San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Open House October 28, 2010 Presented to San Mateo County residents and interested parties by Lauren Ledbetter, Alta Planning + Design Matt Haynes, Fehr & Peers
Meeting Agenda Open House 6:00 8:00 Presentation and Q&A 6:30pm 7:00 PM BPAC Meeting 8:00 9:00pm 2
Project Team C/CAG John Hoang, Project Manager Alta Planning + Design Lauren Ledbetter, AICP, Project Manager Project management, Bicycle element development Fehr & Peers Matt Haynes, PE, AICP Pedestrian element development Eisen Letunic 3 Policy development
C/CAG s Role Coordinate multi-jurisdictional planning Serve as a clearinghouse on information and resources Direct funding to cities and the County for bicycle and pedestrian improvements 4
What Does a Countywide Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan Do? Identify projects for funding Provide a consistent, countywide vision Coordinate multi-jurisdictional projects Provide best practices and policies Identify bicycle routes and pedestrian zones with countywide significance 5
County Plan Components San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Projects of Countywide Significance SamTrans Plans and Projects Regional State Policies Local Plans and Projects Unincorporated County Plans and Projects 6
Project Schedule Public Review Draft December 2010/January 2011 Draft Final January 2011 Final February 2011 7
Vision San Mateo County has an interconnected system of safe, convenient and universally accessible bicycle and pedestrian facilities, for both transportation and recreation. These facilities provide access to jobs, homes, schools, transit, shopping, community facilities, parks and regional trails throughout the county. At the same time, the county has strengthened its network of vibrant, higher-density, mixed-use and transit-accessible communities, that enable people to meet their daily needs without access to a car. As a result, many more people in San Mateo County ride bicycles and walk, making our transportation system more balanced, equitable and sustainable. More bicycling and walking have reduced automobile dependence, traffic congestion, pollution and the county s carbon footprint while increasing mobility options, promoting healthy lifestyles, saving residents money and fostering social interaction. 8
Goals 1. A comprehensive countywide system of facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians 2. More people bicycling and walking for transportation and recreation 3. Improved safety for bicyclists and pedestrians 4. Complete streets and routine accommodation of bicyclists and pedestrians 5. Strong local support for non-motorized transportation 9
Bikeway Types: Off-Street 10 Bay Trail in South San Francisco
Bikeway Types: On Street Bike Lanes 11
Bikeway Types: On Street Bike Routes, Shared Lane Markings 12
Bikeways of Countywide Significance North-south connectivity East-west connectivity 13 US 101/Broadway Interchange Reconstruction Image: San Mateo County Transportation Authority Caltrain Undercrossing
Bikeways of Countywide Significance Cross-jurisdictional connections Access to destinations of county significance 14 Future Oyster Point Ferry Terminal Photo: San Mateo County Harbor District
15
Bikeways of Countywide Significance Inclusion in other County or regional plan 16
Mileage by Jurisdiction Existing Mileage Proposed Mileage* Jurisdiction On-Street Off-Street On-Street Off-Street Atherton 8.0 0.0 7.9 0.0 Belmont 3.4 0.4 12.4 0.0 Brisbane 6.1 3.8 6.4 2.3 Burlingame 8.0 5.9 10.1 0.9 Colma 2.0 0.0 6.8 1.7 Daly City 9.9 0.5 20.3 0.5 East Palo Alto 5.2 0.7 2.2 4.1 Foster City 5.9 9.8 0.0 4.3 Half Moon Bay 0.8 6.4 3.4 1.5 Town of Hillsborough 4.4 0.0 4.3 1.4 Menlo Park 18.3 8.3 7.5 5.2 Millbrae 0.0 2.6 15.8 3.0 Pacifica 6.1 1.8 2.9 1.9 Portola Valley 0.0 0.0 7.9 0.0 Redwood City 15.0 13.8 26.5 4.9 San Bruno 5.1 2.6 7.3 2.3 San Carlos 6.1 3.7 9.5 0.0 San Mateo 17.3 10.9 11.5 1.1 South San Francisco 16.6 13.1 5.9 7.2 Woodside 5.0 0.0 23.7 0.0 County of San Mateo 17.8 2.2 54.1 7.4 17 Total 160.8 86.5 246.3 49.6 *Total proposed mileage subject to change.
County Population Growth 2010 2020 2030 San Mateo County 741,000 801,000 842,000 Bay Area 7,341,700 8,018,000 8,719,300 Data Source: ABAG 2008 San Mateo County population projected to grow by 14% in next 20 years Bay Area projected at 19% County employment projected to grow by 55% in next 20 years (to over 500,000) 18
Walking Statistics County commute mode split (2008): 2.7% walking 1.4% bicycling 7.5% transit 82.7% driving Typical weekday trips: 8.3% of total trips are walking trips % of trips to work 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 7.4% 7.3% 7.5% 2.6% 2.1% 2.7% 1990 2000 2008 Walk to Work Transit to Work Source: 1990/2000 Census, 2008 ACS Source: 2000 Bay Area Travel Survey 19
Pedestrian Project Types - Methodology Ped INDEX GIS Process Based on relationship between built environment and walking Walking Demand: based on many factors Land Use Factors Proximity Factors Demographics Factors Connectivity Factors Pedestrian Deficiencies Collision locations Barriers 20
Population Population hot spots cover a broad area, concentrating along the El Camino Real Corridor 21
Employment Employment hot spots throughout the county Higher concentrations along: El Camino Real Corridor East of US-101 22
Land Use Mix High land use mix in downtown areas 23
Proximity Parks Schools Commercial Districts Employment Centers Caltrain Bus Routes 24
Street Network Intersection Density 25
Pedestrian Index 26
Highest Pedestrian Demand Areas 27
Areas with High Need for Improvements Pedestrian Demand Model Pedestrian Infrastructure Deficiencies High Improvement Need Goal: Identify improvement areas with countywide significance Areas with high demand but with a specific deficiency Deficiencies: o o o Collisions Barriers Other Needs (sidewalks to schools, lighting, recreational trails) 28
Pedestrian Barriers Walking Demand Across 4 major barriers: US-101 El Camino Real Highway 1 Rail lines 29
Creating Connections Example: Caltrain tracks 30
Pedestrian Improvements Potential project types of Countywide significance: Pedestrian safety improvements Pedestrian district enhancements Pedestrian typology zones Based on land use context 31
Pedestrian Improvements General Pedestrian Typology Zones: Urban Downtown/Station Area Rural Town Center School Zones (within ¼ mile of schools) Neighborhood Zones Rural Undeveloped Areas Pedestrian Connection Types Barrier connections Recreational trail connections 32
33 Pedestrian Zone Design Guidelines
Next Steps Incorporate input from Open House Additional meetings with cities, County, SamTrans Public Review Draft: Dec/January www.sanmateocountybikepedplan.org 34
35 Questions?