HomeMy WebLinkAbouttecp_100891TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMITTEE
UKIAH CIVIC CENTER
Conference Room 3
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482
October 8, 1991
2:00 P.M.
A G E N D A
1. CALL TO ORDER BEARD, FERNANDEZ, GOFORTH,
HARRIS, BUDROW, TINDLE,
TURNER AND CHAIRMAN VARA
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 10, 1991
3. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS:
a. Request for Crossing Guard at South Dora and Washington Avenue,
Gary Brawley, Principal Nokomis School, Terry Hird, Nokomis PTA,
Linda McGill, Parent.
b. Request to Reduce Speed Limit on Helen Avenue (30 MPH) Between
Washington Avenue and Observatory - Mrs. Marie Denham.
c. Update on Request for Barracade Opposite Betty on Copper Lane -
Mrs. Dorothy Johnson.
d. Bicycle Parking Facilities - Steve Turner, MTA.
e. Proposed Ordinance for Allowing Benches and Shelters on Sidewalks -
Steve Turner, MTA.
f. Review of Speed Study, 1991, One-third of City.
g. Request for Red Curb on Oak Manor Drive Each Side of Mohawk Drive
Intersection to Provide Adequate Sight Distance - Laurelie Madsen.
4. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
5. ADJOURNMENT
R:TEC1
TEC AGENDA 10/8/91
N r
< 'o
m n
r ro
O N
F• M
fD rt
N `<
~ ~°
r
a
w m
K O
~-
K
r r r ~ d u' rn' to i ,p ' a ! w N ~ r ~ REPORT
N ~+ r j r I r
i
1 r r
F, r I
r I ni
r
r NUMBER
r N r Y {. I j
o r r A 3 a v,I v, r'
I n' n n ro y
w O O r a w rt I
ro r•
I Y r 7 m rt
x E ~ w w w I n <
~ w w G H w
H r+ 7 rt F'• (D 'G K M x 7
3 G1 C] w N I
tD O I I A w d [n
~ T
C ro ro b b R y 1 ~ R rt R N N ~
N N r x
ry p Tl N M rt I N N R !A [*1
~ O ~ rt ~ H
O P a ~ N I ~
. r
r I
I
G1 y m y to y L7 4 I £
S y y U1 VI
O rt C rt F,, O O O w rt K rt rt
v w N
' w < v v 7 Y rl w w a w
cY rt ~ rt ~ tr O' m G w rt R fr rt
1^ fD N r• r N tD N N N
y O rt y
y !A rt y w y Ul y rt y y y Uf
R rt 'S •. R X rt K rt b K rt rt K rt
rt "f N H H I'f M < N H H It I S
m iD tD N b ID N N N N fD N N N
N fD rt N < N N N rt N N N N
R K rt ~ rt rt rt rt ? K rt m
w w w
7 w c a w w w
~ I w l
c I w w a w m
°' m °' ~ °'
a o. a a s o. j o. a a a ~.
a a w t
'o m m o z z E o x x z
i c y n d o o a ro w o w I-• m
K rn rt O tt K Y Y 3' M ~ ~
~ G O O C O b w ~ r n
r (] " r
+
y y r p N 7 7 rt < P ~ 7 ~ ~
r
r r
r , " .
n '< m y b m n a a w
~ m a n ~
M m a m
r ~ l v b
N W rt rt
R rt
N
85TH
w w w w w W w w W N N w N
m N r i-- ~ ~ ~ w w v~ o m ERCENTILE
N
W
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
H
H
N
N Y b
~~, O A
O
^
T
W
N
N
l.n
N
w
l.n
I
Ln
1
O
1
~O
1 .
E
I 1
L~ 1
W I
W 1
W 1
W I
W i
W I
W 1
W N N W N M M
._. x
O i~ O~ W N N In N W In In O ~D
EXISTING
N W W N N N N N N W N N N N
VI O O N lJ~ N W to N O l11 N v+ In• SPEED
N W W N N W N N N W N N N ~`Q+~.~.~~D
to O O to OI O N V+ Vt O N N OI OI
PEED LTMT
~
N
In
V
O
C77
4-+
N
S^
In
~D
~D ro
0 H
b 4
7
~1
C*1 PJ
2
O b
r O
~ w
w ~ r w oo v+ ~ N m p q °p o
i
C
n d
,. y X0~+77 n
~
b Z MI
Y O
i0 P1
~ 9 Z
F
W
'D
l.n
O
F
V
~-'
N
O
~ ~
i-' r
J O
q O H
v y
r
~ VERAGE
~ ~ IFn ~ ~ ~ °~..' a r rn .~ ~ v DAILY
~ ao ~+ rn ~ U o F ~ ~ F w v+ RAFFIC
~. ~, ~l o .~ ~ ~ rn ~ co w c~ o {VPp) 2
p A ~ ;y ~ ly p p ~ A ~ p ROADSIDE
+ + + + + gvEL
p
~N
m o m m m R
ES
='IND.
C
G7
a
:A
y
~n
H
y
ro
n~
ea
0
A
N H
°zK
O
N '7
~ C
ex
[i7 H
K b
[~ W
C
b
K
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: September 12, 1991
T0: Bill R. Beard, City Engineer
FROM: Laurelie Madsen
SUBJECT: RED CURB ON OAK MANOR AND MOHAw~ DRIVE
Please consider painting red curbs on Oak Manor Drive, at the corner of Mohawk
Drive. Trying't"turn left or right onto Oak Manor Drive from Mohawk, it is very
difficult to see oncoming traffic, because automobile's are parked right up
against the corner.
With the tennis lessons and soccer practice at Oak Manor Park, there is
constantly a large amount of automobile's parked on Oak Manor Drive.
Thank you for your consideration.
Laurelie Madsen
835 Mohawk Drive
Ukiah, California
MEMORANDUM
UKIAH PULICE DEPARTMENT
DATE: October 2, 1991
T0: Traffic Engineering Oommittee
FROM: Kenneth Budrow, Captain /'~
SUBJECT: Request for Crossing Guard at Dora and Washington
During the c_~eptember 10th. 1991, Traffic Engineering Committee
meetinyra request was made for a crossing guard to be stationed at
South Dora Street and Washington Avenue. The request was made by
Linda McGill, Pra_sident of the Nokomis ichool PTA. McGill said that
she had a petition requesting crossing guards that was signed by
1,050 teachers, parents and students from Nokomis School.
The Traffic Engineering Committee then requested that the Police
Department look into the requirements for establishing crossing
guards, traffic accident=_:. traffic citations, and vehicle and
pedestrian traffic flow at Dora and Washington.
A check was matte through the police department computer to determine
how many, if any. traffic: accidents hacl occurred at Dora and
Washington between 1-1-89 and 9-1-91. I found that there were no
reported accidents at that location. I was unable te, determine how
many, if any, traffic citations were issued for vi+7lations that
occurred at that location.
I contacted Nokomis Schc>ol arrd requested information on the number of
students attending the school, the number of students living East of
Dora and North of Beacon, and the times that scho:al starts and ends.
