Breakdown 7.3.1. Cost Summary This plan recommends the City fund a total of 17.3 miles of new Class I Bike Paths, 6.7 miles of new Class 11 bake lanes, and 15.7 miles of Class III Bike Routes' Recommendations for City -funded pedestrian facilities include improvements at nine intersections, a high -visibility crossing program, and a sidewalk gap closure program. The total cost of constructing the recommended bicycle projects is estimated at $31.4 million dollars and the estimated cost of the pedestrian projects is estimated at $6.8 million dollars A summary of improvement costs is provided in Table 7- 3 and Table 74. Improvement costs for individual projects are provided in Table 7-5 and Table 7-6. Unless otherwise noted, cost estimates are based on per -mile averages of bikeway construction in California Estimates include 15% for survey and design work, 20% for contingency and 209/o for construction aclimmitration. Cost estimates are in 2012 dollars Cost estimates are planning level, and do not include feasibility, environmental clearance or acquisition costs Projectspecificfactors such as grading, landscaping, intersection modificiroo, right-of- way acquisition, and bridge construction may increase the actual cost of construction, sometimes significantly. Table 7-3 Cost Summary of Class I Bicycle Path 17.3 $1,400,0002 $30,780,000 ss II Bicycle Lane 6.7 $40,000 $268,000 Class III Bicycle Route - $25,000 $352,500 Standard 14.1 Class III Bicycle Route — Bike 1.6 $30,000 $48,000 Boulevard Pedestrian Improvements not applicable not applicable $6,766,000 Total 39.7 $38,214,500 Nom: Can=in2012 &J= Cost Table 7-4 Tier 1 $1,686,500 Tier 2 t)a MR nnn Tier 3 $12,460,000 Total $38,214,500 Mileage does not match that presented in Chapter 5 as it excludes projects that will be constructed as part of other development projects. 3 Based on cost to construct the Iron Horse Trail 7-7 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan All the projects are recommended for implementation over the neat twenty years However, due to the unpredictability of funding sources, economy and community support, some projects, especially those that require rightof-ofpurchase or coordination with multiple jurisdictions, may not be completed within the neat twenty years A description of available funding sources is provided at the end of this chapter. This total cost of projects does not include cost estimates for projects that will be funded as part of future road construction or private development projects Projects associated with future road construction and private development are listed in Table 7-7. M Two bicyclists cross McBean Parkway near the A mother and son walk along the Chuck Pontius South Fork Trail. Commuter Trail nearthe intersection of Soledad Canyon Road and Golden Oak Road. © 7-8 Table 7-5 Facilities: Planning Level Construction Cost Estimates and Implementation Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Trail - South Class I Bike Path 0.4 $560,000 Tier 2 Bouquet Canyon Road Creek Trail - Center Class I Bike Path 0.9 $1,260,000 Tier2 Bouquet Canyon Road Creek 1.8 $2,520,000 Tier 3 Mountain Road to east of CA - 14) Class I Bike Path 0.9 $1,260,000 Tier 2 McBean Road Bridge Upgrade Class I Bike Path 0.1 $6,700,000 Tier 2 Includes bridge widening Newhall Creek (Market Street to Sierra Highway) Class I Bike Path 1.6 $2,240,000 Tier 3 Newhall Creek Bike Path (Newhall Avenue to Sierra Highway) Class I Bike Path 1.9 $2,660,000 Tier 3 Newhall Ranch Road Class I Bike Path 0.3 $420.000 Tier 1 Railroad Avenue Rail with Trail Class I Bike Path 1.3 $1,820,000 Tier 2 Santa Clara River Trail (west) Class I Bike Path 1.6 $2,240,000 Tier 2 Santa Clara River Trail (west - center) Class I Bike Path 1.5 $2,100,000 Tier 2 Santa Clara River Trail (portion of southeast) (south side of river, excluding Vista Canyon improvements) Class I Bike Path 2.3 $3,220,000 Tier 3 South Fork Trail (east side) — connection to existing path (Magic Mountain Parkway planned extension to Pia Princessa planned extension) Class I Bike Path 1.3 $1,820,000 Tier 3 Along flood control channel South Fork Trail Extension (Orchard Village Road to Lyons Class I Bike Path 0.7 $980,000 Tier 2 Along flood control channel 7-9 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Avenue Tibbitts Class II Bike Lanes 0.9 $36,000 Tier I Plum Canyon Road Class II Bike Lanes 0.5 $20,000 Tier 1 Espuella Drive Class III Bike Route 0.5 $12,500 Tier 2 This segment only includes the portion Whites Canyon Road Class II Bike Lanes 1.9 $76,000 Tier 2 of the road within City limits Rye Canyon Road Class II Bike Lanes 0.3 $12,000 Tier I Sierra Highway Class II Bike Lanes 1.7 $68,000 Tier 2 Time -restricted bike lanes. Via Princessa Class II Bike Lanes 0.5 $20,000 Tier I Lost Canyon Road Class II Bike Lanes 0.9 136.000 Tier I Section between Via Princessa and Espuella Drive Class III Bike Route 0.5 $12,500 Tier 2 Valley St Class III Bike Route 1.0 $25,000 Tier I Placenta Canyon Road Class III Bike Route 2.3 $57,500 Tier 2 Sand Canyon Road Class III Bike Route 3.3 $82,500 Tier 2 Sierra Highway Class III Bike Route 4.9 $122,500 Tier 2 Section between Via Princessa and Soledad Canyon Road is physically constrained and will require additional study and work to bring up to bike route standards. Additional work not included Sierra Highway Class III Bike Route 0.9 $22,500 Tier 1 in cost. Average bike boulevard cost per mile Walnut Street — Main Street Bike used is $30,000; cost vanes by level of Boulevard Class III Bike Route 1.6 $48.000 Tier 2 treatment Wiley Canyon Road Class III Bike Route 1.2 $30,000 Tier 2 tal Bike Routes' 0 7-10 and Table 7-6 Recommended Pedestrian Facilities: Planning Level Construction Cost Estimates Sidewalk Gap Closure Industrial Center Pedestrian Program $6,300,000 Tier 2 Phase 1, Avenue Scott: $2.0 million Phase 2, Rye Canyon: $1.4 million Phase 3, Avenue Stanford, $1.1 million Phase 4, Aaza Drive and Avenue Tibbitts, $1.8 million High Visibility Crosswalk Installation Pedestrian Program $300,000 Tier 2 At major arterial -arterial intersections. Sidewalk Gap Closure McBean Parkway Pedestrian Program $400,000 Tier 2 McBean Parkway/Creekside Drive Intersection Improvements $15,000 Tier 2 Lyons Avenue/Peachland Avenue Intersection Improvements $10,000 Tier 2 Lyons Avenue/Avenue Rotella Intersection Improvements $10,000 Tier 2 Railroad Avenue with Trail Intersection Improvements $16,000 Tier 2 At 15f Street Seco Canyon Road and Bouquet Canyon Road Intersection Improvements $14,000 Tier 1 Commuter Way and Soledad Canyon Road Intersection Improvements $30,000 Tier 1 Chuck Pontius Commuter Rail Trail Intersection Improvements $20,000 Tier 1 At Reuther Ave and Rainbow Glen Dr Golden Oak Road and Soledad Canyon Road Intersection Improvements $51,000 Tier 1 GRAND TOTAL 7-11 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Table 7-7 Associated with Future Road Construction, Development or Outside City Jurisd ict ion Santa Clara River Trail 1.5 Section between Bouquet Canyon Road and (northeast) Class I Bike Path River Park. Future Development Santa Clara River Trail 0.5 Short Spur near Santa Clarita Metrolink (center) Class I Bike Path Station. Santa Clara River Trail Future Development (portion of southeast) Class I Bike Path 1'2 Vista Canvon improvements. (planned) Class I Bike Path 1'1 Plum Canyon Road to Newhall Ranch Road Maeic Mountain Parkwav Class I Bike Path 2.4 Road Extension North-South Connector Class I Bike Path 0'4 Could be condition from developer of mall Via Princessa Extension (east and west) Class I Bike Path 2.6 Road Extension nuau wwcmng. Sand Canyon Class I Bike Path 0'6 North of Soledad Canyon Road Class II Bike Shadow Pines Lanes 0'9 County Jurisdiction Dockweiler Drive Class II Bike Extension Lanes 1'4 Road Extension Class II Bike 0.9 Road Widening Copper Hill Bike Lanes Lanes Gap connector. City project- Valencia roject Valencia Town Center Class II Bike 0.4 _North-South Connector Lanes Could be condition from developer of mall Copper Hill Drive (Haskell Class II Bike 1.3 Canvon Rd to David Wav) Lanes Road 7.3.2. Maintenance Costs The existing and recommended bikeway network is predominately made up of bike paths, which require regular maintenance and repair as needed On street bikeways are maintained as part of the normal roadway maintenance program and extra emphasis should be put on keeping the bike lanes and roadway shoulders clear of debris and keeping vegetation overgrowth from bloddng visibility or creeping into the roadway. The other typical maintenance costs for the bikeway network, as shown in Table 7-8, Cost Estimates for Recommended Networic Ten -Year Operations and Maintenance include the maintenance of signage, striping and stencils. 