2017 Suffolk Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan - DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN City of Suffolk, Virginia

2017

DRAFT

2

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SUFFOLK CITY COUNCIL

EXTERNAL STEERING COMMITTEE

>> Mayor Linda T. Johnson

>> Mills Staylor, Planning Commission

>> Vice Mayor Leroy Bennett

>> Tim Johnson, City Council

>> Michael D. Duman >> Roger W. Fawcett

>> Henry Buck, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission

>> Donald Z. Goldberg

>> Robert Rhodes, Citizen Advocate

>> Timothy J. Johnson

>> Regina Brayboy, Healthy Suffolk

>> Curtis R. Milteer, Sr. >> Lue R. Ward, Jr.

CONSULTANT >> Rhodeside & Harwell, Inc.

SUFFOLK PLANNING COMMISSION >> Howard C. Benton, Chairman >> Arthur L. Singleton, Vice Chairman >> Kittrell Eberwine >> Johnnie Edwards >> Anita Hicks >> John Rector >> Mills Staylor >> James G. Vacalis

INTERNAL TECHNICAL COMMITTEE >> Scott Mills, Suffolk Deputy City Manager >> Lakita Watson, Director, Suffolk Parks & Recreation >> Helen A. Gabriel, Asst. Director, Suffolk Parks & Recreation >> Michael Kelly, Principal Planner, Suffolk Parks & Recreation >> Claire Jones, Comprehensive Planning Manager, Suffolk Planning >> LJ Hansen, Asst. Director, Suffolk Public Works >> Robert Lewis, City Traffic Engineer, Suffolk Public Works >> Jason Souders, Asst. Traffic Engineer, Suffolk Public Works >> Major Clyde Patterson, Deputy Chief of Operations, Suffolk Police Dept. >> Kevin Hughes, Director, Suffolk Economic Development

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

DRAFT

3

CONTENTS 1

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................6

2

EXISTING CONDITIONS...........................................................................9

3

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT.................................................................20

4

STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY CORRIDORS...........................................25

5

TOOL KIT.................................................................................................31

6

STRATEGIC ACTIONS............................................................................52

7

RESOURCES...........................................................................................57

8

APPENDIX...............................................................................................58

4

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

PLAN SUMMARY The City of Suffolk Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan creates a framework for the future of non-motorized travel in Suffolk. It guides the City toward a multimodal future and begins the process of creating a network of paths that provide community members and visitors with real options for traveling and recreating within and between the City’s two Growth Areas.

GOALS >> Create safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian networks that connect people to neighborhoods, destinations, and transit. >> Support a range of users by considering variations in physical abilities, perceptions of safety, trip types, and trip purposes of different users. >> Explore opportunities to connect the two Growth Areas for nonmotorized travelers. >> Increase options for people to walk and ride bicycles for recreation and to recreation (e.g., parks). >> Provide educational opportunities for all road users, including people who drive and people who ride bicycles. >> Identify ways that the built environment can better support bicycle and pedestrian movement.

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

PROCESS

5

CONTENTS OF THE PLAN

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan process began with an understanding of needs and opportunities based on data analysis, observation, and community input. It evolved into a set of goals, and a draft network of important multimodal corridors. A Tool Kit was provided to compile a range of strategies for providing facilities, routes, and other amenities. As a final step, the City refined a set of strategic actions to be taken related to projects, policies, and programs.

FALL/ SPRING SUMMER FALL WINTER 17’ 17’ 17’ 16’ Project Initiation Public Meetings Steering Committee Meetings Existing Conditions Analysis Draft Plan Recommendations Project Summary Report Plan Adoption

INTRODUCTION

>> Project overview, goals, and benefits of improving facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians in Suffolk.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

>> Overview of community outreach methods and feedback, including a summary of the community survey.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

>> Review of existing challenges and opportunities related to non-motorized travel in Suffolk.

OPPORTUNITY CORRIDORS

>> Corridors that address needs and/or opportunities to expand the non-motorized network.

TOOL KIT

>> Highlights of methods that may be employed to improve bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in Suffolk.

STRATEGIC ACTIONS

>> Specific projects that begin to address needs and opportunities. >> Policies and programs to increase user safety and access to bicycle and pedestrian amenities.

URBAN DEVELOPMENT AREA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT Completion of this bicycle and pedestrian plan was made possible through an Urban Development Area technical assistance grant provided by the Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment. In accordance with § 15.2-2223.1 of the Code of Virginia, this Plan promotes the development of urban development areas in a way that is consistent with Traditional Neighborhood Design. This Plan will be adopted as an amendment to the City of Suffolk Comprehensive Plan (2015). The City of Suffolk received the grant in the form of a direct on-call consultant services contract with Rhodeside and Harwell, Inc.

6

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

1 INTRODUCTION The City of Suffolk is committed to future growth that includes safe transportation options and opportunities for people walking and riding bicycles. The City has policies that support the development of multimodal infrastructure, but this is the City’s first plan focused on these needs. People walk and ride bicycles for many reasons. For example, some do it for recreation, some for transportation; some do it as a choice, and some out of necessity. This plan will provide a path forward for addressing the needs of all users.

The City of Suffolk Comprehensive Plan (2015) includes policies and actions that support the concept of “complete streets” - streets that provide facilities for all users - and the development of a plan for people who want to walk (or jog/ run) and ride bicycles. Discussion of the need for walkable and bicycle-friendly roads and communities are contained throughout the Plan, supporting the need to develop a strategy to achieve these goals.

In addition, it is clear that facilities that have been built by the City, including the Seaboard Coastline Trail, are wellused, and previous surveys conducted by the City of Suffolk have indicated that there is a community desire for more trails and other enhancements for people walking and riding bicycles. Several regional trails are completed or under development, and the City of Suffolk can provide key pieces for many of the routes, drawing bicycle tourists into the City.

The plan was guided by input from community members, as well as an Internal/Technical Committee (comprising several City departments) and an External/Community Committee (comprising representatives from several stakeholder groups).

WHAT IS IN THIS PLAN THIS PLAN PROVIDES:

>> A conceptual framework of key streets and routes that could provide circulation within each of the two Growth Areas, and connections between the two areas. >> A Tool Kit of strategies (including facilities, routes, and other amenities) for addressing the needs of people who are walking/running and riding bicycles. >> A set of priority actions to be addressed by the City of Suffolk.

THIS PLAN DOES NOT PROVIDE:

>> A map showing a network of specific facilities to be built.

GOALS The following goals were developed based on existing plans and policies (e.g., from the Comprehensive Plan), input from City staff and Committee members, and input received during the first community meeting. The goals that guided the overall vision for the plan include: >> Create safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian networks that connect people to neighborhoods, destinations, and transit. >> Support a range of users by considering variations in physical abilities, perceptions of safety, trip types, and trip purposes of different users. >> Explore opportunities to connect the two Growth Areas for non-motorized travelers. >> Increase options for people to walk and ride bicycles for recreation and to recreation (e.g., parks). >> Provide educational opportunities for all road users, including people who drive and people who ride bicycles. >> Identify ways that the built environment can better support bicycle and pedestrian movement.

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

7

MASTER PLAN FOCUS AREAS The City of Suffolk has two master plan focus areas - the Central Growth Area and the Northern Growth Area. These were designated in the Comprehensive Plan as areas in which to focus growth, in order to protect the many natural resources and undeveloped areas in the City.

NORTHERN GROWTH AREA 664

Isle of Wight County

17

627

337

642

Portsmouth

337

58

13

13

CENTRAL GROWTH AREA Chesapeake

on

pt am h ut y So unt Co

North Carolina

Master Plan Focus Areas (Growth Areas)

0

Suffolk City Boundary

Miles

Streets and Roadways Waterbody

1

2

4

8

DRAFT

BENEFITS OF FOSTERING A MORE WALKABLE, BIKEABLE SUFFOLK Between 2000 and 2013, the percentage of commutes made by bicycle in the United States increased by 62% (League of American Bicyclists, 2015). Many communities are making significant investments in infrastructure to support bicycling and walking: adding bicycle lanes, improving sidewalks, installing shared use paths, and providing related amenities. There are many benefits to fostering a multimodal city:

HEALTH BENEFITS Increasing active transportation options can have an enormous positive impact on the physical health of a community. Regular physical activity (such as walking and biking) reduces depression, and helps prevent heart disease, obesity, diabetes, and other ailments (U.S. Department of Heath and Human Services, 2015).

Integrating physical activity, such as walking or riding a bicycle, into the lifestyle of a sedentary adult is three to four times less expensive than enrolling into a structured exercise program (Sevick, 2000).

ECONOMIC BENEFITS Property Values Investing in non-motorized infrastructure encourages economic development, improves property values, and helps create new jobs and businesses. After the City of San Francisco made a street more conducive to pedestrian and bicycle travel, nearly 40% of the local merchants reported increased sales and 60% reported more area residents shopping locally. Two-thirds of merchants believed business improved with increased levels of bicycling and walking (Drennan, 2003).

Transportation Savings Bicycling and walking are affordable forms of transportation, which is particularly important for lowincome or no-car communities. In 2015, the American Automobile Association found that the average sedan costs about $8,698 to own and operate (Stepp, 2015). By comparison, the Sierra Club estimates that the average cost to operate a bicycle is about $308 (Sierra Club, n.d.).

Tourism Trails don’t only draw local users. Bicycle tourism has been shown to create significant positive impacts on local

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

economies. For example, in the Central Shenandoah Valley region, bicycle tourism is estimated to have generated $8.6 million in sales activity in 2015 (Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission, 2016). By providing connections to other regional trails, or actively working to establish sections of long trails through Suffolk, the City could see more day or overnight tourists, all of whom are likely to shop, eat, or sleep in Suffolk.

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS A city’s air quality can be improved through increased bicycling and walking: according to Transportation Alternatives, if 5% of New Yorkers commuting by private car or taxi switched to commuting by bicycle to work, 150 million pounds of CO2 emissions per year could be reduced.

This is equivalent to the amount reduced by planting a forest 1.3 times the size of Manhattan (Transportation Alternatives, 2008).

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

2 EXISTING CONDITIONS

OVERVIEW

In order to better understand the existing conditions within the City of Suffolk (with a focus within the two Growth Areas), the team toured the City, spoke with City staff to build more on-the-ground knowledge, reviewed existing plans and policies to understand the current framework for development, and analyzed available data. This base of understanding was enhanced by a community review at the first public meeting.

CHARACTER CENTRAL GROWTH AREA

One Portion of the Central Growth Area

The Central Growth Area includes the historic downtown core of Suffolk, as well as the retail areas and neighborhoods surrounding downtown. It also contains long-standing neighborhoods interspersed with industrial areas. Many of these areas, especially Downtown, have traditional grid of street grids, though many streets lack sidewalks.

Sitting just to the northwest of the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, the Central Growth Area is crisscrossed by wetlands and the Nansemond River, with few options for crossing. It is also traversed by several active rail lines that are known to hold up traffic, and which are difficult to cross on foot or bicycle.

Historic Downtown

There are several neighborhood-scale parks throughout the area, including the iconic Peanut Park and Planters Park. The newly-developing plaza associated with the Historic Main Street Station is also a key public gathering place. Constant’s Wharf Public Park & Marina provides a place to access the river, in addition to a pedestrian and bicycle bridge. A portion of the Seaboard Coastline Trail has been built extending out from the station; this is planned to eventually connect with other areas of the trail.

Riverfront Park

9

10

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

NORTHERN GROWTH AREA The Northern Growth Area is comprised of the far northern section of Suffolk, including Crittenden. It is generally characterized by retail areas, newly-developed neighborhoods, and large parcels of undeveloped land.

Street connectivity issues are pronounced in the Northern Growth Area, as many neighborhoods have developed in a more suburban style than Downtown, but many new developments include sidewalks, bike lanes, paths, and/or neighborhood-scale parks.

Interstate 664 runs through the Northern Growth Area.

While this provides great visibility for the City, it also presents a significant barrier between several developing areas.

There are fewer public parks in the Northern Growth area than the Central Growth Area, but those that exist are relatively large, and many neighborhoods have private recreation areas available to residents. A large portion of the Seaboard Coastline trail has been built in the abandoned rail right-of-way.

One Portion of the Northern Growth Area

Neighborhood with Sidewalks and a Large Park

Seaboard Coastline Trail

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

11

DEMOGRAPHICS: QUICK FACTS Suffolk is large, with 400 square miles of land and 29 square miles of water

Population Density (2015) - People per Square Mile, by Census Block group

>> The average land area per county in Virginia is about 295 square miles!

About 86,180 people live in Suffolk

>> Over 80% of the population of Suffolk lives within the two Growth Areas. >> 50% of the population is white (non-hispanic), and 41% identifies as black or African American. >> 91% of families have an income at or above poverty level.

The majority of commuters (94%) currently drive to work, while 1.3% walk, and 0.3% ride a bicycle

>> The average commute is 28 minutes, but 32% of the population reports a commute time of 19 minutes or less, which means that there may be interested in shifting modes if more facilities are available.

Map Adapted from Social Explorer

Commute Times (2015) - Travel Time to Work for Workers 16 Years and Over Who Did Not Work at Home (Proportion of 39,262 people)

40 or more minutes 25%

Less than 10 Minutes 9%

Age (2015) - Proportion of Total Population by Age Range 85 Years and Over 75 to 84 Years

2% 4%

65 to 74 Years

8%

55 to 64 Years

12%

45 to 54 Years

15%

35 to 44 Years

10 to 19 Minutes 23%

14%

25 to 34 Years

13%

18 to 24 Years 15 to 17 Years

9% 4%

10 to 14 Years 5 to 9 Years Under 5 Years

30 to 39 Minutes 21%

7% 8% 7%

Race (2015) - Proportion of Total Population by Race

20 to 29 Minutes 22%

White (Non-Hispanic)

50%

Black or African American (NonHispanic)

41%

Hispanic or Latino

4%

Two or More Races (Non-Hispanic)

3%

Asian Alone (Non-Hispanic)

1%

In addition, less than 1% each from the following: American Indian and Alaska Native 0%(Non-Hispanic),Other Race (Non-Hispanic), Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (Non-Hispanic)

12

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Suffolk has a wealth of environmental resources, including rivers and wetlands. While these can present a barrier to travel, they should also be seen as a benefit, and a draw. The city is fairly flat, which is a positive factor for walking and riding bicycles. The Central Growth Area has a greater (though gradual) change in elevation than the Northern Growth Area.