I was put in conta+~t with Linda Mctiill, who was most helpful, and
provided me with all requested information. I learned that there are
659 students, K-5 grades, and that 93 of those students live East of
Dora and North of Beaoon. School classes begin at OF115 and 0825
hours and the afternoon classes end at 1440 hours.
A check of the city records revealed that during a City Council
meeting held on March 5, 19116, the L''ouncil adopted a policy for
establishing a crossing guard p+raitian. The requirements include:
1- At least 40 elementary schocl children per hour must cross the
street during a 1-hour period on the way to, and a 1-hour period
on the way from school.
2- Where there is not a controlled intersection within 60G feet from
the point in which the elementary school children congregate. (A
controlled intersection is one that t,as at lea=_.1 stop siyns..l
3- The minimum hourly vehicular volume must be at least 30U per hour
for that time when elementary schc+ol children are crossing.
I requested that the City Enrjineeriny Department conduct a survey at
the intersection of Ctora and Washington to determine if the crossing
guard requirements set by the Council c:oulci t+e met. Tom McArthur, of
the Engineering Department. completed the survey and provided me with
the following information:
1- During the one hour time period between 143(1 hours and 1530 hours
(school ended at 1440 hours), on 10-1-91. a total of 20.
elementary age school children crossed crne c+r bath streets at the
intersection of Dara and Washington.
2- During the one hazer time period between 0740 hours and 0840
hours (school started at 0815 and DBL'i hours), on 10-2-91, at
total of 22 elementary age schc+ol c:hildrer+ crossed one or both
streets at the intersection of Dora and Washington.
3- During the one hour time period I]etween 1430 hours and 1530,
hours on 10-1-91, a total of 624 vehicles passed through the
intersection of Dora and Washington.
4- During the one hour time period between 0740 hours and 0840
hours, on 10-'L-91, a total of 712 vehicles passed through the
intersection of Dora ar~d Washington.
5- The distance from the east property line of Nokomis School to Dora
Street was measured at 6:36 feet.
I looked at the results of the survey and the crossing guard
requirements set forth lay the City Council and found the following:
1- The number of shade
Washington (average
(40) established to
2- The intersection of
intersection but it
It is 636 feet from
Street.
Its using the intersection of Dora and
of 21 per hourl fell below the minimum number
warrant a crossing guard.
Clara and Washington is a controlled
is mare than 6UC1 feet from Nokomis School.
the east edge of the school property to Gora
3- The average number of vehicles passing through the intersection of
Dora and Washington was 668 per tiaur. This number c+f vehicles is
in over the 300 per hour established to warrant a crossing guard.
i~Ar .. ., ~, ',
INISHED BUSINESS
.Matter of School Crossing Guard Policy
a Gity Manager recounted, as per Council's direction, staff had contacted
ier Northern California Cities to determine their criteria for establishing
9cement of Crossing Guards at or near schools. The Public Works Department
:eived and documented the information. He asked the Public Works Director
.present the same.
a:^
~_Public Works Director stated that at Council's previous meeting they had
died wanting to "Grandfather" some or all the warrant numbers for existing
~ssing Guard locations. He reviewed the compiled study.
~:,.
member Henderson questioned whether the warrant numbers would be
d at some later date if they were "Grandfathered" now.
Public Works Director responded negatively.
icilmember Hickey proposed that the number of students'per hour be reduced
i 50 to 40.
icilmember Henderson proposed that Column "C", Number of Safe Gaps Per Five
Minutes, be omitted.
~cilmember Kier stated that a more definitive criteria should be estab-
ed so that it would not be subject to interpretation by various Councils
staff .
ensued.
Betty Box, 425 Pomo Drive, stressed not supporting the numbers of the warrants
because the concept may be questioned by parents at future Crossing Guard
requests. Further was noted that insurance could not be provided by the
Y.T.A. if they were to assume funding the Crossing Guards.
Myers recognized that all requests would have to be reviewed by future
~'%H~S: Hickey/Henderson that the four (4) existing Crossing Guards be retained
'-'; ea+established; funded by the City. The number of students per hour of the
%.<,varrants be made to conform with the Cal-Trans requirement number of 40. The
,.,Safe-Gap requirement be eliminated. The motion was carried by the following
s~;ioll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Henderson, Kier, Hickey and Mayor
d~Myers. NOES: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Kelley.
NEARING
,~~Resolution Approving Tentative Subdivision Map No. 86-37, Las Casas
City Manager reported that the Planning Director had prepared the staff
rt in this matter and asked him to present the same.
~'he.Planning Director stated that the Subdivision is for two single family
,parcels on the North side of Capps Lane. The frontage of the two lots were
improved; and the two parcels are consistent with the original development
Reg. Mtg.
March 5, 1986
Page 2
Slate of Cailfornia
IV~emorandum
To: Deputy District Directors
For Planning and Public
Transportation
From: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Division of Highways
E„ L)
Business, Transportation and Housing Agency
~~ 3 F
Date: June 6, 1991
File:
Subject: Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act-Bicycle Guidelines
Attached for your information is a copy of the Clean Air
and Transportation Act (Proposition 116, 1990) Bicycle
Guidelines. They were conditionally approved by the California
Transportation Commission (CTC) on April 25, 1991. Final
copies became available from CTC staff on May 29, 1991.
The guidelines describe the process local agencies must
follow to apply for the $20 million for grants for bicycle
commuter facilities.
Below are some of the highlights:
The CTC will make available S4 million per year for five
years.
A local agency may not receive more than S1 million per
year per project.
• Up to five percent of a grant may be used for preliminary
engineering and design, but not for feasibility or
planning studies.
• A bicycle commuter is defined as a bicyclist making a
trip for transportation purposes such as travel to work,
school, shopping, or other activity center, rather than
for exercise or recreational purposes.
• Projects may include bicycle lanes, paths, roadway
widening, restriping, shoulders, grading, drainage,
paving, barriers, landscaping, right of way, traffic
control devices, signs, shelters, lockers, parking
facilities, bicycle racks on transit vehicles, etc.
• Funds will not be awarded to construct separate bicycle
paths unless the Department determines that they will be
used principally by bicycle commuters.
Deputy District Directors
June 6, 1991
Page 2
• Regional transportation planning agencies and the
Department will review and comment on project
applications prior to review and approval by the CTC.
• The CTC will integrate the bicycle project grant program
with the State Transportation Improvement Program and the
Transit Capital Improvement Program to minimize multiple
application cycles and duplicate applications.
The CTC anticipates considerable interest and activity in
this program. In addition to what is in the guidelines, the
Department may be directly involved in evaluations of project
applications for the CTC. The extent of the involvement is not
yet clear. Because the CTC will be mailing guidelines to local
agencies soon, you may wish to designate one of your staff as
the bicycle contact person to respond to questions from local
agencies an e oor mate the program within the Department.
If you have suggestions on how you would like to see this
program managed, or if you or your staff have any questions,
please contact me at ATSS 8-492-9015.