0 7-12 7. Funding and Implementation The total annual budget increase related to bikeway maintenance cost is estimated to be about $270,000 per year, and approximately $3.7 miDion over ten years, assuming all of the projects proposed in this Plan are implemented; Maintenance costs also assume that the Ctty will maintain privately funded trails and bikeways, and therefore include the bikeways listed in Table 7-7. Table 7-8 Cost Estimates for Recommended Network: Ten -Year Operations and Maintenance and debris and removal of Class I $8.500 Miles/Year 27.6 Class II $2.000 Miles/Year 11.6 $23.200 replacement as Jign and shared use stencil replacement as Class III $1,000 Miles/Year 15.7 $15,700 needed Avg. Cost/Year $273,500 10 -year cost includes one time cost of pavement seal coat at $10,000 per mile for class I bikeways and estimates inflation rates calculated using conversion factor of 1.282. Est. 10 -Year Cost Cost does not include patching and repair as (2016 dollars) $3,782,270 these vary significantly by trail 7.4. Funding There are a variety of potential fimding sources indudi g local, state, regional, and federal funding programs as well as private sector funding that can be used to construct the proposed bicycle and pedestrianimprovements. Most of the federal, state, and regional programs are competitive and involve the completion of extensive applications with clear documentation of the project need, costs, and benefits Local funding for bicycle projects typically comes from Transportation Development Act (IDA) funding which is prorated to each County based on the return of gasoline M= 7.4.1. Federal Funds The passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act PTEA) in 1991 signaled a major change to allocation of federal funding for transportation projects. As the fist federal legislation after the completion of the Interstate Highway System, ISIEA presented an intermodal approach to transportation planning and funding, ping additional control to the country's Metropolitan Planning Organizations ISTEA and subsequent transportation legislation, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (IEA -21) (1998) and the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act, a Legacy for Users (8A MM AJ4 (2005), have allocated dedicated funding for transit, bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs Bicycle and pedestrian projects are funded at a very small 3 Includes projects not prioritized since the City will take over maintenance responsibilities even if bikeways are constructed as part of larger development projects. 7-13 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan percentage compared to highway projects, but SAFFTEA-LU provided broader eligibility regwrenents than previous acts that allow bicycle and pedestrian projects to qualify for traditional "highway' funding. On June 29, 2012 a new transportation bill, MAP -21, was passed that has many changes to the funding of bicycle and pedestrian projects. SAFEIEA-LU, the previous legislation, contained dedicated programs including Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School, and Recreational Trails, which were all commonly tapped sources of funding to make non -motorized improvements nationwide. MAP -21 combines these programs into a single source called Transportation Alternatives.' At the time of publication of this plan, these funding mednatvsms are new, and it will take some time to fully understand all of the implications of MAP -21 and to get this new program up and running MAP -22 Funds According to the F IWA, MAP -21's Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) "provides funding for programs and projects defined as transportation alternatives, including on and off-road pedestrian and bicycle facilities, infiast ochre projects for improving nondriver access to public transportation and enhanced mobility, community improvement activities, and environmental mitigation; recreational trail program projects; safe routes to school projects; and projects for the plarnrrg, design or construction of boulevards and other toadvamys largely in the right- of-way of former Interstate System routes or other divided highways"4 Nationwide, MAP -21 provides States $808,760,000 in fiscal year 2013 and $819,900,000 in fiscal year 2014, totaling to $1,628,660,000 over the two-year lifetime of the hill. This is a reduction in funding from $12 billion annually, a reduction of approximately one third California's TAP funding can be calculated by dividing the nationwide ental based on its proportionate share of funding from the Transportation Enhancements program in fiscal year 2009. Additionally, states may `opt-ouf of up to 50 percent of the funding and use it for other projects. If California decides to optout, this will result in a reduction in dedicated finding for transportation alternative related improvements by up to two-thitds when compared to 2011 levels For most TAP projects, including Safe Routes to School, the Federal share is 80 percent Federal and the State share is 20 percent (or local match with a sliding scale). This represents an increase in local match from prior finding sources. More information on TAP, including eligible activities, can be found at http://wwwflTwa.dotgov/map21 /guidance/guidetapcfin 7.4.2. Statewide Funding Sources The State of California uses both federal sources and its own budget to fund pedestrian projects and programs In some cases, such as Safe Routes to School, Office of Traffic Safety, and F.mtirontnental Justice grants, project sponsors apply directly to the State for funding In others, sponsors apply to a regional agency Recreational Trails Proaram (RTP mLwwfhwa.dotgov/environment/rec=ls /indemhtm hhW: / /wmQarkscagov /mages / 1008 / files /rtpguide�df In California, RTP funds are administered by the California State Padts Department Recreational Trails Program funds may be used for the following. 4http://www.ffi a.dot.gov/map2l/guidance/guidetap.cfrn ® 7-14 7. Funding and Implementation • Maintenance and restoration of existing trails; • Purchase and lease of trail construction and maintenance equipment; • Construction of new trails; • Acquisition of easements or property for trails; and • Operation of educational programs to promote safety and environmental protection related to trails (limited to five percent of a State's funds). $2.1 million statewide was available in fiscal year 2011. Under MAP -21, RTP funding is a set-aside from the TAP. Unless the Governor opts out in advance, an amount equal to the State's FY 2009 RTP apportionment is to be set aside from the State's TAP funds for recreational trails projects.5 Land and Water Conservation Fund wunvpadts.ca.gov/?page id=21360 The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a federal program that provides grants for planning and acquiring outdoor recreation areas and facilities, including trails. The Fund is administered by the California State Parks Department and has been reauthorized until 2015. Cities, counties and districts authorized to acquire, develop, operate and maintain park and recreation facilities are eligible to apply Applicants must fund the entire project, and will be reimbursed for 50 percent of costs Property acquired or developed under the program must be retained in perpetuity for public recreational use. The grant process for local agencies is competitive, and sixty percent of grants are reserved for Southern California Approximately $1.7 million is available annually statewide Active Transportation Program hap://www.dotca.poa / hg/LocaMmgrams / aW /indexhtml On September 26, 2013, Governor Brown signed legislation orating the Active Transportation Program (ATP) in the Department of Transportation (Senate Bill 99, Chapter 359 and Assembly Bill 101. Chapter 354). The ATP consolidates existing federal and state transportation programs, including the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and State Safe Routes to School (SR2S), into a single program with a focus to make California a national leader in active transportation. The ATP administered by the Division of Intal Assistance, Office of Active Transportation and Special Programs. The purpose of ATP is to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation by achieving the following goals: Increase the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and wallting, Increase safety and mobility for non -motorized users, Advance the active transportation efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals, s http://www.ffiwa.dot.gov/map2l/gaidmce/guidetap.cfm 7-15 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Enhance public health, Ensure that disadvantaged communities fully share in the benefits of the program, and Provide a broad spectrum of projects to benefit many types of active transportation users. Environmental Justice: Context Sensitive Planning Grants b=://www.dotca.ga&q/tpp/offices/QW/Oandddevih The Caltrans -administered Environmental Justice: Context Sensitive Planning Grants Program funds planning activities that assist low-income, minority, and Native American communities in becoming active participants in transportation planning and project development Grants are available to transit districts, cities, counties, and tribal governments This grant is funded by the State Highway Account at $1.5 million annually statewide Grants are capped at $250,000. Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grants ham://www.omca.ga/Grants/Program lnformuion/defaultasp The California Office of Traffic Safety distributes federal funding apportioned to California under MAP -21. Grants are used to establish new traffic safety programs, expand ongoing programs to address defidencies in current programs Bicycle and pedestrian safety are included in the list of traffic safety priority areas Eligible grantees include governmental agencies, state colleges and state universities, local city and county government agencies, school districts, fire departments, and public emergency services providers Grant funding cannot replace existing program expenditures, nor can traffic safety funds be used for program maintenance, rm=d>, rehabilitation, or construction. Grants are awarded on a competitive basis, and priority is given m agencies with the greatest need Evaluation criteria to assess these needs include potential traffic safety impact, collision statistics and rankings, seriousness of problems, and performance on previous OTS grants Grant funding amounts through OTS vary by fiscal year. 7.4.3• Regional Funding Sources Regional bicycle and pedestrian grant programs come from a variety of sources, including federal transportation funding, the State budget, and sales taxes Regional funds are administered by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. TDA Article a hap://www.metranet/pro ects/TDA/ Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds are available for transit, bicycle and pedestrian projects in California According to the Act; pedestrian and bicycle projects are allocated two percent of the revenue from a'/< cent of the general state sales tax, which is dedicated to local transportation. These fimds are collected by the State, returned to each county based on sales tax revenues, and typically apportioned to areas within the county based on population. Eligible pedestrian and bicycle projects include construction and engineering for capital projects; maintenance of bikeways; bicycle safety education programs; and development of comprehensive bicycle or pedestrian facilities plans. A city or county is allowed to apply for funding for bicycle or pedestrian plans not more than once every five years These funds may be used to meet local match requirements for federal funding sources 0 7-16 7. Funding and Implementation Metro Cal I for Projects hW://wwwmetrnnet/ ects/call projects/ Metro programs a variety of federal, state, and local revenues to regionally significant projects in the Transportation Improvement Program for Los Angeles County through a competitive "Call for Projects" Projects that create benefits for bicycle transportation can be funded, if eligible and competitive, through three modal categories: 1) Regional Bikeways and Pedestrian Improvements, 2) Transportation Demand Management, and 3) Transportation Enhancement Metro accepts Call for Projects applications every other yeas Proposition A ://wwwmetronet/pmjects/local return pgmZ In 1980, Los Angeles County residents voted to establish a half -cent sales tax dedicated to transportation funding One-fourth of the fiords go to Local Return Programs. The monies help these entities develop and improve local public transit, paratransit, and related transportation itnfiastmcnrre. Proposition C 2o% Local Return 1 w://wwwmetmnet/ r(ects/local return ggtn/ These revenues are generated from L.A. County's '/z ccnt sales tax for public transit purposes. Funds can be used for congestion management programs, bikeways and bike lanes, transit- related TDM programs, street improvements supporting public transit service and related services to meet the Federal requirements for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Metro is required tc distnbute Local Return funds directly w the cities on a per capita basis To expend the Prop C 201/6 funds, local jurisdictions must submit forts for Metro approvaL Measure R b-V://www.metmnet/pMem/local return pgtn/ In 2008, Los Angeles County voters approved a half -cent sales tax to finance new transportation projects and programs, and accelerate many of those already in process Metro estimates that Measure R wall result in $40 biDion toward congestion relief and transportation improvements throughout the Los Angeles County over the next 30 years Bicycle and pedestrian projects are eligible uses of Measure R funds 7.4.4• Non -Traditional Funding Sources Adopt -A -Trail Programs Adopt-A-Tral Programs can be used to fund new construction, renovation, trail brochures, informational kiosks and other amenities These programs can also be extended to include sponsorship of trail segments for maintenance needs. Integration into Larger Projects California State's "routine accommodation" policies require Caltrans to desrgt, construct, operate, and maintain transportation facilities using best practices for pedestrians and bicyclists Local jurisdictions can begin to expect that some portion of bicycle and pedestrian project costs, when they are built as part of larger transportation projects, will be covered in project construction budgets This applies to Caltrans and other transportation facilities, such as new Metrolink stations 7-17 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Community Development Block Grants www.hudgm/offices/Wd/coffimunadcyei The CDBG program provides money for stteetscape revitalization, which may be largely comprised of bicycle and pedestrian improvements Federal Community Development Block Grant Grantees may use CDBG funds for activities that include (but are not limited to) acquiring real property; budding public facilities and improvements, such as streets, sidewalks, and recreational faclities; and planning and administrative expenses, such as costs related to developing a consolidated Plan and managing CDBG funds The City of Santa Oniita receives CDBG Entitlement funds annually from the US. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The 2012-2013 CDBG entitlement allocation is $1,083,757. Requirements for New Development With the increasing support for "routine accommodation" and "complete streets," requirements for new development, road widening, and new commercial development provide opportunities to construct pedestrian and bicycle facilities more efficiently. Impact Fees One potential local source of fanclingis develops impact fres, typically tied to trip generation rates and traffic impacts produced by a proposed project The City of Santa Clarita currently collects Bridge and Thoroughfare Fees and Transit Impact fees fiorn developers to provide necessary infrastructure and trarhsit-related improvements. Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act The Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act was passed by the Legislature in 1982 in response to reduced funding opportunities brought about by the passage of Proposition 13. The Mello -Roos Act allows any county, city, special district, school district, or joint power of authority to establish a Community Facility District (CFD) for the purpose of selling tax-exempt bonds to fund public improvements within that district CFDs must be approved by a two- thirds margin of qualified voters in the district Property owners within the district are responsible for paying back the bonds Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are eligible for funding under CFD bonds Bikes Belong Grant Bikes Belong provides grants for up to $10,000 with a 509/6 match that recipients may use towards paths, bridges and parks. Grant applications are due several times per year, Communitv Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE n=;i iwwwroa.u,��/ care/care The US EPA administers this giant program to help communities organize and take action to reduce toxic pollution in their local environments Applicants must fall within the statutory terms of EPA's research and demonstration grant authorities. CARE request for proposals were not issued in 2012. 0 7-18 and 7.5. Implementation Strategies The Non -Motorized Transportation Plan provides the long-term vision for the development of a citywide biking and walking network that can be used by all residents for all types of trips. Implementation of the Plan will take place in small steps over many years The following strategies, action items and measures of effectiveness are provided to guide the City toward the vision identified in the plan. 7.5.1. Strategy 1: Establish Implementation Responsibility The Non -Motorized Transportation Plan recommends the establishment of a Non -Motorized Transportation Planner position (hill or part-time) within the City to implement and update the Plan. Fstablishment of this position is contingent on available funding Action Item: The City shall determine the duties, time required and departmental affiliation for a Non -Motorized Transportation planner Once determined, the City shall pursue funding for the position and hire or assign duties as appropriate- 7.5.2. ppropriate 7.5.2. Strategy z: Strategically Pursue Infrastructure Projects City staff should strategically pursue infrastructure projects. Ideally, City staff should pursue capital improvements funding or grant funding for high-priority bicycle and pedestrian improvements fust However, if grant requirements, or construction in conjunction with another roadway project make construction of a lower priority project possible, then the City should pursue funding sources for that project regardless of priority. Additionally, regardless of the priority placed upon a bicycle or pedestrian project, it is intended that an approved bicycle or pedestrian project be installed simultaneous to road improvements projects scheduled in the same area Action Item: At the end of eadi fiscal year, City shall publish a public report documenting the status and ongoing actions for all bicycle and pedestrian projects. This report may be combined with the prioritization review discussed below First update due July 2013. 7.5.3• Strategy 3: Regularly Revisit Project Prioritization Projects have been prioritized based on transportation benefit, regional connectivity benefit, cost, safety and feasibility This list should be reviewed every fiscal year, with new projects added, completed projects removed, and the priorities revised as conditions change- Action hange Action Item: Annual review and update of non -motorized transportation plan project list Updated list to be shared with the public First update due July 2013. 