Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Bellflower-Paramount

Active Transportation Plan June 2019

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City of Bellflower Phillip Wang, PE, Associate Engineer Len Gorecki, Director of Public Works Bernardo Iniguez, Public Works Manager

City of Paramount Adriana Figueroa, Public Works Director Wendy Macias, Public Works Manager Bill Pagett, City Engineer

KTUA Joe Punsalan, Associate Principal Jacob Leon, Mobility Planner, Project Manager Juan Alberto Bonilla, Senior Planner Silvia Fang, GIS Analyst

KPA Cindy Suh, Outreach Project Manager Thelma Herrera, Outreach Support

II | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Contents 01

Introduction 1

Study Area...............................................................................................................2 Background and Scope.....................................................................................2 Objectives and Goals........................................................................................ 4 Planning Context..................................................................................................5 Primary Guidance................................................................................................7 Applicable Legislation ...................................................................................... 9 Bicycling and Walking Benefits....................................................................14

02

03

Existing Conditions and Analyses

05

17

Existing Conditions Overview......................................................................18 Demographics.....................................................................................................18 Transportation Mode Share........................................................................20 Existing Land Use.............................................................................................. 22 Potential Right-of-Way Opportunities....................................................24 Street Classification.........................................................................................26 Existing and Previously Proposed Bicycle Facilities.......................... 28 Transit Routes and Stops..............................................................................30 Analysis.................................................................................................................. 32

Community Engagement

04

06

Recommendations 47

Recommendations Overview......................................................................48 Bicycle and Pedestrian Treatments..........................................................48 Potential Active Transportation Recommendations........................64 Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Overview..............................................132

Policies and Programs

173

Policies Overview............................................................................................ 174 Programs Overview....................................................................................... 178 Evolving State of Practice in Active Transportation....................... 178 Existing Programs........................................................................................... 178 Evolving State of Mobility...........................................................................186 Signage and Wayfinding Guidelines....................................................... 187

Funding 195

Potential Infrastructure Funding Sources...........................................196

39

Community Engagement Overview........................................................ 40 Outreach Materials......................................................................................... 40 Survey................................................................................................................... 40 Pop-up Events Workshops............................................................................41 Survey Summary...............................................................................................44

Table of Contents | III

Figures Figure 2-1: Regional Map...................................................................................2 Figure 2-2: Study Area........................................................................................3 Figure 2-1: Land Use Map.............................................................................. 23 Figure 2-2: Public Easements and Utilities Map.................................. 25 Figure 2-3: Street Classification Map....................................................... 27 Figure 2-4: Existing and Previously Proposed Bikeways Map.......29 Figure 2-5: Transit Routes Map....................................................................31 Figure 2-7: Propensity Analysis Map..........................................................35 Figure 2-8: Level of Traffic Stress Map.................................................... 37 Figure 4-1: Project Feasibility....................................................................... 65 Figure 4-2: Potential Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects.....................66

Tables Table 2-1: Propensity for Bicyclist and Pedestrian Activities......... 34 Table 4-1: Potential Bike & Pedestrian Projects- Bellflower........... 67 Table 4-2: Potential Bike & Pedestrian Projects- Paramount........70 Table 6-1: Funding Sources......................................................................... 197

IV | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

01 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Study Area This Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is a joint effort between the cities of Bellflower and Paramount. Both cities are located in southeast Los Angeles County, approximately 17 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles. Bellflower shares its northern boundary with Downey, eastern boundary with Norwalk and Cerritos, southern boundary with Lakewood and Long Beach, and western boundary with Paramount. Paramount shares its northern boundary with South Gate and Downey, eastern boundary with Bellflower, southern boundary with Long Beach, and western boundary with Compton, Lynwood, and unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County. Both cities are generally encompassed within a network of highways that include Interstate 105 to the north, Interstate 605 to the east, CA Highway 91 to the south, and Interstate 710 to the west. Additionally, the San Gabriel River is located along the eastern boundary of Bellflower and the Los Angeles River is located along the western boundary of Paramount. Bellflower’s population according to the 2016 American Community Census 5-year estimates is 77,687 people within its 6.17 square miles. Paramount’s population is estimated at 54,941 people within its 4.84 square miles. Residential, commercial, industrial, and open space land uses (among others) are found within their boundaries.

Background and Scope This Joint Active Transportation Plan (ATP) was developed to provide both the City of Bellflower and City of Paramount planning guidance to increase safety for all roadyway users and to identify improvements that make multimodal transportation safe and enjoyable. Additionally, the ATP seeks to educate and promote active transportation to increase bicycling and walking throughout both cities as a way to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The ATP was created with input from the community and City staff as a tool to facilitate future grant efforts and public-private partnerships. Facility inventory, document research, field visits, and extensive GIS analysis were also conducted as part of this plan’s preparation.

105

5

This joint ATP is funded through California’s Active Transporation Program (ATP) Cycle 2 Program and will serve as a guide for development of multimodal projects that best meet the needs of both cities.

710 605

The following tasks are addressed in the ATP: 1. Identify an integrated network of walkways and bikeways to connect neighborhoods to destinations 2. Develop a prioritized list of city-wide projects 3. Identify safe routes to school improvements 4. Identify end-of-trip facilities 5. Develop a list of recommended policies that support active transportation infrastructure and programs 2 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

405

Figure 2-1: Regional Map

Figure 2-2: Study Area Chapter 1: Introduction | 3

Objectives and Goals This ATP will guide the development of active transportation infrastructure, programs, and policies for Bellflower and Paramount. The following goals will guide the planning process to ensure a successful plan that everyone can support and work towards implementation: The ATP will identify barriers, both actual and perceived, to bicycling and walking and provide opportunities through community outreach and improvement projects to remove the barriers and improve the network.

Implementing the ATP will improve community health as access to more active means of transportation (bicycling and walking) are developed. The public health will benefit from increased exercise, collision reduction, and reduction in GHG emissions through less vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as alternative methods are used and level of physical activity increases.

The disadvantaged communities will benefit from a plan, and subsequent projects, that provide social equity. Many low-income residents rely on alternative transportation for jobs, access to medical facilities, and food options.

There will be an increased sense of pride in the community as a result of the community engagement, social interaction, and participating in achieving a common goal.

This ATP aims to be the vehicle for the cities’ commitment to become a greener, more pedestrian and bicycle friendly community as part of a comprehensive sustainability strategy by reducing the need for motor vehicle travel and associated emissions.

4 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Planning Context The following Plans are several examples of local and regional transportation efforts that provide context and understanding for active transportation.

SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, 2016 The 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS, or Plan) is a planning document for SCAG’s regional transportation and land use network. It balances the region’s future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. This plan is meant to be updated by SCAG every four years as demographic, economic and policy circumstances change.

The Plan highlights progress that has been completed since 2012 as well as major initiatives SCAG will strive for to meet their vision for 2040. Some of those major initiatives as they relate to transportation include: Expanding the regional transportation system to give people more alternatives to driving alone Optimizing the performance of the transportation system Promoting walking, biking, and other forms of active transportation Focusing new growth around transit Improving air quality and reducing greenhouse gases

West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor, On-going

There are two proposed stops, one each respectively in Bellflower and Paramount. Providing safe and convenient access to these future transit stops will be one of the goals of this ATP.

Bellflower-Paramount Bicycle and Trail Master Plan, 2015 The joint Bellflower-Paramount Bicycle and Trail Master Plan was a planning effort to improve the cities’ bicycling options for transportation and recreation purposes. The Plan includes an existing conditions and needs analysis that described both cities’ state of bicycling at the time of its publication. It also included a prioritized list of bicycle and pedestrian projects, recommended policies, programs, and conceptual plans for several of the top projects.

The recommendations from the Bicycle and Trail Master Plan served as a foundation for the development of this ATP. The ATP will update projects, policies, and programs as-needed.

Bellflower ADA Transition Plan, 2015 The City of Bellflower ADA Transition Plan was created to address Title II of the American Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. Title II ensures equal participation in public life for all Americans in areas of employment, public spaces, State and local government services, and telecommunications. The Transition Plan address several active transportation-related topic areas such as curb ramps, bus stops, and pedestrian signals.

Metro (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) is evaluating a new light rail transit line that will connect downtown Los Angeles to southeast LA County. This new 20-mile transit line, the West Santa Ana Branch (WSAB), will serve the cities and communities of downtown Los Angeles, unincorporated Florence-Graham community of LA County, Vernon, Huntington Park, Bell, Cudahy, South Gate, Downey, Paramount, Bellflower, Cerritos and Artesia. The WSAB is undergoing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/ Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process to prepare the corridor for light rail use as of the publication of this ATP.

Chapter 1: Introduction | 5

Bellflower General Plan

Paramount General Plan Transportation element

The Bellflower General Plan serves as a guide for the planning and development of the City. The Circulation Element of the General Plan was developed as a policy and technical document with information on how to provide a safe, effective, and efficient transportation system for the City

The Paramount General Plan also serves as a guide for planning and development of the City. The General Plan indicates the City’s vision for the future through policies and plans that are designed to shape the physical development throughout. It consists of eight elements that guide the City’s development. The Transportation Element is important to this ATP because it identifies the “location and extent of existing and proposed streets and roadways, intersection improvements, public transit facilities, railroads, transportation terminals, and other transportation facilities.”

The following goals from the Circulation Element provide background information for this ATP: Goal 1 : Provide a comprehensive transportation system for the movement of persons and goods with optimum safety, efficiency, and convenience, and with a minimum of delay and cost.

Goal 3: Provide residents and business occupants in the City of Bellflower with a convenient and viable public transportation system.

Goal 4: Encourage the use of alternative and/or non-motorized transportation modes including bicycle and pedestrian travel.

6 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

The following policies provide background information for this ATP: Transportation Element Policy 3. The City of Paramount will continue to develop and enhance the existing streets and intersections in the City.

Transportation Element Policy 6. The City of Paramount will continue to support the development and expansion of the region’s public and mass transit system.

Transportation Element Policy 10. The City of Paramount will encourage new and existing businesses to include those improvements that will promote the use of alternative forms of transit.

Resource Management Element Policy 4. The City of Paramount will require new larger residential developments to provide sufficient open space (including pedestrian and bicycle linkages) to meet the local need.

Primary Guidance Providing safe, convenient, comfortable access for all users is the goal of “Complete Streets,” the conceptual basis for much new roadway design, construction, and renovation. Assembly Bill 1358 codifies Complete Streets into law by requiring that general plan circulation element updates: “identify how the jurisdiction will provide for the routine accommodation of all users of the roadway including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, individuals with disabilities, seniors and public transit users.”

While pedestrians have benefited from “routine accommodation,” with features such as sidewalks, curb ramps, crosswalks, dedicated crosswalk signals, etc., these infrastructural improvements are still not universally applied, resulting in a walking environment often perceived as unsafe and uncomfortable, which therefore discourages people from walking. Pedestrian accommodation is being re-evaluated in the context of improving the overall street environment through the implementation of additional enhancements that make walking more comfortable, and therefore to encourage more people to do so.

Bicycle infrastructure state of practice in the United States has undergone a significant transformation in the last decade. Much of this may be attributed to bicycling’s changing role in the overall transportation system. Once viewed as an “alternative” mode, it is increasingly viewed as a legitimate transportation mode and one that should be actively promoted as a means of achieving environmental, social, and economic goals.

While connectivity and convenience remain essential quality indicators, much recent research indicates the increased acceptance and practice of daily bicycling, in particular, will require “low-stress” bicycle infrastructure. Specific types and design interventions intended to encourage ridership among the “interested, but concerned” demographic tend to be those that separate bicyclists from high volume and high speed vehicular traffic.

Just as the state of practice of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure has evolved, so has technical guidance. While bikeway design guidance in California, in particular, has traditionally come from the State, especially Caltrans and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), cities are increasingly turning to national organizations for guidance on best practices. These are primarily the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

Fortunately for California cities, there is increased flexibility in design guidance offered by both Caltrans and the FHWA. In 2014, Caltrans officially endorsed the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide and Urban Bikeway Design Guide as valuable toolkits for designing and constructing safe, attractive streets for all users. California cities may also apply for experimental designation from the FHWA for projects not in conformance with the CA MUTCD. The creation of more Complete Streets is supported by these manuals’ guidance, as well as by several pieces of important legislation. The following section provides a review of the state of practice for walking and bicycling infrastructure, particularly the AASHTO and NACTO guides. It also includes a discussion on Routine Accommodation, as well as summaries of relevant legislation at the local, regional, State, and national levels.

Infrastructure design improvement recommendations described later in this BPMP borrow heavily from the AASHTO Guide to Bicycle Facilities and the NACTO Urban Bikeway and Urban Street Design Guides, particularly for guidance on “innovative” infrastructure. The FHWA supports using these resources to further develop bicycling and walking transportation networks, particularly in urban areas. Bicycle master plan compliance with applicable guidelines and standards is also required by California Street and Highways Code Section 891.2 and most grant programs.

Chapter 1: Introduction | 7

NACTO Urban Bikeway and Urban Street Design Guides The NACTO guides represent the industry standard for innovative bicycle and walking infrastructure and treatments in the United States. In 2014, Caltrans followed AASHTO and officially endorsed the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide and Urban Bikeway Design Guide as valuable toolkits for designing and constructing safe and attractive streets. At the time, Caltrans was only the third State Department of Transportation to officially endorse the Guides. It is important to note that virtually all of the bikeway guide’s design treatments (with two exceptions) are permitted under the Federal MUTCD. The NACTO Urban Street Design Guide is the more generalized of the two guides and organized into six sections. Each section is further subdivided, depending on topic.

The NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide is also organized into six sections, but its information is bicycle-specific. For each section, it offers three levels of guidance: Required Features, Recommended Features, and Optional Features.

NACTO Transit Street Design Guide As transit starts to gain a more prominent role in cities, more people are using buses, streetcars, and light rail than ever before. As a result, street design is shifting to give transit the space it deserves. The NACTO Transit Street Design Guide provides guidance for the development of transit infrastructure on streets, as well as for prioritizing transit, improving its service quality, and to support other related goals.