1
i
i~;~,, C~ ~~, ~~. lt'~~, % titi
RICHARD L. BLUNDEN, Chief
Office of Bicycle Facilities
Attachment
cc: AHendrix
AWrenn
PHudson
JWOlf
MAros
1Z5\L
~~~il
State of Cal(fornia
IVlemorandum
To: Deputy District Directors
For Planning and Public
Transportation
From: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Division of Highways
E~` c.~
Business, Transportation and Housing Agency
Date: June 6, 1991
File:
Subject: Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act-Bicycle Guidelines
Attached for your information is a copy of the Clean Air
and Transportation Act (Proposition 116, 1990) Bicycle
Guidelines. They were conditionally approved by the California
Transportation Commission (CTC) on April 25, 1991. Final
copies became available from CTC staff on May 29, 1991,
The guidelines describe the process local agencies must
follow to apply for the S20 million for grants for bicycle
commuter facilities.
Below are some of the highlights:
• The CTC will make available S4 million per year for five
years.
• A local agency may not receive more than S1 million per
year per project.
• Up to five percent of a grant may be used for preliminary
engineering and design, but not for feasibility or
planning studies.
• A bicycle commuter is defined as a bicyclist making a
trip for transportation purposes such as travel to work,
school, shopping, or other activity center, rather than
for exercise or recreational purposes.
Projects may include bicycle lanes, paths, roadway
widening, restriping, shoulders, grading, drainage,
paving, barriers, landscaping, right of way, traffic
control devices, signs, shelters, lockers, parking
facilities, bicycle racks on transit vehicles, etc.
• Funds will not be awarded to construct separate .
paths un e s the Department determines that they
used principally by bicycle commuters.
I'~ c~,o. ~v o a
B~
T0: City of Ukiah Traffic Engineering Committee~~
FROM: Steve Turner, Manager of Operations, MTA
DATE: September 10, 1991
SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance for allowing Benches and Shelters on Sidewalks
Attached are draft guidelines for the location of bus stop benches and shelters.
These guidelines were adopted from the Sacramento Regional Transit's Design
Guidelines for Bus and Light Rail Facilities. Also consulted were similar
guidelines for Alameda-Contra Costa County Transit and Orange County Transit
District.
Please review and discuss the content as well as the format of this draft and
provide me with further direction.
241 Plant Road - Ukiah, California 95482 - (707) 462-5765
Mendocino Transit Authority
5.0 BUS SHELTERS
Bus shelters are covered, semi-enclosed waiting areas with benches at bus stops.
Bus shelters offer protection from inclement weather conditions, provide for
passenger comfort, and establish a transit presence within a local area.
5.1 Placement Guidelines
Bus shelters may be installed at:
(a) Bus stops with a large number of passenger boardings per day.
(b) Bus stops near medical facilities, shopping, and areas with a high
proportion of senior citizens, disabled residents, or school-age
children.
Bus shelters may also be installed at existing or proposed bus stops adjacent to
specific developments by the developer/owner as a transit amenity. Such
installations must be coordinated with MTA.
Bus shelters should meet the following minimum placement guidelines:
1. Shelters located adjacent to buildings should be placed a minimum of
8-inches away from the building wall to allow for cleaning.
2. Shelters should not be placed so as to obstruct sidewalks or access to
and from transit vehicles.
3. Shelters should not be placed where they obstruct visibility at street
intersections or where vehicles exit onto an arterial from a private
roadway or driveway.
Figure 5-1 illustrates a typical bus stop design with shelter placement.
5.2 Design Guidelines
Bus shelter designs can vary considerably, from a single standardized structure, to
a fully integrated design treatment when provided by developers or other sources
(i.e., property owners, City, County, etc.). Bus shelters should, however, be
easily recognizable as a bus stop and be consistent with the standard design
specifications provided by MTA, especially if MI'A is responsible for their
maintenance.
Where architectural concerns inhibit this consistency, specific designs must be
submitted to MTA and will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Figure 5-2
illustrates a typical bus shelter design.
5-1
._ ~n
.,
12" '-_O 12"
4~~ A.C.
LEANING RAIL ; ~
I ! it
I BENCH ~ I
I ~~ ~
SCHEDULE '
HOLDER ~ i ; i
N
PUBLIC WAL ~ _'' ~
O Z ••
~ ~'.
BUS SHELTER PLACEMENT
t/I FlGURE 5 -I
i
i
5-2
~OF
SCIA
1LLION
ANING~
.IL
IUARE
ISTS
I I/
. J
Q
4~-9~~ IV2~~
S
BUS SHELTER DESIGN
l
FIGURE ' S-2
5-3
9-2~~MWIMUM INSID IM N I
2=fig MAXIMUM BETWEEN DIVIDER
All bus shelters, regardless of design, should meet the minimum guidelines given
below:
1. Bus shelters should be constructed of tough, weather-and-vandal-resistant
materials (i.e, brick, wood, metal, tempered glass, etc.) that do not
require any special cleaning solvents, painting, repair tools, etc.
Components requiring routine, time-based replacement should not be
included. All components should be easily removable to facilitate
maintenance.
2. Bus shelters must be constructed so as not to pose safety hazards to
passengers or to other individuals.
3. Free-standing shelters should be placed on a non-slip concrete pad sloped
toward the roadway for drainage, with the minimum dimensions of the pad to
be 10-feet x 6-feet x 4-inches.
4. Curb cuts and ramps should be provided for wheelchair access, as
necessary.
5. Minimum clearance of 4-feet from the curb is recommended (5-feet is
desirable) for the front, sides, and rear for free-standing shelters to
provide for wheelchair access.
6. Shelters should have an opening from grade to the bottom of the wall
panel of at least 6-inches for ventilation, prevention of trash
accumulation, and drainage.
7. Roof and support structure of the shelter should be designed to hold a
load of 40 pounds per square foot, and designed so that drainage is sloped
away from the street side of the shelter.
8. Benches installed in bus shelters should be at least 6-feet long and be
made of a hardwood or other durable material (such as aluminum).
9. Bus shelters may have bike racks (minimum Class III) which should be
placed at the rear and should have a minimum allowance of 4-feet on the
sides and a minimum maneuvering space allowance of 9.5-feet. (See Bicycle
Storage Facilities, Section 18.0).
In addition, for passenger safety, security, and convenience, MTA recommends that
bus shelters be provided with lighting where the existing outdoor lighting level is
inadequate. Lighting fixtures should be easily maintained and vandal-resistant,
and placed to maximize passenger illumination.
5-4
Public telephones, bicycle racks (see Bicycle Storage Facilities, Section 18.0),
waste cans, route and schedule information holders and newspaper racks may also be
incorporated into the bus shelter design. They should be placed so as not to
obstruct access to the bus.
A building overhang or awning may substitute for a bus shelter. In many instances,
this may be more aesthetic than a free-standing shelter and improve pedestrian
access to the bus stop. Figure 5-3 illustrates an example of a building overhand
used as a bus shelter.
5-5
~m.~
SIDEWALK T FLOOR
ARCADE
SETBACK
BUILDING OVERHANG AS
A NATURAL 8US SHELTER
FIGURE S - 3
5-6
6.0 BUS BENCHES
Bus benches are a convenience amenity provided for passenger comfort.
6.1 Placement Guidelines
Bus benches should meet the following placement guidelines:
1. Bus benches should be placed no closer than 5-feet and no farther than 12
-feet from the forward end of any bus stop, to remove it from passenger
loading and unloading areas.