7.5.4• Strategy 4: Update the Plan While this Plan is intended to guide Santa Clarita's non -motorized transportation planning for the next 20 years, it should be reviewed and updated on a regular basis. To be eligible for State Bicycle Transportation Account funding, the bicycle portion of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan should be updated every five years Other components of the Plan should be reviewed every five years and updated as needed 7-19 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Action Item: Update BTA Compliance Document every five years, starling in 2018. Other elements of the Plan shall be reviewed and updated as needed 7.5.5• Strategy 5: Establish Measures of Effectiveness Measures of effectiveness are used as a qualitative way to measure the City; progress toward implementing the Non - Motorized Transportation Plan. Well crafted measures of effectiveness measure progress toward meeting an agreed- upon goal, include measurable indicators of progress, and include time -sensitive targets for the City to meet Table 7-9, Potential Measures of Effectiveness describes several measures that the City may consider These measures were developed for the 2008 plan based on known baseline conditions and have been updated for this plan. The City has met or made progress towzrd meeting several benclmmadrs since adoption of the 2008 plan: • The City has increased the mileage of Class I bike paths, Class 11 bike lanes, and Class III bike routes • Nearly all elementary schools are parnopatingin the Safe Routes to School Program • The T ag e of American Bicyclists designated Santa Clarita as a bronze level Bicycle Friendly Community • Reduction in bicycle and pedestrian collisions by 2010 • The City has received grant funding each year through Safe Routes m School, Metro, and Caltrans Goal targets, when given, are developed based on reasonable expectations within the time fume. As new baseline information is discovered as conditions change, and as the City implements more of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan, the measures of effectiveness should be reevaluated, revised and updated The City should regularly review the progress made toward these targets, preferably on an annual or biennial basis. The City of Santa Monica has been using measures of effectiveness C indicators') since 1994 to measure the progress the City has made toward becoming sustainable. Santa Clarita should consider reviewing Santa Monica's sustainability report card and sustainability indicators as a guide for developing their own non motorized measures of effectiveness Santa Monica provides its Sustainable City Report Curl online at http://wwvzsmgovnet/Depamnents/OSE/categories/sustmmbihtyaspx 0 7-20 7. Funding and Implementation Table 7-9 Potential Measures of Effectiveness 8% bike to truissit 3%bike to school 14% bike to go shopping 5% V, -A to work 10% walk to transit 6% walk to school 27% walk to go stir By 2018 increase the percentage of people who bike and walk for utilitarian purposes by 50% Trail use Benchmark data to be established Double recreational trail use by 2018. City should conduct regular counts Increase comrmiter/utilta= trail use with an obicenve sampin z rnednod by 50%bv 2018. tllilic attitudes about WAUmg and The Wil/ O -Ane Biking and'Yfflang Increasempostme attitudes about — Wang in Santa M.. v. Survey provides some inforrnation, wAang and•.• about but .'w. geared toward .• m atubades of .. • • .walluers and nori-walliers should be developed 36.4 and routes 24.4 miles of bike lanes Proportion of Arterial Streets with Bike Innes Percentage of Sdnools with Safe Routes to Schools Progruns Independent recopvtion of Non - Motorized Transportation Planning 5.4 miles of bike routes Benclunark data to be established 27 out of 28 Elementary Schools Designated bronze level Bicycle Friendly Community by League of 2009:37 bike, 42 pedestrian 2010: 23 brake, 29 pedestrian S"m SIP= ONO" Grant funding received for Non- 2007: $1,070,000 (Bicycle Receive an annual average of $400,000 Motorized Transportation Projects Transportation Account, Safe Routes or more in non -motorized to School) transportation grunts. Evaluate every 2009:$1,003,063 (Safe Routes to five years School, Bxyck Transportation Account, Metro Cal for Projects) 7-21 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan School) 2012 $450,000 (Safe Routes to School) Pemmmge of conunututywith access Baseline to be established 90% of residents five widiln'/z mile to trail or paseo of a paseo or bicycle &chty by 2028. 0 7-22 8. Safe Routes to School 8. SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL The City of Santa Clarta began its Safe Routes to School efforts during the development of the first Non -Motorized Transportation Plan, between 2006 and 2008. Since then, the City has successfully funded Safe Routes efforts through state and federal grant sources, and just concluded a pilot education and encouragement program in 2011. This chapter explains Safe Routes to School concepts and summarizes the work the City has undertaken since 2006. The chapter consists of the following sections: 8.1 Introduction identifies the aspects of a Safe Routes to School Program. (Page 8-1) 8.2 Santa Clattta's Safe Routes to SchoolProgram describes the improvements made as part of die citywide program established in 2008. (Page 8-2) 8.3 School Prioritization explains the school tanking criteria and prioritizes middle and high schools to compete for grant funding (Page 8-5) 8.4 Elementary School Walk Audit Notes presents recommended improvements for elementary schools that have not yet been awarded grant funding (Page 8-9) 8.5 T guor High and High School Notes presents information about walling and biking at junior high and high schools (Page 8-19) 8.6 Next Stens describes the City is future plans for the Safe Routes to School Program. (Page 8-21) 8.1. Introduction Safe Routes to School (SR2S) refers to a variety of multi -disciplinary programs aimed at promoting walking and bicycling to school, and improving traffic safety around school areas through education, incentives, increased law enforcement, and engineering measures. Safe Routes to School programs typically involve partnerships among municipalities, school districts, community and parent volunteers, and law enforcement agencies. The City of Santa Clarity has been successful in working with school districts and parents to identify, fund, and construct infrastructure improvements and implement education and encouragement programs throughout the city. Comprehensive Safe Routes to School programs use five complementary strategies, referred to as the "Five E's": Engineering—Design, implementation and maintenance of signing, striping, and infrastructure improvements designed to improve the safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists along school commute routes. Enforcement— Strategies to deter the unsafe behavior of drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians and encourage all road users to obey traffic laws and share the road. 8-1 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Encouragement– Special events, dubs, contests and ongoing activities that encourage more walking, bicycling, or carpooling through fun and incentives Education – Educational programs that teach students bicycle, pedestrian and traffic safety skrlfs, and teach drivers how to share the road safely. Evaluation – Strategies to determine which programs are most effective and identify ways to improve programs 8.2. Santa Clarita's Safe Routes to School Program In 2007, during development of Santa Clanta's first Non -Motorized Transportation Plan, the City began Safe Routes to School programs in earnest The City used land use, socioeconomic, and transportation data to score and rank all public elementary schools within the city limits The highest scoring school from Newhall Unified School District and Sulphur Springs Unified School District•, and the top two schools from Saugus Unified School District were selected to receive walk audits. Infrastructure improvements identified in the walk audit were incorporated into the Non - Motorized Transportation Plan and have been constructed. In 2008, the City of Santa Clanta received a State of California Safe Routes to School grant and expanded the program to cover all 27 of the City's public elementary schools The expansion allowed the City to conduct walk audits at the remaming elementary schools, and to provide education and encouragement programming at four pilot schools The education and encouragement progrannning is described in the next section. In 2012, the City conducted three additional walk audits at elementary schools in unincorporated Los Angeles County that would become City jurisdiction as the result of annexation later in the year The City has been worldng down the prioritized list of schools to apply for grant funding to construct inSasttucture improvements. Each grant cycle, three schools are selected—me from each of the three school districts. For six consecutive years, the City has been awarded State or Federal Safe Routes to School funding to implement the infrastructure improvements Table 8-1 describes the improvements implemented at each school through funding received. Table 8-1: mwycpm�uonema�y mnw� �: �,:� � Canyon Springs Community Sulphur Springs School • . • • School District Cedarcreek Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • • District Emblem Elementary School Saugus Union School . 