8 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

The majority of design elements included in this guide are consistent with MUTCD standards, including signage, markings, and signal elements that have received interim approval. These guidelines were developed using other design guidance as a basis, along with city case studies, best practices, research, and evaluation of existing designs, and professional consensus.

NACTO Urban Street Stormwater Guide The NACTO Urban Street Stormwater Guide provides guidance on how to create resilient cities that are better prepared for climate change, while creating public spaces that deliver social and economic value. This guide focuses on green infrastructure within urban streets, including the design and engineering of stormwater management practices that support and improve mobility. It also intends to reduce the impacts of runoff and human activity on natural ecological processes.

One of the main goals of this guide is to encourage interdepartmental partnerships around sustainable infrastructure, which includes communicating the benefits of such projects. However, this guide does not address stormwater management strategies on private property, nor does it address drainage and infiltration around controlled-access highways.

Caltrans Highway Design Manual - Chapter 1000 – Bikeway Planning and Design This reference has long the official resource for bikeway planning and design in California, but now largely represents the minimum standards required for specific bikeway infrastructure types. Senate Bill 1 (Road Repair and Accountability Act) includes a provision for Caltrans to update the Highway Design Manual to incorporate “Complete Streets” design concepts.

AASHTO Guide to Bikeway Facilities This memorandum expresses FHWA support for taking a flexible approach to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure design. The AASHTO bicycle and pedestrian design guides are the primary national resources for planning, designing, and operating bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Designing Urban Walkable Thoroughfares guide builds upon the flexibilities provided in the AASHTO guides, which can help communities plan and design safe and convenient walking and riding infrastructure.

Applicable Legislation

AB-390 Pedestrian Crossing Signals (2017) AB-390 was signed by the governor in October 2017. Under the previous state law, it was illegal to step into a crosswalk if the countdown timer was counting down—even if the person crossing the street had enough time to make it to the other side before the traffic light changed. The new bill allows a pedestrian facing a flashing “DON’T WALK” or “WAIT” or approved “Upraised hand” symbol with a “countdown” signal to proceed so long as a pedestrian completes the crossing before the display of the steady “Don’t Walk” or “Wait” or “upraised hand” symbol when the countdown ends..

AB-902 Traffic Violations and Diversion Programs (2015) Existing law provides that a local authority may not allow a person who has committed a traffic violation under the Vehicle Code to participate in a driver awareness or education program as an alternative to the imposition of those penalties and procedures, unless the program is a diversion program for a minor who commits an infraction not involving a motor vehicle and for which no fee is charged.

This bill allows any person of any age who commits an infraction not involving a motor vehicle to participate in a diversion program that is sanctioned by local law enforcement. The bill eliminates the requirement that such a program charge no fee.

Several pieces of legislation support increased bicycling and walking in the State of California. Much of the legislation addresses greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction and employs bicycling and walking as means to achieve reduction targets. Other legislation highlights the intrinsic worth of bicycling and walking and treats the safe and convenient accommodation of bicyclists and pedestrians as a matter of equity. The most relevant legislation concerning bicycle and pedestrian policy, planning, infrastructure, and programs are described in the following section.

AB-1096 Electric Bicycles as Vehicles (2015)

State Legislation and Policies

Class 2 e-bike, or low-speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle, is equipped with a motor that can exclusively propel the bicycle and that cannot provide assistance above 20 mph.

AB-32 California Global Warming Solutions (2006) This bill calls for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and codifies the 2020 emissions reduction goal. This act also directs the California Air Resources Board to develop specific early actions to reduce greenhouse gases while also preparing a scoping plan to identify how best to reach the 2020 limit.

This bill clarifies electric bicycle (e-bike) status in California as those with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts. It establishes three classes of electric bicycles based on their motor speed and level of electric assist: Class 1 e-bike, or low-speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle, is equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and that stops providing assistance when the bicycle reaches 20 mph.

Class 3 e-bike, or speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle, is equipped with a motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and stops providing assistance when the bicycle reaches 28 mph.

Chapter 1: Introduction | 9

E-bike operators do not need a driver’s license, registration or license plate, but must abide by existing traffic laws. While Classes 1 and 2 are considered legal on streets and trails, Class 3 e-bikes are prohibited from paths, lanes, and trails unless specifically authorized by a local ordinance. Class 3 e-bikes operators must be 16 or older and wear a helmet.

AB-1218 California Environmental Quality Act Exemption: Bicycle Transportation Plans (2017) According to the Civil Code, Section 15262, Feasibility and Planning Studies:

This bills amends various code sections, all relating to bikeways in general, specifically by recognizing a fourth class of bicycle infrastructure, cycle tracks. However, the following may be even more significant to future bikeway development:

“A project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded does not require the preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration but does require consideration of environmental factors. This section does not apply to the adoption of a plan that will have a legally binding effect on later activities.

Association of Environmental Professionals 2014 CEQA Guidelines 229.�

Existing law requires Caltrans, in cooperation with county and city governments, to establish minimum safety design criteria for the planning and construction of bikeways, and requires the department to establish uniform specifications and symbols regarding bicycle travel and traffic related matters. Existing law also requires all city, county, regional, and other local agencies responsible for the development or operation of bikeways or roadways to utilize all of those minimum safety design criteria and uniform specifications and symbols.

AB-1218 extends CEQA exemptions for bicycle transportation plans for an urbanized area until January 1, 2021. These exemptions include restriping of streets and highways, bicycle parking and storage, signal timing to improve street and highway intersection operations, and related signage for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles under certain conditions. It exempts projects consisting of restriping of streets and highways for bicycle lanes in an urbanized area that are consistent with a bicycle transportation plan under certain conditions.

This bill revised these provisions to require Caltrans to establish minimum safety design criteria for each type of bikeway and also authorized local agencies to utilize different minimum safety criteria if adopted by resolution at a public meeting.

Planning projects such as this ATP are generally exempt from CEQA analysis since they are planning and conceptual recommendations. As individual recommendations move forward toward further design and implementation, the City will then need to determine if there are impacts for which additional environmental review may be necessary.

AB-1193 Bikeways (2014)

10 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

AB-1358 Complete Streets (2008) This bill requires the legislative body of a city or county, upon revision of the circulation element of their general plan, to identify how the jurisdiction will provide for the routine accommodation of all users of the roadway including drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, individuals with disabilities, seniors, and public transit users. The bill also directs the OPR to amend guidelines for general plan circulation element development so that the building and operation of local transportation infrastructure safely and conveniently accommodate everyone, regardless of their travel mode.

AB-1371 Passing Distance/Three Feet for Safety (2013) This bill, widely referred to as the “Three Foot Passing Law,” requires drivers to provide at least three feet of clearance when passing cyclists. If traffic or roadway conditions prevent drivers from giving cyclists three feet of clearance, they must “slow to a speed that is reasonable and prudent” and wait until they reach a point where passing can occur without endangering the cyclist. Violations are punishable by a $35 base fine, but drivers who collide with cyclists and injure them in violation of the law are subject to a $220 fine.

AB-1581 Bicycle and Motorcycle Traffic Signal Actuation (2007) This bill defines a traffic control device as a traffic-actuated signal that displays one or more of its indications in response to the presence of traffic detected by mechanical, visual, electrical or other means. Upon the first placement or replacement of a traffic-actuated signal, the signal would have to be installed and maintained, to the extent feasible and in conformance with professional engineering practices, so as to detect lawful bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway. Caltrans has adopted standards for implementing the legislation.

SB-1 Road Repair and Accountability (2017) This bill was drafted to address California’s significant funding shortfall in maintaining the state’s multi-modal transportation network, which is considered the state’s economic backbone and critical to quality of life. It is specifically intended to direct increased revenue to the state’s highest transportation needs, while fairly distributing the economic impact of increased funding across all user types.

SB-1 increases several taxes and fees to raise over $5 billion annually in new transportation revenues, prioritizing funding towards maintenance and rehabilitation and safety improvements on state highways, local streets, and roads, and bridges and to improve the state’s trade corridors, transit, and active transportation infrastructure. Once fully implemented, approximately $1.5 billion per year in new revenue is earmarked for local streets and roads maintenance and rehabilitation and other eligible uses, including Complete Streets projects.

In addition to augmenting the Active Transportation Program by $100 million per year, SB 1 requires that Caltrans update the Highway Design Manual to incorporate “Complete Streets” design concepts.

SB-375 Redesigning Communities to Reduce Greenhouse Gases (2008) This bill seeks to reduce vehicle miles traveled through land use and planning incentives. Key provisions require the larger regional transportation planning agencies to develop more sophisticated transportation planning models, and to use them for the purpose of creating “preferred growth scenarios” in their regional plans that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The bill also provides incentives for local governments to incorporate these preferred growth scenarios into the transportation elements of their general land use plans.

SB-672 Traffic-Actuated Signals: Motorcycles and Bicycles (2017) This bill extends indefinitely the requirement to install traffic-actuated signals to detect lawful bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway. By indefinitely extending requirements regarding traffic-actuated signals applicable to local governments, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.

SB-743 CEQA Reform (2013) For decades, vehicular congestion has been interpreted as an environmental impact. Projections of degraded Level of Service (LOS) has, at a minimum, driven up project costs and, at a maximum, precluded projects altogether, particularly on-street bicycle projects.

Chapter 1: Introduction | 11

SB-743 removes the requirement of LOS as a measure of vehicle traffic congestion that must be used to analyze environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This is important because adequately accommodating bicyclists, particularly in built-out environments, often requires reallocation of right-of-way, and the potential for increased vehicular congestion. The reframing of LOS as a matter of driver inconvenience, rather than an environmental impact, forces planners to assess the impacts of transportation projects differently and may help to support active transportation projects that improve mobility for all roadway users. For example, as of November 2017, California state agencies stopped using LOS to measure environmental impacts in lieu of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).

SB-760 Transportation Funding: Active Transportation: Complete Streets (2017) This bill established a Division of Active Transportation within Caltrans to give attention to active transportation program matters to guide progress toward meeting the department’s active transportation program goals and objectives.

This bill requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to give high priority to increasing safety for pedestrians and bicyclists and to the implementation of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. The bill also directs the department to update the Highway Design Manual to incorporate “Complete Streets” design concepts, including guidance for selection of bicycle infrastructure.

Caltrans’ Deputy Directive 64-R1 Deputy Directive 64-R1 is a policy statement affecting Caltrans mobility planning and projects requiring the agency to: “...provide for the needs of travelers of all ages and abilities in all planning, programming, design, construction, operations, and maintenance activities, and products on the State highway system. The Department (Caltrans) views all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve safety, access, and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system.” The directive goes on to describe the environmental, health and economic benefits of more Complete Streets.

12 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Federal Legislation S-2004/HR-2468 Safe Streets Act (2014) HR2468 encourages safer streets through policy adoption at the state and regional levels, mirroring an approach already being used in many local jurisdictions, regional agencies and states governments. The bill calls upon all states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to adopt Safe Streets policies for federally funded construction and roadway improvement projects within two years. Federal legislation will ensure consistency and flexibility in road-building processes and standards at all levels of governance.

Complete Streets and Routine Accommodation A Complete Street is one designed and operated to provide safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicle drivers, and transit riders of all ages and abilities. Complete Streets make it easy to cross the street, to walk to shops, and to bicycle to work. They allow buses to operate efficiently and make it safer for people to walk to and from transit locations.

For many cities, an active transportation plan alone is not enough to ensure the implementation of the plan’s goals and projects. A hurdle many cities face is that their various plans are not well integrated. Despite many cities’ attempts to support a “Complete Streets approach,” entrenched and often contradic-

tory policies can make implementation difficult. For instance, an active transportation plan, an ADA transition plan, and a specific plan may address the same area, but ignore each other’s recommendations. One plan may identify a certain project, but it may not be implementable due to prevailing policies and practices that prioritize vehicular flow and parking over other modes.

Implementing Complete Streets policy often addresses increased flexibility to allow for the creation of a more balanced transportation system. In the case of an active transportation plan, the network identified could become the bicycle and pedestrian layers. Identification in such a plan, reiteration within a Complete Streets policy framework and exemption from traditional traffic analyses can make implementation more likely and much more affordable.

Legislative support for Complete Streets can be found at the State level (AB1358) and is being developed at the national level (HR-2468). As noted in the previous section on applicable legislation, AB-1358 requires cities and counties to incorporate Complete Streets in their general plan updates and directs the State Office of Planning Research (OPR) to include Complete Streets principles in its update of guidelines for general plan circulation elements.

Chapter 1: Introduction | 13

Bicycling and Walking Benefits Numerous environmental, health, and economic benefits are attributable to bicycling and walking, especially as substitutes for travel by motor vehicle. This section summarizes these benefits, some from research by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC).

Environmental Benefits

Health Benefits

Increased bicycling and walking reduces fossil fuel emissions. In California, 40 percent of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are produced by the transportation sector. While CO2 is not the most harmful greenhouse gas (GHG), it is the most abundant. Even after accounting for the global warming potentials of other greenhouse gases (comparing them in terms of CO2), 95 to 99 percent of vehicle emissions are CO2. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found the average vehicle emits 0.95 pounds f CO2 per mile. Therefore, almost a pound of CO2 emissions could be avoided each day for each mile, each way of an individual’s commute that was switched from driving to an active transportation mode like bicycling or walking.

Despite dramatic strides in recent decades through regulations and technological improvements, vehicle emissions still pose a significant threat to human health. Vehicle generated air pollution contains harmful greenhouse gas emissions including carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and volatile organic compounds. These pollutants and irritants can cause asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia, and decreased resistance to respiratory infections.

Taking steps to reduce these emissions is particularly important in the United States, which leads the world in petroleum consumption. The conversion of driving to bicycling or walking offers a great opportunity to reduce emissions and improve public health.