2. Bus benches should be placed facing the street.
3. No bus bench should be closer than 2-feet from the street curb to
adequately allow for pedestrian movement in front of the bus bench.
4. When placed on a sidewalk, a bus bench should have a minimum clearance of
4-feet (5-feet is desirable) at the side and rear, to allow for wheelchair
access at the bus stop.
Where sidewalks are narrow, benches should be placed behind the sidewalk so that
adequate width exists for pedestrians and wheelchair users. In this case, the
bench should be installed at a location, and on a "bench pad".
Figure 6-1 illustrates bus bench placement at a standard design bus stop with bench
only.
6.2 Design Guidelines
Bus bench designs can be varied but should meet the following design guidelines:
1. Bus benches should be comfortable, constructed of durable, weather-and
-vandal-resistant materials, and be pleasing in appearance.
2. Bus benches should include an upright back support and be able to seat 3
to 4 people. Recommended dimension: 8-feet long.
(seat height).
3. Benches should be integrated into the landscape and architectural style of
the project site and facility design.
6-1
PROPERTY LINE
_i
., o
• 'a
-- PUBLIC WALK
...',
:~'~t
. rl~.
,~
-- _..~I~
~ BUS BENCH
o z ~-~ ~ -~
a ~ ~~ FACE OF CURB
STREET CURB
PAINTED RED
8US STOP SfuN
PLANTER
~- ROADWAY
BUS BENCH PLACEMENT
F16URE 6 - I
6-2
18.0 BICYCLE STORAGE FACILITIES
Bicycle storage facilities range from simple racks to lockers. The provision of
bicycle storage facilities at transit stops, is one method of encouraging transit,
and bicycle use as an access mode.
18.1 Placement Guidelines
Bicycle storage facilities should be provided in transit trip origination areas
such as park-and-ride facilities, high passenger volume bus stops, etc., to
generate maximum rider and transit user protential.
Potential sites for bicycle storage facilities should be at bus stops where two or
more bus routes meet, park-and-ride facilities and transit centers. Figure 18-1
illustrates a typical placement design at a bus stop with, and without, a bus
shelter.
Bicycle storage facilities must be located in the public right-of-way, or at sites
with an easement license agreement from the property owner(s).
18.2 Design Guidelines
Bicycle storage facilities can either be open (e.g., bicycle racks) or enclosed
(e .g. bicycle lockers).
Bicycle racks require a minimum allowance of 9.5-feet for maneuvering space into
the rack with an additional 4-feet allowance on each side of the bicycle rack.
18-1
BICYCLE LOCKER
PARKING\
PLANTER
BUS STOP FLAG
PUBLIC WALK
TRANSIT SHELTER
ROADWAY
BICYCLE LOCKERS
PARKING
I~I I l to
PLANTER
BUS STOP FLA
PUBLIC WALK
LIGHT POLE
CROSS WALE
ROADWAY
l BICYCLE STORAGE FACILITY AT 8US STOPS
FIGURE 18-I
18-2
_ _. __ . _ ,~ ~_.v.... ~, .~_,.f.. _- .. , ~,-~_.
CLASS I
BICYCLE LOCKERS
CLASS 2
LOCK BAR
CLASS 3
BICYCLE RACKS
~ BICYCLE STORAGE FACILITIES
FIGURE 18-2
18-3
I,a hOPctwrJT; ;i;)a
~~~t+~;~. ~/,%,•c- -~t ~ /~ ATTAC}IMENT A
PAGE 1
o Local agencies must fund at least 10 percent of the
cost as required b;- Section ^378, Streets and Iighways
Code. ^io agency may receive more than 25 percent of the
total funds appropriated fcr this program as stated in
Ser,ti.on 390 of the Streets and Highways Code (that is
$90,000).
o Any city or county submitting a project proposal must
have a General Bikec.a1° Plan (GBP) which has peen
reviewed and approved by the D1V15:LUn of Transportation
Planning, Office of F.egional Planning.
o The progx•am is funded by gasoline taxes whose
expenditure must be justified th!•ough improved capacity
or safety on an existing local street or highway.
'Thus, the project proposal must show that the
'oicyclists expected to use L-he new facility are now
riding on state, county or city roadways approximately
parallel to the bil;=way, or that motorists would be
willing to change their mode of commute to tT.e bicycle
if the facility is L-uilt.
o Project proposals mast be received in the District by
December I, 199J for projects which the local agency
intends to begin during the following year. Proposals
should be submitted for only those projects where.
cooperative agreement= with other grcups such as
railroads, utilities, flood control districts, coastal
commissions, etc., are ahead; comp.'_eted or will be
completed prior to contract award,
o Project proposals mu5~ include arc a minimum; accurate
locatior. dcscriFtions, an estimate of project costs
including preliminary anu construction engineering,
right of way and const.~_uction costs. The agency's
estimatr. should cove: only those items for which they
intend to claim rei.mbttrsement. For example, if they do
not want to be reimbursed for preliminary engineering,
and/or right of way, sT.ow these items as zero costs.
We do not expect c: detailed estimate at this time, but
we do :seed enough information in th°_s estimate to be
sure that nonparticipating items, such as landscaping,
are nut included.
o Although the local agency is not required to furnish
full project PS&E until aft=r approval of the proposal,
they should be aware that the project will have to
conform to the m'r.in:um design standards for bikeways as
set, forth in the Hi.~h»ay Design 9lamtal Bikeway Planning
and Design (7-1000). If the project i.s approved for
funding, the local agency will be expected to Frovide
plans and specificaticns for District review prior to
ad~-erti::ing.
ATTACHMENT A
PAGE 2
0 T'he rules and regulations call for a traffic diagram
:which shows existing daily commuting bicycle traffic on
roadways adjacent to the project. They also call for
;,n estimate of the commuting bicycle traffic expected
to use i:he tikeways and adjacent roadways one year
after completion. These are necessary to comply with
the legislation which requires that the projects serve
the functional needs of commuting bicyclists.
o Section 2386 of the Streets and Highways Code lists the
guidelines for a1_locating funds. Project proposals
should follow the guidelines for project applications
as indicated in this section.
The provisions of the California Bikecaays Act are
rrovided in the Streets and Highways Code, Section 2370
through 2392.
ATTACHMENT B
PAGE 1
General Bikeway Plan
Requirements
This Bikeway Plan shall include as a minimum, the following
elements:
(A) Route Selection which shall include, but not be limited to,
the commuting needs of employees, businessmen, shoppers and
students. (Some of this data is available in the Regional
Transportation Plan.)
(B) Land use of the areas adjacent to the bike routes. (This
data is usually available in the city or county master
plan.) Population density and settlement patterns of the
areas adjacent to the bike routes.
(C) Transportation interface, which shall include, but not be
limited to, coordination with other modes of transportation
so that a bicyclist may employ multiple modes of
transportation in reaching his destination. (This data is
available in the Public Transportation Inventory.)
(D) Citizen and community involvement in planning. (The
Transportation Commission's Citizen Advisory Committee could
fulfill this requirement.)
(E) Flexibility and coordination with long-range transportation
planning. (The close coordination with the Regional
Transportation Plan could fulfill this requirement.)