664

627

17

337

460

642

58

13

0

0.5

Miles

1

2

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

13

LAND USE The Central Growth Area has a significant industrial presence, as well as concentrated retail nodes along Holland/ Washington and Main. Developed areas in the Northern Growth Area are dominated by retail/commercial uses.

Neighborhoods (mostly single family) are scattered throughout both Growth Areas. A mix of uses means that people can access more destinations within a shorter distance, which is conducive to non-motorized travel.

664

627

17

337

460

642

58

13

0

0.5

Miles

1

2

14

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

HUBS AND DESTINATIONS Different people have different places that they go on a regular basis, but there are some destinations that are important for large segments of the population. Mapping key activity hubs and destinations throughout Suffolk helps to designate priority routes.

664

627

17

337

460

642

58

13

0

0.5

Miles

1

2

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

15

EXISTING AND PLANNED BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES FACILITIES IN SUFFOLK There are concentrated areas of sidewalks in the City, and there are several sections of multi-use paths. However, many facilities are disconnected, and several neighborhoods have few or no sidewalks. Existing facilities (e.g., Seaboard Coastline Trail) are well-used.

664

Respass Be a ch

Colle ge

our

en

View

Bridge

e nd Critt

Be n n

Prin ce

le

Lake

Kings

yH ep

ond

Har b

Pughsville

Bo b W hite

Nansem

Sle

God

337

ole

win

n

nd mo

rk 642

Pit

Wilr oy

M phys ill Mur

dy

od

ew o

ne ke Ke n

Bl y

th

Jericho Ditch (Private)

a Car olin

Turli n g

D ill

13

n

uth

rb

La

res

d

to

Moore

Coun ty

ho

ce ner tan E Pin W Co n s Fin W Washington Marketney E Wa shin ton g

Sar ato ga

Kenyon llan

Holland by S

bu

mo

ood Hollyw

Ho

58

Ki l

Su

Holly Lawn

le

ts Por

an

n

e tt

Main

India

Lake K ilb y

c

hk

Na

Ki

ng

sF o

Providence

460

nse

Prude

k

er Driv

py H o

ek Par

oint

Slee

etts Cr e

Should e rs Hill

Evere t s

Be n n

Townp

etts Pa stur e

Kings

Neck

Godwin

s Knott

Bridge 17

627

n Road s Ham p to

White Marsh

0

0.5

Miles

1

2

16

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

REGIONAL, STATEWIDE, AND INTER-STATE TRAILS There are many existing and planned statewide and regional trails, in and adjacent to the city. The City of Suffolk has an opportunity to both connect its residents to these trails, and draw in visitors from other areas, by providing extensions or connections to these trails.

The South Hampton Roads Trail is a 41-mile proposed multi-use/bicycle route between Suffolk and Virginia Beach.

The existing portion of the Suffolk Seaboard Coastline Trail in the Northern Growth Area is a part of this trail. The national bike route known as the TransAmerican Bicycle Trail from Oregon currently terminates in Williamsburg. It may be extended to Virginia Beach via this trail.

The Beaches to Bluegrass Trail is a statewide trail being planned by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. It crosses the entire state, from the Cumberland Gap to the Virginia Beach oceanfront and Eastern Shore.

The Birthplace of America Trail is actually two 30-mile trails, under development. One trail would connect the South Hampton Roads Trail to the Virginia Capital Trail, through Suffolk.

The East Coast Greenway is envisioned as a nearly 3,000 mile route from Maine to Florida. Pieces of the Greenway are already completed. The existing portions of the Seaboard Coastline trail are considered part of the “Historic Coastal Route,� an alternate route for the Greenway, which is planned to run into and between both Growth Areas.

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

17

TRANSIT There are several bus routes in Suffolk, and three transfer points where people can switch between local and regional routes. People who use public transportation need to get to and from transit access points. Sidewalks and bike lanes provide a way for passengers to get from origin points to the stops at the beginning of their trip, and from bus stops to destinations at the end. Safe and convenient connections make the overall transit system more usable.

664

Respass Be a ch

Colle ge our

en

View

Bridge

e nd Critt

Be n n

Prin ce

le

Lake

Kings

Nansem

Sle yH ep

God

ond

Har b

Pughsville

337

ole

win

n

nd mo

rk 642

Pit

Wilr oy

M phys ill Mur

res

d

dy

od

ew o

ne ke Ke n

th

Jericho Ditch (Private)

D ill

a

13

n

Bl y

Car olin

Turli n g

to

uth

rb

La

ho

Coun ty

Holland

by S

Moore

ce ner tan E Pin W Co n s Fin W Washington Marketney E Wa shin ton g

Sar ato ga

Kenyon llan

58

bu

mo

ood Hollyw

Ho

Ki l

Su

Holly Lawn

le

ts Por

an

n

e tt

Main

India

Lake K ilb y

c

hk

Na

Ki

ng

sF o

Providence

460

nse

Prude

Bo b W hite

er Driv

py H o

ek Park

oint

Slee

etts Cr e

Should e rs Hill

Evere t s

Be n n

Townp

etts Pa stur e

Kings

17

Neck

Godwin

s Knott

Bridge

627

n Road s Ham p to

White Marsh

0

0.5

Miles

1

2

18

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

SUMMARY OF CHALLENGES The most common challenges to walking and riding bicycles that were observed during the preliminary assessment of the existing conditions include: >> THE SIZE OF SUFFOLK: The city’s large spatial area and distance between developed areas could provide barriers to walking and riding bicycles to destinations. >> LACK OF CONTINUOUS PARALLEL EAST-WEST ROUTES: The lack of existing parallel roadways means that there are fewer options for places to add new multimodal facilities. >> MANY HIGH-TRAFFIC AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ROADWAYS: There are several high-capacity, high-traffic roadways throughout the city. While they provide access to key destinations for people driving vehicles, they generally present a barrier to other modes of travel, particularly if there are few designated crosswalks, sidewalks, or sidepaths. >> DISCONNECTED (AND FEW) SIDEWALKS AND/ OR BICYCLE FACILITIES AND AMENITIES: The City is adding new facilities to existing roadways when they are rebuilt, and has built out some portions of off-road trails However, many existing streets have no bicycle or pedestrian facilities, and no plans for the streets to be rebuilt.

High-Traffic Roadways with No Crossings

At-Grade Rail Crossings with No Sidewalk

>> NARROW RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN THE HISTORIC DOWNTOWN: Downtown is a major destination, and has a good grid network of streets, but the streets are generally narrow, which means that there is not a lot of room to provide new facilities. >> FEW CROSSINGS: There are few bridges across the wetlands, streams, and river, and there are also many at-grade railroads and several interstate and highway crossings that create barriers to continues non-motorized paths. >> LACK OF CLARITY REGARDING MULTI-USE PATHS VS. SIDEWALKS: An existing City ordinance prohibits riding bicycles on sidewalks, but it is not always easy to differentiate between sidewalks and existing multi-use paths.

Disconnected Paths

Lack of Clarity Regarding Multi-use Paths and Sidewalks

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

SUMMARY OF OPPORTUNITIES Though its clear that there are challenges to overcome, it is also evident that the City has many resources that create opportunities for improving multimodal conditions: >> THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS SUPPORTIVE: The Plan lays the groundwork and rationale for supporting bicycle and pedestrian facilities throughout Suffolk. >> PRESENCE OF EXISTING HIGH-QUALITY MULTI-USE PATHS AND TRAILS LOCALLY AND IN REGION: Having good examples of multimodal infrastructure in the region means that there are precedents, and that the community has already had experience using - and benefiting from - such facilities. >> DESIRABLE DESTINATIONS, INCLUDING HISTORIC DOWNTOWN, RETAIL AREAS, ACCESS TO RIVERS, AND OTHER RESOURCES/ ATTRACTIONS: The City has many resources that draw visitors and new residents alike. >> ABANDONED RAILWAYS: As seen with the Seaboard Coastline Trail portion, these railways provide a fantastic opportunity to provide off-road, significant trails.

The Current Comprehensive Plan

>> PUBLIC WORKS POLICIES INCLUDE THE PROVISION OF MULTI-USE PATHS AS PART OF ROAD RECONSTRUCTION IN MANY INSTANCES: Having this practice in place means that there are already portions of a network built out. >> WIDE RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN MANY PLACES: While wide rights-of-way can be barriers for people walking and riding bicycles, they also present an opportunity to rethink these facilities and provide new multimodal options.

Existing Trail in Suffolk

Riverfront Park

19

20

DRAFT

3 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OVERVIEW

Along with City Staff, members of the community played an important part in driving the need for this plan, establishing opportunities and challenges, and setting goals for the plan.

Input was obtained in several ways, as summarized in this section. Strategies included: >> EXTERNAL/COMMUNITY STEERING COMMITTEE »» Planning Commission »» City Council »» Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission »» Citizen Advocate »» Healthy Suffolk >> INTERNAL/TECHNICAL STEERING COMMITTEE »» City Manager’s Office »» Parks & Recreation »» Public Works »» Planning »» Police Department »» Economic Development >> WEBSITE (suffolkva.us/parks/bicycle-andpedestrian-master-plan) >> CITYWIDE PUBLIC MEETINGS >> COMMUNITY SURVEY (Completed in Feb/March) Public meetings and the survey are summarized further in the remainder of this section.

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

PUBLIC MEETINGS Full summaries of the public meetings are in the Appendix.

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETING #1 (MARCH 7, 2017) The City of Suffolk, Virginia, held the first public meeting for the Suffolk Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan on March 7, 2017, at City Hall. An open house with interactive exhibits was open from 6:30-8:30 PM, and the project team gave a presentation from 7-7:30 PM. Approximately 65 people signed in to the meeting.

At the event, the community was invited to learn about the Master Plan process and share their input on existing conditions analyses, draft goals and strategic corridors, and potential tools for addressing needs. All meeting materials were posted on the City’s website (http://www.suffolkva.us/ parks/bicycle-and-pedestrian-master-plan) for review and comment.

Some hard copies of the bicycle and pedestrian survey (described later in this document) were also provided, though attendees were encouraged to take the survey online.

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETING #2 (MAY 25, 2017) The City of Suffolk, Virginia, held the second public meeting for the Suffolk Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan on May 25, 2017, at Creekside Recreation Center. An open house with interactive exhibits was open from 6:30-8:30 PM, and the project team gave a presentation from 7-7:30 PM. Approximately 13 people (in addition to Suffolk City of Suffolk staff) signed in to the meeting.

At the event, the community was invited to learn about the Master Plan process and share their input on existing conditions analyses, revised goals and strategic corridors, potential tools for addressing needs, and a first pass at assigning facility types to opportunity corridors. All meeting materials, including an electronic version of the comment sheet, were posted on the City’s website (http://www. suffolkva.us/parks/bicycle-and-pedestrian-master-plan) for review and comment. All attendees were given a comment sheet to record their input, and were also encouraged to add comments to the exhibits and maps provided.

DRAFT

21

Age range of survey respondents (323 total responses) DRAFT

22

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

COMMUNITY SURVEY A survey was open on the City of Suffolk website from February 1 through March 14, 2017. The goal of the survey was to gain insight into how, where, and why people walk/ run or ride bicycles outside (or not). The survey was also available in a hard copy format at the public meeting. There were 322 responses to the survey.

Survey responses by ZIP code

2% 1% 34% <1%

CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS Both Northern and Central Growth Areas were represented in the survey, though the largest proportion of responses came from the central part of the city.

The age ranges with the greatest number of responses were 45-54 (25%) and 35-44 (21%) years old. 10% of responses came from people aged 34 or younger, with less than 1% from people aged 24 or younger. When similar surveys are conducted in the future, outreach through schools or youth-oriented organizations could be used to reach younger populations.

BICYCLING

41% 4%

<1%

Age range of survey respondents

45-54 Survey responses by ZIP code 25% 35-44

When asked about their current experience and level of interest in cycling, 15% of respondents indicated that they are “strong and fearless,” meaning that they will ride in most places, under most conditions. Nearly 70% indicated that they are either “moderately experienced,” or a beginner (“interested but concerned” or “new to bicycling”). These latter two sets of cyclists are likely to gain the most from an increase in bicycle-focused and shared-use facilities.

However, we assume that people who took this survey are interested in bicycling (and walking) and therefore results may not be representative of the entire community in Suffolk.

80%

21%

16-24 1%

25-34 9%

55-64 19%

65 or Did not over respond 13% 12%

How much do the following fac

Age range of survey respondents (323 total responses)

60% Respondents’ self-classifications as types of bicyclists

40% Nearly 100% of survey respondents own or have access to a working motor vehicle, and have driven a vehicle in the past year. About 90% have access to a bicycle, but only about 64% rode a bicycle in the past year.

20%

45-54 25%

0%

35-44 Survey results show that most respondents do not ride 55-64 65 or Did not 21% nearly as frequently bicycles as they walk outside. The 19% over respond majority of respondents (57%) their bicycle an average 13% ride 25-34 12% of one or zero days per week.

Only 8% of respondents 9% -24 report riding their bike, on average, five or more days per % week. However, 77% of respondents stated that they wish they were able to ride a bicycle more often.

Age range of survey respondents

Experienced ("Strong and fearless") Did not 15% respond 9%

I have no interest in riding a bicycle ("No way, no Moderately how") Traffic & ("Enthused No bicycle Unsafe Personal Lack 7% of scenic Destinations skilled badand confident") / walking intersections routes are too far safety Beginner away driver 48%facilities, ("Interestedconcerns but behavior or facilities concerned" or in poor "New to bicycling") condition 21%

(323 total responses)

Automobile No bicycle Unsafe Personal Lack of Destinations How do you classify yourself as a bicyclist? traffic & bad lanes / intersections safety scenic routes are too far driver Survey bicycle away responses by concerns ZIP code

HowAND much do the following frequently?