15 lbs A four-mile walking trip keeps about 15 pounds of pollutants of the air we breathe

14 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

In addition to the universal public health benefit, such as improved air quality, bicycling and walking has the potential to positively impact personal health. A significant percentage of Americans are overweight or obese and projections indicate 42 percent of the population will be obese by 2030. To combat this trend and prevent a variety of diseases and their associated societal costs, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) suggests a minimum of 30 minutes of moderate intensity physical activity five days per week. Not only does bicycling and brisk walking qualify as “moderate intensity activities,� they can also be seamlessly integrated into daily routine, especially if chosen for utilitarian purposes like commuting or running errands.

Other health benefits associated with moderate activity like bicycling or walking include improved strength and stamina through better heart and lung function. Regular exercise reduces the risk of high blood pressure, heart attacks, and strokes. In addition to heart disease, regular exercise can also help to prevent other health problems such as non-insulin dependent diabetes, osteoarthritis, and osteoporosis. Lastly, exercise has been shown to improve mental health by relieving depression, anxiety, and stress.

Economic Benefits Bicycling infrastructure and programs has increasingly been shown to deliver economic benefit to both individuals and society at large. The benefits of bicycling may, in fact, outweigh its costs. Bicycling, and utilitarian bicycling in particular, offers obvious cost savings to individuals. Beyond the upfront cost of operating a vehicle are additional maintenance, insurance, and often parking expenses. According to the American Automobile Association, the annual cost of owning a car and driving 15,000 miles a year is now over $9,000.

Converting even a fraction of automobile trips to bicycling or walking trips can generate transportation-related savings, including reduced vehicle traffic congestion. Increased bicycling and walking also translates to health-related savings, for both individuals and taxpayers, in the form of less need for preventative care. More bicycling and walking has also been tied to increases in commercial and residential property values and retail sales. Shoppers who reach their destination by bicycle have been shown to make smaller purchases, but shop more often and to spend more money overall. Shoppers who arrive by bicycle or on foot, because of their more limited range, are also more likely to support local businesses, and require much less space for parking compared to those who arrive by motor vehicle.

Perhaps more compelling than reducing GHG emissions or combating the obesity epidemic is the benefits bicycling has to offer in terms of quality of life.

Bicycling, and especially utilitarian bicycling, is increasingly seen as a fun, lowcost, healthy, and sustainable way of getting around.

According to the American Automobile Association, the annual cost of owning a car and driving 15,000 miles a year is over $9,000

Individuals living in poverty are more likely to lack access to a personal vehicle and also have the highest rates of bicycling and walking trips as compared to higher income groups

Social Justice In addition to the extensive environmental, health, and economic benefits gained from enhanced active transportation infrastructure, there is also the potential to alleviate issues for disadvantaged populations that are disproportionately impacted by rising transportation costs. According to the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) 2009 National Household Travel Survey, individuals living in poverty are more likely to lack access to a personal vehicle and also have the highest rates of bicycling and walking trips as compared to higher income groups. The survey also reported that poor, racial, and ethnic minorities and the elderly have much lower mobility rates than the general population. These trends highlight the importance of providing safe and comprehensive transportation options for community members who do not have regular access to a personal vehicle.

In 2013, California established the Active Transportation Program (ATP) to promote increased use of active modes of transportation in an effort to achieve GHG reduction goals and enhance public health and equity. This grant program is effective in encouraging biking and walking, particularly for children travelling to school, as well as for residents of disadvantaged communities.

Chapter 1: Introduction | 15

16 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

02 CHAPTER 2

Existing Conditions and Analyses

Existing Conditions Overview Understanding the existing roadway conditions, demographics, land use, and other context-sensitive information in Bellflower, Paramount, and the adjacent region is imperative for planning for its future. This chapter summarizes various datasets to provide meaningful discussions on how each of the topics support or impede pedestrian and bicycle facility development within the cities.

This chapter also summarizes various analysis models used to understand the cities’ roadway network and for the development of the pedestrian and bicycle projects found in the recommendations chapter of this ATP. Each dataset provides valuable information that contributes to the comprehensive understanding of the street network and how to improve it.

23,359 Number of Households

14,339

Demographics According to the U.S. Census 2017 American Community Survey (ACS), Bellflower has a population of 77,852 within its 6.17 square mile city boundary, resulting in a population density of 12,618 people per square mile in 23,359 households. In comparison, Paramount has a population of 55,020 within its 4.84 square mile boundary, and a population density of 11,368 people per square mile in 14,339 households.

Both cities have a similar age distribution with approximately 10 percent of the population classified as seniors (over the age of 65) and over 30 percent being under the age of 19. The racial and ethnic make-up in Bellflower is 32 percent white, 13 percent Asian, 13 percent black, 0.5 percent American Indian, 0.1 percent Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, 4 percent two or more races, and 36 percent of some other race. This is different in Paramount, with 54 percent white, 3 percent Asian, 9 percent black, 1 percent American Indian, 1 percent Pacific Islander, 3 percent two or more races, and 28 percent of some other race. About 55 percent of the population in Bellflower identifies as Hispanic or Latino, while 81 percent of Paramount’s population is of Hispanic origin.

The median household income in Bellflower is $52,944. In contrast, the median household income in Paramount is $49,064. Of the households surveyed in 2017, most households have access to one or more vehicles in both cities, with two percent reporting lacking access to a vehicle.

Paramount Source: 2017 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate

Median Household Income

$52,944

$49,064

Paramount Source: 2017 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate

18 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Bellflower

Source: 2017 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate

Paramount

Source: 2017 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 19

Transportation Mode Share

Bellflower

According to the U.S. Census 2017 American Community Survey, most residents in both cities (over 89 percent) rely on personal vehicles to travel to an from work. Mode splits for workers’ commute trips are described below:

Bellflower

Paramount

Car: 91 percent Transit: 3 percent Walk: 1 percent Bicycle: 1 percent Work from Home: 3 percent Other Means: 1 percent

Source: 2017 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate

Car: 89 percent Transit: 4 percent Walk: 2 percent Bicycle: 1 percent Work from Home: 3 percent Other Means: <1 percent

Walking Mode Share The walking mode share measures the percentage of workers aged 16 years and over who commute to work by foot. Mode share reflects how well infrastructure and land-use patterns support travel to work by foot. Walking mode share patterns are connected to the relative proximity of housing to employment centers.

Bicycling Mode Share Similar to the walking mode share, bicycling mode share measures the percentage of resident workers aged 16 years and over who commute to work by bicycle.

Public Transit Mode Share Transit mode share measures the percentage of workers aged 16 years and over who commute to work by transit. This mode share reflects how well first mile-last mile infrastructure, transit routes, and land-use patterns support travel to work by transit.

20 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Paramount

Source: 2017 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 21

Existing Land Use Land use distribution varies between Bellflower and Paramount. Bellflower is primarily comprised of residential land uses (single and multi-family), followed by commercial and office, public facilities, education, and open space land uses.

Residential land uses are evenly distributed throughout the City, while commercial land uses are commonly found along major arterial and collector streets.

Bellflower

Paramount

3%

Open Space

6%

2%

Education

12%

Vacant

1%

7%

2%

10%

Commercial &

20%

Single-family Residential

5%

Industrial

1%

Vacant

Open Space

Public Facilities

Mixed Use

Paramount is mostly comprised of residential and industrial land uses, followed by public facilities, commercial and office, vacant, and education land uses. Paramountâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s industrial land use is concentrated around the center of the City as well as adjacent to railroad corridors and major truck routes. Commercial land uses are also commonly found along arterial and collector streets.

Education

Land Use Distribution

Land Use Distribution

10%

43%

Public Facilities

Single-family Residential

18%

Multi-family Residential

2%

Mobile Homes & Trailer Parks

21%

25%

Multi-family Residential

22 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

4%

Industrial

9%

Mobile Homes & Trailer Parks

Commercial &

Figure 2-1: Land Use Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 23

Potential Right-of-Way Opportunities Within the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s land use, there are several public easements that are managed by different agencies. Identifying and understanding each of these areas will provide a better understanding for the opportunities and challenges for pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

A potential right-of-way (ROW) opportunity includes the utility easements found within both cities. Southern California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power own several corridors that can potentially

Salud Park 24 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

be used to address mobility challenges and opportunities. Cities throughout Southern California have found success constructing linear parks and trail facilities in these ROWâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s.

One local example can be found at Salud Park in Paramount. This park was built in 2014 with the help of Prop. 84 (Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program) and Southern California Edison.

Figure 2-2: Public Easements and Utilities Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 25

Street Classification

9%

Primary

The street network in Bellflower and Paramount consists of primary (arterial), secondary (collector), and minor (local) streets. The primary and secondary streets provide city-wide, uninterrupted transportation to commuters. Most of these streets are not interrupted by the railroad corridors and highways that traverse and surround the cities. The minor streets primarily service the residential neighborhoods, many ending in cul-de-sacs near railroad, highways, and utility right-of-way corridors.

8%

Secondary

Street ClassiďŹ cation

Primary Roadways intended to carry relatively high volumes of long distance and local traffic to and from freeways and other major streets. Intersections are atgrade and signalized.

Secondary Roadways intended to carry traffic throughout all areas of a city in an efficient manner. They connect minor roadways to primary roadways, distributing traffic between neighborhoods to other major destinations.

Minor Local roadways that primarily provide access to individual properties and residential neighborhoods. They are intended to be low-speed and low-volume streets. Through traffic (vehicular) is typically discouraged.

26 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

83%

Minor

Figure 2-3: Street Classification Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 27

Existing and Previously Proposed Bicycle Facilities Figure 2-5 depicts the existing and previously proposed bicycle facilities. The existing bicycle facility network consists of roughly 7.1 miles of multi-use paths and 0.2 miles of bike routes within City limits. The existing roads were reviewed for potential upgrades and missing sidewalk data will help guide future infill projects.

Previously proposed projects include multi-use paths, bicycle lanes, shared bicycle routes, and bicycle boulevards.

Bellflower Bike Trail 28 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Figure 2-4: Existing and Previously Proposed Bikeways Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 29

Transit Routes and Stops Metro (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority) provides public transportation services for both cities. Metro Local bus routes 125, 127, 128, 130, 258, 265, and 266 provide transportation on the citiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; street network.

The Metro Rail Green Line can be access via the Lakewood Boulevard and Interstate 1-5 station. Metro Express provides regional transportation services via their 460 and 577 routes.

Bellflower 3%

of workers use public transit

The West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor (WSAB) is a 20-mile corridor that is currently being evaluated. The WSAB would be a new light rail transit lane that would provide access between Downtown Los Angeles and southeast LA County. Additional connections include the Metro Green Line, Metro Blue Line, and many other transit services in Los Angeles Countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s regional transit network.

One station is being proposed in Bellflower at Bellflower Boulevard and one in Paramount at the intersection of Rosecrans Avenue and Paramount Boulevard.

In addition to the public transportation services provided by Metro, Bellflower operates a fixed route system within City limits. This bus system consists of two routes (North Route and South Route), which provide connections to Los Angeles County Metro, Norwalk Transit, and Long Beach Transit. Both routes only operate during weekdays.

Paramount 4%

of workers use public transit

Metro bus stop in Paramount 30 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Figure 2-5: Transit Routes Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 31

Analysis of existing and future conditions, as well as latent demand, is an essential step in any transportation project planning process. For this project, analysis included spatial (GIS) analysis, fieldwork, and community and stakeholder input. This multi-pronged approach allowed for maximal data capture and cross-referencing of findings. For example, bicycle and pedestrian safety concerns were analyzed through collision data, including locations, frequencies and causes. Cross-referencing these collision data with public input helped to verify safety issues and identify areas for new or improved facilities.

This section focuses on explanations and discussions of the various spatial analyses employed in this project. Brief discussions of the role of fieldwork and community/stakeholder input are provided below, while the remainder is devoted to spatial analysis.

Fieldwork The project team conducted fieldwork, using measuring tools and georeferenced photos, on several occasions. Fieldwork was conducted prior to project kick-off (to better understand existing conditions) and during project development (to verify data obtained from GIS and community/stakeholder input).

Community/Stakeholder Input Community and stakeholder input played a very important role in developing facility and program recommendations. A summary of community and stakeholder input obtained to-date and its impact on the existing conditions analysis is included in this report.

Spatial Analysis (GIS) Spatial analysis included simple, data-driven analyses and more complex analyses, requiring evaluations of layered information and multiple inputs. Data-driven topics include existing bicycle facilities, proposed bicycle facilities, average daily trips, activity centers, transit routes, safety analysis and bicycle-pedestrian suitability. Topics requiring more complex analysis (safety/collisions and bicycle-pedestrian routing) are discussed in more detail in their respective sections.

32 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Bicycle and Pedestrian Collision Analysis Bicycle and pedestrian collision data were obtained from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) collision data set managed by the California Highway Patrol (CHP). This dataset captures all reported bicycle-vehicle, pedestrian-vehicle and bicycle-pedestrian collisions that resulted in injury or property damage in Bellflower and Paramount in the five-year period of 2012 through 2016. Collisions on off-street paths or highways are not reported in the data. It is important to note that collisions involving bicyclists are known to be under-reported, and therefore bicycle collisions are likely under-represented in this analysis.

During this five-year period there were a total of 199 bicycle-related collisions and 210 pedestrian-related collisions; 13 of which resulted in fatalities. Bicycle-related collisions decreased throughout this time period with lows in 2013 and 2016, while pedestrian-related collisions fluctuated with highs in 2012 and 2015. The bulk of both collision types resulted in the categories of Injury-Complaint of Pain (52 percent) or Other Visible Injury (36 percent). However, of all cases, nine percent resulted in severe injury and 13 percent resulted in fatality, totaling 22 percent of collisions. Approximately 73 percent of collisions occurred in daylight conditions, compared to 22 percent in Dark-with Street Light, and four percent in Dusk/Dawn.

Most collisions (21 percent) were caused by vehicles not driven on the right side of the roadway. The remainder of collisions were caused by a variety of driver, bicyclist, and pedestrian violations.

The corridors and intersections with the highest density of collisions include Artesia Boulevard, Bellflower Boulevard, Alondra Boulevard, Downey Avenue, Paramount Boulevard, and Rosecrans Avenue.