(F) Local eovernment involvement in planning. (This planning
requirement can be accomplished through the Transportation
Commission's Technical Advisory Committee.)
(G} Proti•ision for rest facilities, including, but not limited
to, rest rooms, drinking water, public telephones, and air
for bicycle tires. (This data could be shown on the plans
or statement of availability.)
(H) Provision for oarkinQ facilities, including but not limited
to, bicycle parking with theft prevention devices located
at, business districts, shopping centers, schools, parks and
playgrounds, and other locations where people congregate.
(Much of this data can be acquired from the school
districts, libraries, etc.)
Generally speaking, it is the District Local Streets and Roads
Engineers' responsibility to see that the above requirements are
incorporated in the bikeway plan prior to review and subsequent
approval by the Department of Transportation Planning.
D]STRICT "r - A. notifies agency of GIIP approval
b. Notifies agency GBP not approved - agency to
address comments and begin process again.
General Bikeway Plan review is not required yearly.
Plodifications, revisions and updates to GBP s}•,ould be forwarded
for review as Lhey occur.
ATTACHMENT C
PAGE I
BICYCLE LANE ACCOUNT
GENERAL BIKEWAY PLAN GBP)
FLOWCHART PROCESS
RESPONSIBILITY ACTION
AGENCI' 1 - Develops General Bike Plan - local governing body
approves
2 - Submits plan to District Local Streets and Roads
DISTRICT 3 - Submits to Headquarters Uffice of Local Streets
and Roads
OLSR ~ - Logs in plan and forwards to Ieadquarters DOTP for
review
DOTP 5 - Reviews GBP and appro~-es or comments on
deficiencies - notifies Office of Local Streets
and Roads of results of review
OLSR 6 - notifies District Local Streets and Roads of
approval or comments on the GBP
a. Keeps approved GBP on file fcr referral and
notifies District of approval
b. ;~etifies District GBP not approved and cf
cvmments made
DISTRICT 7 - A. Notifies agency of GBP apl:royal
b. Notifies agency GBF not approved - agency to
address comments and begir, process again.
General Bikeway Flan review is not required yearly.
Piodificativns, revisions and updates to GBP should be forwarded
for review as they- occur.
07/05/91 11:17 $445 63 " ELEC. OFFICE i~005
ATTACHMENT C
PAGE 2
BICYCLE LAKE ACCOUNT FLOWCIIAP,T
CONTRACT PROPOSAL, COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, PS&E AND PAYMENTS PROCEDURES
Responsibility Action
OLSR 1 - Develop and send project proposal information package
to Districts (August 1989) _
District 2 - Develop and send project proposal information packages
to the agency.
Agency 3 - Develop project proposals for projects included in the
approved GBP and submit to the District Local Streets
and Roads office b)• December 1, 1989.
District 9 - Rer-iews projec±s for commuter ar,d utilitarian value and
determines that the project is in compliance with the
intent of the California Bikeway Act. (Caltrans
Statutes, Chapter 8, California Bikeways Actl.
Prioritizes submitted projects. Submits priorit)~ list
with proposed projects to OLSk b)~ December 20, 1989.
OLSk v - Reviews and evaluates the District proposed projects
for statewide priority. Adjusts priority list
(depending on what arrangements are made b)• OLSR -
nther individuals, offices and/cr divisions pan advise
in the- F,r•oject selection)
fi - Consult with Financial Operations & Control and
determine available funds for programming in 7990.
7 - Determine which projects will be funded in 1990.
8 - Notify Districts by letter of which projects were
funded for 1990, integrated into the priority list for
future funding and which projects were rejected and
why. Assigns BLA 90 numbers t.o selected projects.
UISTRICT 9 - Notifies the local agency.
GLSR 10 - Develops 2 original cooperative agreements for each
project (with Exhibit A) for 199C funded projects.
lI - Advist's Pintrncial Operations & Control of project
selection an3 exact amount programmed.
DFOC 12 - Certifies Lhxt funds are available to finance i.l~o
Bic)'cle Lane Account share of the project cost.
OLSR 13 - Corwards cooperative agreements to Districts.
DISTRICT 1-1 - Forwards cooperative agreements to agency for signature
and governing body resulution.
ATTACHMENT C
PAGE 3
AGENCY 15 - Signs agreements and develops resolution then forwards
to District.
DISTRICT 16 - Reviews and approves by stoning cooperative agreements.
I9 - Forwards to OLSR for final r•eview• and signature
approval by June 1, 1990.
OLSR 23 - Sins and forwards one original to financial Operations
& Control and sends the other original to the District.
DISTRICT 19 - Forwards signed cooperative agreement to agency.
AGENCY 20 - Develops FS&E and forwards to District for review ar:d
approval.
DISTRICT `Lla. Approves FSbE
b. States w•h}' it is not approved and advises agency.
AGENCY 22a. Awards oonstruction contract by December 31, 1990,
b. Establishes why that is impossible and requests a time
extension from the District.
DISTRICT 1. Concurs with time e~;tension and forwards request
tc CLSP. for approved.
2. Rc-jects time extension ra•~,uest. a::d r;ntifies OLSR.
OLSR '.'.3 - Approves or rejects time e?:tension request - advises
D9 st rict.
a. District advises agency extension approved.
b. Extension rejected cooperati+-e agreement is now
void - money is reverted for future programming.
AGENCY 24 - o *lcnitors project construction
o Completed project accepted by the 1ccal agency
o Requests payment w/invoice and letter stating
project is acceptable t.o agency then forwards to
District office.
DISTRICT 25 - o Reviews request and invoice (with agency's
Department of Finance address and contact person)
o ]aspects 2>roject
a. Advises OLSR that the agency and the District
accept the project as complete and when
inspected was determined to be .in compliance
with Highway Design Manual "-1000.
b. P.eject.s project. and advises agency project
must be in compliance with Highway Design
Manual Section 5-1000 - Keview begins a6ain.
rnvu t
OLSR 26 - Revier:s submitted invoice against file cooperative
agreement then forwards to Financial Operations &
Control requesting payment.
DFOC 27 - Authorizes Department of Finance to make out check to
reimburse agency.
FINANCE 28 - Makes payment to agency's Department of Finance.
ATTACHMENT D
ATTACHMENT D
PAGE 1
California State Administrative Code
SUBCHAPTER 10
Bicycle Lane Account
1470.1. Definitions.
The following terms when used in this subchapter have the
following meanings:
(a} "Department" means the Department of Transportation of
the State of California.
(b) "bicycle Lane Account" means the account established in
the State Transportation Fund by Section 2382 of the Streets and
Highways Code.
(c) "Project costs" means all costs reasonably necessary to
construct the project.
1470.2. Application for Funds.
!a) A1] application for funds must be received by the
Department on or before December i, preceding the calendar year
in r.hich construction of the project is to commence.
(b) ApFaications far funds must contain the following
information:
(1) An estimate of the project cost showing the cost
of preliminary and construction engineerin,, right of way
acquisition, and construction.
(2) For bi}~:eway projects, a set of plans including a
location plan and typical cross-section. For other projects, a
description of the hazards to be eliminated or supplemental
facilities to be provided.