SUFFOLK BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN MASTERfactors PLAN discourage you from riding a bicycle or walking moreDRAFT RIDING A BICYCLE Minor reason Major reason

23

WALKING Minor reason Major reason

When they do ride a bicycle, most respondents ride for exercise (74%) and recreation (73%). When looking at the frequency of riding a bicycle, 41% of respondents report riding for exercise/recreation/racing purposes at least once per week. Social responses (eating, meeting friends) were the second largest reason for riding a bicycle at least once per week (17%).

WALKING

The largest factors that discourage people from riding bicycles mirror those that discourage people from walking outside: automobile traffic and driver behavior (77%), lack of bicycle lanes or bicycle parking (or facilities in poor condition) (76%), and unsafe intersections (74%).

Most respondents who walk outside said that they do so for exercise (89%) and recreation (70%). When looking at the frequency of walking outside, the majority of respondents (86%) said they walk outside for exercise/recreation at least once per week, with 44% citing daily walks. Many respondents also said that they walk outside at least once per week for social events (41%) and shopping/errands/ appointments (36%).

Nearly half (49%) of the 322 survey respondents walk outside at least five days per week, and less than 20% walk outside two or fewer days per week. When respondents walk outside, the majority (54%) said that they walk, on average, 1-5 miles. Most respondents (84%) wish that they were able to walk outside more often.

When looking at factors that discourage respondents from walking outside, the biggest factors are automobile traffic and driver behavior (70%), lack of sidewalks or sidewalks in poor condition (69%), and unsafe intersections (65%).

How much do the following factorsfrom discourage from ariding a bicycle or walking more frequently?

Factors that discourage respondents walkingyou or riding bicycle more frequently

80% RIDING A BICYCLE Minor reason Major reason

60%

WALKING Minor reason Major reason

40% 20% 0%

TraďŹ&#x192;c & bad driver behavior

No bicycle Unsafe Personal / walking intersections safety facilities, or concerns facilities in poor condition

Lack of scenic routes

Destinations I don't are have enough too far away time

Lack of Unsure amenities of (e.g., route showers, storage) at destination

Travel with small children

Not interested

Disability Too I do not I do not or much to own / know how carry have access to ride a health impairment to a bicycle bicycle

24

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

PLACES PEOPLE WALK/RIDE OR WANT TO WALK/RIDE

DESIRED IMPROVEMENTS

When asked about their favorite places or streets/paths for walking and bicycling now, 18% of respondents (58 people) said they enjoy the Seaboard Coastline Trail. Reasons given include the lack of vehicle traffic, high quality of the trail and amenities, natural surroundings, and safety. Other popular responses include local neighborhoods, Dismal Swamp trails, Harbour View, Windsor Castle Park (in Smithfield), local rural roads, and downtown.

When asked to choose the top three types of improvements they feel would be most supportive to improving waking and bicycling in Suffolk, the top response (84%) was more facilities (sidewalks/bike lanes/multi-use paths). Other top responses include maintenance of these facilities (33%) and better intersections with pedestrian signals and crosswalks (28%).

When asked about places they wish they could walk or ride a bicycle, where you are currently not able to do so, common locations included Pitchkettle Road, Bridge Road, and Shoulders Hill. Many people responded generally, saying theyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d like to see more paths, sidewalks, and trails, in general.

IMPORTANCE OF SAFETY & CONVENIENCE The majority of respondents think that it is very or somewhat important to have safer and more convenient facilities for walking (85%) and riding bicycles (81%) in Suffolk, and that having improved facilities would make respondents more likely to walk (83%) and ride bicycles (80%).

How important is it to you to have safe and convenient walking and bicycling facilities in Suffolk?

Please select up to three improvements which you feel would be most supportive to improving bicycling and walking in the City of Suffolk.

More sidewalks/bike lanes/multi-use paths

84%

Maintenance of sidewalks/bike lanes/ multi-use paths

33%

Better intersections (pedestrian signals/ crosswalks)

28%

Bicycle route map

19%

Better street lighting

19%

Enforcement for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists

18%

Education for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists

15%

Secure bicycle parking

13%

Better signage, including wayfinding and/or educational signage

11%

Bicycling

Walking

Very important

57%

70%

More amenities at destinations (showers, dressing rooms, etc.)

4%

Somewhat important

24%

15%

Improved connections to the bus

3%

Somewhat unimportant

2%

2%

2%

Not very important

5%

2%

Did not respond

12%

12%

Other (Connectivity to Seaboard Coastline Trail, shoulders on busier roads, focus on Downtown, improve bus system, support meet up groups for neighborhoods)

If it were more safe and convenient, how likely would you be to walk or ride a bicycle more frequently?

Bicycling

Walking

Very likely

62%

67%

Somewhat likely

18%

16%

Somewhat unlikely

1%

2%

Not very likely

6%

3%

Did not respond

12%

12%

NAVIGATION Most respondents (64%) use a map website or app on a phone to figure out walking and/or bicycling routes to new destinations. Map websites on a computer (46%) and asking friends for recommendations (37%) were also common.

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

25

4 STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY CORRIDORS OVERVIEW

TYPES OF CORRIDORS

The Strategic Opportunity Corridors were developed based on the analysis of existing conditions, a workshop with the Internal Committee, existing plans, and use of the project goals. They were then refined using input from the first two public meetings, as well as meetings with both committees.

The corridors shown on the following pages provide a potential network that provides circulation and connectivity within each of the Growth Areas and provides connections between them.

There are three types of Strategic Opportunity Corridors identified on the map:

Designating a street as an Opportunity Corridor in this plan means that this process determined that these corridors have significant needs (based on current use, or potential use), and/or pose significant opportunities. As with the rest of this plan, the corridors should be revisited on a regular basis.

The following maps do not designate specific facilities or route designations for each corridor. Not all corridors are appropriate for both bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Future facility design will need to include a full analysis, and should take as guidance the Tool Kit presented in the next section.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS There are many places where sidewalks may be missing in neighborhoods, where they could provide vital connections to destinations such as grocery stores, schools, and transit stations. Because many of these sidewalks would provide only neighborhood- or block- level improvements, they may not be included as part of an Opportunity Corridor.

However, a small sidewalk could provide a much-needed connection. These improvements need to be identified by the City based on an updated understanding of the current sidewalk network.

Though they are not specifically identified in this plan, there are also many intersections along these corridors where there are opportunities to provide new or enhanced facilities. Need for these improvements should also be explored further by the City.

CORRIDORS ALONG EXISTING STREETS These corridors comprise the majority of the map. They indicate streets that are optimal routes for pedestrian and bicycle traffic.

CORRIDORS ALONG ABANDONED RAILWAYS These corridors include the existing Seaboard Coastline Trail right-of-way, as well as all remaining inactive railways.

CORRIDORS THAT CREATE OTHER CONNECTIONS These include corridors that create new street connections, corridors that re-establish former bridges, and corridors through parks.

26

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITY CORRIDORS Jam

es

664

Riv

er

Respass Be a ch

Colle ge

our

en

View

Bridge

e nd Critt

ns em

on d

Riv Na

etts Pa stur e

Be n n

Prin ce

oint

Lake

k

Pughsville

Bo b W hite

Sle

Nansem

Townp

le

Kings

ek Par

er Driv

py H o

etts Cr e

17

Should e rs Hill

Slee

Be n n

Har b

Neck

er

Godwin

s Knott

Evere t s

yH ep

God

ond 337

ole

win

n

nse

mo

rk

Ki

ng

sF o

nd

Providence

460

Mill

Pit

Wilr oy

642

res

d

uth

rb

dy

od

ew o

ne ke Ke n

Bl y

th

Jericho Ditch (Private)

D ill a

13

n

Car olin

Turli n g

to

Moore

Coun ty

ho

ce ner tan E Pin W Co n s Finney M arket W Washington E Wa shin ton g

Sar ato ga

Kenyon llan

Holland

by S

mo

ood Hollyw

Ho

Ki l

58

bu

ts Por

an

n

Su

Holly Lawn

le

Main

India

e tt

Lake K ilb y

c

hk

La

phys Mur

Na

Prude

Bridge

627

Kings

n Road s Ham p to

White Marsh

0

0.5

1

2

Miles

#

0

0.5

1

1.5

2 Miles

Godwin

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

etts Pa stur e

Kings

Be n n

CENTRAL GROWTH AREA

Prin ce

Lake

Sle yH ep

God

ole

win

n

nd mo nse Na

Ki

ng

sF o

Providence

rk

Pit

Wilr oy

M phys ill Mur

res

d

dy

ew o

od

Moore

ne

Bl y

th

Jericho Ditch (Private)

D ill n

a

See Downtown map, next page

Car olin

Turli n g

to

ke Ke n

ho

uth

rb

La

by S

r ce nne tan E Pi W Co n s Fin W Washingto Marketney n E Wa shin ton g

Coun ty

Kenyon

Holland

mo

ood Hollyw

llan

Ki l

bu

ts Por

an

Rail trail co Indian Tra ntinues to il

Su

Holly Lawn

Sar ato ga

le

Main

n

Ho

e tt

Lake K ilb y

c

hk

India

Be n n

etts Cr e

White Marsh

Continue to Desert Rd., then to the state line

0 0.25 0.5 Miles

1

ek P

Bo b W hite

er Driv

The Central Growth Area has many cultural and natural resources, as well as many other activity hubs, including the Evere t s historic Downtown, and several retail areas, schools, and parks. The Central Growth Area corridors seek to create Sl y Ho connections to existing and future shared-use paths, and connections to Downtown. They also designateeepheavily-used le streets (Main, Washington, etc.) as important connections, though future analyzed are necessary to determine what Kings facilities are possible within the available right-of-way.

Prude

Bridge

27

Nansem

ond

28

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

DOWNTOWN ZOOM Downtown is an active place, and a draw for both local residents and visitors. The corridors outline several loops that could be used to accommodate people walking and/or riding bicycles to, around, and through Downtown. The Downtown Plan (in progress) will also identify potential improvements in this area.

Main

Wilroy

Holly Lawn

Pit ch

ke ttle

nce

nsta

E Co

Prentis

Broad

Mt

ood Hollyw

W Constance

eb Hor

k

Myric

Market Pinne

r

W Washington

n gto n i h

as EW

Waln ut

den

Sa

Cullo

son

dy od ne n wo e e h K t ke Bly La

rsh

e Ma Whit

Coun ty

Caro

lina

Madi

th

S6

ra to ga

Smith

0 Miles

0.25

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

29

NORTHERN GROWTH AREA The corridors in the Northern Growth Area provide circulation between several neighborhoods, with routes that connect to the Seaboard Coastline Trail, as well as several neighborhoods and schools. There are also corridors that connect into the northernmost area of Suffolk, where there are several retail areas. Because many of these retail areas are of a suburban scale and design, there is a need to provide enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Respass Be a ch

Coll

ege our

en

View

Bridge

e nd Critt

etts Pa stur e

Be n n

k

Pughsville

int

Sle

Nansem

o Townp

le

ek Par

Bo b W hite

er Driv

Kings

py H o

etts Cr e

Should e rs Hill

Sl ee

Be n n

Har b

Neck

Godwin

s Knott

Bridge

Kings

n Road s Ham p to

God

yH ep

ond

ole

win

0

sem

on

d

Miles

0.5

DRAFT

30

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

CONNECTIONS BETWEEN GROWTH AREAS Though most analyses were focused on the space within both Growth Areas, one goal of the plan was to create connections between the Growth Areas. At public meetings and on the survey, it was clear that many bicyclists currently use routes that connect the two Growth Areas on the west side as routes for longer rides. The corridors seek to formalize some of these connections.

as

Another area of connection is between the two Growth Areas, where an active railway and rail yard, abandoned railway, and Nansemond Parkway run parallel. There are two corridors provided, either of which could provide an enhanced multimodal connection and provide a connection between segments of the abandoned railway within both of the Growth Areas.

Hole

ee

n

r

G

ro w

Drive

th

A

re

Sleepy

ole

yH ep

C

on

Sle

ne

ct

io

ns

be

tw

Kings

d ar ly

i Ra

Na

ns

em

on

d

See inset map, right

0 0.5 1 Miles

2

0 Miles

0.5

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

DRAFT

31

5 TOOL KIT OVERVIEW

This “Tool Kit” provides examples of bicycle and pedestrian best practices that can be used to create a multimodal network in Suffolk and to address the goals of this plan.

THE TOOL KIT INCLUDES: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

Off-road Facilities On-road Facilities & Treatments Intersection Safety Treatments Facilities for Bridges & Crossings Lighting Furnishings & Comfort Amenities Signage & Wayfinding Bicycle Parking & Storage Other Amenities Built Environment Strategies

TOOL KIT RESOURCES In 2004, the Commonwealth Transportation Board adopted a policy (“VDOT Policy To Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Access”) for providing bicyclists and pedestrians greater access to safe transportation on roadways across the state. The policy includes a framework for accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians in the planning, funding, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of Virginia’s transportation network. It states that bicycle and pedestrian accommodations shall be designed and built using resources listed in the policy, including the VDOT “Road Design Manual,” though it does allow for contextsensitive flexibility in the design.

The Tool Kit takes into account the Design Manual, as well as design guidelines developed by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to suggest potential facilities.

The City of Suffolk published a traffic calming guide in 2004 (“Traffic Calming Guide for Local Residential Streets”).

Because it has not been recently updated, and because traffic calming is not a primary goal, it was not fully incorporated into this plan. However, slowing down traffic can yield a safer and more comfortable non-motorized traveling experience, so this and similar guidance should be utilized during further facility planning.

The Tool Kit is not comprehensive; it highlights examples that can successfully address the needs and conditions presented in Suffolk. It should be updated as new resources become available.

HOW TO USE THE TOOL KIT The Tool Kit provides a suite of options for addressing needs and opportunities. When planning for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in Suffolk, the tools in this section should be considered for implementation.