Collisions (2012-2016)

Analysis

54 52

53 40 38

2012

2013

Pedestrian Bicycle

40 39 32

2014

33 28

2015

2016

Figure 2-6: Collision Analysis Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 33

Bicycle-Pedestrian Propensity Model A Bicycle-Pedestrian Propensity Model was developed to help understand where bicyclists and pedestrians are most likely to be and to help define focus areas. The Propensity Model is a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) model that reveals relationships between the data layers analyzed. It is comprised of three submodels: Attractor, Generator, and Barrier Models. These three sub-models are then combined to create the composite Propensity Model.

Attractors are essentially activity centers known to attract bicyclists and pedestrians. Examples are schools, transit stops and shopping centers. Generators are developed from demographic data and address potential pedestrian and bicyclist volume based on how many people live and work within the study area. Examples of generators are population density, employment density, primary mode of transportation to work and vehicle ownership. Barriers are features likely to discourage or detract people from bicycling or walking. These are generally physical limitations, such as areas with high numbers of bicycle-related collisions, high vehicle volumes and speeds, and missing sidewalks.

Figure 2-8 is the resulting map that will help develop general recommendations and to help select priority projects described Chapter 4 of this plan.

Table 2-1: Propensity for Bicyclist and Pedestrian Activities ATTRACTORS Activity centers known to attract bicyclists and pedestrians DESTINATION LOCATION DATA

GENERATORS Demographic characteristics that address potential pedestrian and bicyclist volume within the study area CENSUS DATA ACS 2016

BARRIERS FOR BICYCLISTS Features likely to discourage or detract people from bicycling TRAFFIC & ROAD CONDITION DATA

BARRIERS FOR PEDESTRIANS Features likely to discourage or detract people from walking TRAFFIC & ROAD CONDITION DATA

34 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Shopping Centers & Commercial Land Uses Parks Preschool/Elementary Schools Bus Stops Community Attractions (City Hall, Library, Arts Centers) Neighborhood Access Points Greenbelt Access Points Healthcare Middle/High School Class I Access Points Junior resident density Senior resident density Disability Household Income Population Density Public Transit to work Bicycle to work Walk to work Vehicle Ownership Health and Equity Factor

Bike/Ped Bike/Ped Ped Only Bike/Ped Bike/Ped Bike/Ped Bike Only Ped Only Bike/Ped Bike/Ped

Speed (Buffer 150’) Absence of Bicycle Facility (Buffer 150’) Bicycle Related Collisions (1/16-Mile Buffer) Major Crossings Slope Speed (Buffer 150’) Missing Sidewalk Missing Curb Ramps (Buffer 150’) Pedestrian Related Collisions (1/16-Mile Buffer) Major Crossings Slope

Figure 2-7: Propensity Analysis Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 35

Level of Traffic Stress Analysis The Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) analysis is a GIS-based tool used to quantify a bicyclist’s perception of comfort given specific roadway conditions.

Because different bicyclists have different tolerances for stress created by volume, speed, and proximity of automobile traffic, the LTS method identifies four levels of stress, from the most comfortable scenario to the least tolerable conditions. Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) criteria span from 1 to 4, with 1 being the least stressful or most comfortable, and 4 being the most stressful.

The analysis was applied to the major roadways and it reveals that most of these roadways have a high level of traffic stress (LTS 3 and LTS 4). This means that users may not feel safe and comfortable riding on these roadways and that mostly “confident, experienced, and strong bicyclists” are the likely users.

1 2 3 4

36 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

LTS 1 Low Stress Comfortable for all ages and abilities

LTS 2 Los stress with attention required Comfortable for most adults

LTS 3 More stressful than level 2 Riding a bike is tolerated by confident riders

LTS 4 Most Stressful Uncomfortable for most, except for experienced riders

Figure 2-8: Level of Traffic Stress Map Chapter 2: Existing Conditions and Analyses | 37

38 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

03 CHAPTER 3

Community Engagement

Community Engagement Overview The Community Outreach Plan (COP) for the Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan was designed to include stakeholder and community involvement of a broad spectrum throughout the planning process. Stakeholders included elected officials, schools, members of recreational, environmental, community-based, faith-based and business organizations, property owners, residents, and other interested parties.

The COP includes goals, key messages, a list of contacts, and an outline for potential community workshops. Most importantly, it outlines strategies for how to maximize community engagement through a series of pop-up workshops at various city events. The full COP can be found in Appendix A.

Outreach Materials As part of the community engagement process, outreach materials were developed to maximize community participation. Because of the diverse populations in Bellflower and Paramount, the project needed to have a variety of outreach methods, including printed media and an online presence. This included a fact sheet that provided a project overview, as well as a web-based survey designed for those who could not attend the four pop-up event workshops.

According to the 2016 US Census, approximately 55 percent of Bellflower’s population is Hispanic or Latino, and 82 percent of Paramount’s population is of Hispanic origin. Based on these demographics, both illustrative and online outreach materials were created both in English and Spanish.

In addition to this, the project team developed social media messages to reach out to interested members of the community. Press releases were also produced and submitted to local media three weeks in advance of each round of pop-up events.

Survey A survey was prepared to determine satisfaction levels of current pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, as well as desired improvements. The survey asked people a variety of walking and bicycling questions, and prompted them to provide both general and site-specific comments.

The survey was announced at the first pop-up event workshop and was available to the public through October 31, 2018. The survey’s data was used to gain a general understanding of existing walking and bicycling issues. The data was also used as a factor for GIS analyses, such as project recommendations and prioritization. A detailed summary of the survey’s results is included in Appendix A.

40 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Pop-up Events Workshops A series of four workshops (two per city) were conducted throughout the planning process to gather input and solicit feedback on recommendations. It was determined during team management meetings that the pop-up workshop approach would be the best avenue to gather input for the project. Conventional workshops have not been well-attended in the citiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; past experiences, so this approach allowed the team to gather feedback at events where an audience was guaranteed to be present. The two first workshops were held in Spring of 2018 to present initial findings for the public to review or comment. The second round of workshops took place during Summer and Fall 2018 to present preliminary recommendations. Community members were asked to provide feedback and comments.

Chapter 3: Community Engagement | 41

Pop-up Event Workshop #1

Pop-up Event Workshop #3

The first pop-up event was conducted on March 24, 2018 during Paramount’s Sustainability Fair. This event featured vendors, workshops, and informational booths that provided ideas on how to create an environmentally sustainable future. A project booth with maps, data, and surveys was present to gather input on opportunities and constraints from residents. Bicycle lights and helmet giveaways were provided at the booth to participants and survey respondents.

Over 70 surveys were filled out and five helmets given away.

The third pop-up event workshop was held on September 29, 2018 during Bellflower’s Annual Car Show. This classic car show attracts car enthusiasts from all over the region, providing a great opportunity to gather community input. A project booth with maps, data visualizations, and surveys was set up to gather general feedback on the preliminary proposed projects. Bicycle lights and helmet giveaways were provided at the booth in order to engage people.

The majority of residents showed positive support for the goals of the ATP and a desire for greater pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure improvements.

Pop-up Event Workshop #2 The second pop-up event workshop took place in Bellflower during their annual StreetFest on June 28, 2018. This event draws hundreds of residents from Bellflower and nearby communities with food, vendors, and shows. A project booth was present alongside the City’s to gather information on opportunities and constraints from participants. Once again, bicycle lights and helmet giveaways were provided at the booth. Maps, data and surveys were displayed at the booth to gather information. Over 105 surveys were filled out and four helmets given away.

42 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Pop-up Event Workshop #4 The final pop-up event workshop was conducted on October 21, 2018 during Paramount’s Día de los Muertos Celebration at Paramount Park. This cultural festival draws hundreds of residents from Paramount and nearby communities with music, art, food, and vendors. Similar to the third workshop, a project booth with maps, data visualizations, and surveys was set up to gather general feedback on the preliminary proposed projects. Most participants agreed on the importance of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout Paramount and showed positive support for the goals of the ATP. Once again, bicycle light and helmets giveaways were provided as a way to encourage people to participate.

Chapter 3: Community Engagement | 43

A total of 256 people completed the survey for Bellflower, while 270 people completed the survey for Paramount. The results from these two resources were analyzed and used for the development of the potential project list. They also provided the cities with a current view of peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s opinions, concerns and desires for pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

The following 10 figures depict results from the surveys. About 77 percent of respondents drive to work or school in Bellflower, and over 86 percent of respondents do it in Paramount. Approximately 61 percent of respondents drive to the park in Bellflower, while 69 percent do it in Paramount. In addition, when asked what would make walking, biking, and reaching transit better in both Bellflower and Paramount, respondents answered street lighting, bike paths, and safer crossings respectively. These results communicate the importance of improving the walking and biking infrastructure in both cities.

256 surveys How do you get to work/school?

Paramount

Two online surveys, one for Bellflower and one for Paramount, were developed as additional resources to collect feedback from the community. Paper copies of these surveys were distributed at all pop-up event workshops.

Bellflower

Survey Summary

270 surveys How do you get to work/school?

44 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

How do you get to a city park?

What would make it easier for you to walk more?

What would make it easier for you to bike more?

What would make it easier for you to reach transit stops?

How do you get to a city park?

What would make it easier for you to walk more?

What would make it easier for you to bike more?

What would make it easier for you to reach transit stops?

Chapter 3: Community Engagement | 45

Page Intentionally left blank

46 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

04 CHAPTER 4

Recommendations

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 47

Recommendations Overview Understanding the existing roadway conditions, demographics, land use, and other context-sensitive information in both cities and the adjacent region is imperative for planning for their future. This chapter includes an active transportation toolbox with examples from California and other states, a prioritized list of corridor recommendations, and a Safe Routes to School overview to provide meaningful discussions on how each of these topics support pedestrian and bicycle facility development within both cities.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Treatments While not universally applied, in general, pedestrian travel in urban areas has long tended to be accommodated with features like sidewalks, crosswalks, dedicated signals, and curb extensions. The proposed pedestrian treatments in this ATP address a wide variety of issues identified in the analysis and community engagement process. The recommendations include enhanced connectivity to transit, school zones, activity centers, parks, and other community destinations. The pedestrian recommendations are critical to ensuring equitable multi-modal transportation because it serves the populations that may not be able to bike, and instead rely on transit and walking. Newer innovations like pedestrian scrambles, modified signal timing, flashing beacons, and other pedestrian improvements are explained in this chapter in addition to standard pedestrian treatments.

A focus on providing safer, less stressful bicycle travel has occurred more recently across the United States, with significant transformation in the state of practice for bicycle travel over the last five years. Much of this may be attributed to bicycling’s changing role in the overall transportation system. No longer viewed as an “alternative” mode, it is increasingly considered as legitimate transportation that should be actively promoted as a means of achieving community environmental, social, and economic goals. While connectivity and convenience remain essential bicycle travel quality indicators, recent research indicates the increased acceptance and practice of daily bicycling will require “low-stress” bicycle routes, which are typically understood to be those that provide bicyclists with separation from high volume and high speed vehicular traffic. The route types described in the following section, are consistent with this evolving state of practice.

48 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Conventional Bicycle Treatments

Enhanced Bicycle Treatments

There are four conventional bicycle route types recognized by the CA Department of Transportation. Details of their design, associated wayfinding, and pavement markings can be found in the CA MUTCD and CA Highway Design Manual.

Class I multi-use paths (frequently referred to as “bicycle paths” or “multi-purpose trails) are physically separated from motor vehicle travel routes, with exclusive rights-of-way for non-motorized users like bicyclists and pedestrians.

Multi-use paths are paved and may have additional dedicated natural-surface pathways for pedestrians or equestrian users.

While the conventional bicycle route types can be found throughout the United States, there has been a distinct shift towards further enhancement.

For example, the CA MUTCD has approved the installation of buffered bicycle lanes, while Shared Lane Markings or “Sharrows” have been in use since 2008 throughout the State. These enhancements are low cost, easy to install, and provide additional awareness about the likely presence of bicyclists. In many instances, installation of these bicycle route enhancements can be coordinated as part of street resurfacing projects. The use of green paint has also become a simple and effective way to communicate the likely presence of bicyclists. It is also used to denote potential conflict zones between bicyclists and vehicles.

Class II: Bicycle Lanes

Buffered Bicycle Lanes

Bicycle lanes are one-way route types that carry bicycle traffic in the same direction as the adjacent motor vehicle traffic. They are typically located along the right side of the street, between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road edge, or parking lane.

Buffered bicycle lanes provide additional space between the bicycle lane and traffic lane, parking lane, or both, to provide a more protected and comfortable space for bicyclists than a conventional bicycle lane. The buffering also encourages bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked vehicles, keeping them out of the “door zone” where there is the potential danger of drivers or passengers suddenly opening doors into the bicyclists’ path.

Class I: Multi-Use Paths

Class III: Bicycle Routes A bicycle route is a suggested bicycle path of travel marked by signs designating a preferred path between destinations. They are recommended where traffic volumes and roadway speeds are fairly low (35 mph or less).

Class IV: Separated Bikeways (Cycle Tracks) Separated bikeways are physically separated from motor vehicle traffic and designed to be distinct from any adjoining sidewalk. The physical protection measures can include raised curbs, parkway strips, reflective bollards, or parked vehicles. Separated bikeways can be either one-way or two-way, depending on the street network, available right-of-way, and adjacent land use.

Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”) The shared lane marking is commonly used where parking is allowed adjacent to the travel lane. It is now common practice to center them within the typical vehicular travel route in the rightmost travel lane to ensure adequate separation between bicyclists and parked vehicles. Many cities install sharrows over a green background to enhance visibility.

Bicycle Boxes A bike box is a designated area at the head of a traffic lane at a signalized intersection that provides bicyclists a safe and visible way to wait ahead of queuing traffic during the red signal phase. This positioning helps encourage bicyclists traveling straight through not to wait against the curb for the signal change.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 49

Class 1 Multi-use Path

Class 2 Bicycle Lane

Class 3 Bicycle Route

Class 4 Separated Bikeway

50 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Buffered Bicycle Lanes

Bicycle Sharrows

Bicycle Boxes Chapter 4: Recommendations | 51

Low Stress Bicycle Treatments

Green Intersection Conflict Striping

There are a number of other non-conventional route types that the city may find useful in specific situations. In many cases, the conventional bicycle route types previously mentioned may not meet the community’s perceptions of safe and comfortable bikeways. Protected, low-stress streets, and bicycle-prioritized routes are constantly revised and improving to meet the communities needs.