(3) For hi l:eraay projects, a traffic diagram showing
the e~:isting average daily commuting bicycle traffic on the
roadways ndjac:ent to the project and a traffic diagram showing
the estimated average daily commuting bicycle traffic on the
bikeway, and on the adjacent roadways one year after com},let.ion
cf the project. For other projects, the average daily commuting
traffic usiuQ the existing facility or expected to use the
proposed facilities.
(•1 ) P, certification that sufficient city or co,.inty
funds are available to finance the local agency share of the
project. costs (at least. 10 percent}.
ATTACHMENT D
PAGE 2
1490.3. Allocation of Funds.
(a) After the Pepar*_ment has determined the total cost of
eligible projects, it shall establish a priority list showing all
projects for which funds are available and shall distribute the
list to all applicants.
(b} If funds are available for an eligible project, but
will not reduce local agency share to ten percent of the project
cost because of the allocation limit set out in Section 2390 of
the Streets and Highways Code, the Department shall notify said
local agency, The affected local agency will retain its priority
if it certifies within 30 days of notification *_hat it has
sufficient funds to finance t}ie deficit or that the scope of the
project may be reduced to bring its share to ten percent without
substantial detriment to the purpose of the pr-cject. If thv
affected local agency does act certify, the project will be
deferred.
(c) All allocations caill be subject to the execution of
appropriate agreerner.ts between the Department and the local
agency relative to design standards, the handling and accounting
of funds, time for completion and all other phases of the
project.
pa AdOvllJr'J 'b TOA
MS~ED f7
APR 2 51991
eu_®su
1I1aRf/ORTlTi C~~~tyq~
CALI:OZVZA TRANS?ORTATION CO:S`SZSSION
POLIG_3S FOR T'dE
CL=.~:t AR AND TFta.`iS20RTATION L'SsROP~~IT ACT
BZCYCL-: CIIIDELINES
Resolution No. G-91-4
GE~'igAL POLICIES
1. The Commission, as thz desi3:.a:ed policy body in the [Lean Air a.d
Transportation Imp:ovemenc Act (CATIA) of 1990, will implenenc the CATI:~
in a finely, cos: e=feccive, a:.d efficient manner.
2. The Commission shall, to the except feasible, integrate the CATIA
process with the Scace Transportation Lmprovenent Progran (STIP) and
Transit Capital Improvement (TCI) prog:aa process to minimize multiple
application cycles and duplicate applications, while not delaying any
CATLa projects proposed for funding.
3. The Commission will award grants as specified in the C?.TIA and ensure
that the is L^plenented owe: the tern of the Act from 1990 to 2010.
4. The Commission prefers to implement this gran[ program so as to assure
that use of CATLa funds will implement bicycle facilities no lacer than
Lilt year 2DDD.
5. The Commission will seek to maximize the use of funds in the CATIA and
other funding sources to provide bicycle facilities.
6. The Commission will only accept grant applications for bicycle projects
as defined or identified in the CATIA (see Policy 30).
7. The Commission shall require that grants for the establishment of
separate bicycle paths and ways be awarded only if the California
Department of Transportation determines that the route will be
principally used by bicycle commuters.
8. The Commission intends that if CATIA bond issues are not sold as
anticipated, the amount available to each grant applicant during that
time period will be reduced proportionately for that bond issue as
allowed by PUC.Section 99604.
9. Supplemental Funding:
a. The CATIA does not require matching funds for bicycle projects.
Preference will be given to projects chat have supplemental
funding from federal, state, local or private fund sources.
- 2 -
b. CATIA funds cannot be used to fulfill matching requirerents of
other state funds.
10. The Commission shall request, before the implementation dame of 2000,
that local and regional agencies suggest substitute projects to zaplace
the original CATIA project; if funds remain unencumbered, or if the
project proves infeasible or is uncompleted by the implementation dares
- set forth in the CATIA; the Coomission intends to make project and
funding recomaenda=ions to Cha Legislacu:a for substitute state•:ida
projects.
11. The Commission shall reviev arZUally, and as necessary, aaerd the CATIA
policy guidelines, application guidelines, and financial guideli^.as co
ensure that the program reflects the currant statutes, as ve11 as
Commission policies and programs.
?20GR.a.`t ?OLICIcS
12. A11 grant applicants shall coordinate and vozk closely with t:.a
Commission (through its staff or consultant) and a:":acted age::cias
during the early preparation stages of the grant applicatior, prior to
submittal. Advance reviev by the Commission and the affected agencies
is intended to assure timely reviev of the grant application submittal.
Applicants are required to submit a complete application for an:.ua1
element projects. The CTC will reviev and approve annual element
projects. The Commission will allocate funds to a project attar
approval of the project application. The project must have c`:e
appropriate enviro:mental clearance prior to fund allocation.
11. Complete applications for bicycle projects shall be submitted by the
grant applicant co the Commission, as ve11 as the Depar~ent of
Transportation and transportation planning agencies for revie•: and
comaent.
a. The grant applicant shall respond to the comments as a part of its
complete application for funds and submit its responses to the
commenting agency and to the Commission.
b. Where multiple funding sources are involved and approval must be
given by the appropriata Ragional Transportation Planning Agency
- (R2?A) on the non-CATLa funds, then the RT?A shall vichin e:o
months of the receipt of the complete application for funds
indicate that non-CATLa funds have been requested and submit its
response to the Commission. The non-CATIA funds must be approved
and confirmed, prior co allocation of CATIsI funds or allocation
will be denied. This policy does not relieve ehe grant applicant
from complying with other State statutes chat mandate project
• reviev and approval.
14. The Commission shall accept complete applications for annual element
projects on an annual calendar cycle, to be determined by the
Commission.
- 3 -
13. Subject to its approval, the Coc~ission Jil'_ a'_lov any public agency
identified in the CdTI:I or in the application guidelines as an eligible
applicant, to transfer its a?plicant sca.i; co another public ag=_ncy
that accepts the rights and resporsibiliry to implement and deliver the
project.
16c The Commission shall amend all approved CA=LF projects by resolution or.
an ongoing basis into the current State I:ansportation Improvement
Program.
FIVA.vC7.1L/FL'i:IDI:2G POLICIES
17. The Commission intends to adopt the financial guidelines for the
transfer and expenditure o° funds the: are consistent with Section 164.4
of the Streets and Highvays Code.
13. T'ne Co;~ission intends co allocate CAiL~ f~_cds in a manner chat
minimizes the state debt service on the bond issues. The Coc~ission
will allocate funds only on an as needed reimbursement basis. The
Commission's approval of a complete application will delineate the
state's share of the total project cost acd fo: the grant applicant's
purpose shall also serve as a verificatio^. latter of Che state's fundi.^.g
commitment.
19. the Commission will use its Five-Point Strategy for Program Delivery
Reform (itG-90-21), Cost Monitoring Polic•; (yC-90-11), and Timely Use of
Funds Policy (3~G-88-6) to ensure that the grant applicant shall provide
bicycle facilities in a timely and cost e_'icient manner. I' the project
is delayed, the grant applicant shall describe the causes of the cost
increases, and detail measures to fwZd tie increases, and cost control
measures on future project costs.