8-2 8. Safe Routes to School Fair Oaks Ranch Elementary Sulphur Springs School • • • • School District Golden Oak Community Sulphur Springs School School District Helmers Elementary School Saugus Union School • District Highlands Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • • School District James Foster Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Leona Cox Community School Sulphur Springs School • • . . District McGrath Elementary School Newhall School District • • • • Meadows Elementary School Newhall School District Mitchell Community School Sulphur Springs School • • • • School District Mountain View Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Newhall Elementary School Newhall School District 49 0 North Park Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • • Valley View Community School District • • • • Old Orchard Elementary Newhall School District School Newhall School District Peachland Elementary School Newhall School District Pinetree Community School Sulphur Springs School Plum Canyon Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Rio Vista Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • • District Rosedell Elementary School Saugus Union School • • • . District Santa Clarita Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Skyblue Mesa Elementary Saugus Union School • • • • School District Sulphur Springs Community Sulphur Springs School • School[i] District Valencia Valley Elementary Newhall School District School Valley View Community School Sulphur Springs School • • • • District Wiley Canyon Elementary Newhall School District School 8-3 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan 8.2.1. Education and Encouragement Programming Between 2009 and 2011, the City provided education and encouragement pingrarrurvirig at four pilot elementary schools: Rio Vista Elementary, Old Orchard Elementary, Pinetree Elernentary, and North park Eletuentaty. These four schools were selected as pilot schools based on district support, and demographic and geographic characteristics, including the number of bicycle and pedestrian collisions near the school, the percentage of no -car households within the school area and the population densitywithin the school area. Education and encouragement programming included • Teachers, school administrators, district staff and city staff attending walk audits at elementary schools to identify infrastructure unprovernents that could improve walking and bicycling to school; • Cttywtde publicity provided through the Safe Routes to School website and the semi annual newsletter Safe Routes to School sponsored a booth and bike rodeo at the City's Arbor Day Event in 2010 and 2011; • A Safe Routes to School Toolkit that was developed and made available to all elementary schools.; and • Four pilot schools teeming focused education and encouragement pins: o lnclassroom education and hands-on bicycle rodeos and traffic safety programs for all students o Walk and Bike to School Day promotions in fall 2009 and 2010 o Walking School Bus Training and establishment of walking school busses Zoog Walk and Bike to School Day o Safe Routes to School information at school events such as Back to School Night • Evaluation efforts included in-classroorn hand tallies to track how students get to and Froin school, patent surveys to understand parent attitudes toward walking and biking to school and knowledge of the SR2S program, and an administrator survey to identify existing SR2S efforts. 8.2.2. Previously Existing Programs Prior to the implementation of the citywide Safe Routes to School Pxograrn, Santa Clarita had several programs already in place The City Traffic Engineering staff develops and maintains Suggested Route to School Maps for all primary schools located within the city limits The maps are updated as necessary, and made available to each school . 8-4 The City of Santa Clarita hires and trains adult crossing guards 8. Safe Routes to School The City of Santa Clarity also hires and trains adult crossing guards. Typical locations include uncontrolled intersections, stop sign controlled intersections with high vehicle volumes (500+ per hour) and signal controlled intersections with high conflicting Haring movements. In 2002, the City, the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (whiclt serves as local law enforcement for Santa Clarita) and the local school districts established School Valet Programs at most elementary schools in Santa ClArita The program uses the 5th and 6th grade students as valets to open the car doors of arriving students in a specially designed drop-off area The drop-off arra allows 10 to 15 cars at a time tu enter, drop off children, and leave in as little as 55 seconds Fourth grade students assist as escorts or walkers. These students walk the younger ones to their classroom or a line up area so the parents do not have to park and escort their children onto the campus The program has dramatically reduced traffic congestion around the schools, and improved safety for students who dioose to walk and bicycle to schools Though this program is focused on improving drop-off conditions, it is necessary to have an orderly drop-off so that parents will feel comfortable allowing their children to walk or bicycle to school The Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department runs a Sheriffs Teen Traffic Offender Program (SITOP). This program provides an Most elementary schools in Santa Clarita opportunity for citizens to call the Sheriffs Department and report have school valet programs hazardous teen drivers. An officer will, contact the offending teens and their parents in order to conect their behavice: By improving teen driving behavior, this program improves the safety for all who use the streets, including students who walk and bike to school 8.3. School Prioritization The City of Santa Oarita ranked all elementary schools within city litnits in the 2007 plan by a set of weighted criteria. This plan re -ranks the six elementary schools that the City has not yet submitted for grunt funding, as well as junior high and high schools within Santa Clarity The prioritization criteria and weighting is shown in Table 8-2. Table 8-3 displays the results of the prioritization 8-5 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transoortation Plan Table 8-z: Prioritization Criteria Population density Points assigned based on density of housing within half o.s a mile of the school; higher points for higher density Pedestrian/bicycle collisions Points assigned based on number of pedestrian 1 collisions in vicinity of school (ih mile radius); higher points for more collisions Frontage street classification Points assigned based on type of street school frontage i is on (e.g., 3 points arterial, z points collector, i point residential) Presence of an arterial crossing Points assigned based on whether students are required i to cross an arterial on their walkinq route to school Percentage of car -free households Points assigned based on percentage of households i without cars within half a mile of the school 8-6 Table 8-3: Prioritized Schools Pedestrian/ Frontage Presence Bicycle Street Arterial Collisions Classification Crossing Ii Arroyo Seca Junior Hart Union High 4 3 3 1 4 15 16 High School School District Placenta Junior High Hart Union High 4 4 1 1 4 14 16 School School District 8. Safe Routes to School Sierra Vista Junior High Hart Union High 4 4 3 1 2 14 16 School School District Saugus High School Hart Union High 3 4 3 1 2 13 25.5 School District Canyon High School Hart Union High 4 4 2 1 z 13 15 School District La Mesa Junior High Hart Union High 2 3 2 1 4 12 14 School School District McGrath Elementary Newhall School 3 3 1 2 3 12 13.5 School District Helmers Elementary Saugus Union 4 2 2 2 3 23 13 School School District Bridgeport Elementary Saugus Union 2 2 3 2 3 12 13 School School District Highlands Elementary Saugus Union 4 3 1 2 2 12 13 School School District Golden Valley High Hart Union High 1 2 3 1 4 u 12.5 School School District Valencia High School Hart Union High 3 3 3 1 1 11 12.5 School District Wiley Canyon Newhall School 3 2 1 3 2 11 11.5 8-7 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Elementary School District Golden Oak Sulphur Springs 1 1 3 3 z io 10.5 Community School School District Sulphur Springs Sulphur Springs 1 z 1 z 3 g 10.5 Community School School District Hart High School Hart Union High 1 z i 1 1 7 8.5 School District Rio Norte Middle Hart Union High i i z 1 1 8 8 School School District . 8-8 8. Safe Routes to School 8.4. Elementary School Walk Audit Notes This section presents notes and observations from walk audits conducted around the elementary schools that have not yet been submitted for grant funding, as well as recommendations for improvements that can be used in futrue grant applications Golden Oak Community School is new and has not yet been studied, thus it is not included below 8.4A. Bridgeport Elementary School Concerns Heavy car traffic was observed around the school approaching 8:00 AM. Traffic backed up along Newhall Randa Road as parents waited to enter the school parking lot/valet line. The school shares a large parking lot with Bridgeport Park Some parents were observed malting double right hand turns to overtake/bypass valet traffic There is no enforcement at the schooL Bridgeport Staff observe parking inhactions and children crossing. Private security service monitors the residential neighborhood to the west of the school, prohibiting vehicular access The paridng lot (partially coned off for buses during arrival and dismissal) is used by parents looking to bypass right hand tum traffic Children walk through the large parking lot unmonitored As 1Windward turns west from Bayside (the elbow), both high speeds and u-turrs were observed There are faded "slow school zone" pavement markings (southbound side of Bayside). Bayside becomes heavily congested between street pacing and the unofficial "Pick-up/Drop-off" zone on the east side of Bayside The crossing is impaired by parked cats on either side of road Opportunities Northbound Bayside features a temporary, coned -off drop-off zone south of the Bayside/Spinnaker crosswalk Temporary "slow student crossing" signs, similar to custodial (caution wet floor) signs, are in use during the drop-off and pick-up. These could be made to look more permanent There are roundabouts with pedestrian crossing islands at Bayside and Bridgeport intersection. Children access the school from the north entrance, despite the backside being open to day care and stafE Residential areas within the "suggested route to school plan" do not have to cross a major arterial. There is great potential for high levels of walking and biking as Bridgeport has higher levels