Intersection crossing markings indicate the intended path of bicyclists. Colored striping can be used to highlight conflict areas between bicyclists and vehicles, such as where bicycle lanes merge across motor vehicle turn lanes.

The improvements described in this section have been implemented in other states in the United States as well as other countries with great success and are quickly becoming standard recommendations. Details of these route types and other treatments can be found in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide or AASHTO Guide of the Development of Bicycle Facilities.

Protected intersections maintain integrity (low-stress experience) of their adjoining separated bicycle lanes by fully separating bicyclists from motor vehicles.

Hallmark features of these protected intersections include a two-stage crossing supported by an advance queuing space, protective concrete islands, special bike-cross markings (parallel with crosswalks), and special signal phasing.

Bicycle Boulevards

Two-Stage Turn Queue Box

Bicycle boulevards provide a convenient, low-stress cycling environment for people of all ages and abilities. They are installed on streets with low vehicular volumes and speeds and often parallel higher volume, higher speed arterials. Bicycle boulevard treatments use a combination of signs, pavement markings and traffic calming measures that help to discourage through trips by motor vehicle drivers and create safe, convenient bicycle crossings of busy arterial streets.

Signage and Wayfinding Signage and wayfinding on all streets and bicycle routes are intended to identify routes to both bicyclists and drivers, provide destination information and branding, and to inform all users of changes in roadway conditions.

Colored Bicycle Lanes Colored pavement increases the visibility of bicycle routes, identifying potential areas of conflict, and reinforces bicyclists’ priority in these areas. Colored pavement can be used as a corridor treatment, along the length of a bicycle lane or within a protected bikeway. Additionally, it can be used as a spot treatment, such as crossing markings at particularly complex intersections where the bicycle path may be unclear. Consistent application of color across a bikeway corridor is important to promote clear understanding for all roadway users.

52 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Protected Intersections

Two-stage turn queue boxes can provide a more comfortable left-turn crossing for many bicyclists because they entail two simple crossings, rather than one complex one. They also provide a degree of separation from vehicular traffic, because they do not require merging with vehicle traffic to make left turns. Bicyclists wanting to make a left turn can continue into the intersection when they have a green light and pull into the green bike box. Bicyclists then turn 90 degrees to face their intended direction and wait for a green light to continue through.

Bicycle Signals This category includes all types of traffic signals directed at bicyclists. These can include typical green/yellow/red signals with signage explaining the signal controls, or special bikeway icons displayed within the signage lights themselves. Near-side bicycle signals may incorporate a “countdown to green” display, as well as a “countdown to red.”

Bicycle Detection Bicycle detection is used at intersections with traffic signals to alert the signal controller that a bicycle crossing event has been requested. Bicycle detection occurs either through the use of push buttons or by automated means.

Traffic Calming Traffic calming involves changes in street alignment, installation of barriers, and other physical measures to reduce traffic speeds and/or cut-through motor vehicle traffic volumes. The intent of traffic calming is to alter driver behavior and to improve street safety, livability, and other public purposes. Other techniques consist of operational measures such as police enforcement and speed displays.

The following examples are traffic calming measures that may apply.

Speed Displays Speed displays measure the speed of approaching vehicles by radar and inform drivers of their speeds using an LED display. Speed displays contribute to increased traffic safety because they are particularly effective in reducing the speed of vehicles traveling ten or more miles per hour over the speed limit.

Chicanes

Roundabouts / Traffic Circles A roundabout is a circular intersection with yield control at its entry that allows a driver to proceed at controlled speeds in a counter-clockwise direction around a central island. Roundabouts are designed to maximize motorized and non-motorized traffic through their innovative design that includes reconfigured sidewalks, bikeway bypasses, high-visibility crosswalks, pedestrian flashing beacons, and other traffic measures. Roundabouts can be implemented on most streets, but may require additional right-of-way.

A traffic circle is a traffic calming measure commonly applied at uncontrolled intersections throughout low volume, local residential streets. They lower traffic speeds on each approach and typically avoid or reduce right-of-way conflicts because the overall footprint is smaller compared to roundabouts. Traffic circles may be installed using simple markings or raised islands, but are best accompanied with drought-tolerant landscaping or other attractive vertical elements.

Chicanes are a series of narrowings or curb extensions that alternate from one side of the street to the other forming an S-shaped path. Chicanes reduce driversâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; speeds by causing them to shift their horizontal path of travel.

Traffic Diverters A traffic diverter is a roadway design feature placed in a roadway to prohibit vehicular traffic from entering into or exiting from the street, or both.

Speed Tables/Raised Crosswalk Speed tables are flat-topped road humps, often constructed with textured surfacing on the flat section. Speed tables and raised crosswalks help to reduce vehicle speeds and enhance pedestrian safety.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 53

Bicycle Boulevards i.e. Traffic Diverters

Protected Intersection 54 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Wayfinding Signage

Two-Stage Queue Turn Box

Colored Bicycle Lanes

Bicycle Signals

Green Intersection Conflict Striping

Bicycle Detection Chapter 4: Recommendations | 55

Speed Displays

Chicanes

Traffic Diverters

Speed Tables / Raised Crosswalks

56 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Roundabout

Traffic Circle Chapter 4: Recommendations | 57

Pedestrian Treatments Many streets in both cities already have sidewalks, especially within newer neighborhoods. However, it is important to evaluate the network to determine if appropriate sidewalk widths and ADA compliant curb ramps are present. While many intersections are signalized and crosswalks exist, there are some segments with long blocks without convenient crossing places. Providing crossing treatments will help reduce â&#x20AC;&#x153;jaywalkingâ&#x20AC;? and unsafe crossings between intersections.

Enhanced Crosswalk Markings Enhanced crosswalk markings can be installed at existing or proposed crosswalk locations. They are designed to both guide pedestrians and to alert drivers of a crossing location. The bold pattern is intended to enhance visual awareness.

Curb Extensions Also called bulb-outs or neck-downs, curb extensions extend the curb line outward into the travel way, reducing the pedestrian crossing distance. Typically occurring at intersections, they increase pedestrian visibility, reduce the distance a pedestrian must cross, and reduce vehicular delay. Curb extensions must be installed in locations where they wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t interfere with bicycle lanes or separated bikeways. If both treatments are needed, then additional design features such as ramps, or half-sized curb extensions should be considered.

Refuge Island Refuge islands provide pedestrians and bicyclists a relatively safe place within intersection and mid-block crossings to wait if they are unable to complete their crossing in one movement.

Mid-block Crossings Mid-block crossings provide convenient locations for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross thoroughfares in areas with infrequent intersection crossings or where the nearest intersection creates substantial out-of-direction travel. Midblock crossings should be paired with additional traffic-control devices such as PHBs, RRFBs, LED enhanced flashing signs, and/or refuge islands.

58 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Lighting Pedestrian-scale lighting provides many practical and safety benefits, such as illuminating the path and making crossing walkers and bicyclists more visible to drivers. Lighting can also be designed to be fun, artistic, and interactive.

Pedestrian Scramble Pedestrian scrambles stop vehicular traffic flow simultaneously in all directions to allow pedestrians to cross the intersection in any direction. They are used at intersections with particularly heavy pedestrian crossing levels.

Modified Traffic Signal Timing Adjusting the time needed to cross high-volume and wide streets provides additional safety and comfort for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Signals and Warning Devices Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs) and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) are special signals used to warn and control traffic at unsignalized locations to assist pedestrians in crossing a street via a marked crosswalk. Either of these devices should be installed at locations that experience high pedestrian volumes and that connect people to popular destinations such as schools, parks, and retail.

Signals and warning devices should be paired with additional pedestrian improvements, where appropriate, such as curb extensions, enhanced crosswalk marking, lighting, median refuge islands, and corresponding signage.

Transit Stop Amenities Transit stop amenities such as shelters with overhead protection, seating, trash receptacles, and lighting are essential for encouraging people to make use of public transit.

Placemaking The inclusion of urban elements such as parklets and community gardens encourages walking and provides usable space for all ages. In many cities, these urban elements have helped to transform urban villages and downtowns into walkable destinations. Coordinating with local businesses and organizations may provide collaborative design and funding opportunities between the city, its businesses, residents, and visitors.

Parklets Parklets are small, outdoor seating areas that take over one or two parking spots, reclaiming the space for the community, and improving the urban environmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s aesthetics and streetscape.

Special Intersection Paving and Crosswalk Art Special intersection paving and crosswalk art provide unique opportunities at intersections to highlight crossings, key civic or commercial locations, while breaking the visual monotony of asphalt. Intersection paving treatments and crosswalk art can integrate context-sensitive colors, textures, and scoring patterns.

Paving treatments and crosswalk art do not define a crosswalk and should not be seen as a safety measure. Standard transverse or longitudinal high visibility crosswalk markings are still required.

Furnishings and Public Art Transit shelters, bicycle racks, seating, and public art provide important amenities for functionality, design and vitality of the urban environment. They announce that the street is a safe and comfortable place to be and provide visual detail and interest.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 59

High-Visibility Crosswalks

Curb Extension

Refuge Island

Mid-Block Crossing with Refuge Island

60 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Pedestrian Scramble Crossing

Pedestrian Scale Lighting

Transit Stop Amenities

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 61

Parklet

Crosswalk Art 62 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Public Art

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 63

Potential Active Transportation Recommendations This section addresses the physical improvements component of a comprehensive suite of recommendations to help improve the cities’ bicycling and walking environment. These built improvements include all of the treatment types referenced in the “BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS” section at the beginning of this chapter. Also included are quarter-mile walkshed maps for each of the schools that depict existing infrastructure and planning-level costs for potential improvements. Recommended policies and programs unique to Bellflower and Paramount as well as throughout California are found in Chapter 5.

Table 4-1 lists the proposed bicycle and pedestrian projects including information such as location, route type, length, extent, and ranking.

Prioritization Process

Feasibility Analysis and Project Recommendations

Project prioritization was an iterative process that combined data-driven analysis consisting of cumulative scores derived from the various inputs (criteria), to determine initial project priority. The inputs used for the prioritization process were as follows:

A feasibility analysis was conducted as part of the existing conditions analysis and the preliminary project recommendations phase. This analysis entailed measuring the existing curb-to-curb widths on all the corridors identified as potential projects to better understand the constraints and opportunities. Through this process, the team was able to identify excess or lack of available right-of-way to determine if at a minimum, bike lanes would fit throughout the corridor.

»» »» »» »» »» »» »» »» »» »» »» »»

Number of Attractors (points of interest) Number of Schools Number of Parks Reported Collisions Public Transportation to Work Walk to Work and Bike to Work Households Without Vehicles 2010 Population Density (Residents / acre) 2010 Employment Density (Employed per Residents 16) Seniors over 65 Active Transportation Network / Gap Closure Grant Competitiveness

The numbering used to identify projects in the following section does not necessarily imply which project should be built first. Implementing the proposed improvements has no specific time line, since the availability of funds for implementation is variable and tied to the priorities of the cities’ capital projects.

If there is desire, recommended projects can be implemented at whatever interval best fits funding cycles, or to take into consideration the availability of new information, new funding sources, updated statistics, updated CIP lists, etc.

64 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

In addition, other constraints such as maintaining all existing parking lanes on the street and maintaining the total number of existing travel lanes limited the bikeways proposed in this ATP. Because of these constraints and the existing street network in both cities, many projects were limited to bike routes or enhanced bike boulevards. Facilities such as bike lanes or separated bikeways were limited to corridors where right-of-way was available.

Figure 4-1 depicts how the feasibility analysis is conducted on corridors that were identified for potential recommendations. This sample roadway consists of two travels and on-street parking in each direction, with a center planted median. The exhibit depicts parking and travel lanes that are wider than the minimum standards.

The feasibility analysis determines the existing curb-to-curb right-of-way could accommodate bike lanes if the parking and travel lanes were reduced to their minimum standards. In this scenario, the recommended bike lanes can be designed without affecting the total number of travel lanes or disturbing the center median.

This scenario is just one example where the excess right-of-way provided the available room for bikeway improvements, but limitations due exist in both Paramount and Bellflower. Future traffic studies, analyses, and coordination between city officials will be needed to determine if certain corridors can be subject to modifications to install recommended bikeways that may affect the existing number of parking or travel lanes.

Figure 4-1: Project Feasibility Example

Excessive ROW Bike Facilities Feasible

In this scenario, parking and travel lanes are wider than needed. They can be reduced to minimum standards.

Parking lane width reduced but parking supply remains unaffected

In this scenario, travel lane and parking lane widths are reduced to minimum standars. This provides needed room to install buffered bike lanes.

Sample Roadway Before Improvements

Buffered bike lanes added

Travel lane widths reduced but vehicular traffic and center median remain unaffected

Sample Roadway After Improvements

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 65

Figure 4-2: Potential Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects 66 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Table 4-1: Potential Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects- City of Bellflower Rank

Corridor Street Name

1

Fleming Ave / Eucalyptus Ave

Mileage Class 1.1

III

Between Washington St

Notes Flora Vista St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

2

Flower St

1.9

III

Downey Ave

Flora Vista St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Coordinate w/ City of Paramount east of Hayter Avenue.

3

Ramona St

1.8

III

Downey Ave

Artesia Blvd

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

4

Park St

2.1

III

Downey Ave

California Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

5

Ardmore Ave

1.3

III

Rose St

Bellflower Bike Trail

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections. May need to coordinate with Caltrans for Highway 91 underpass improvements.

6

Rose St

1.9

III

Downey Ave

Woodruff Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

7

Oak St

0.7

III

Virginia Ave

Bellflower Blvd

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Alondra Blvd

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections. Explore possibility of converting sidewalk on north side of Rosecrans Ave. between Carpintero Ave. and McNacb Ave. to multi-use path for continuation of bikeway.