The Opportunity Corridors presented earlier showcase some of the primary routes that could benefit from enhanced pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in Suffolk.

Other routes may also emerge over time. After it is determined where bicycle and pedestrian facilities should be located, roadway conditions, usage levels, adjacent land uses, etc., should determine which type of facility is most appropriate. On-street improvements are determined primarily by vehicular traffic volume and speed. As volume and speed increase, greater separation between bicycle facilities and vehicular lanes is recommended. For off-road facility types, right-of-way and/or easement availability are key. Pedestrian-focused or shared facilities should be ADA compliant.

The table of Design Considerations in this section contains information about the considerations that need to be taken into account when planning for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. These are high-level, summarized design guidelines. Actual facility placement and design depend on the context and conditions of the street or available space, including available right-of-way.

32

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

USER TYPES

People walk and ride bicycles for a variety of reasons, including recreational and transportation needs. A connected network of sidewalks and paths will facilitate movement for all purposes.

RECREATION

TRANSPORTATION

>> Enjoyment

>> Alternate Mode of Transportation

>> Health

>> Primary Mode of Transportation >> Environmental Stewardship

BICYCLE USER CLASSIFICATION

A. Strong & Fearless (Advanced experience) >> Willing to ride a bicycle in most conditions, whether or not a bicycle facility is present

B. Enthused & Confident (Moderately experienced) >> Comfortable riding a bicycle on roadways but prefer using a dedicated bicycle facility

PEDESTRIANS People walking, running, and using mobility devices (e.g., wheelchairs, walkers) - all of whom are considered pedestrians - can all benefit from off-road transportation improvements, as well as intersection improvements and other amenities. Some users may be comfortable walking on a roadway shoulder or shared street, while others may only walk from place to place if a sidewalk or path is provided. Taking into account characteristics such as speed or amount of vehicle traffic when determining pedestrian or shared facility type makes it more likely that a roadway will be designed in a way that feels safer for a greater number of users.

BICYCLE USERS Different types of cyclists have different levels of experience and comfort when riding. One way of looking at different types of bicycle users is to separate them into four categories based on experience, interest, and level of comfort with riding bicycles. By better understanding these user groups, and their presence in Suffolk, facilities can be designed to meet their needs and allow riders to feel safe and comfortable across a range of road conditions.

C. Interested but Concerned / Children (Beginner)

D. No Way, No How! (Not at all interested in riding a bicycle)

>> Curious about riding a bicycle but concerned about riding near fastmoving vehicular traffic

>> Not interested, not able to ride a bicycle, or not comfortable riding a bicycle in any condition

>> Would prefer riding on trails or other facilities separated from the roadway

Categories based on a publication from Roger Gellar of the Portland Office of Transportation. https:// www.portlandoregon.gov/ transportation/article/158497

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

33

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS TOOL TYPE

POSTED SPEED LIMITS*

ANNUAL FACILITY WIDTH AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (AADT)*

USERS WHO MAY PREFER THIS FACILITY (BICYCLE CLASSIFICATION ON PREV. PAGE)

Any

Pedestrians Only

OFF-ROAD FACILITIES - PEDESTRIAN Sidewalk

Any

8’ minimum for VDOT roads (5’ sidewalk and 3’ buffer or 8’ sidewalk)

OFF-ROAD FACILITIES - SHARED BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN Shared-use Path High (45 mph+) Any Shared bicycle/pedestrian path not or where on-road adjacent to a roadway. facilities are not feasible

14’ minimum (10’ path, with 2’ buffer on both sides). 8’ minimum path for constrained corridors.

Pedestrians

Sidepath Shared bicycle/pedestrian path adjacent to a roadway.

15-18’ (10’ path with 3-6’ buffer on street side and 2’ buffer on inside). 8’ minimum for constrained corridors.

Pedestrians

One-way: 7’ minimum each side of the road (5’ lane with 2’ buffer)

A / B / C Bicyclists

High (45 mph+) Any or where on-road facilities are not feasible

A / B / C Bicyclists

A / B / C Bicyclists

ON-ROAD FACILITIES - BICYCLE Separated Bicycle Lane Bicycle lane with vertical, physical buffer between bicycle and motor vehicles.

High (35+ mph)

Buffered Bicycle Lane Bicycle lane with buffer between bicycle and motor vehicles.

Medium-high (30-45 mph)

High (>10,000)

7’ minimum each side (5’ lane with 2’ buffer)

A / B / C Bicyclists

Bicycle Lane Intended to delineate the right of way assigned to bicyclists and motorists and to provide for more predictable movements by each.

Low-medium (25-35 mph)

Lowmoderate (≤10,000)

5’ minimum each side

A / B Bicyclists

Moderatehigh (>2,000)

Two-way: 15’ (two 6’ lanes with 3’ buffer)

OTHER MARKINGS OR DESIGNATIONS (NOT FACILITIES) Shared Lane Marking (Sharrows)

Low (≤25 mph)

Low (≤2,000)

0’ additional

A / B Bicyclists

Signed Bicycle Route Designated by bicycle route signs, and sometimes including a paved shoulder. Serve either to provide continuity to other bicycle facilities or designate preferred routes through high-demand corridors.

Wide range depending on roadway characteristics

Low (≤2,000)

4’ paved shoulder where space allows

A / B Bicyclists

Paved Shoulders

Medium-high (30-45 mph)

Moderatehigh (>2,000)

6.5’ minimum each side of the road (5’ lane with 1.5’ buffer); more space where speeds or AADT are higher

All users

Yield Roadway / Shared Street

Low (≤25 mph)

Low (≤2,000)

12’-20’ of total travel width

All can use; likely most comfortable for A / B Bicyclists

* See maps on the following pages.

34

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

POSTED SPEED LIMITS 664

Respass Be a ch

Colle ge

etts Pa stur e

Be n n

Prin ce Lake

Har b oint Townp

le

Kings

k Pughsville

Bo b W hite

er Driv

py H o

ek Par

rs Hill

Slee

etts Cr e

Should e

Evere t s

Be n n

17

Neck

Godwin

s Knott Bridge

627 Kings

Nansem

Sle yH ep

God

ond

337

ole

win

n

nd mo

rk 642

Pit

Wilr oy

M phys ill Mur

res

d

dy

od

ew o

Moore

ne ke Ke n

th

Jericho Ditch (Private)

D ill a

13

n

Bl y

Car olin

Turli n g

to

uth

rb

La

ho

Coun ty

Holland

by S

ce ner tan E Pin W Co n s Fi n W Washington Marketney E Wa shin ton g

Sar ato ga

Kenyon llan

58

bu

mo

ood Hollyw

Ho

Ki l

Holly Lawn

le

ts Por

an

n

Su Main

India

e tt

Lake K ilb y

c

hk

Na

Ki

ng

sF o

Providence

460

nse

Prude

n Road s Ham p to

our

en

View

Bridge

e nd Critt

White Marsh

0

1

0.5

2

Miles Waterbody City Park National Wildlife Refuge Growth Area Boundary Suï¬&#x20AC;olk City Boundary Streets and Roadways Active Railways

Speed Limit 15 - 25 30 - 35 40 - 45 50 - 55 60 - 65

#

0

0.5

1

1.5

2 Miles

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

35

ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (AADT)

Pasture R d Bennett s

Dr

Princ e Lake

r Ln Drive

Kings H wy

Hole R d

Rd

Sleepy

Creek Pa rk Rd

Shoulders H i ll Rd

d Everets R

Bennetts

oads Hampto n R Pkwy P ric es F ork B U n iv ersit lvd yB l vd

t Townpoin

Kings H wy

Harb ou

Godwin Blvd

eck Rd Knotts N

r Vi e

w Bl vd

Dr ege

Rd

Respass Beach R d

Coll

Bridge Rd

end e n Critt

Slee H py Rd

d in Blv

ole

Godw

Pruden

Blvd

Providence Rd Pkw

y

Rd Fork

Nan

sem

ond

Ki

ngs

Murphys Mill R d

Rd

hk

K i l by

ban bur

Lake

r

D

Rd

St

Dr

Ln

edy

od

enn

Lak eK

Dr

ton

e

wo

Moore Ave

St

es

E W a shi n g

County

hor

Finney

Wellons St Sara toga

Kenyon Rd

Kilb yS

W Washington St

Ave

B ly t h

Jericho Ditch Ln (Private)

t on

Rd

Caro

Tur

li n g

Rd

D ill R d

lina

and

Holland Rd

Hollywood

Holl

Su

t ner S e E Pin Arizona Av

Rd ce W C on s t a n

rl

India nT

Holly Lawn Pkwy

le R d

Main St

P it c

e tt

White Marsh Rd

Waterbody City Park Na�onal Wildlife Refuge Growth Area Boundary Suffolk City Boundary Streets and Roadways Ac�ve Railways

Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) - Updated August 2016 (VDOT) 0 - 2000 2001 - 10000 10001 - 195000

0

0.5

Miles

1

2

36

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

OFF-ROAD FACILITIES

Off-road pedestrian and bicycle facilities provide the highest level of separation from motor vehicle traffic. They offer varying levels of separation between bicycles and pedestrians.

OFF-ROAD: PEDESTRIAN CONTINUOUS SIDEWALKS

Sidewalk

Roadway

Local Example: Sidewalk Near City Hall

>> Sidewalks should be well-maintained and wide enough for anticipated use >> Should meet American Disability Act standards of width, slope, and surface condition

OFF-ROAD: SHARED (BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN) SIDEPATHS

Sidewalk

Sidepath

Roadway Buffer

>> Road-adjacent path shared by people walking and riding bicycles >> Path is separated from the road by a curb and ideally includes a planted buffer strip between the path and the roadway >> Center line may be used to divide users by their direction of travel >> Signage should be used to warn users of constrained conditions, obstacles, or other conflict zones

SHARED-USE PATHS

Local Example: Seaboard Coastline Trail

Shared-use path

>> Similar characteristics as sidepaths, except the shared-use path is separated from the roadway (e.g., in a former railway, as with the Seaboard Coastline Trail)

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

ON-ROAD FACILITIES

37

On-road facilities provide varying levels of separation between bicycles and vehicles. The faster the traffic is moving, and the higher the volume, the more separation that should be considered.

ON-ROAD: BICYCLE BICYCLE LANES

Sidewalk

Roadway Bicycle Lane Buffer

>> Striping separates marked bicycle lane from vehicular traffic >> Appropriate for streets with posted traffic speeds of 25-35 mph

BUFFERED BICYCLE LANES

Sidewalk

Roadway

Bicycle Lane Buffer

>> Striped buffer zone separates bicycle lane from vehicular traffic >> Appropriate for streets with high-speed or high-volume traffic

SEPARATED BICYCLE LANES

On-road example

Sidewalk Bicycle Roadway Lane

Buffer Buffer with Barrier

Raised example >> Bicycle lanes are protected by a physical barrier (curb, flexible posts, bollards, planters, a raised median, or parked cars) between the between the lane and vehicular traffic >> Appropriate for streets with high-speed or high-volume traffic >> May be on-road or raised

Sidewalk Bicycle Roadway Lane

Buffers

38

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

ON-ROAD: SHARED PAVED SHOULDERS

Roadway

Paved Shoulder

Local Example: Driver Village

>> On-road markings designate that the roadway is shared by people riding bicycles and driving >> Appropriate for streets with low-speed and low-volume traffic >> Can be used where limited road width cannot accommodate other bicycle facilities

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

39

OTHER MARKINGS/DESIGNATIONS When installation of new facilities is not feasible, due to issues such as lack of available space, other markings or designations could help to clarify routes or spaces available for people riding bicycles or walking.

SHARED LANE MARKINGS (“SHARROWS”)

Sidewalk

Roadway with Sharrows

>> On-road markings reinforce that the roadway is shared by people riding bicycles and driving >> Can be used to advise people riding bicycles on the best place to ride in the road (e.g., central for more narrow roads, or further to the outside on wider roads) >> Appropriate for streets with low-speed and low-volume traffic >> Utilizing a bicycle boulevard or greenway concept with sharrows creates a more pleasant riding experience

SIGNED BICYCLE ROUTES

Sidewalk

Roadway

>> Serve either to provide continuity between bicycle facilities or to designate preferred routes through high-demand corridors >> Can be used with bike lanes, sharrows, or with no on-road bicycle markings

YIELD ROADWAYS / SHARED STREETS

Roadway

>> Serves people driving, walking, and riding bicycles in the same area >> There are no lane markings >> There may be signage indicating that the space is shared >> Appropriate for streets with very low-speed and low-volume traffic >> Used for local residential streets, not for areas with through traffic

40

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

INTERSECTION SAFETY TREATMENTS Intersections are often points of high conflict, and unsafe intersections were called out by many Suffolk community members as a deterrent to riding bicycles and walking in Suffolk.

FOR PEOPLE WALKING AND RIDING BICYCLES MARKED CROSSWALKS

Local Example: Market St & Clay St.

>> High-visibility striped or textured crosswalks make crossing area more visible to vehicles >> Standard parallel line crosswalks should be used where high-visibility is not required >> May be paired with strategies on this page and the following page to enhance safety and visibility

CROSSING SIGNAGE AND/OR RAPID-FLASHING BEACONS

Local Example: N Saratoga St.