of car-&= households than many Santa On"ta elementary schools Biking Children are permitted to bicycle to school once they enter the 3rd grade Children who bicycle to school are requited to sign a permission form with a parent, bring a lock, and wear a helmet Bicycle racks are located on the west side of campus, accommodating close to 30 bicycles Specific Location Notes and Potential Solutions Below are potential solutions identified during the audit Recommended improvements are shown in Figttre 8-1 • Possible bulbout at Spinnaker and Bayside • Explore need for crossing guard • Enhance crosswalk striping and street stencils. • Potentially very high levels of walking and biking students, given topography and school boundaries 8-9 i SR2S Improvements I NEWNgLL� HRD� .x s 8. Safe Routes to School 8.4.2. Helmers Elementary School Concerns The primary concern of Charles Helmets staff is visibility along Grandview Dt Street parking is utilized on both sides of Grandview Dr. As curbside parking space is taken, visibility of both motorists and children crossing the street is minimized. Visibility becomes an issue where Grandview Dr. intersects Chadsford Dr. and Phillbrock Ave Both intersections are monitored by a crossing guard, but the intersections do not have stop signs Being able to see the crossing guards in advance is essential to children's safety. Non-standard signage, resembling stop signs from behind, confuses drivers and pedestrians Traffic enforcement is another area of concern at Charles Helmets. Charles Helmets is immediately adjacent to Northbridge Pads The park provides ample street parking space for parents to drop off or wait for their children. The street space nearest the school is quickly occupied As parking space becomes limited nearest the school, parents often double park or make illegal u -turns in search of optimal pick-up/drop-off locations Kids run across Grandview Dr between parked cars to get to their parents' cars on the other side Some parents stop at the north driveway while their kids get into the vehicle Opportunities Charles Helmers is located in an ideal location for walking and bicycling to school School grounds are immediately next to Northbridge Park Northbridge Pads features a path that connects to an entrance to the north side of campus South of Philbrock Ave, a paseo connects Charles Helmets with the residential neighborhoods west of the school. A majority of homes within the school boundary does not require the crossing of major arterials, and residents on the north side of Deccro Dt can access Charles Helmets via the paseo network Charles Helmets is in a bike/walk to school friendly neighborhood, but does not have commensurate levels of bicycling and walking students Staff reported that most kids are taken to school by parents in cats. Biking Students in grades 3.6 are permitted to bicycle to schooL Bicycle racks are provided for children to park their bike Specific Location Notes and Potential Solutions listed below are potential solutions identified during the walk audit Recommended improvements are shown in Figure 8-2. • Site could benefit from periodic enforcement Many illegal behaviors observed during audit • Charles Helmets appears to be an ideal location for walk and bike to school education progruns • Number of students that walk or bike to school could be increased through parent support and encouragement from school events or progranu • Assess need for stop control at both intersections along Grandview. • Use a valet system in the afternoon, similar to the one currently implemented in the morning 8-11 SR2S Improvements i t aR'S .iI LA M � r •� PHILBknug' AVE . 1 N — W r� IX i 8. Safe Routes to School 8.4.3• Highlands Elementary School Concerns The entrance of Highlands is located at the intersection of F.mpino In. and Catala Ave Both slope downhill towards the sdhooL naturally increasing the speed of vehicle traffic as they approach the school The east portion of the crosswalk on the north leg of the intersection lines up halfway with the school driveway facing the vehicles exiting the school parking lot When a vehicle pulls up to the driveway to exit the school parking lot, it is either directly behind or facing the kids crossing at the crosswalk and orates potential conflicts. Parking lot pavement markings are non- standard and do not provide adequate width to safely direct children/parents from the school to the schoors e=t The potential for conflict is magnified when a car wants to tum right (ie., north on Catala Ave.). The same narrow passageway becomes additionally hazardous for children crossing the street Current crosswalk configurations direct pedestrians into the concrete ramp accessing the school parking lot Children waiting to cross the street are waiting on a vehicle ramps not on a sidewalk with an ADA compliant rung A separate pedestrian gate is available, but it includes a ramp with several switchbacks, making it appear inconvenient for most pedestrians. Enforcement is an issue- Presently ssuePresently, pariang lot access is restricted to special education and private before/after school buses A temporary sign at the parking lot entrance notifies parents of the restricted access The audit found cars disc egardiug the sign. Because all the students must pass through the parking lot to exit the school, restricting/limiting vehicle access is a top priority. Opportunities Highlands Elementary School has one entrance, unlike other elementary schools that can have several access points. This allows staff to focus safety and observation efforts at the front of the school Highlands has a crossing guard at the intersection of Empino Ilh. and Catala Ave The crossing guard works during both arrival and dismissal Padang space for parents to wait for their children is limited due to the street layout This encourages patents who drive their childrert to park further from the school to avoid traffic conflicts Biking Biryding to Highlands Elementary School could be difficult for some children, due to the topography. Students south of the school would have to bike uphill to get to school, while those living north of the school would have to bike uphill to get home There are bicycle racks at the school that accommodate about 15 bicycles Children are permitted to bicycle to school once they enter the 3rd grade. Children who bicycle to school are required to sign a permission form with a parent, bring a lock, and wear a helmet Specific Location Notes and Potential Solutions Below are potential solutions identified during the audit Recommended improvements are shown in Figure 8-3. • The crosswalk along Catala Ave could be shifted north several feet to redirect pedestrian traffic away from the vehicle entrance of the school; more prominent/direct crosswalks and pavement signage in parking lot • Create a separate/more direct entrance for pedestrians on the north side of the vehicle entrance. • Install permanent/high visibility signage on Catala and Empiric. 8-13 . 8. Safe Routes to School Figure 8-3: Highlands Elementary School Recommended Improvements 8-14 8. Safe Routes to School 8.4.4• McGrath Elementary School Concerns McGrath Elementary School has one maul enhance, accessing the school south from Deputy Jake Dt As expected, one access point to the school creates a natural bottleneck of pedestrian and car activity. There is limited waiting room for the patents wishing to pick up their children, as they are encouraged to wait at the top of the walling ramp. At the entrance, the combination of cats waiting in line to enter the valet, parents parking and walking their lads, and children walking makes for a hectic atmosphere. Greater enforcement and parental responsibilitywould help conditions Opportunities McGrath Elementary has mastered the valet system Because of the padang lot layout, McGrath has enough room to implement two valet lines — a regular line and an "express line." The express valet is located on the island just north of the school sidewalk Students are recommended by teachers, and then are required to have a parent signed consent form The express valet moves about twice as fast as the other valet lines, so parents are greatly encouraged to participate, based on their dnildr&s conduct at school. School boundaries include a significant amount of multi -f m* apartments that has increased the amount of children walling to school Biking Staff indicated that some families in the McGrath area may not be able to afford bicycles, which may make bicycling difficult for d» ldren. One student was observed bringing a knke to school, but it is not a common ocntrrence (according to Principal Heath). Specific Location Notes and Potential Solutions Listed below are potential solutions identified during the walk audit Recommended improvements are shown in Figure 8-4. • There are two crossing guards at the intersection of Deputy Jake Dr. and Valle del Ora While they are utilized now, there may be an additional need for crossing guards when Deputy Jake Dr extends fiuther west and connects with the Santa Clarita road network. • McGrath is a model school for staff involvement during dismissal. All staff is required to participate, and it is evident in the efficiency of the valet program. • Beyond the Valet— the sidewalk at the top of the pedestrian walkway becomes crowded with students, waiting parents, and staff A concrete pad as a staging/waiting area could be beneficial as there are reports of students having to go into the streets to get through the crowds of waiting parents. • McGrath should be used as a model for their valet, and for staff involvement 8-15 SRZS Improvements DEPUTYj0E DR fA \b 4 j N 8. Safe Routes to School $•4.5• Wiley Canyon Elementary School Concerns There are dime separate access points for children to