8

McNab Ave/Carpintero Ave

1.6

III

Foster Rd

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 67

Rank

Corridor Street Name

Mileage Class

Between

Notes

9

Virginia Ave

0.7

III

Bellflower Bike Trail

Flower St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

10

Ardis Ave

1.0

III

Foster Rd

Somerset Blvd

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

11

Mayne St

0.5

III

Hayter Ave

Virginia Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

12

Alondra Blvd

0.2

I

Bellflower Bike Trail

Ryon Ave

Re-purpose sidewalk on south side of Alondra Blvd. as a Class 1 multi-use path to provide connection from proposed Ryon Ave. bike boulevard to the Bellflower Bike Trail.

13

Ryon Ave

0.5

III

Somerset Blvd

Alondra Blvd

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Maplewood St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Explore possibility of converting sidewalk on north side of Rosecrans Ave. between Cabell Ave. and Dunrobin Ave. to multiuse path for continuation of bikeway.

Park St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Coordination needed to address irregular intersection at Alondra Blvd. for continuation of proposed bikeway north of Alondra blvd.

14

15

Cabell Ave/Dunrobin Ave

Carpintero Ave / California Ave

68 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

0.8

0.8

III

III

Foster Rd

Alondra Blvd

Rank

Corridor Street Name

Mileage Class

Between

Notes

16

Hayter Ave

0.2

III

Mayne St

Flower St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

17

Maplewood St

0.5

III

Ardis Ave

Fleming Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

18

Washington St / Mapledale St

0.6

III

Fleming Ave

McNab Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 69

Table 4-2: Potential Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects- City of Paramount Rank

Corridor Street Name

Mileage Class

Between

Notes

1

Railroad

2.3

I

Los Angeles River Path

Lakewood Blvd

Coordination needed with Metroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s WSAB Transit Corridor. Class 1 path between Paramount Blvd. and Hayter Ave. in engineering phase.

2

Utility Easement

1.3

I

Proposed WSAB Path

Park St

Coordinate with utility corridor agencies for feasibility of installing multi-use path.

3

Easement

1.7

I

Proposed WSAB Path

Jackson St

Coordinate with utility corridor agencies for feasibility of installing multi-use path.

4

Anderson St/Merkel Ave

0.9

III

Alhambra Ave

Rosecrans Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

5

Madison St

0.9

II

Vermont Ave

Eastern street end

Class 2 bike lanes. Install buffered bike lanes where excess right-of-way exists.

6

Howe St / Century Blvd

0.6

III

McClure Ave

Downey Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Jackson St

Class 2 bike lanes. Install buffered bike lanes where excess right-of-way exists.

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

7

Orange Ave

1.7

II/III

Proposed WSAB Path

8

Orizaba Ave

0.1

III

Rosecrans Ave

Proposed WSAB Path

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

Coordinate installing new connection to proposed WSAB multi-use path.

9

McClure Ave

0.5

III

Denver St

Proposed WSAB Path

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

10

Jackson St

0.9

III

Vermont Ave

Eastern street end

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

70 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Rank

Corridor Street Name

Mileage Class

Between

Notes

11

Jefferson St

1.0

II

Easement

Georgia Ave

Class 2 bike lanes. Install buffered bike lanes where excess right-of-way exists.

12

California Ave

0.9

III

Somerset Blvd

Harrison St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

13

San Luis St

0.6

III

Dills Park entrance

Eastern street end

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

14

Rosecrans Ave

0.1

I

Orizaba Ave

Anderson St

Explore possibility of converting sidewalk on south side of Rosecrans Ave. between Orizaba Ave. and Anderson Ave. to multiuse path for bikeway connection between Anderson Ave and WSAB multi-use path.

15

E 72nd St/Jackson St

1.3

III

Los Angeles River Path

Illinois Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

16

San Marcus St

0.6

III

Dills Park entrance

Eastern street end

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

17

Minnesota Ave

0.8

II

Somerset Blvd

Jackson St

Class 2 bike lanes. Install buffered bike lanes where excess right-of-way exists.

18

San Carlos St

0.4

III

Dills Park entrance

Gundry Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

19

San Juan St

0.4

III

Dills Park entrance

Gundry Ave

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

20

S San Jose Ave

0.7

III

San Carlos St

Myrrh St

Class 3 / Bike Boulevard markings w/ wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility crosswalks at major intersections.

21

Vermont Ave

0.13

II

Jefferson St

Madison St

Class 2 bike lanes. Install buffered bike lanes where excess right-of-way exists.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 71

Bellflower Project #1: Fleming Avenue / Eucalyptus Avenue Bike Boulevard The Fleming Avenue and Eucalyptus Avenue bike boulevard project is located in central Bellflower in a residential neighborhood. This proposed bike boulevard provides an enhanced north-south connection for residents wishing to reach Frank. E. Woodruff Elementary School, nearby shopping, places of worship, and the Bellflower Bike Trail.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, shared-lane markings (sharrows) or bike boulevard road markings (see right), enhanced crossings, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Context Photos

1.1 Project Length (Miles)

1 Schools

72 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

1 Parks

2 Bus Stops

Parking lane Bike boulevard markings

Pedestrian-scale lighting with corridor branding Sidewalk with parkway

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 73

ma ple wo od st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

fleming ave

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

somerset blvd

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

eucalyptus ave

Bikeway crossing, include wayfinding signage, highvisibility school crosswalks, and install curb ramp. Option to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB.

74 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Install high-visibility school crosswalks and missing curb ramps. Relocate fire hydrant to accommodate curb ramp.

Install high-visibility crosswalks and wayfinding signage.

eucalyptus ave alondra blvd

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 75

Install missing sidewalk. Install sharrows or greenbacked sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

bel lfl ow er bik et rai l

flo ra vis ta st

cornuta ave

eucalyptus ave

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

76 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Install wayfinding signage to direct people to Bellflower Bike Trail entrance on Flora Vista St. and Flower St.

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 77

Bellflower Project #2: Flower Street Bike Boulevard The Flower Street bike boulevard project is located in south-central Bellflower. The surrounding neighborhoods include residential, education, and commercial land uses. This proposed bike boulevard provides an enhanced eastwest connection to Mockler Elementary School, Somerset Continuation High School, Downtown Bellflower, nearby shopping, places of worship, Bellflower City Hall, Court House, and the Bellflower Bike Trail.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, shared-lane markings (sharrows) or bike boulevard road markings (see right), enhanced crossings, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Context Photos

1.9 Project Length (Miles)

2 Schools

78 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

0 Parks

12 Bus Stops

Parking lane Bike boulevard markings

Pedestrian-scale lighting with corridor branding Sidewalk with parkway

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 79

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB and a speed table, or RRFB with curb extensions.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Install high-visibility school crosswalks and option to install transition striping through intersection.

hayter ave

downey ave

flower st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

80 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Option to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB at school crossing.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection. Curb extensions optional.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage. Option to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB with high-visibility school crosswalks. Curb extensions optional.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

virginia ave

lakewood blvd

flower st

Install wayfinding signage. Install sharrows, or greenbacked sharrows.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 81

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

clark ave

flower st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

82 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install transition striping through intersection. Curb extensions optional.

civic center dr

Install wayfinding signage. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

ardmore ave

bellflower blvd

flower st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install wayfinding signage and highvisibility crosswalks.

Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 83

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB or four-way controlled stop sign.

bel lfl ow er bik et rai l

woodruff ave

Install wayfinding signage for Bellflower Bike Trail.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

84 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

flo ra vis ta st

california ave

bixby ave

flower st

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install transition striping through intersection.

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 85

Bellflower Project #3: Ramona Street Bike Boulevard The Ramona Street bike boulevard project is located in southern Bellflower. The surrounding neighborhoods include residential, commercial, and some industrial land uses. This proposed bike boulevard provides an enhanced east-west connection for residents wishing to reach nearby shopping, places of worship, and other commercial destinations along major boulevards such as Lakewood Boulevard, Clark Avenue, Bellflower Boulevard, and Artesia Boulevard.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, shared-lane markings (sharrows) or bike boulevard road markings (see right), installing missing sidewalks and curb ramps, enhanced crossings, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Context Photos

1.8 Project Length (Miles)

0 Schools

86 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

0 Parks

4 Bus Stops

Parking lane Bike boulevard markings

Pedestrian-scale lighting with corridor branding Sidewalk with parkway

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 87

Install missing sidewalks.

Curb extensions optional.

coke ave

Coordinate with City of Long Beach to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB with high-visibility crosswalks. Would provide safer connection to Ramona Park Community Center. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

downey ave

ramona st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

88 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Install missing sidewalks and curb ramps.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

virginia ave

Additional traffic study to verify if controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

lakewood blvd

ramona st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install missing sidewalks and curb ramps.

Curb extensions optional.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 89

Additional traffic study to verify if controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate. New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection and curb extensions.

clark ave

ardmore ave

ramona st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

90 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage. Option to install transition striping through intersection and curb extensions.

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install transition striping through intersection and curb extensions.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

bellflower blvd

ardmore ave

ramona st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 91

Install wayfinding signage and highvisibility crosswalk.

ar te sia bl vd

ramona st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

92 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 93

Bellflower Project #4: Park Street Bike Boulevard The Park Street bike boulevard project is located in southern Bellflower. The surrounding neighborhoods include residential, industrial, and commercial land uses. This proposed bike boulevard provides an enhanced east-west connection for residents wishing to reach Downtown Bellflower, nearby shopping, places of worship, and the Bellflower Bike Trail.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, shared-lane markings (sharrows) or bike boulevard road markings (see right), installing missing sidewalks and missing curb ramps, enhanced crossings, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Context Photos

2.1 Project Length (Miles)

0 Schools

94 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

0 Parks

7 Bus Stops

Parking lane Bike boulevard markings

Pedestrian-scale lighting with corridor branding Sidewalk with parkway

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 95

Coordinate with City of Long Beach to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB or PHB with high-visibility crosswalks.

Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

Install wayfinding signage.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks.

downey ave

park st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

96 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install missing sidewalks.

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

lakewood blvd

park st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 97

Install wayfinding signage and highvisibility crosswalks.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

clark ave

ardmore ave

park st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

98 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install transition striping through intersection.

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks.

Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

bellflower blvd

ardmore ave

park st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 99

Additional traffic study to verify if controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

100 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

woodruff ave

bixby ave

park st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

california ave

Install missing sidewalks and curb ramps.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage. Proposed California Ave bike boulevard provides connection to Bellflower Bike Trail. New trail access required.

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 101

Bellflower Project #5: Ardmore Avenue Bike Boulevard The Ardmore Avenue bike boulevard project is located in central Bellflower.

The surrounding neighborhoods include residential, education, and commercial land uses. This proposed bike boulevard provides an enhanced northsouth connection for residents wishing to reach nearby shopping, Simms Park, places of worship, and other commercial destinations.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, shared-lane markings (sharrows) or bike boulevard road markings (see right), enhanced crossings, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Context Photos

1.3 Project Length (Miles)

1 Schools

102 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

1 Parks

4 Bus Stops

Parking lane Bike boulevard markings

Pedestrian-scale lighting with corridor branding Sidewalk with parkway

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 103

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks.

Create a direct entrance to Bellflower Bike Trail.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

104 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

flower st

ardmore ave oak st

bel lfl ow er bik et rai l

belmont st

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Option to install transition striping through intersection.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install high-visibility crosswalk at existing crosswalk.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Install high-visibility school crosswalks and option to install transition striping through intersection.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

CA-91

park st

flower st

ardmore ave

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Option to install pedestrianscale lighting and / or art through freeway underpass.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 105

Install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install transition striping through intersection.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Option to install transition striping through intersection.

rose st

ramona st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

artesia blvd

ardmore ave

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

106 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 107

Paramount Project #1: West Santa Ana Branch Multi-use Path The West Santa Ana Branch project is located in northwest Paramount. The surrounding neighborhoods include residential, education, industrial, and commercial land uses. This proposed multi-use path provides an enhanced east-west connection for residents wishing to reach Paramount Park, Paramount Park Middle School, Paramount High School, nearby shopping, places of worship, the proposed WSAB transit stop, the Los Angeles River Bike Trail, and the Bellflower Bike Trail.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, pedestrian-scale lighting, enhanced crossings, high-visibility crosswalks, site furnishings such as trash receptacles and benches, and drought-tolerant landscaping.

The portion of this multi-use path between Paramount Boulevard and Hayter Avenue is currently in engineering design.

Context Photos

2.3 Project Length

6 Schools

108 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

1 Parks

6 Bus Stops

Pedestrian-scale lighting Fence Proposed Metro West Santa Ana Branch Rail

Concrete multi-use path Optional natural surface walking path

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 109

Coordinate trailhead connection to LA River Bike Path

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage. Trailhead connection between proposed Orange Ave bike lanes and multi-use path

wsab multi-use path eld rfi ga

orange ave

ave

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

110 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Enhanced multi-use path crossing at existing traffic light. Option to install transition striping.

Coordination needed to align multi-use path through multiple rail lines

Install wayfinding signage.

d blv nt ou am par

ve sa n a ecr ros

wsab multi-use path ave eld rfi ga

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 111

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage. Trailhead connection between proposed bike boulevard and multi-use path

wsab multi-use path

ave ey wn do

ave ba iza or

ve sa n a ecr ros

d blv nt ou am par

Additional traffic study to verify which controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

112 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Additional traffic study to verify which controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

d oo ew lak d blv

wsab multi-use path

ave ey wn do

d blv t e ers som

Additional traffic study to verify which controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 113

Paramount Project #2: East Paramount Utility Easement Multi-Use Path The East Paramount Utility Easement project is located in eastern Paramount.

The surrounding neighborhoods include residential, education, industrial, and park land uses. This multi-use path provides an enhanced, completely separated north-south connection for residents wishing to reach a number of schools, parks, the proposed WSAB multi-use path, and the Bellflower Bike Trail. Approximately half of the easement is currently being used by horticultural nurseries for plant growth and sales.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, pedestrian-scale lighting, enhanced crossings, high-visibility crosswalks, site furnishings such as trash receptacles and benches, and drought-tolerant landscaping.