>> The Code of Virginia states that people driving vehicles must stop for any pedestrian at a crosswalk, regular crossing (including ends of sidewalks), or intersection where the legal maximum speed doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t exceed 35 mph >> Pedestrian crossing warning signs alert drivers to the potential presence of people walking (and riding bicycles) at crossings >> Rapid-flashing beacons may be used for increased visibility

ADVANCE STOP OR YIELD MARKINGS

>> Advance yield or stop lines (places 20-50 feet ahead of a crossing) increase pedestrian visibility and reduce the likelihood of pedestrian/vehicle crashes at unsignalized mid-block crossings >> Crossings for trails/shared-use paths may warrant higher-visibility treatments - for example, VDOT has piloted programs that use zigzag striping to give advanced warning to motorists

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

DRAFT

41

CURB EXTENSIONS

>> Extended sidewalks at intersections in higher-density areas reduce crossing distance and make pedestrians more visible to drivers >> Extensions are often paired with street parking, and can help to slow traffic by reducing the width of the roadway >> When paired with bicycle lanes, must allow clear space for bicycle passage

ADA-COMPLIANT CURB RAMPS

>> Ramps and curb cuts at driveway and road crossings allow easier access for people with limited mobility, as well as easier access in general >> Truncated domes provide a detectable warning

MEDIAN REFUGES

>> Waiting areas in the median of wide roadways split crossing distances for pedestrians, and should be wide enough to also accommodate bicycles

42

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

INTERSECTION FACILITIES FOR RAISED BICYCLE LANES

>> Where a raised bicycle lane crosses an intersection, one way to make the bicyclist more visible is to move the bike lane toward the travel lanes just before the intersection >> Protected intersection designs provide an extra barrier for bicyclists and pedestrians at intersections

SIGNAL TIMING / PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SIGNAL HEADS

>> Signal timing may be adjusted to allow all users to safely cross roadways >> Pedestrian countdown signals help to ensure that people know when they have enough time to cross before the light changes >> Bicycle signals are timed to prevent conflicts with vehicles at road intersections - for example, a bicycle may have the signal before a vehicle is given a turn signal, rather than giving both vehicle and bicycle a green light simultaneously

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

DRAFT

BICYCLE-FOCUSED INTERSECTION INFRASTRUCTURE COLORED/FILLED BICYCLE LANES

>> Bicycle lanes can be painted for higher visibility at potential conflict points (such as driveways and intersections) >> Solid paint indicates bicycle-only spaces, while hashed paint indicates shared bicycle/vehicle spaces >> On-ramps, turn lanes, and driveways are a few example of high-conflict points >> Combined bicycle/turn lanes can also be used

BIKE BOXES

>> Bicycle boxes provide a safe area for riders to stop and make turns at intersections

43

44

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

FACILITIES FOR BRIDGES

In Suffolk, bridges provide vital connections over water and major transportation infrastructure, but most are not designed to safely accommodate non-motorized traffic. Where it is appropriate to provide multimodal facilities on bridges, railings, fences, or other barriers must meet VDOT height standards, to prevent falls in either direction. In addition, bridge materials should be evaluated for traction under wet/icy conditions, and on-bridge facilities should be continuous with facilities on either side of the bridge.

PROTECTED SIDEPATH

>> A protected sidepath provides a mixed-use facility for bicycles and pedestrians

SEPARATED BICYCLE LANES WITH A SIDEWALK

>> Consider separate bridge facilities for people riding bicycles and walking for routes with high non-vehicle traffic

PARALLEL BRIDGE

Local Example: Pedestrian and Bicycle Bridge Adjacent to Kimberly Bridge

>> A separate but parallel bridge provides high separation from vehicle traffic

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

45

FACILITIES FOR RAILROAD CROSSINGS Suffolkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s many active railroads can be a significant barrier to travel for all road users. Few, if any, of the rail crossings currently have pedestrian facilities. Where sidewalks exist on either side of the rail, they do not continue across the railroad. Providing safer, continuous facilities will ensure that it is clear how and when bicyclists and people walking should traverse the crossing, putting them out of harmâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s way with regard to both trains and vehicles. There are many tools that can be used to improve railroad crossings for people riding bicycles and walking. Passive and active devices may be used to supplement typical highway-related control devices to improve non-motorist safety.

PASSIVE TOOLS

ACTIVE TOOLS

>> Pedestrian barriers and signage

>> Active barriers, such as moving gates can be used for all travelers

>> Path routes that make the railway more visible

>> Adding lights to crossing gates makes them even more visible

>> Unique paving and texturing

46

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

LIGHTING Lighting improves visibility and should be considered in the design of all facilities. Where facilities are on-road or roadadjacent, pedestrian-scale lighting could be considered to supplement vehicle-scale lighting. As appropriate, off-road facilities may also be lit for safety and visibility.

PATH LIGHTING

>> In areas where lighting is appropriate and desired, human-scale, directed lighting should be used to illuminate bicycle facilities, shared use paths, and sidewalks

UNDERPASS LIGHTING

>> Lighting at underpass routes should be used to ensure safety and visibility

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

47

FURNISHINGS & COMFORT AMENITIES Furnishings along pathways can encourage use by a wide range of users. By providing amenities such as trash bins and pet stations, users are also encouraged to share in the task of keeping the paths clean.

SEATING

>> Furnishings such as benches and/or picnic tables may be appropriate for higher-use areas, and/or longer stretches of pathways

PET STATIONS AND TRASH BINS

WATER FOUNTAINS

>> Drinking fountains keep people - and pets - hydrated

TRAILHEADS

Local Example: Seaboard Coastline Trail

>> Amenities such as parking, route maps, and rest rooms are all valued at trailheads

SHADE TREES

>> Pet stations and frequent trash bins encourage path users to keep the facility clean

>> Trees can provide shade along sidewalks, paths, and bicycle lanes, but care needs to be taken to ensure that they do not impede sight lines

48

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

SIGNAGE & WAYFINDING Signs help to clarify pedestrian and bicycle movements, and can serve important cultural/historic education and economic development functions.

WAYFINDING

>> Wayfinding signage can direct both non-motorized and motorized travelers >> Displaying distance information may encourage people to leave their car parked and walk to selected destinations >> Sign design may be coordinated with city-wide branding strategy

TRAIL SIGNAGE

Local Example: Seaboard Coastline Trail

>> Signs can clarify when and how paths are meant to be shared, and provide information about path obstacles, opening hours, etc.

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

49

BICYCLE PARKING & STORAGE BICYCLE RACKS

>> Bicycle racks may be simple or decorative, but should accommodate a range of bicycle designs and sizes >> Should be provided at recreation areas and near building entrances in retail zones and medium- and high-density residential buildings >> Users should be able to intuitively secure their frame and one wheel using a U-lock

BICYCLE CORRALS

SHELTERS

>> If sidewalk space is limited, a bicycle corral (which takes the place of one vehicle street parking space) could be used to hold up to 12 bicycles

>> Sheltered bicycle racks protect parked bicycles in inclement weather

LONG-TERM STORAGE LOCKERS

BICYCLE RACKS ON BUSES

>> Should be placed near areas with high bicycle traffic

Local Example: Suffolk Transit

>> Storage boxes can be used at locations such as transit stations (e.g., bus transfer stations) and areas frequented by touring trail users for secure day-long storage

>> Bicycle racks on the front of buses allow people to bring their bicycle with them, easing not only the connection to the bus, but the connection from the bus to their destination

50

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

OTHER AMENITIES BICYCLE SHARING STATIONS

>> Stations can be located strategically at transit points or key destinations

REPAIR STATIONS

>> Repair stations along bicycle routes allow cyclists to perform basic bicycle repairs and maintenance

>> Programs can be large or small, and are often completed as public-private partnerships >> Some cities have provided reduced cost memberships for low income populations, enhancing access

PROGRAMS EDUCATION

SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS

>> Educational programs can increase safety for all travelers - people driving, walking, running, riding bicycles, using mobility devices, etc.

>> Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a federal program that is administered at the state-level

>> They can also provide education about proper use of facilities >> The City of Suffolk currently has police-led, bicycle-focused education programs in schools >> Other programs could focus on adult bicycle user awareness, driver awareness, pedestrian safety, or other issues

>> Its purpose is to ensure that children have safe, nonmotorized routes to schools >> VDOT provides several types of grants to help communities develop programs and infrastructure related to SRTS

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

51

BUILT ENVIRONMENT STRATEGIES Design of facilities and provision of bicycle- and pedestrian-specific amenities are crucial to supporting the growth of multimodal travel. In addition, there are design strategies related to the built environment (including buildings and development sites) that can also better support the movement of people walking and riding bicycles.

SMALL BUILDING SETBACKS

>> Having small setbacks, rather than large setbacks for parking lots or unusable green spaces, provides a better building envelope and pedestrian scale >> By placing parking lots behind buildings rather than in front, the building itself is more directly accessible to the street (including street parking) and sidewalk

SUPPORT FOR MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT

>> Mixed-use development allows for a wider range of uses in one area, meaning that people walking and riding bicycles do not have to travel as far to reach more destinations, including offices, residences, shopping, dining, parks, schools and recreation opportunities

CONNECTED STREETS

>> A connected grid of streets - rather than a cul-de-sac model of street development or a superblock - allows for more connections and more convenience between adjacent neighborhoods and provides a greater number of route options

FACADE TRANSPARENCY

>> Percent transparency requirements for buildings can make a streetscape more inviting and allow for more â&#x20AC;&#x153;eyes on the streetâ&#x20AC;?

52

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

6 STRATEGIC ACTIONS OVERVIEW The tools described in the previous section will not all be used at once, and will not be used on all Strategic Opportunity Corridors. In order to move forward with regard to improving conditions for people riding bicycles and walking, the City of Suffolk has created a list of Strategic Action Items.

Each Action Item is a high-level statement. The Sub-actions beneath each Action Item provide more detail about specific strategies. Some Action Items are facility-specific, while others outline a strategy for studying specific areas or types of facilities to begin implementation of improvements.

There are three types of Action Items: >> PROJECTS: Actions that describe projects to complete or study >> PROGRAMS: Actions that can improve the safety and viability of non-motorized transportation >> POLICIES: Actions that assess and improve the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s current policy framework to further support bicycling and walking Project Actions are numbered; those numbers correspond to a location on the following map.

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

53

MAP OF PROJECT ACTIONS Jam

es

664

Riv

er

Respass Be a ch

Colle ge

Riv on d ns em Na

Be n n

Prin ce

le

er Driv

py H o

6a 5

Kings

ek Par

Sle

Nansem

Har b

26

6b

Bo b W hite

15

k

6c

Pughsville

rs Hill

Slee

25 etts Cr e

oint

Evere t s

17

Should e

27

Be n n

23

Townp

etts Pa stur e

Kings

Lake

Bridge

627

24

n Road s Ham p to

Neck

er

s Knott

Godwin

our

en

View

Bridge

e nd Critt

8

14

God

yH ep

ond

337

ole

win

7 12

n

e tt

rb

2

ho

res

d

10

dy

ne

Moore

uth

Bl y

th

Jericho Ditch (Private)

D ill a

13

n

19b

mo

Car olin

Turli n g

to

13

ke Ke n

yS

22

La

Ki l 17 b

Holland

3 1 4b 21

ce ner tan E Pin W Co n s Fi n n W Washington Market ey E Wa shin ton g

4a

Coun ty

58

Sar ato ga

Lake K ilb y Kenyon

bu

ts Por

ood Hollyw

llan

16

20

11

an

Ho

18

Holly Lawn

le

Su

Main

n

19a

od

c

hk

ew o

Pit

Wilr oy

642

Na

Ki

M phys ill Mur

India

9

mo

rk

ng

sF o

nd

Providence

460

nse

Prude

White Marsh

0

0.5

1

2

Miles

#

0

0.5

1

1.5

2 Miles

54

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

STRATEGIC ACTIONS: PROJECTS The Project Action Items provide strategies for both short and longer terms. Short-term actions are shown as bold.

ACTION: COMPLETE AND IMPROVE THE SEABOARD COASTLINE TRAIL IN THE CENTRAL GROWTH AREA SUB-ACTIONS:

1. Improve the existing Downtown section by widening the narrow trail sections on Prentis Street; adding bike/pedestrian-friendly bollards; and defining a path through, as well as signage and amenities at, the train station park.

2. Improve the connection to North Main Street by extending the trail from the existing pedestrian bridge (adjacent to the Kimberly Bridge) to the existing sidewalk at Wendy’s Restaurant.

3. Develop a bike/pedestrian-friendly crossing at East Constance Road to connect the spur trail to Constant’s Wharf Park.

4. Identify funding to design and construct an extension of the trail west from the West Constance Road/Prentis Street intersection (4a) and east from Moore Avenue (4b).

ACTION: COMPLETE AND IMPROVE THE SEABOARD COASTLINE TRAIL IN THE NORTHERN GROWTH AREA SUB-ACTIONS:

5. Expand trailhead parking at Driver.

6. Study the feasibility of improving connections to adjacent neighborhoods at Driver Village (6a), Bob White Lane/Shoulder Hill Road (6b), and Pughsville (Town Point Road) (6c).

7. Identify funding to design and construct an extension of the Seaboard Coastline Trail from Driver to Nansemond River High School.

8. Study the feasibility of connecting the trail to the new Florence Bowser Elementary School on Nansemond Parkway.

ACTION: CONNECT THE NORTHERN AND CENTRAL GROWTH AREAS WITH EXPANSIONS OF THE SEABOARD COASTLINE TRAIL SUB-ACTIONS:

9. Extend the trail from Suburban Drive to Nansemond Parkway and Regency Drive.

10. Extend the trail south along Suburban Drive and across Business 58 to the trail and existing sidewalks on the other side of railroad crossing.

11. Connect Mack Benn Elementary School to the trail.

12. Study the feasibility of extending the trail south from Sportsman Boulevard and across the CSX right-ofway.

13. Study the feasibility of extending a sidepath north along Suburban Drive to existing neighborhoods.

ACTION: COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS ON NANSEMOND PARKWAY SUB-ACTIONS:

14. Complete sidewalk and sidepath improvements concurrent with the Nansemond Parkway road improvements from Helen Street to the Chesapeake City Line.

15. Study the feasibility of extending a sidepath from Nansemond Parkway to the Suffolk Meadows Neighborhood.

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

ACTION: COMPLETE IMPROVEMENTS ON HOLLAND ROAD

ACTION: COMPLETE OTHER NORTHERN GROWTH AREA IMPROVEMENTS

SUB-ACTIONS:

SUB-ACTIONS:

16. Complete sidewalk and sidepath improvements with the construction of Route 58 bypass improvements.

17. Study the feasibility of connecting the sidepath between Holland Road, Kilby Shores Drive, and Turlington Road.

18. Study the feasibility of connecting from Holland to Kenyon Road and the future western portion of the Seaboard Coastline Trail.