enter/exit the schooL School staff is concerned about the multiple access points, particularly during dismissal time Students walking home from school exit at the north side of campus onto La Glorita through a pedestrian gate La Glotita is heavily used during pick-up/drop-off and is frequently lined with can parked on both sides of the street On the north side of La Glorita is a large apartment complex that prohibits unauthorized parking Unauthorized parking severely restricts motorist visibility along La Glorta. This conflict is magnified by La Glotita being the primary access point of children walking to/from school. Wiley Canyon has an efficient valet system Despite the valet, traffic backs up in both directions on Wiley Canyon Rd (a secondary arterial) in preparation for the valet to begin. Parents disregard parking restrictions on school property and along Wiley Canyon Rd Vehicles making a left tum into the staff Parking lot (for the valet pick-up lane) also backup and queue along the middle lane along Wiley Canyon Rd Loral police have given tickets to vehicles "parked' along the middle lane waiting to make a left tum into the staff parting lot In addition, motorists waiting to make the left tum block vehicles trying to tum left out of the lot A primary obstacle for biking/walking children is Wiley Canyon Rd As an arterial street, it can be an uninviting and intimidating barter to families and young children. Opportunities Wiley Canyon has crossing guards to help children cross Wiley Canyon Rd Bicycle racks allow children to park their bike while at school. There is a significant amount of housing in close proximity to Wiley Canyon, making it possible for many more dtildren to be currently walking and biking to school. Biking There are two bicycle racks at Wiley Canyon, each with an approximate 10 -bike capacity. Children in grades 3+ are permitted to ride their bike to school widen a helmet and lock. Principal Yannich reports that a handful of children currently ride their bike to school and about 20% of children walk to school Scooters are not petmitted Listed below are potential solutions identified during the walk audit Recommended improvements are shown in Figure 8-5. • High visibility crosswalk at Wiley Canyon Rd and La Glonta Cir. • Bulb -out at north valet entrance — south of Wiley Canyon/La Glonta intersection. • Frhhahced traffic enforcement could be beneficial • Curb or post needed in valet area • Right tum only striping and signage at the south school driveway (exit drive%my) could help with queuing 8-17 A A Y SR2S Improvements I A 1 8. Safe Routes to School 8.5. Junior High and High School Notes In addition to the seven remaining elementary schools in the previous section, the City has plans to apply for funding for junior high and high schools within Santa CLrrita. The high schools include Canyon, Golden Valley, Hart, Saugus, and Valencia. The junior high schools include Arroyo Seco, La Mesa, Placenta, Rio Norte, and Sierra. Vista. Interviews with staff from each school were conducted to determine existing non -motorized mode share to school, identify barriers to walking and biking in the school vicinity, and evaluate existing levels of programmatic efforts Only a subset of these schools was available for interviews The following schools did not participate: • Canyon High School • Saugus High School • La Mesa Junior Higb School • Rio Norte Junior High School 8.5.1. Golden Valley High School At Golden Valley High School, approximately 50 percent of children walk or bike to school, the majority of which walk Barriers to children walking and biking to school include Sierra Highway and Golden Valley, as these streets are commuter mads with high volumes of vehicles Busses drop students off far from the school, requiting them to walk approximately 15 to 20 minutes into the campus and walk along/across the aforementioned roads Existing crosswalks are narrow and do not have the capacity to accommodate the volumes of children using them The school does not arnendy provide any bicycle/pedesman education or encouragement programs. 8.5.2. Hart High School No more than 25 percent of students use non-motomed transportation to get to Haft High SchooL At amval and dismissal times, there are high vehicle volumes on Newhall Ave The circular drive at the front of the school also can be very congested with vehicles and students at these times. The principal noted that the crosswalk at Newhall Ave and 14th St is in need of safety enhancements. The school has a limited number of bike racks available because of a lack of available locations to place and secure then. The school does not have any emsting bicycle/pedestrian education or encouragement programs 8-19 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transoortation Plan 8.5.3• Valencia High School Less than five percent of students walk or bike to Valencia High School as many live far from the campus However; there has been a recent increase in biking, and the school has had to install additional bicycle parking The long distances of residences away from the school act as a barrier to using non -motorized transportation Congestion before and after school on Decoro and Newhall Ranch make it challenging for bicyclists The school has no existing programa 8.5.4• Arroyo Seco Junior High The principal of Arroyo Seco junior High noted that most students are driven to school. Parents pidc up and drop off children a block away to avoid traffic, and start lining up eady, which causes congestion around the school Transit vehicles and buses for school programs contribute to the congestion. Poor driver behavior is another baser to children walking and biking to school The school has narrow sidewalks, which cannot handle large volumes of pedestrians, specifically at the crossing guard location Students form packs at the corner to wait to cross and because the sidewalks are not wide enough; they wait in the street Several sites are potentially hazardous to students walking and biking las Mananitas at Vista del Gato has a stop srgn, but lacks a crosswalk. There is a blind curve on Vista Del Gato approaching Decom, and motorists drive fast There is a crosswalk on Decoro after the blind curve Students are required to walk bhlkes on and off campus and must wear a helmet There is no concrete enforcement, though a deputy threatens to write tickets to students not wearing helmets 8.5.5• Placerita Junior High The principal estimates that approximately 65 percent of students at Placenta walk to school every day. They utilize the traffic light on Orchard VI* Rd to cross the street and the existing paseos Many students also bike to school via the paseos and the bridge over the Santa Clara River. The most congested comer for bicyclists and pedestrians to toss is the intersection of Newhall Ave and Dalbey Dr. There is a long line of parents in cars waiting to pick students up in die afternoons. However, school admiuist woes stand at the crosswalk to assist The school participates in an annual bike to work/school day that the city of Santa Clanta publicizes. 8.5.6. Sierra Vista Junior High Approximately 25 to 35 percent of students walk or bike to Sierra Vista Junior High. Traffic congestion and busy intersections are barriers to addition students using non-motowed transportation, as parents do not trust that their children w it be safe. . 8-20 8. Safe Routes to School Past collisions have occurred in the mornings at the intersection of Whites Canyon and Stillmore To avoid this location, some parents ask their students to walk to one of the strip mall areas to be picked up there. The school does not have any existing programs for students. However, sometimes staff members participate in a bike to school (work) day. 8.6. Next Steps After adoption of this plan, the City should take the following steps in improving walling and biking to schools: • Implement outstanding improvements for which funding has been secured. • Conduct walk audits and improvement plans for junior high and high schools, and Golden Oak Community School • Continue applying for Safe Routes to School grants, including a grant to expand the education and encouragement program to all schools. • Construct improvements. 8-21 S S. Safe Routes to School Thupage left blank intentional 8-22 9. Complete Streets 9. COMPLETE STREETS 9.1. Introduction A complete street provides for safe, convenient, and comfortable travel by foot, bicycle, public transit, and personal vehicle Complete streets are designed for access, mobility, and safety for all users, regardless of travel mode They provide for automobiles while enabling and encouraging transit, walling, and biking Complete streets are an important element in improving bicyclist and pedestrian safety, and making walking and biking easier and more pleasant Complete streets designs take into account a jurisdiction's unique setting and roadway conditions Depending on the context, complete streets designs can look very different among locations and can be implemented in various ways Some of the common elements of complete street designs include: Pedestrian infrastructure Sidewalks, crosswalks, and paseos Bicycle infrastructure: Bike lanes and bike parking Coordinated transit facilities: Bus pull-outs or transit right of way Aesthetic and safety improvements: landscaping, contrasting pavement colors and signage There are many benefits of implementing complete streets By providing walkuig, biki% and transit facilities, people are encouraged to commute through active transportation, thus increasing physical activity and countering the nationwide obesity epidemic Complete streets can improve safety by reducing conflicts between users and calming traffic Providing alternatives to driving can have a profound environmental impact by reducing