Context Photos

1.3 Project Length

3 Schools

114 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

1 Parks

4 Bus Stops

Concrete multi-use path Fence

Optional natural surface walking path

Pedestrian-scale lighting Optional space for trees and other amenities

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 115

Coordinate trailhead connection to proposed WSAB multi-use path and existing Bellflower Bike Trail.

Install wayfinding signage.

116 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Coordinate with school district to determine trailhead connection and path through the existing parking lot.

Install wayfinding signage.

Additional traffic study to verify which controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

Install wayfinding signage.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 117

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install enhanced crossing such as RRFB and a speed table, or RRFB with curb extensions.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage and high-visibility crosswalks.

118 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 119

Paramount Project #3: West Paramount Utility Easement Multi-Use Path The West Paramount Utility Easement project is located in eastern Paramount.

The surrounding neighborhoods include residential, education, industrial, and park land uses. This multi-use path provides an enhanced, completely separated north-south connection for residents wishing to reach a number of schools, parks, the proposed WSAB multi-use path, and the Bellflower Bike Trail.

Salud Park was designed and constructed within this easement and can be found immediately north of Somerset Blvd. A portion of the easement is currently being used by horticultural nurseries for plant growth and sales.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, pedestrian-scale lighting, enhanced crossings, high-visibility crosswalks, site furnishings such as trash receptacles and benches, and drought-tolerant landscaping.

Context Photos

1.7 Project Length

3 Schools

120 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

2 Parks

3 Bus Stops

Concrete multi-use path Fence

Optional natural surface walking path

Pedestrian-scale lighting Optional space for trees and other amenities

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 121

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Trailhead connection to the proposed WSAB multi-use path.

Install wayfinding signage.

Additional traffic study to verify which controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

122 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Enhanced multi-use path crossing at existing traffic light. Option to install transition striping.

Coordination needed to determine best multi-use path alignment through Salud Park.

Coordination needed to determine best multi-use path alignment if plant nursery is to remain. Possible alignment on the northern portion of the easement.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 123

Additional traffic study to verify which controlled crossing such as a new traffic signal or PHB is appropriate.

New crossing to include high-visibility crosswalks. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

Install wayfinding signage.

124 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

Page Left Intentionally Blank

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 125

Paramount Project #4: Anderson Street / Merkel Avenue Bike Boulevard The Anderson Street and Merkel Avenue bike boulevard project is located in northern Paramount. The surrounding neighborhood includes residential, education, and park land uses. This proposed bike boulevard provides an enhanced north-south connection for residents wishing to reach Roosevelt Elementary School, All-American Park, Paramount Park, Paramount High School, nearby shopping, and the proposed WSAB multi-use path.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, shared-lane markings (sharrows) or bike boulevard road markings (see right), installing missing sidewalks, enhanced crossings, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Context Photos

0.9 Project Length

5 Schools

126 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

2 Parks

2 Bus Stops

Parking lane Bike boulevard markings

Pedestrian-scale lighting with corridor branding Sidewalk with parkway

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 127

Install wayfinding signage and highvisibility crosswalks

Update existing high-visibility school crosswalks

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install wayfinding signage

florence st

st on s r e and

alhambra ave

century blvd

merkel ave

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install highvisibility school crosswalks

128 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Install wayfinding signage and highvisibility school crosswalks

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage.

denbo st

quimby st

Install missing curb ramp

Intersection of two bikeways, install wayfinding signage. Install high-visibility school crosswalks. Curb extensions optional.

cen tur yb lvd

rosecrans ave

howe st

anderson st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Connection to proposed multi-use path on south side of Rosecrans Ave that provides access to proposed multi-use path along rail corridor via Orizaba Ave.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 129

Paramount Project #5: Madison Street Bike Lanes The Madison Street bike lanes project is located in central Paramount. The surrounding neighborhood includes residential, industrial, and park land uses.

The proposed bike lanes provide an enhanced east-west connection for residents to reach centers of employment, restaurants, Progress Park, and Jefferson Elementary School.

Recommendations along this corridor include wayfinding signage, bike lane markings, installing bike lane buffer striping where there is excess right-ofway, enhanced crossings, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Context Photos

0.9 Project Length

1 Schools

130 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

1 Parks

4 Bus Stops

Parking lane Bike lane markings.

Option to add striped buffer where excess right-of-way exists

Pedestrian-scale lighting with corridor branding Sidewalk with parkway

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 131

Standard bike lane striping. Install buffered bike lane with excess ROW.

georgia ave

california ave

Additional traffic study to verify best enhanced crossing such as traffic signal or PHB. Crossing to include high-visibility crosswalk and wayfinding signage.

vermont ave

paramount blvd

madison st

Install wayfinding signage.

Intersection of two bikeways.

Install wayfinding signage.

Potential location for traffic circle at intersection.

132 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Potential location for traffic circle at intersection. Option includes curb extensions, high-visibility crosswalks, and green transition striping.

Install high-visibility crosswalk and wayfinding signage. Option to install green transition striping through intersection.

progress park

Convert standard crosswalk to highvisibility crosswalk

downey ave

indiana ave

madison st

Install sharrows, or green-backed sharrows.

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 133

Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Overview Safe Routes to School is one of the primary principles used for pedestrian and bicycle improvements in this plan. As described in the previous chapters, a GIS analysis of the existing conditions, field work, and community engagement were used to determine existing concerns and issues regarding the safety and comfort of walking and bicycling in throughout both cities.

A GIS-based methodology was used to define Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Zones, quarter-mile walkable zones (walksheds) based on the schoolsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; entrances and the street network, where walking and biking improvements can be prioritized. In addition, bicycle and pedestrian related collisions are mapped to highlight needs for improvements. The zones were used to ensure that recommendations of the highest level for safety and comfort (lowest stress) were made where they would provide the most benefit.

The following pages contain the existing conditions and deficiencies identified for each of the schools in this plan. Each school is supported by a detailed map with the locations of potential improvements. Please note that several maps include more than one school due to their proximity to one another.

The City of Paramount has completed extensive crosswalk improvements (red crosswalks) at several intersections throughout the City. The proposed high-visibility crosswalks recommended include intersections that either have no marked crosswalks or are marked solely by transverse lines.

CITY OF BELLFLOWER SCHOOLS

CITY OF PARAMOUNT SCHOOLS

7 Somerset HS

1

2 Bellflower HS

8 Thomas Jefferson ES

2 Frank J. Zamboni MS

10 Paramount High School

3 Ernie Pyle ES

9 Washington ES

3 Harry Wirtz ES

11 Paramount Park MS

4 Frank E. Woodruff ES

10 St. John Bosco HS

4 Howard Tanner ES

12 Park ES

Las Flores Home 5 Education Independent Study Academy

11 Lynn Pace ES

5 Jefferson ES

13 Theodore Roosevelt ES

6 Lincoln ES

14 Wesley Gaines ES

7 Los Cerritos ES

15 Leona Jackson MS

1

Albert Baxter ES

6 Ramona ES

Alondra MS

8 Mark Keppel ES 134 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

9 Mockler ES

13 10 4

12

7

10

11

3

11 6

8

3

1 9

5

4

2

2 15

14

1 9

6 7 5

8

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 135

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Albert Baxter Elementary School Albert Baxter Elementary School is located in northwest Bellflower. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, and utility. Lakewood Boulevard, Somerset Boulevard, and Cerritos Avenue provide access to the school. Nearby activity centers include restaurants, Hollywood Sports Paintball and Airsoft Park, Bellflower BMX, and a shopping center with a Walmart Supercenter.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

5,365 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

15 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

26,825

$321,900

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

15

$48,000

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

12

$33,600

Sub-Total

$403,500

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$80,700

Contingency (25%):

$100,875

GRAND TOTAL:

$585,075

136 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

12 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

cer rito sa ve

lakewood blvd

fay wo od st

somerset blvd

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 137

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Bellflower Middle / High School Bellflower High School is located in central Bellflower. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, and utility. Nearby activity centers include Riverview Park, restaurants, general commercial services, and other schools. The San Gabriel River Bike Path and the Interstate 605 overpass along Alondra Boulevard are within walking and biking distance from the school. Woodruff Avenue, Alondra Boulevard, McNab Avenue, and Somerset Boulevard provide access to the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

25,920

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

38 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

129,600

$155,200

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

38

$121,600

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

42

$117,600

Sub-Total

$,794,400

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$358,880

Contingency (25%):

$448,600

GRAND TOTAL:

$2,601,880

138 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

42 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

washington st

carfax ave

mcnab ave

somerset blvd

woodruff ave

alondra blvd

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 139

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Ernie Pyle Elementary School Ermie Pyle Elementary School is located in northeast Bellflower. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, mobile home residential, and commercial. Rosecrans Avenue, Woodruff Avenue, McNab Avenue, and Mapledale Street provide access to the school. Nearby activity centers include restaurants and shopping. The San Gabriel River Bike Path is also within walking and biking distance from the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

3,517 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

1 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

17,585

$211,020

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

1

$3,200

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

22

$61,600

Sub-Total

$275,820

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$55,164

Contingency (25%):

$68,955

GRAND TOTAL:

$399,939

140 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

22 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

woodruff ave

rosecrans ave

McNab ave

mapledale st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 141

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Frank E. Woodruff Elementary School Frank E. Woodruff Elementary School is located in central Bellflower. The adjacent land uses are predominantly single-family and multi-family residential. Somerset Boulevard, Eucalyptus Avenue, and Alondra Boulevard provide access to the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

2,495 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

3 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

12,475

$149,700

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

3

$9,600

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

7

$19,600

Sub-Total

$178,900

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$35,780

Contingency (25%):

$44,725

GRAND TOTAL:

$259,405

142 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

7 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

linden st

cornuta ave

eucalyptus ave

somerset blvd

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 143

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Las Flores Home Education Independent Study Academy Las Flores Home Education Independent Study Academy is located in southeast Bellflower. The adjacent land uses are predominantly single-family and multi-family residential, with nearby commercial and utility land uses. Woodruff Avenue, Beach Street, Bixby Avenue, and Palm Street provide access to the school. The school is also located within walking distance to two CA Highway 91 underpasses.

Nearby activity centers include shopping and restaurants. The San Gabriel River Bike Path is also within walking and biking distance from the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

3,070

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

4 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

15,350

$184,200

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

4

$12,800

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

11

$30,800

Sub-Total

$227,800

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$45,560

Contingency (25%):

$56,950

GRAND TOTAL:

$330,310

144 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

11 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

beach st

woodruff ave

bixby ave

park st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 145

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Ramona Elementary School and Somerset High School Ramona Elementary School and Somerset High School are located in central Bellflower. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, open space, and utility.

Nearby activity centers include Simms Park, Bellflower Farmersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Market, restaurants, and other commercial services such as salons. Clark Avenue, Flower Street, Oak Street, and Virgina Avenue provide access to the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

3,084 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

1 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

15,420

$185,040

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

1

$3,200

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

23

$64,400

Sub-Total

$252,640

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$50,528

Contingency (25%):

$68,213

GRAND TOTAL:

$371,381

146 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

23 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

virginia ave

oak st

clark ave

flower st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 147

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Thomas Jefferson Elementary School Thomas Jefferson Elementary School is located in southern Bellflower. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, and utility. Nearby activity centers include restaurants, places of worship, and other local commercial services. Woodruff Avenue, Cedar Street, Rose Street, and Bellflower Boulevard provide access to the school. The school is also within walking distance to two CA Highway 91 underpasses. The San Gabriel River Bike Path is also within walking and biking distance from the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1,013

1. Missing sidewalks 2. Crosswalk maintenance needed 3. High-visibility crosswalks needed

Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

5,065

$60,780

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

16

$44,800

Sub-Total

$105,580

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$21,116

Contingency (25%):

$26,395

GRAND TOTAL:

$153,091

148 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

16 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

woodruff ave

cedar st

ibbetson ave

rose st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 149

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Washington Elementary School Washington Elementary School is located in central Bellflower. The adjacent land uses are predominantly single-family residential, multi-family residential, and commercial. Nearby activity centers include restaurants, general commercial services, and other schools. Bellflower Boulevard, Ryon Avenue, Blaine Avenue, and Jefferson Street provide access to the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

9,949 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

22 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

49,745

$596,940

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

22

$70,400

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

18

$50,400

Sub-Total

$717,740

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$143,548

Contingency (25%):

$179,435

GRAND TOTAL:

$1,040,723

150 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

18 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

ryon ave

bellflower blvd

somerset blvd

jefferson st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 151

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Alondra Middle School / Mockler Elementary School Alondra Middle School and Mockler Elementary are located in central Paramount. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, utility, and open spaces.

Downey Avenue, Alondra Boulevard, and Flower Street provide direct access to the schools. Nearby activity centers include Progress Park, restaurants, shopping, and other schools.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1. Crosswalk maintenance needed 2. High-visibility crosswalks needed

0 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

0

0

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

10

$30,800

Sub-Total

$30,800

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$6,160

Contingency (25%):

$7,700

GRAND TOTAL:

$44,660

152 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

10 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

ALONDRA BLVD

monroe st

jackson st

downey ave

flower st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 153

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Frank J. Zamboni Middle School Frank J. Zamboni Middle School is located in southwest Paramount. The adjacent land uses are predominantly single-family residential, multi-family residential, and industrial. Alondra Boulevard and Orange Avenue provide direct access to the school. Nearby activity centers include Meadows park, restaurants, and other schools.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1. Crosswalk maintenance needed 2. High-visibility crosswalks needed

0 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

0

0

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

1

$2,800

Sub-Total

$2,800

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$560

Contingency (25%):

$756

GRAND TOTAL:

$4,116

154 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

1 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

myrhh st

orange ave

alondra blvd

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 155

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Harry Wirtz Elementary School / Paramount High School Harry Wirtz Elementary School and Paramount High School are located in central Paramount. The diverse adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, utility, and open space. Rosecrans Avenue and Downey Avenue provide direct access to the school. The rail corridor is also located within the walking distance of the school. Additional popular activity centers include Paramount Park, Drive-in Theatre, shopping centers, as well as four other schools.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1. Missing sidewalks 2. Crosswalk maintenance needed 3. High-visibility crosswalks needed

370 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

Some recommendations within this walkshed may appear in another school’s walkshed. These recommendations are denoted by this pink symbol. »» One high-visibility crosswalk appears in the Park Elementary School / Paramount Park Middle School cut sheet.