ACTION: COMPLETE OTHER CENTRAL GROWTH AREA IMPROVEMENTS SUB-ACTIONS:

19. Develop a plan to improve sidewalks and crosswalks on Main Street (19a) and Washington Street (19b).

20. Construct a sidepath along Holly Lawn Parkway from Main Street to Lake Meade Park.

21. Study the feasibility of an on-street bicycle loop through the Historic Downtown area with connections to the Seaboard Coastline Trail at Moore Avenue, Pine Street, and E Constance Road.

22. Develop a bicycling and walking path or route with signage through the Downtown Historic District that includes amenities at important destinations for people walking and riding bicycles.

55

23. Develop a detailed plan to improve a network of bicycle and pedestrian trails connecting residential developments to existing and future commercial development. The plan should identify important missing connections on Respass Beach Road, Harbour View Boulevard, Prices Fork Boulevard, University Boulevard, and Burbage Grant Drive, and recommend improved bicycle and pedestrian connections to existing and future commercial developments.

24. Study the feasibility of bicycle and pedestrian improvements on College Drive and Hampton Roads Parkway.

25. Study the feasibility of bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Town Point Road.

26. Study the feasibility of bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Shoulder Hill Road.

ACTION: SUPPORT COMPLETION OF REGIONAL, STATEWIDE, AND NATIONAL TRAILS THROUGH SUFFOLK SUB-ACTIONS:

27. Support development of the South Hampton Roads Trail, Birthplace of America Trail, Beaches to Bluegrass Trail, East Coast Greenway, and other similar trails.

28. Coordinate with the Hampton Roads Transportation Organization to facilitate studies of sidepaths through Lone Star Lakes Park, Godwin Boulevard, Kings Fork Road, and Pitchkettle Road, and the use of the Seaboard Coastline Trail as part of one or more of the regional, statewide, and/or national trails.

56

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

STRATEGIC ACTIONS: PROGRAMS ACTION: SUPPORT PROGRAMS THAT IMPROVE SAFETY SUB-ACTIONS:

>> Work with the Director of Suffolk’s Public School transportation to develop a Safe Routes to School pilot program for a subset of the City’s elementary schools. >> Develop a bicycle safety awareness program to educate drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians through public safety & awareness programs with the Suffolk Police Department, Suffolk Tourism, etc.

ACTION: SEEK FUNDING FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS SUB-ACTION:

>> Develop and monitor a database of grants for bicycle and pedestrian improvements to help fund studies and construction of new facilities and/or amenities.

ACTION: SUPPORT RUNNING/ WALKING AND CYCLING EVENTS SUB-ACTION:

>> Support events through creation of public/private partnerships with various organizations.

STRATEGIC ACTIONS: POLICIES ACTION: SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS SUB-ACTIONS:

>> Hold periodic meetings of the Internal Committee to review progress on accomplishing the goals of this plan.

>> Update the Suffolk Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan on a regular basis, potentially in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan.

>> Develop policies for identifying, prioritizing, marking, signing, and maintaining bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and other pathways.

>> Ensure that new developments incorporate tools and amenities described in this plan, when relevant.

>> Review policies in the City Ordinances to assess alignment with the corridors, tools, and actions outlined in this document. >> Consider adoption of a Complete Streets Ordinance. >> Analyze compatibility and connectivity of plans and projects with regional trails and bicycle/pedestrian plans in adjacent communities. >> Develop policies regarding the identification and improvement of intersections and railroad crossings for facilitation of safe bicycle and pedestrian travel. >> Review and improve non-motorized connections to transit lines and transfer stations, in conjunction with the Transit Development Plan.

>> Update the 2004 “Traffic Calming Guide for Local Residential Streets”.

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

7 RESOURCES

LIST OF REFERENCED SOURCES

>> Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission (2016). The Economic Impact of Bicycling in the Central Shenandoah Valley. >> Drennan, E. (2003). The Benefits of Complete Streets 7: Complete Streets Spark Economic Revitalization. National Complete Streets Coalition.

DRAFT

57

>> Page 36, “Off-Road Facilities”: Joe Flood via flickr, LADOT, Michael Sacuskie/TED, YoChicago, City of MIssoula, >> Page 39, “Other Markings/Designations”: French Broad River MPO, BikeWalkLee Blog, Western Transportation Institute

>> League of American Bicyclists (2015). The Growth of Bicycle Commuting [PDF]. Data from the American Community Survey.

>> Page 40-43, “Intersection Safety Treatments”: Google Streetview, U.S. Army, PedBikeSafe, VDOT, NYSDOT, Calmstreetsboston.blogspot.com, Metropolitan Engineering Consulting & Forensics, City of Missoula

>> Sevick, M. A., Dunn, A. L., Morrow, M. S., Marcus, B. H., Chen, G. J., & Blair, S. N. (2000). Costeffectiveness of lifestyle and structured exercise interventions in sedentary adults: results of project ACTIVE. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19(1), 1-8.

>> Page 44, “Facilities for Bridges”: Alta, www.se23. com, NACTO, LADOT Bike Blog via flickr, Roger Averbeck via The Street Trust, Rich & Cheryl via flickr, Greg Raisman, Alta, Rails-To-Trails Conservancy, NYC via Twitter, Daniel Mauer, Google Streetview, twowheelpoli.blogspot.com

>> U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2016). The Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Promote Walking and Walkable Communities.

>> Page 45, “Facilities for Railroad Crossings”: American Trails, cityblm.org, Transportation Research Board

>> Sierra Club (n.d.). Pedaling to Prosperity: Bicycling will Save Americans $4.6 Billion in 2012.

>> Page 46, “Lighting”: City of Fayetteville AR, City of Temple TX, Arup, blogTO

>> Stepp, E. (2015). Annual Cost to Own and Operate a Vehicle Falls to $8,698, Finds AAA. Retrieved August 4, 2016, from http://newsroom.aaa. com/2015/04/annual-cost-operate-vehicle-falls8698-finds-aaa-archive/

>> Page 47, “Furnishings & Comfort Amenities”: TrailLink, Murdock Manufacturing, Trash It

>> Transportation Alternatives (2008). Rolling Carbon: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Commuting in New York City.

IMAGE CREDITS >> Page 9-10, “Existing Conditions”: Aerials from Google Maps >> Page 16, “Regional, Statewide, and Inter-state Trails”: South Hampton Roads Trail via Facebook, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, HRTPO, East Coast Greenway >> Page 18, “Summary of Challenges”: FIrst and fourth images from Google Streetview >> Page 32, “User Types”: Mecklenburg County, LADOT, City of Chicago, SF Examiner, Margaret Gibbs, Steigerwaldt, Alex Proimos via Wikimedia Commons

>> Page 48, “Signage & Wayfinding”: City of Arlington, http://policyinstitute.iu.edu >> Page 49, “Bicycle Parking & Storage”: KTDrasky via flickr, NYCDOT, Duo-Gard, inTysons, Intercity Transit >> Page 50, “Other Amenities” and “Programs”: M01229 via flickr, Bike Portland, Bike Santa Cruz County, NJBWC, Safe Routes to School NJ >> Page 51, “Built Environment Strategies”: Market Common Clarendon, Google Maps, PedBikeSafe, DALHOFF THOMAS design studio

58

DRAFT

8 APPENDIX CONTENTS >> Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Community Survey >> Summary of Public Meeting #2

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN City of Suffolk, Virginia Summary of Public Meeting #1 (March 7, 2017) and Suffolk Bicycling and Walking Survey

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

CONTENTS

3

Meeting Overview

4

Presentation and Q&A

5

Input on Meeting Exhibits

13

Survey Results

DRAFT

2

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

OVERVIEW The City of Suffolk, Virginia, held the first public meeting for the Suffolk Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan on March 7, 2017, at City Hall. An open house with interactive exhibits was open from 6:30-8:30 PM, and the project team gave a presentation from 7-7:30 PM. Approximately 65 people signed in to the meeting.

At the event, the community was invited to learn about the Master Plan process and share their input on existing conditions analyses, draft goals and strategic corridors, and potential tools for addressing needs. All meeting materials were posted on the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s website (http://www.suffolkva.us/ parks/bicycle-and-pedestrian-master-plan) for review and comment. Some hard copies of the bicycle and pedestrian survey (described later in this document) were also provided, though attendees were encouraged to take the survey online.

DRAFT

3

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

4

PRESENTATION AND Q&A The meeting presentation provided a summary of information that was shared in more detail on the exhibit boards. Lakita Watson, Director of Suffolk Parks & Recreation, kicked off the presentation by briefly explaining the background and need for the Master Plan. She then introduced Deana Rhodeside, PhD, Director of Rhodeside & Harwell, who further explained Virginia’s Urban Development Area grant program, which funded the development of the Master Plan. Dr. Rhodeside also explained the public input process for the project, which involves public input sessions, two committees, and web-based input activities.

Jennifer Koch, Project Manager from Rhodeside & Harwell, summarized existing conditions, opportunities, and challenges related to walking and riding a bicycle in Suffolk. She also summarized the draft goals and draft strategic corridors for the project, both of which will form the framework for recommendations. The final part of the presentation focused on a tool kit of potential strategies for addressing issues related to walking and riding bicycles.

Following the presentation, the project team responded to questions from the attendees. A summarized version of questions and responses follows.

Question: Have you reached out to Virginia Capital Trails and other trail networks in order to ensure that we connect with their plans? Response: We have not yet met with other trails groups, but are reviewing their plans. City staff may meet with some trails groups as we continue to develop recommendations.

Question: Are you looking to connect to other jurisdictions? For example, to work with Chesapeake to ensure trail connectivity and continuity? Response: We have reviewed existing facilities and plans in neighboring jurisdictions, and we will share our recommendations with them to discuss and get their feedback. Connectivity within and between the UDAs is our primary focus, but where we have an opportunity to connect to a regional trail or a neighboring trail, we will try to find ways to do so.

Question: Have you reached out to developers to ensure that they are aware of what’s going on with this plan, and so they can plan to incorporate facilities as needed? Response: We have not spoken with developers yet, but the goal is to have this plan in place so that developers and others have guidelines to use when they are developing or redeveloping properties.

Question: What is the timeline for implementation of the Master Plan? Response: The plan itself will be completed by October 2017. We cannot say yet when the plan recommendations will be implemented, because it will depend on funding. There will be a prioritization process to incorporate some recommendations into the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). Other recommendations may be partially funded by grants or partnerships.

Question: What counts as “bicycle facilities”? If a road is already heavily used by bicyclists, are you planning to change that route? Response: We recognize that there are many routes that bicyclists already ride, even though there may be no bicycle-focused infrastructure in place. We’re not looking to change those routes. However, where many cyclists are riding now, particularly out in the less developed parts of the Growth Areas, traffic often moves at a speed that may be uncomfortable for more novice riders. Our goal is to assess who is interested in riding a bicycle more often, where they would like to ride, and whether different or improved (e.g., more protected or separated) facilities are needed to encourage those people to ride.

Question: How long will the survey be open? I’d like to be able to tell others to give their input. Response: We will leave the survey open for one more week from today, and close it at 11:59 PM on March 14.

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

INPUT ON MEETING EXHIBITS There were five stations of exhibits. At each station, meeting attendees were asked to review the information provided and give their input. Markers and sticky notes were available to write notes on the boards. Some questions were provided, but general input was encouraged and accepted as well.

Project team members were standing at stations to speak with meeting attendees and answer questions. Not all boards received input, but all boards are summarized below with input summarized when available.

Station 1: Background / Introduction to the Plan BOARD: PROJECT BACKGROUND • This board provided background about the need for and funding of the project, plans for community involvement throughout the project, and the schedule through Fall 2017.

BOARD: WHERE DO YOU LIVE? • Attendees were asked to place a dot on a map to indicate where they live. Most meeting attendees live within the two growth areas, with higher attendance from the central growth area. There were a handful of attendees who live in Suffolk outside of the growth areas, and a few attendees from outside of Suffolk.

Station 2: Existing Conditions BOARD: EXISTING FACILITIES • This board displayed bicycle and pedestrian facilities that are currently existing in Suffolk. Many comments were related to potential opportunities, and thus are summarized with the boards in the next station.

• There were some bike lanes and sidewalks that were missing from the map, and will be added for future maps.

DRAFT

5

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

BOARD: SPEED LIMITS & TRIP COUNTS / BUS ROUTES & TRANSFER STATIONS • This board displayed two transportation-focused maps.

Amount and speed of vehicle traffic sharing the streets will be an important factor as recommendations are drafted, and transit routes and transfer points will help to complete the multimodal network.

BOARD: EXISTING LAND USE / TOPOGRAPHY & WETLANDS • This board focused on existing land uses and environmental features, both of which will play a key role in determining facility design and location.

BOARD: HUBS & DESTINATIONS • This board showed the study area with schools, retail areas, hospitals, rec centers, parks, villages, and historic districts. Meeting attendees were asked to indicate (with dots or notes) where else they like to go in Suffolk.

• Many comments were related to potential opportunities, and thus are summarized with the boards in the next station. Several people also placed dots on locations that were existing on the map, presumably to indicate that it is an important destination for them. For example, several parks had many dots.

• New suggestions for destinations to take into account included places of worship.

DRAFT

6

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

Station 3: Opportunities & Challenges BOARD: DRAFT LIST OF OPPORTUNITIES & CHALLENGES • This board displayed a list of opportunities and challenges gathered during the analysis of existing conditions, review of previous plans, and meetings with committees. Attendees were asked to add other opportunities and challenges to the list. Several people noted opportunities and challenges on other boards as well. All of these ideas have been summarized and consolidated into thematic groups below.