vehicle emissions In addition, complete streets have the potential to improve the economy by encouraging residents and visitors to linger in shops and restaurants. Complete streets can provide transportation options for community members who cannot drive the elderly, students, people with disabilities, and people who cannot afford a car. 9.2. Policy Background In the past, most transportation infrastructure in the United States has been designed to meet the needs of drivers: streets are wide, speeds are high, intersections are large, and parking is abundant Asan unintended consequence, walking, tiding transit, and bicycling are less pleasant, less convenient, and often, less safe Most cities' policies and design standards still reflect this older way of thinking Revising policies and standards to reflect complete streets concepts snakes it more likely that public agencies will incorporate the needs of all road users into new projects and roadway retrofits. Recognizing the importance of incorporating complete streets policies into local governance, the California legislature passed the Complete Streets Bill it 2008 (Assembly Bill 1358). As of January 1, 2011, California cities and counties are required to include provisions for the accommodation of an roadway users when updating the part of a local plan that governs traffic flow; per California Government Code 565302 (2) 0) Commemamg jammy 7, 2011, upon any ub !antic nvurwu' of the anu/alion element the /egL lakt� body shall modify the xm1akom ekmremt to plan fora /az W mudrnmdrd nmupwirr<rom m awk that meetsdx needy of all urea of rhwt, rw , and hiS6sW fim'safe and m mx &W hmrl m a maowAW it mutable to dx rma� .mrbm bam, ormrlmr amtext of tlxgememdplmr. (B) Forpurparer of 9-1 . Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan thu pzmgmpb, kers of amen; acids, and inghwegy' means bignluts, cht7d w person with dirrahiker, motorists, mmm of amimerml pods, pedeshiara,useryofpubkcpanywrtakon,andseni . In 2010, Caltrans published a revised version of Deputy Directive 64, which ehrplid4 states that complete streets policies shall be considered in all phases of state-owned roadway planning, design, construction, maintenance, and repair. 9.3. Objective The objective of this policy is to establish guiding principles and practices so transportation improvements are planned, designed, constructed, operated and maintained to encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use while promoting safe operations for all users The City of Santa Clnrita will create a safe and efficient transportation system that promotes the health and mobility of all Santa C larna citizens and visitors by providing high quality pedestrian, bicycling, and transit access to all destinations throughout the City. The City of Santa Clarity will provide for the needs of drivers, transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities in all planning, design, construction, reconstruction, retrofit, operations, and maintenance activities and products. The City of Santa Clarita will enhance the safety, access, convenience, and comfort of all users of all ages and abilities The City understands that children, seniors, and persons with disabilities may require special accommodations 9.4. Street Network/Connectivity A. The City of Santa Garita will design, operate and maintain a transportation network that provides a connected network of facilities accommodating all modes of travel. R The City will actively look for opportunities to repurpose tights -of -way to enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicydists, and transit C. The City will focus non -motorized connectivity improvements to services, schools, padts, civic uses, regional connections and commercial uses D The City will require new developments to provide interconnected networks for all modes 9.5. Jurisdiction A. Ibis Complete Street Policy is intended to cover all development and redevelopment in the public domain and all street improvement assessment districts with Santa Clarita, but will also focus on regional connectivity. R The City will require all developers and builders to obtain and comply with this policy. C. The City will encourage agencies not under Santa Clarita's jurisdiction, including, but not limited to local school districts, to wort with the City to implement this policy. D The City willuvrk closely with Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, and the Southern California Association of Governstients to encourage compliance with this polity. ® 9-2 9. Complete Streets 9.6. Phases The City of Santa Clatita will apply this Complete Streets Policy to all roadway projects, including those invohmhg new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation, or changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway, as well as those that involve new privately built roads and easements intended for public use Complete Streets may be achieved through single projects or incrementally through a series of smaller improvements or maintenance and operation activities over time 9.7. Design A. Provide well-designed pedestrian accommodations on all streets and crossings Pedestrian accommodations can take numerous forms, including but not limited to traffic signals, roundabouts, bulb -outs, extensions, sidewalks, buffer zones, shared -use pathways, and perpendicular curb ramps, among others. a Provide well-designed bicycle accommodations along all streets. Bicycle accommodations can take numerous forms, including but not limited to the use of bicycle boulevards, striping, slow sweets, low auto -volume streets, traffic calming, signs, and pavement markings, among others. C. Where physical conditions warrant, landscaping shall be planted whenever a street is newly constructed, reconstructed, or relocated, to provide a buffer between the vehicular travelled way and adjacent pedestrian facilities 9.8. Context Sensitivity A. The City of Santa Clarita will plan its streets in harmony with the adjacent land uses and neighborhoods B The City will solicit input from local stakeholders during the planning process C. The City will integrate natural features, such as waterways, and other topography into design of streets D The City will design streets with a strong sense of place Architecture, landscaping, streetscapinp public art, signage, etc will be used to reflect the community and neighborhood E. The Citywill coordinate street improvements with merchants and along retail and commercial corridors to develop vibrant and livable streets E The City will practice sustainable storm water management practices 9.9. Implementation After adoption, effective implementation of the Complete Streets Policy will require additional steps to ensure success The City of Santa Cla ita will need to review their procedures and, if necessary, restructure them, to accommodate all users on every project The City of Santa Clanta will incorporate Complete Streets principles into the following documents as they are updated: the City of Santa Clarita General Plan, City of Santa Ckhrita Municipal Code, and other plans, manuals, rules, regulations and programs as appropriate In addition, applicable changes to design manuals or public works standards will need to be trade to fully encompass the safety and needs of all users by employing the latest in design standards and innovation Periodic education and training of planners and engineers is also recommended to ensure the latest techniques in balancing the needs of 9-3 Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan roadway users are being applied Finally existing data sources and projects can be tapped to track how well the streets are serving all uses. Unless otherwise indicated, the Public Works Department Will be responsible for the implementation of this Complete Streets Policy. g.io. Exceptions Complete Street principles and practices will be included in street construction, reconstruction, repaving, and rehabilitation projects, as well as other plans and manuals, except under one or more of the following conditions: A. A project involves only ordinary or emergency maintenance activities designed to keep asses in serviceable conditions such as mowing, cleaning, sweeping, spot repai , concrete joint repair, or pothole flung or when interim measures are implemented on temporary detour of haul routs B. The City Council exempts a project due to excessive and disproportionate cost of establishing a bikeway, wallcway or transit enhancement as part of a project C The Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development jointly determine the construction is .not practically feasible or cost effective because of significant or adverse environmental impacts to waterways, flood plains, remnants of native vegetation, wetlands, or other critical areas, or due to impacts on neighboring land uses, including impact from tight of way acquisitions D Where absence of need exists, including absence of future need. E. Where the City Engineer issues a documented exception concluding that the application of Complete Streets principles is unnecessary or inappropriate because it would be contrary to public safety. F. Where the existing right of may does not allow for the accommodation of all uses hi this case, alternatives shall be explored such as the use of revised travel lane configuradons, paved shoulders, signage, traffic calming education or enforcement to accommodate pedestrians, cyd fists, transit, and persons with disabilities G The Director of Public Works and the Director of Community Development jointly determine it is not practically feasible or cost effective to implement the provisions of this policy through public or private project design or manuals or other plans Exceptions described above, will be documented . 9-4