20. C.~TL4 funds are not subject to the South/`7orth split and county minimums
except where applicable under Sections 158.0 and 188.8 of the Streets
and Highvays Code.
21. CaTL~. funds may be used co enhance a cocpletad bicycle project if a cost
savings exists pursuant to the Commission's Cost Saving Policy
(/~C-90-9) .
22, The Commission shall require that the grant applicants demonstrate they
have the financial capacity to construct and maintain the project, as
yell as the financial and institutional ability to accept the legal
liabilities and obligations.
23. Project cost shall be based on the first annual complete application
submitted and approved by the Commission.
24. If projects exceed the cost proposed by :.he grant applicant, then the
grant applicant shall cover the cost increases with federal funds, those
state funds which are not programmed or allocated by the Commission,
local funds, or private funds.
4
2i. CATIA funds shall be expended with other funding sources in a
proportionate manner during the implementation of the project. The
intent of the Commission is to allocate funds throughout all of the
project to ensure that reasoraSle progress and project implemenca=ion
occurs.
PROJECT POLICY
26. The Commission will alloy up to SZ of the grant a'_location for pre-
construction work such as preliainary engineering and design, but not
feasibility or planning studies.
ELIGIBILITY POLICIES
27. The Cor~ission shall accept applications from the eligible applicants as
defined in PAC Section 99601(1).
26. Tne Commission will fund and a'_Locate monies only for those activities
which it considers to be eligible based upon the activities defined in
the Act and the application guidelines.
JIISTIFICATION POLICY
29. A grant applicant may request the Commission, during its application, to
waive a specific policy or policies in the policy guidelines. The grant
applicant shall justify the waiver by responding in full to comments and
requests for data and infor~ation from the Commission, the Depar~enc of
Transportation, transportation planning agencies, trarportation
commissions, affected crarsit districts, and affected cities, counties
and agencies.
The affected agencies shall submit their comments to the appropriate
RT?A to assemble the comments and responses for submittal to the
Commission for consideration and action (see Policy 13). The Commission
will consider the applicant's justification request, comments submitted
by affected agencies via the RT_?A and other information received from
interested parties. The Commission will make a formal finding by
resolution, to either deny or grant a partial waiver or waive the policy
- or policies in the policy guidelines for that annual cycles of full
project application and annual request for funds. Future submittals of
complete applications ara not exempt from the Commission's policies
without a resubmictal of a justification vaivez request and approval of
this resubmittal by the Commission.
DEFINITION:
30. Bicycle project means (PUG Section 99650) capital outlay for bicycle
improvement projects which improve safety and convenience for bicycle
commuters.
Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act
BIC:CLE P20JECT APPLICATIOV GL'IDcLI`:'cS
I. PLZe POSE e1:iD ?.~Tr.C2II-i
The Clean Air and Transportation Inprovement Act (CATIA) makes available $20
million to fund a prograa of competitive grants to local agencies for capita'_
outlay for bicycle i=provenent projects which improve salary and cor.•~e-zence
for bicycle coc:.ucers.
These guidelines are intended to assist in the submission of applications for
bicycle projects under the CAT_IA. Applications will be evaluatyd on how the
project encourages bicycle coe~uting and coordinates with other trarsportatior.
modes.
Tha guidelines imple.>_at the CAI LA Program in accordance with the basic
programs requireaents ystablished in Sections 99000 et seq. o= the Pnb1_`c
Utilities Code, as ad~ed by Proposition 116 (Jura 1990). PtiC Section 99560(a)
requires that programs g•.udelin>_s be adopted by the California Transportation
Commission. T::e progra3 has a to cal of 51.99 billion in State bonding
authority.
II. ELICIBI °. 2~°9LICa:~iS
Eligibly fund applicants are "Local Agencies", which means a county, city,
city and couarj, coon-/ transportation commission, county transportation
authority, transit development board, transit district, or any joint powers
agency specified in the CATZA.
III. QCALIc~:iVG BICYCL' P40J3CTS
Eligible projects include the construction, improvement, acquisition and ocher
capital expenditures associated with bicycle projects which improve sa=e~j and
convenience for bicycle commuters (PUC Section 996501. Bicycle commuter is
defined as a bicyclist making a trip for transportation purposes such as
travel to wort, to school, shopping or other activity center, rather than far
exercise or recreational purposes.
Eligible projects may also include, but are not limited to: bicycle lanes,
paEhs, shoulders; grading, drainage, paving, barriers, landscaping, and
structures needed co accommodate users of the facility; fixed-source lighting
where appropriate; right-of-way (land acquisition and relocation assistance);
bikeway grade sepazation; tzaffic control devices; provision of signs
designating bicycle transportation routes; conversion of railroad rights-of-
vay to bikeways; supplementary features such as shelters and parking and
storage facilities; installation of bicycle racks an transit vehicles; roadway
widening, restriping, parking removal for bicycles, bicycle bridge, and
adjustment of traffic-actuated signals to make them bicycle sensitive.
- 2 -
Crarts for the establishaent of separate bicycle paths and ways shall b>_
awarded only if the Ca1i_ornia Depart=enc of Transportation dete:nires t..at
the route established will be principally used by bicycle eoamuters.
IV. ELZGIBL' ACTIVITZcS
Prelimina_y engineering, right-of-way purchase, and final project desig^
associated with a specific capital project ara the only allowable project
development costs within the total project cost. Fe asibili:f planni,3 a,d
enviror~ental assesscents are not eligible project development cos:;.
Project costs incurred prior eo state allocation of the funds ara not eligible
for reisbursement and the project scope may not be significantly altered after
programing and before tae allocation is mach without the express vritt>_^.
corsent of the Coc:.issior..
~i. FI::: _`;CI ~L RQ~iI3=`:=\iS
A. Each application must supply all data required for eval_a:'_on and
shall be accoapanied by a plan describing how the grant f•_-.ds rill
be used, what other capital funds ara available for tae project
and how chose funds will be used.
Tha plan must include a cash expenditure plan which idanti_:as the
cash flow necessary for the impleaencationjconpletion o: t:.e
project.
B. Allocation of Funds
P.:e co;~issian will allocate funds to a project after eva'_uation
and approval of the application.
The project aunt have the appropriate environmental cleara-ca
prior to an allocation of funds.
VI. PROJECT EVALUATIO:t
A. Screening Criteria
Statutory Eligibility - The applicant is an eligible elaiaar.t for
- CATIA funds, pursuant to Section 49650 of the Clean air and
Transportation Improvement Act of 1990.
Policy Board Approval - The applicant's policy board/body has
approved the project and the project fund application.
Financial Capacity - The applicant has the financial capacity co
construct and maintain the project.
Timely Use of Funds - The applicant can obligate/encumber/expend
the funds for the proposed project within 15 months after
Commission project approval and allocation.
- 3 -
Appropriate Use of Funds = The applicant de~onscrates that the
project will improve sa_`ecy and con•~enience fo: bicycle coc~autars.
(The Department of Transportation Snd11 d2t2r~Lne that
applications to construct separate bicycle paths and ways (e.g.
Class I facility) will be principally used by bicycle commuters
pursuant to PUC Section 99o50(b)).