Connectivity Ideas »» Fill in missing sidewalks »» Connect neighborhoods »» Connect abandoned railroad beds »» Install sidewalks throughout HOAs »» Create wide corridors that connect communities »» Connect trails to transit »» Coordinate shuttles between businesses and trails »» Connect all parks together with bike lanes and sidewalks »» Explore Beaches to Bluegrass trail connections »» Coordinate with Chesapeake (Western Branch trail connections) for trails continuity, and finish the trail to Chesapeake from Downtown Funding & Implementation Ideas »» Share the Road designation »» “Rails to Trails” funding »» Partnerships »» Cut cost, do more: use crushed granite, not blacktop; less perks more miles; don’t mow it, let the trees grow Location-specific Ideas Downtown »» Sidewalk to Planet Fitness from Hilton

DRAFT

7

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

»» Sidewalk around the exterior of Kingsboro Neighborhood »» Kingsboro skate park potential at Highland - dead end near Planet Fitness »» Connective bike trails through downtown »» Safe sidewalk crossings to Planters Park and into Downtown »» Better parking at Planters Park »» River walk along Main Street in downtown Suffolk. (Enjoy the River, don’t cover it up!) »» Trail along Nansemond River across from Hilton Inn behind Walmart to Obici Place »» Saratoga community crossings »» Alternate railroad crossings (other than Main St / Carolina): Explore Wellons and Saratoga »» Safer travel down Constance »» Multipurpose center city park downtown for big events Connections between Growth Areas »» Williams & Wilroy Road to Driver »» Connect growth areas via trails and bike paths Pitchkettle Road »» Sidewalk/bike path from Prentis/ Pitchkettle intersection to Murphys Mill Road »» Need sidewalks on Pitchkettle »» Connect neighborhoods on Pitchkettle »» There are a lot of bikes on Pitchkettle Road. There is also significant residential, commercial, and industrial development planned.

Pitchkettle to Kings Fork loop? Property near fire station won’t be developed and may be available.

Route 10 »» Rt 10 from Elephants Fork to Lone Star Lakes »» Connect Constance Wharf to Lone Star by multi-use path »» Trail following Rt 10 to ferry in Surry

DRAFT

Other Locations »» Need continuous access from Chuckatuck to Downtown »» Explore trail along the Suffolk side of Dismal Swamp to North Carolina »» Add light at Progress and 337 »» Add a crossing at Walmart »» Rebuild bridge on Kings Highway to Driver »» Address parked cars, bicycles, and curvature of Harbor Pointe Drive (Harbour Pointe Drive at North James Drive) »» Create a designated path along the Tour de Cure route (Kings Fork) • Examples that people have seen elsewhere »» Williamsburg: trails to schools, parking on weekends at schools »» Windsor Castle Park: great trails – soft, not pavement »» Portsmouth 164 (State Road): allows bike access. Is this possible on 58 between Main and Wilroy?

• Desired Amenities »» Bicycle racks with lighting, and bicycle racks downtown »» Restrooms and additional benches »» More parking at Driver trailhead • Safety Needs »» Street lights »» Safe facilities on country roads »» Safe passage between less traveled neighborhoods »» Better safety and connectivity in the outskirts of the UDAs »» Solution to speeding on side streets »» Examination of potential safety issues caused by switching which side of the street the parking is on from one block to the next. »» Multi-use paths on bridges (e.g., 58 bridge) »» Safe equestrian trails

8

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

Station 4: Draft Goals & Draft Strategic Corridors BOARD: DRAFT GOALS • Attendees were asked to place up to three dots on three separate goals to indicate which were most important to them. They were also able to add new goals and “vote” on those.

Goals

Create safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian networks that connect people to neighborhoods, destinations, and transit.

Identify ways that the built environment can better support bicycle and pedestrian movement.

Increase options for people to walk and ride bicycles for recreation and to recreation (e.g., parks).

Explore opportunities to connect the two Growth Areas for non-motorized travelers.

Support a range of users by considering variations in physical abilities, perceptions of safety, trip types, and trip purposes of different users.

Educate motorists how to share the road and bicyclists how to keep the traffic laws. [Added at meeting.]

Ensure that key corridors are complete streets.

# of dots indicating “This is a priority for me” 22

14

12

9

6

4

3

DRAFT

9

BOARD: DRAFT STRATEGIC CORRIDORS • This board presented a draft idea for strategic corridors, which will provide the framework for the eventual set of recommendations.

• Comments provided (on this board or others) related to potential strategic corridors include: »» White Marsh road from E Washington St to Jericho Lane »» Downtown to Lone Star »» Pitchkettle to Kings Fork Road »» All unused rail corridors, including the unused rail corridor parallel to US 58 through the edge of Dismal Swamp »» Pitchkettle Road to Kings Fork Road »» Kings Fork across 460 around lakes »» Bennetts Creek Park (to connect from Shoulders Hill to bus transfer station)

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

Station 5: Draft Toolkit of Potential Strategies (Please note that the colors of the dots used in this section are not relevant. Attendees were asked to use any dot to indicate interest and/or preference.)

BOARD: BEST PRACTICES AND TYPES OF BICYCLE USERS • This board provided a background to the draft Tool Kit, which showcased a variety of potential options for addressing needs related to walking and bicycling.

• The board also gave some background related to different types of bicycle users, and how the needs, desires, and comfort level of each type of user may influence the types of facilities recommended in the final plan. »» Though it wasn’t an explicit exercise, people placed dots to indicate which type of bicyclist they consider themselves to be (Strong and Fearless, Enthused & Confident, Interested But Concerned, No Way No How).

Participants were fairly split between the first three categories, and only one attendee indicated that they had no interest in riding a bicycle.

DRAFT

10

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

DRAFT

11

BOARD: OFF-ROAD FACILITIES / ON-ROAD FACILITIES

BOARD: INTERSECTION INFRASTRUCTURE

• This board presented examples of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as well as a table showing the conditions under which each type of facility was most feasible and necessary. Attendees indicated which facilities they preferred by placing a dot on the image.

• This board presented examples of bicycle- and pedestrian-focused intersection infrastructure. Attendees indicated which facilities they preferred by placing a dot on the image.

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

BOARD: OTHER AMENITIES â&#x20AC;¢ The final board presented examples of other off-road amenities that may be important for encouraging more people to walk and ride bicycles in Suffolk. Attendees indicated which facilities they preferred by placing a dot on the image.

DRAFT

12

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

SURVEY RESULTS To supplement the existing conditions analyses and other information-gathering, a survey was open on the City’s website from February 1 – March 14, 2017, to get insight into how, where, and why (or not) people like to walk/run 45-54 or ride bicycles outside in 25% Suffolk. The survey was also 35-44 available in a hard 21% copy format at55-64 the public Paper 65 ormeeting.

Did not 19% over respond copies received were input into the online survey system 13%There 25-34 together with those results.

12% and processed were 322 9% 16-24 responses to the survey.

1%

Characteristics of Respondents

Age range of survey respondents (323 total responses)

Both north and central Suffolk were represented in the survey, though the largest proportion of responses came from the central part of the city.

2%

13

Nearly all survey respondents (excepting one who did not respond to the question) indicated that they own or have access to a working motor vehicle, and about 90% have Experienced access to a bicycle. However, while nearlyand all respondents ("Strong fearless") reported having driven their car in the past year, only about Did not 15% 64% have ridden on a bicycle in the same time.

Nearly respond 9% of I have no intere 80% of people report the use of walking as a mode in riding a bicyc transportation in the past year. Nearly 30% of respondents("No way, no how") report participation Moderately in a bicycle or walking/running club. skilled ("Enthused and confident") Beginner 48% ("Interested but of When asked about their current experience and level concerned" or interest in cycling, 15% indicated that they areto“strong and "New bicycling") fearless,” meaning that they will ride in most places, under 21%

7%

most conditions. Nearly 70% indicated that they are either “moderately experienced,” or a beginner (“interested but concerned” or “new to bicycling”). These latter two sets of cyclists are likely to gain the most from an increase in Howand doshared-use you classify yourself aswea bicyclist? bicycle-focused facilities.

However, assume that people who took this survey are interested in bicycling (and walking) and therefore results may not be representative of the entire community in Suffolk.

1% 34%

Experienced ("Strong and fearless") Did not 15% respond 9%

<1%

41% 35-44 21%

45-54 25%4%

55-64 19%

<1%

Moderately skilled ("Enthused and confident") 48%

65 or Did not Survey responses by ZIP codeover respond 13% 25-34 12% 9% Survey responses by ZIP code

Beginner ("Interested but concerned" or "New to bicycling") 21%

I have no interest in riding a bicycle ("No way, no how") 7%

Experienced We asked survey respondents to tell us their age, within ("Strong and given ranges. The ranges with the most responses were fearless") Did not 45-54 (25%) and 35-44 (21%). Only 10% of responses came 15% Age range of survey respondents respond How much do the following factors discourage you from riding a bicycle or walking more frequently? from people 34 or younger, with less than 1% from people 9% (323 responses) 24 or total younger.

4

80%

35-44 21%

60% 40% 20%

16-24 1% 0%

Respondents’ self-classifications as types of bicyclists

45-54 25%

55-64 19%

25-34 9% Traffic & bad driver behavior

No bicycle Unsafe / walking intersections facilities, or facilities in poor condition

Personal safety concerns

AgeAge range ofrange survey respondents of survey

65 or Did not over respond 13% 12%

Moderately RIDING A BICYCLE WALKING How do you classify yourself as a bicyclist?

Minor reason Minor reason Navigation Major reason

Beginner

but Most respondents (64%) use a map website or app("Interested on a concerned" or phone to figure out walking and/or bicycling routes to new "New to destinations. Map websites on a computer (46%) andbicycling") asking 21% friends for recommendations also Unsure of Travel with to common.

I do not Lack of Not (37%) Disabilitywere or Too much I do not know

Lack of scenic Destinations I don't have routes are too far enough time amenities (e.g., showers, away storage) at destination

respondents (323 total responses)

skilled ("Enthused Major reason and confident") 48%

route

small children

interested

health impairment

carry

own/have access to a bicycle

how to ride a bicycle

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

Walking Nearly half (49%) of the 322 survey respondents walk outside at least five days per week, and less than 20% walk outside two or fewer days per week. When respondents 45-54 25%(54%) said that they walk, on walk outside, the majority 35-44 55-64 65 or Did 21% average, 1-5 miles. Most respondents (84%) wish not that they 19% over respond were able to walk outside more often.

13% 25-34 12%

9%

16-24 Most respondents who walk outside said that they do so for 1% exercise (89%) and recreation (70%). When looking at the frequency of walking outside, respondents the majority of respondents Age range of survey (86%) said (323 they walk outside for exercise/recreation at total responses) least once per week, with 44% citing daily walks. Many respondents also said that they walk outside at least once per week for social events (41%) and shopping/errands/ appointments (36%).

When looking at factors that discourage respondents from walking outside, the biggest factors are automobile traffic and driver behavior (70%), lack of sidewalks or sidewalks in poor condition (69%), and unsafe intersections (65%).

Riding a Bicycle Survey results show that most respondents do not ride bicycles nearly as frequently as they walk outside. The majority of respondents (57%) ride their bicycle an average of one orresponses zero days per Survey byweek.

ZIP Only code8% of respondents report riding their bike, on average, five or more days per week. However, 77% of respondents with they were able to ride a bicycle more often.

14

Experienced When they do ride a bicycle, most respondents ride for ("Strong and exercise (74%) and recreation (73%).

When looking at the fearless") not 15%41% ofDid frequency of riding a bicycle outside, respondents respond report riding for exercise/recreation/racing purposes atI least 9% have no interest in riding a bicycle once per week. Social responses (eating, meeting friends) ("No way, no were the second Moderately largest reason for riding a bicycle at leasthow") ("Enthused 7% once per weekskilled (17%). and confident") Beginner ("Interested but concerned" The largest factors that discourage people fromorriding "New to bicycles mirror those discourage people from walking bicycling") 21% outside: automobile traffic and driver behavior (77%), lack 48%

of bicycle lanes or bicycle parking (or facilities in poor condition) (76%), and unsafe intersections (74%).

PlacesHow People oryourself Want to Walk/Ride do Walk/Ride you classify as a bicyclist?

When asked about their favorite places or streets/paths for walking and bicycling now, 18% of respondents (58 people) said they enjoy the Seaboard Coastline Trail. Reasons given include the lack of vehicle traffic, high quality of the trail and amenities, natural surroundings, and safety. Other popular responses include local neighborhoods, Dismal Swamp trails, Harbourview, Windsor Castle Park (in Smithfield), local rural roads, and downtown.

When asked about places they wish they could walk or ride a bicycle, where you are currently not able to do so, common locations included Pitchkettle Road, Bridge Road, and Shoulders Hill. Many people responded generally, saying they’d like to see more paths, sidewalks, and trails, in general.

How much do the following factors discourage you from riding a bicycle or walking more frequently?

80% RIDING A BICYCLE Minor reason Major reason

60%

WALKING Minor reason Major reason

40% 20% 0%

Traffic & bad driver behavior

No bicycle Unsafe / walking intersections facilities, or facilities in poor condition

Personal safety concerns

Unsure of Lack of Lack of scenic Destinations I don't have routes are too far enough time amenities (e.g., route showers, away storage) at destination

Travel with small children

Not interested

Disability or Too much to carry health impairment

I do not own/have access to a bicycle

I do not know how to ride a bicycle

Factors that discourage respondents from walking or riding a bicycle more frequently Automobile No bicycle Unsafe Personal Lack of Destinations I don't have Lack of traffic & bad lanes / intersections safety scenic routes are too far enough time amenities driver bicycle concerns away (e.g., behavior parking (or in showers,

Unsure of route

Travel with Too much to I do not small carry own/have children access to a bicycle

Not Disability or interested health impairment

Other

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #1 and Survey

15

Importance of Safety & Convenience

Desired Improvements

The majority of respondents think that it is very or somewhat important to have safer and more convenient facilities for walking (85%) and riding bicycles (81%) in Suffolk, and that having improved facilities would make respondents more likely to walk (83%) and ride bicycles (80%).

When asked to choose the top three types of improvements they feel would be most supportive to improving waking and bicycling in Suffolk, the top response (84%) was more facilities (sidewalks/bike lanes/multi-use paths). Other top responses include maintenance of these facilities (33%) and better intersections with pedestrian signals and crosswalks (28%).

How important is it to you to have safe and convenient walking and bicycling facilities in Suffolk?