Plans - The applicant shall provide documenta on daconscracing
local support for the project; doc.imentation types include:
shoving the project's consistency with an adopted bicycle plan or
circulation element of a General Plan, congestion manage:~ent plan.,
regional crarsportation plan, transportation control measure plan,
or ocher regional plan.
Design Standards - Bicycle projects shall be designed where
applicable in conformity with the latest design. criteria described
in Cha?tar 1000 of eha Highway Design `!aaual, "3:<zvay Planning
and Design".
B. Evaluation (Ranking) Criteria
The applicant shall demonstrate that the project will provide for
ore or more of the following:
- Elimination or improvement of a problem area on routes that
serve bicycla cocaucers.
- Improvements that provide for a continuous iacerconnected
route to provide reasonably direct access eo vor'.c, to
school, shopping and other activity centers rather than
recreational trips
- Provisions that facilitate bicycle/tra.-uic trips.
- Cost of the project compared to similar ones constructed in
the state in comparable urban/nLral areas.
- Coordination of an overall bicycle or transportation
nerrozk; or in linking activity centers.
- A joint project that is sponsored by multi-jurisdictional
agencies.
- Inczeased safety that will result from the project.
- Financial commitment shoving percent of federal, scare local
or private funding for the project.
- Letters of support from local schools, citizens, bicycle
organizations, businesses to demons trace local support for
the project.
• 4 -
- Degrae that the project will se: 1e utilitarian
transportation uses such as trips co von;:, to school,
shon~i^.3 and otter activity canters rather than racrza=?or.a:
trips. -
- Evidence of ongoing financial commitment co bike•.ray
developmenC, as demonstrated by the percentage of local
transportation funds (Transportation Development Act) or
local funds expendzd on bicycle facilities during tan
Current and past t•:o fiscal years.
VII. A-°PLICATION PROCc55
Applicants are required to submit a eoaplete a>plication for annual eleeent
projects. The Commission. will review and approve annual element projects or.
an annual basis. The a??lication process for the CATIA funds is outlinad
below.
Applicants subait applications for annual project co Coamission,
Calcrans and the regional agency(ies).
Regional agency(ies) and Caltrans reviavs and com.:.eats on projects
received and sends comaents to Coaaission.
The Commission shall set the fu^.ding for the annual CATL,a bicycle
program at $4 million./year over a five year period, but may set tae
amount at a different level, if conpecition for funding shoes twat tae
amount is insufficient. The maximum coami~ent of Pron_osition 116 funds
is limited to $1 million/year/project.
Note: Reference to "regional agency" includes R:?As, couary transportation
comnissions, transportation authorities, etc.
- 5 -
Application for FY 1991-92 Funds
CATZA Fuad Progras
Bicycle Projects
A:i~ZiAL EL`ti:T PnOJECTS
YA_RT 1. TITI=. A.V'D CI2:T_:ICATION
Applicant Agency:
ALdress:
Contact Person:
Tale hone ::o.:
Project Title:
Project Location (Cou^.-y, City or Cities):
A:ount of Pro?. 115 Funds Requested in FY 1992-93: $
To the bast of my lczovledge and belief, the data and information in this
application is true and correct and I am authorized to file this application
on behalf of the ap?licanc.
Name 6 Title:
Signature: Date:
6 -
PA_~T 2. C0:^fISSZON SCRE'sNINC CRITERIA
Does your agency/project meet the statutory requirement to-bz eLigiblz
for CASIA funding, pursuant to Seceion 99030 of thz CLean Air a::d
'Transportation Improvement Act of 1990?
([ Yes [] No
Does your agency have the financial ability to implement, opzrace and
maintain the proposed project?
[] Yes [] No
Has your agency's policy board body approved the project and the projzc=
fund application (attach certified resolution or othzr doce+zntation
shoving policy board approval)?
[] Yes (] No
Has your agency completed, or will it complete prior co begi^ring the
project, the rzquired environmental documentation, pursur.t to the
Ca1i_fornia Environnencal Quality Act (CEQA)?
[] Yes [] No
Ui11 your agency be able co obligate/encumber/expend funds for the
proposed project at least 15 aonths after project approval and
allocation?
[J Yes [] No
Is t.'te project designed in conformity with the standards set forth in
Chapter 1000 of the Highway Design :ianual, "Bikeway Planning and
Design"?
(] Yes [J No
Is your agency's proposed project identified in a Regional/Loca1 P'_an?
[] Yes [j No
Identify the plan(s):
Has your agency submitted the fund application to the appropriate
regional transportation agency, as well as to affected agencies for
review and comment?
[J Yes [J No
-~-
PART 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
Describe the project for which you are a??Ding for fund; using the fo1'_o::icg
format: -
Section 1. Protect Description
a. Describe the proposed project in detail including
- Type of facilities (e.g. roadva•r videni-g for bicycles, se?orate
pathway, bicycle parking facilities).
- If the projecC is part of a larder project, describe the overall
project. If ocher projects need to be cot:?leced for this project
to be operational, list the ocher projects, their estimated cost
and proposed completion date(s).
b. Identify whether Loa im?le_anting pcblic agency •:i11 do the work, or
will contract the work out..
c. Attach a ma? of the project and any a>?ropriate project drawings.
Section 2. Protect Veed ar.d Be^e?its
a. Describe how this project will improve safety and convenience for
bicycle commuters, including how, if a?plicable, the project will be
coordinated with transit providers.
b. Describe the project benefits, including any access iaprovements or
bicycle parking in high use activity carters (e.g. employment,
commercial, educational, governmental or social se^~ice center).
c. Describe the relationship of the proposed pzoject to other recently
completed or proposed projects in the area.
Section 3. Protect Status
a. Provide information on the current status of the project.
b. Describe the cost control measures chat will be implemented for the
project.
- 8 -
Y.tRT 4. PROTECT BZ'iDGET
1. Please provide a project bud3et, includin3 a breakdo:m o` all
project costs and rz•~zrues and any eu!ti-yzar phases of chz
project:
91/92 92/93 93/94 94/93 95/90
EROJECT COST.
Engineering/Design
Property Acquisition
Gonstruction/RehabiLitation
TOT_~I. PROJECT COST
PROJECT R~J~~-UPS
General Fund
Private
Other (Specify)
State:.
Proposition.I16 Funds
Ocher (Specify)
Federal:.
-Othet (Specify)
TOT?.L. PROJECT R.LV"t-WES
2. Please briefly describe the sources o' your cost and revenue estimates.
-9-
PA.2T 5. E.`iORON?~?hZAL DOCIi'C^NTdTI4N
Provide informacior, or. tha status of the environrsental clearance for ch>_
project. '
Appropriate
~nv~ _on:le ntal Doe•_-.e^`_
Categorical Exemption
Other exem?lion (cite)
Notice of Exemption
Negative Declaration
Draft EI2/EIS
Final EIR/EIS Certifica:'_on of EI2
Notice of Determination
Project Cor.str_ct:or./?_o'_ecentacior. Schedule
Environmental Assessaent
Preliminary Engineering
Final Design
Property Acquisition
ConstructionJRehabilitation
Actual or Estimated
Conole_ion Date
Begin Glor'~c Completion
(`*.or.th/Yearl (?!onth/'!aar~