Very important Somewhat important Somewhat unimportant Not very important Did not respond

Bicycling

Walking

57% 24%

70% 15%

2%

2%

5%

2%

12%

12%

If it were more safe and convenient, how likely would you be to walk or ride a bicycle more frequently?

Very likely Somewhat likely Somewhat unlikely Not very likely Did not respond

Bicycling

Walking

62% 18% 1%

67% 16% 2%

6% 12%

3% 12%

Please select up to three improvements which you feel would be most supportive to improving bicycling and walking in the City of Suffolk.

More sidewalks/bike lanes/multi-use 84% paths Maintenance of sidewalks/bike lanes/ 33% multi-use paths Better intersections (pedestrian signals/ 28% crosswalks) Bicycle route map 19% Better street lighting 19% Enforcement for motorists, pedestrians, 18% and bicyclists Education for motorists, pedestrians, and 15% bicyclists Secure bicycle parking 13% Better signage, including wayfinding and/ 11% or educational signage More amenities at destinations (showers, 4% dressing rooms, etc.)

Improved connections to the bus 3% Other (Connectivity to Seaboard 2% Coastline Trail, shoulders on busier roads, focus on Downtown, improve bus system, support meet up groups for neighborhoods)

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN City of Suffolk, Virginia Summary of Public Meeting #2 (May 25, 2017)

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

DRAFT

CONTENTS

3

Meeting Overview

4

Presentation and Q&A

5

Summary of Meeting Exhibits and Input Received

2

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

OVERVIEW The City of Suffolk, Virginia, held the second public meeting for the Suffolk Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan on May 25, 2017, at Creekside Recreation Center. An open house with interactive exhibits was open from 6:30-8:30 PM, and the project team gave a presentation from 7-7:30 PM. Approximately 13 people (in addition to Suffolk City of Suffolk staff) signed in to the meeting.

At the event, the community was invited to learn about the Master Plan process and share their input on existing conditions analyses, revised goals and strategic corridors, potential tools for addressing needs, and a first pass at assigning facility types to opportunity corridors. All meeting materials, including an electronic version of the comment sheet, were posted on the City’s website (http://www. suffolkva.us/parks/bicycle-and-pedestrian-master-plan) for review and comment. All attendees were given a comment sheet to record their input, and were also encouraged to add comments to the exhibits and maps provided. A summary of comment sheets is included in this public meeting summary.

WELCOME! BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN City of Suffolk, Virginia Public Meeting #2 May 25, 2017

MEETING AGENDA 6:30 PM - 7:00 PM

Sign-In & Open House

7:00 PM - 7:30 PM

Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan

7:30 PM - 8:30 PM

Open House: Information, Ideas, & Conversation

» Visit Stations

» Project Presentation

» Visit Stations » Talk with the Planning Team

STATIONS (BOARDS) 1: Introduction 2: What We’ve Learned: Survey Results 3: Goals 4: Opportunity Corridors 5: Tool Kit 6: Draft Recommendations

Thank you for attending!

3

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

PRESENTATION AND Q&A The meeting presentation provided a summary of information that was shared in more detail on the exhibit boards. Helen Gabriel, Assistant Director of the City of Suffolk Department of Parks & Recreation, kicked off the presentation by briefly explaining the background for the Master Plan. She then introduced Jennifer Koch, Project Manager from Rhodeside & Harwell, who summarized existing conditions, revised goals and opportunity corridors, survey results, and draft facility recommendations completed since the previous meeting.

Following the presentation, the project team allowed time for public questions and comments. No issues were raised.

DRAFT

4

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

INPUT ON MEETING EXHIBITS There were six stations of exhibits. At each station, meeting attendees were asked to review the information provided and give their input. Markers and sticky notes were available to write notes on the boards. Some questions were provided, but general input was encouraged and accepted as well.

Project team members were standing at stations to speak with meeting attendees and answer questions. Not all boards received input, but all boards are summarized below, with input summarized when available.

Station 1: Background / Introduction to the Plan BOARD: PROJECT BACKGROUND • This board provided background about the need for and funding of the project, plans for community involvement throughout the project, and the schedule for completing the plan.

BOARD: WHERE DO YOU LIVE? • Attendees were asked to place a dot on a map to indicate where they live. Most meeting attendees live within the two growth areas. Generally, there was equal attendee turnout between the two growth areas. One attendee came from Chesapeake. Another attendee came from Norfolk.

BOARD: EXISTING CONDITIONS • This board displayed bicycle and pedestrian facilities that are currently existing in Suffolk. There were no comments on the existing conditions board.

DRAFT

5

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

6

Station 2: What We’ve Learned

Station 4: Opportunity Corridors

BOARD: SURVEY RESULTS

BOARD: OPPORTUNITY CORRIDORS

• This board displayed the results of the online survey, which was open on the City’s website between February 1 and March 14, 2017. There were no comments written on this board.

• This board presented the evolved concept of strategic corridors, renamed “opportunity corridors,” which provide the framework for the eventual set of recommendations.

Station 3: Goals BOARD: GOALS • This board displayed a list of the plan’s six goals, which were developed and refined using input from City staff, Committee meetings, the first public meeting, and the online survey. There were no additional suggestions written on the boards.

• There was a comment mentioned by one attendee, but echoed by others, that there should generally be more opportunities to ride safely in the areas west and south of the Downtown area.

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

Station 5: Tool Kit BOARD: INTRODUCTION TO THE TOOL KIT • This board provided a background to the Tool Kit, which described the best practices of bicycle and pedestrian planning, guidance for the development of the Tool Kit, and how to use the Tool Kit for board comment exercises. There were no written comments.

BOARD: KEY CONSIDERATIONS • This board presented information about the types of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The key element of this board was its matrix, which describes a variety of tool kit facility types paired with data defining when each facility is appropriate to implement base on existing road conditions. There were no written comments.

BOARD: KEY CONSIDERATIONS (CONT’D) • This board complimented the previous board by illustrating Suffolk’s growth areas’ current speed limits and traffic counts. The board’s two maps assisted the public to independently determine which facility types might be appropriate along certain opportunity corridor segments. There were no written comments.

DRAFT

7

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

8

BOARD: OFF-ROAD AND ON-ROAD FACILITIES

BOARD: OTHER AMENITIES

• The board described various types of on- and off-road bicycle and pedestrian facilities that might be worth exploring in Suffolk. There were no comments added to this board.

• This board described other bicycle and pedestrian amenities that could be included in plan recommendations. These amenities included lighting, bicycle parking, and bicycle storage, among other elements. There were no comments added to this board.

BOARD: INTERSECTION INFRASTRUCTURE • This board showcased numerous bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure facility types designed specifically for intersections.

• A a comment on this board, one community member mentioned a new development in the Northern Growth Area that incorporated pedestrian timing on its signals at major roadway intersections. The inclusion of this infrastructure encouraged him to walk to the new development. Without the signals, he would choose to only drive due to safety concerns.

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

Station 6: Draft Recommendations This station included the majority of public input as content.

These boards described one method of applying the tool kit to the opportunity corridors at a very high level.

BOARD: DRAFT ON- AND OFF-ROAD FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS • This board functioned as an introduction to the station.

There were no written comments made on this board.

BOARD: CENTRAL GROWTH AREA • This board presented the facility types recommended for the Central Growth Area and asked for comments about selected treatments and priorities for a downtown loop.

• The following comments were made on the board: »» The team should re-evaluate the Saratoga route. »» A connection between Providence Road and Lake Prince would be ideal. »» Many of Suffolk’s rural roads can be challenging to ride on due to their intense crowning. (Wet crowned roads are especially challenging to navigate by bike.) »» There’s currently a bottleneck at Jericho Ditch Lane and that future housing development in the area would worsen the traffic problems. Recommend re-constructing the roadway to better accommodate future multi-modal users. »» Potential downtown loop: East and West Constance Road, East and West Washington Street, Main Street, Carolina Road, Suburban Drive, Moore Ave/ County Street, Pinner Street, Smith Street, Hall Avenue

DRAFT

9

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

BOARD: NORTHERN GROWTH AREA • This board presented facility types recommended for the Northern Growth Area and encouraged the public to add comments on selected facility types and to comment on priorities for a loop in this Growth Area.

• The following comments were made on the board: »» A new development is in the process of being approved between Shoulders Hill Road and Bennett’s Pasture Road. The development will be located just north of the existing Seaboard Coastline Trail, and will need easy access to the trail in the future. A new road between the trail and the development with bicycle and pedestrian facilities could accomplish this. »» The future alignment of the Seaboard Coast Trail as it crosses the active rail lines south of Kings Highway could pose a challenge for safe bicycle and pedestrian flow. Recommend, at a minimum, including a covered way station at the intersection with the future trail if the crossing is at-grade. This would improve the experience of cyclists and pedestrians waiting for long trains to pass in inclement weather. »» There should be dog poop bag and disposal stations along the Seaboard Coastline Trail. »» Potential loop: Town Point Road should connect to the Seaboard Coastline trail, then to Harbour View Drive and terminate at the future Tidewater Community College (TCC) property. »» Potential loop: From the Seaboard Coastline Trail to Shoulders Hill Road to Bennett’s Creek Park and back to the Seaboard Coastline Trail.

DRAFT

10

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

BOARD: CONNECTIONS BETWEEN GROWTH AREAS • This board illustrated some of the key bicycle and pedestrian route connections between the Central and Northern Growth Areas as well as recommended facilities for those connections.

• The following comments were made on the board: »» There is an excess of fast-moving freight traffic traveling on Pruden Boulevard that discourages bike travel. »» The Providence Road, Lake Prince Drive, Everets Road, and Crittenden Road corridors are very well-used by cyclists. While outside of the City’s growth areas, this overall route is a critical connection and should be a prioritized project.

BOARD: SIDEWALKS • This board illustrated key future corridors for enhanced sidewalks as determined by the Master Plan team. This board asked for public input on corridor designations.

• The following comment was made on the board: »» There’s a general demand for higher quality and more connected sidewalks within the Downtown Area. Demand for more sidewalks is especially high for areas along Main Street and areas along Hillpoint Boulevard by the Nansemond Golf Course. At a minimum, there should be a white line designating dedicated pedestrian space along Hillpoint Boulevard.

DRAFT

11

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

BOARD: INTERSECTIONS AND CROSSINGS • This board asked for input on Suffolk bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure at roadway intersections.

• There was general interest in clearer pedestrian signage at major roadway intersections in the Northern Growth Area, particularly at intersections along Route 17 between Bennett’s Pasture Road and the City’s eastern border.

BOARD: PROGRAMS AND POLICIES • This board described recommended programs and policies to compliment the implementation of Suffolk’s bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.

• Comments relevant to this board include: »» Require additional signage to remind drivers about 3 feet buffer minimums for passing bicyclists on roadways. »» Coordinate with developers to ensure implementation of cohesive and appropriate bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure throughout Suffolk.

BOARD: PRIORITY PROJECTS • This board illustrated the Master Plan team’s current recommendations on priority projects for Suffolk. There was no written comments on this board.

DRAFT

12

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

13

SURVEY SUMMARY The survey received seven responses.

Are we missing any key connections?

• No responses.

What are the top three tools (facilities or amenities) that you think are most needed in Suffolk? (7 responses) Tools (Summarized from Open-End) Off-road shared facilities Bike lanes Safer intersections for all Sidewalks Lighting More/better destinations (restaurants, stores) Bike racks Walking paths in parks Signage Bike share / access to bikes in the downtown area

Number of Responses 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1

Are there any tools that you would not like to see in Suffolk? If so, please tell us which, and why. (1 response) • Sharrows - I think they are simply too dangerous.

Are there any tools that we’re missing that you think would work in Suffolk? (2 responses) • Bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly crossings over railroads and water crossings.

• Family-friendly destinations.

Which streets would you prioritize for a downtown bicycle & pedestrian loop? (1 response) • I don’t recommend any of it be downtown. We need something in a good, safe area like upper Main Street near Godwin Blvd.

What are the top two recommendations that you would prioritize in the Central Growth Area? (For example, you can name a street and/or type of facility.) (3 responses) • Saratoga Street (behind N. Main Street) • An east to west route - not sure if Washington Street is feasible for that • Smith Street for biking • Godwin Boulevard • Walking/leisure park in a safe area Which streets would you prioritize for a bicycle & pedestrian loop in the Northern Growth Area?

• No responses.

What are the top two recommendations that you would prioritize in the Northern Growth Area? (For example, you can name a street and/or type of facility.) (2 responses) • Shoulders Hill - Shared-use path • Bridge Road - Shared-use path • Shoulders Hill from Bridge Road to Nansemond Parkway

DRAFT

SUFFOLK BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Summary of Public Meeting #2

Are we missing any opportunities to connect the two Growth Areas? If so, where? (1 response) • No. Where are new sidewalk connections most needed? (4 responses) • Shoulders Hill Road between the Seaboard Coastline Trail and Bridge Road • Connect neighborhoods surrounding downtown to downtown • E. Washington, Constance, Suburban, between Constance and Washington • Bennett’s Creek Park (the actual park), Shoulders Hill, Bridge Road Which intersection(s) or other barrier(s) to mobility (e.g., waterbodies, bridges, overpasses, railroad tracks) would you prioritize for enhanced pedestrian/bicycle crossings? (2 responses)

What are your top three overall priority projects related to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan? (These should be the projects you would most like to see completed within five years. This may include bicycle and/ or facility construction, policy or program implementation, etc.) (4 responses) • Sidewalk connections on Shoulders Hill Road • One loop in Northern Suffolk and one loop in Central Suffolk • Lighted walkways away from trees • Bridge Road / Shoulders Hill / Bennett’s Creek Park Rd • Bike lanes/paths • Connect the growth areas in one way • Designated paths and sidewalks in the downtown area • North/Central connector • Improved intersections • Extend the Seaboard Coastline Trail

• N. Main Street

• Crosswalks

• Bridge Road

• Connecting Bennett’s Creek to Harbour View area

Do you have other ideas for programs & policies related to riding bicycles and walking?

• No responses.

14