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

1,850

$22,200

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

6

$16,800

Sub-Total

$39,000

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$7,800

Contingency (25%):

$9,750

GRAND TOTAL:

$56,550

156 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

6 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

anderson st

downey ave

rosecrans ave

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 157

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Howard Tanner Elementary School Howard Tanner Elementary School is located in the west-central region of Paramount. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, industrial, utility, and open space.

Rosecrans Avenue, Richfield Street, and Texaco Avenue provide direct access to the school.

Adequate walking infrastructure exists within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

0 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

0

0

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

0

0

Sub-Total

0

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

0

Contingency (25%):

0

GRAND TOTAL:

0

158 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

0 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

garfield ave

rosecrans ave

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 159

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Jefferson Elementary School Jefferson Elementary School is located in central Paramount. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, utility, and open spaces. Downey Avenue and Jefferson Street provide access to the school. Nearby activity centers include Progress Park, restaurants, shopping, and other schools.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map. Although there are no sidewalk gaps immediately adjacent to the school, the streets directly north do have sidewalk obstructions such as fire hydrants and large power poles. Due to limited ROW, the City should evaluate the feasibility of relocating these obstructions to clear the sidewalks.

1. Crosswalk maintenance needed 2. High-visibility crosswalks needed

0 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

Some recommendations within this walkshed appear immediately outside this school’s walkshed.

These recommendations are denoted by this pink symbol. »» One high-visibility crosswalk is recommended outside this walkshed at the intersection of Downey Avenue and Adams Street.

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

0

0

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

9

$25,200

Sub-Total

$25,200

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$5,040

Contingency (25%):

$6,804

GRAND TOTAL:

$37,044

160 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

9 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

downey ave

jefferson st

madison st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 161

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Lincoln Elementary School Lincoln Elementary School is located in central Paramount. The diverse adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, industrial, and utility. Paramount Boulevard, Somerset Boulevard, California Avenue, and Orizaba Avenue provide access to the school.

The City may consider an additional study to verify the potential to install an enhanced crossing such as an RRFB or PHB at the intersection of Adams Street and Paramount Boulevard.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1.

2.

3.

4.

475

Missing curb ramps Missing sidewalks Crosswalk maintenance needed High-visibility crosswalks needed

Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

Some recommendations within this walkshed may appear in another school’s walkshed. These recommendations are denoted by this pink symbol. »» Three high-visibility crosswalks appear in the Park Elementary School / Paramount Park Middle School cut sheet.

4 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

2,375

$28,500

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

4

$12,800

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

12

$33,600

Sub-Total

$74,900

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$14,980

Contingency (25%):

$20,223

GRAND TOTAL:

$110,103

162 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

12 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

paramount blvd

somerset blvd

adams st

california ave

jefferson st

madison st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 163

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Los Cerritos Elementary School Los Cerritos Elementary School is located in the west-central region of Paramount. The adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, industrial, utility, and open space.

Rosecrans Avenue, Orange Avenue, and Gundry Avenue provide access to the school. The nearby residential street network is comprised of one-way local streets.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1. Missing curb ramps 2. Crosswalk maintenance needed 3. High-visibility crosswalks needed

0 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

6 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

0

0

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

6

$19,200

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

7

$19,600

Sub-Total

$38,800

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$7,760

Contingency (25%):

$10,476

GRAND TOTAL:

$57,036

164 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

7 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

rosecrans ave

san carlos st

san juan st ave dry gun

orange ave

san miguel st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 165

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Mark Keppel Elementary School Mark Keppel Elementary School is located in western Paramount, bordering the City of Compton.

The adjacent land uses are predominantly single-family and multi-family residential. Hunsaker Avenue, Somerset Boulevard, and San Jose Avenue provide access to the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1. Crosswalk maintenance needed 2. High-visibility crosswalks needed

0 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

Some recommendations within this walkshed appear immediately outside this school’s walkshed.

These recommendations are denoted by this pink symbol. »» Four high-visibility crosswalks are recommended outside this walkshed at the intersection of Somerset Boulevard and Orange Avenue.

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

0

0

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

16

$44,800

Sub-Total

$44,800

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$8,960

Contingency (25%):

$12,096

GRAND TOTAL:

$65,856

166 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

16 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

Orange Ave

el camino ave

faulkner ave

san jose ave

somerset blvd

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 167

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Park Elementary School / Paramount Park Middle School Park Elementary School and Paramount Park Middle School are located in central Paramount. The diverse adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, commercial, industrial, utility, and open space. Rosecrans Avenue and Paramount Boulevard provide direct access to the schools. The proposed WSAB corridor multi-use path is also located within the walking distance of the school. Additional popular activity centers include Paramount Park, Drive-in Theatre, shopping centers, as well as four other schools.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

780

1. Missing sidewalks 2. Crosswalk maintenance needed 3. High-visibility crosswalks needed

Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

Some recommendations within this walkshed may appear in another school’s walkshed. These recommendations are denoted by this pink symbol. »» One high-visibility crosswalk appears in the Harry Wirtz Elementary / Paramount High School cut sheet. »» Three high-visibility crosswalks appear in the Abraham Lincoln Elementary School cut sheet.

Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

3,900

$46,800

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

10

$28,000

Sub-Total

$74,800

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$14,960

Contingency (25%):

$18,700

GRAND TOTAL:

$108,460

168 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

0 Missing Curb Ramps

10 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

paramount blvd rosecrans ave

3rd st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 169

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Theodore Roosevelt Elementary School Theodore Roosevelt Elementary School is located in the northern region of Paramount. The adjacent land uses are predominantly single-family and multi-family residential with nearby park spaces.

Merkel Avenue and Century Boulevard provide direct access to the school.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1. Missing sidewalks 2. Crosswalk maintenance needed 3. High-visibility crosswalks needed

500 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

2,500

$30,000

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

15

$42,000

Sub-Total

$72,000

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$14,400

Contingency (25%):

$19,440

GRAND TOTAL:

$105,840

170 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

15 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

me rke la ve

I-105

cen tur yb lvd

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 171

Wesley Gaines Elementary School and Leona Jackson Middle School

AT A GLANCE METRICS

Wesley Gaines Elementary School and Leona Jackson Middle School are located in southwest Paramount. The diverse adjacent land uses include single-family residential, multi-family residential, mobile home residential, industrial, and utility. Orange Avenue, Jackson Street, and Garfield Avenue provide direct access to the school. Nearby activity centers include Meadows park, restaurants, and other schools.

Existing infrastructure varies within the 1/4 mile walkshed identified in the map.

1. Missing sidewalks 2. Crosswalk maintenance needed 3. High-visibility crosswalks needed

1,150 Linear Feet Missing Sidewalk

0 Item

Unit Cost

Unit

Quantity

Cost

Sidewalk

$12

SF

5,750

$69,000

Curb Ramp

$3,200

EA

0

0

High Visibility Crosswalks

$2,800

EA

9

$25,200

Sub-Total

$94,200

Design / Permitting / Management / Engineering (20%):

$18,840

Contingency (25%):

$23,550

GRAND TOTAL:

$136,590

172 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Missing Curb Ramps

9 High Visibility Crosswalks Recommended / Maintenance Needed

garfield ave jackson st

Chapter 4: Recommendations | 173

174 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

05 CHAPTER 5

Policies and Programs

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 173

Policies Overview Policies supporting both Cities’ active transportation vision are an integral part of this joint ATP. The policies were developed to be consistent with the General Plans and to support mobility planning processes. The policies that were included the Bellflower-Paramount Bicycle and Trail Master Plan from 2015 served as a great foundation for establishing policies related to bicycling for both cities. The development of this joint ATP is an opportunity to take a second look and develop additional polices that support both walking and bicycling.

The following section provides an overview of the policies included in the Bicycle and Trail Master Plan, followed by additional new policies that reflect the goals of this joint ATP.

Policy Recommendations from BellflowerParamount Bicycle and Trail Master Plan, 2015 This plan recommends both Bellflower and Paramount revise their existing policies as follows: Allow bicycling in public parks, adding the following restrictions: bicyclists may travel no more than 15 mph, and must yield to pedestrians, when riding on Class I shared-use paths, on sidewalks, and within parks. Encourage respectful shared-use path etiquette.

Bicycle parking should be intuitive and easy to use, and be securely anchored to a surface or structure. The rack should keep the bicycle upright by supporting the frame in two places, and should allow a user to secure the frame and at least one wheel using a standard U-lock.

Racks should be located close to a main building entrance, in a lighted, high-visibility, covered area protected from the elements. Long-term parking should always be protected.

Bicycle parking should be required in the quantities listed in Table 4-7. In addition, bicycle parking should be provided at schools, along downtown corridors, and at bus stops.

Businesses or property owners that elect to provide additional bicycle parking beyond these minimum requirements, or who elect to provide bicycle parking where none is required, should be allowed to replace one required vehicle parking space with bicycle parking.

174 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Adopt bicycle rack standards to ensure racks are uniform throughout the community and intuitive for bicyclists to use. Acceptable bicycle racks are shown in Figure 4-7.

Consider bicycle facilities as part of the design and construction of all new roadways and, where feasible within existing right-of-way, as part of all upgrades or resurfacing of existing roadways.

Consider endorsing the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide as the best practice in bikeway design.

Designate a staff person to implement the policies, programs, and projects identified in this Plan and apply for grant funding.

Community Development Departments or Planning Departments should work with developers and school districts to implement planned improvements through redevelopment.

Bellflower Recommendations In addition to the Joint Policy Recommendations, this plan recommends the City of Bellflower revise its policies as follows: Adopt current best practices allowing low-speed electric-assist bicycles on Class I shared-use paths.

Set a goal date to apply for Bicycle-Friendly Community designation through the League of American Bicyclists by 2019.

Paramount Recommendations In addition to the Joint Policy Recommendations, this plan recommends the City of Paramount revise its policies as follows: Remove mandatory bicycle licensing policy. Instead, encourage licensing as a theft prevention measure and consider adopting a voluntary online bicycle registry in partnership with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

Chapter Chapter 5: Policies 5: Policies andand Programs Programs | 175 | 175

Recommended polices from Joint ATP:

Goal 2: Design

The following comprehensive policies are meant to supplement the bike-specific polices from the Bike and Trails Master Plan from 2015.

Policy 2.1 The City shall strive to design streets using a “centerline outward” approach that considers all users (i.e. provide only as many travel lanes as needed, and only as wide as needed).

Policy 2.2 The City shall strive to incorporate the latest in safety design standards/best practices, signage, and traffic control techniques approved and accepted by Caltrans, FHWA, or City, into City regulations to ensure a high level of safety for bicyclists, walkers, and motorists (i.e. NACTO Urban Street Design Guide)

Goal 1: Completing the Network Policy 1.1 The City shall strive to develop an ongoing bicycling and walking improvement planning process to review facilities installed, assess future needs, potential funding sources and make recommendations to update the joint ATP. Policy 1.2 The City shall strive to forecast future bicycling and walking travel needs for all ages and abilities to close both actual and perceived gaps in the network.

Policy 1.3 The City shall strive to develop an integrated multi-modal public transportation system with an emphasis on the ability to use bicycles as a viable means for commuting so that commuters are not as reliant on automobiles.

Policy 1.4 The City shall, as funding becomes available, strive to plan, upgrade, and expand bicycling and walking network improvements consistent with the vision of this plan.

Policy 1.5 The City shall strive to include small scale projects, such as signing and striping, in upcoming City paving projects when appropriate.

Policy 1.6 The City shall strive to provide safe bicycling and walking infrastructure between major destinations such as retail, entertainment, and services, employment centers, neighborhoods, transit, schools, and parks.

176 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Goal 3: Network Maintenance Policy 3.1 The City shall strive to maintain a smooth pavement surface of bikeways free of potholes consistent with Section 1003.6 (2) and Table 1003.6 of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual.

Policy 3.2 The City shall strive to ensure the City’s pavement management system maintains safe, clean bikeways, sidewalks, crosswalks, and other bicycling and walking infrastructure facilities.

Goal 4:Safety Policy 4.1 The City shall strive to work with community partner organizations to develop a comprehensive bicycling and walking safety training program.

Policy 4.2 The City shall strive to improve safety conditions for bicyclists and walkers through law enforcement efforts focused on drivers, bicyclists, and walkers.

Policy 4.3 The City shall strive to conduct City-wide monitoring and evaluation of collisions involving bicyclists and walkers.

Goal 5: Support Resources

Goal 7: Project Partnering and Funding

Policy 5.1 The City shall strive to encourage public walking improvement projects to help to create and maintain a comfortable environment that encourages walking and bicycling.

Policy 5.2 The City shall strive to coordinate with other City departments, local non-profits, schools, and community organizations to maximize signage efficiency at strategic locations.

Policy 7.1 The City shall strive to seek and allocate adequate funding to enhance the bicycling and walking network, in alignment with the City’s community development and transportation goals.

Policy 7.2 The City shall strive to collaborate with local, regional, state, federal agencies, and private entities to ensure the joint ATP is consistent with regional transportation plans and agency regulations.

Policy 7.3 The City shall strive to update its joint ATP every five years to maintain eligibility for State-administered active transportation grant funding.

Policy 7.4 The City shall consider requiring that development contribute its share toward the costs of bicycling and walking facilities and programs.

Policy 7.5 The City shall strive to continue to prioritize funding towards transportation congestion relief projects including high priority bicycling and walking projects.

Policy 7.6 The City shall strive to work with local organizations to pursue additional funding for bicycling safety education programs. By providing support to grants and other funding applications, the City can help organizations that conduct education to increase their resources and reach more bikeway users.

Policy 7.7 The City shall strive to use grant funding to the maximum extent feasible to pay for bicycling and walking projects and programs.

Goal 6: Encouragement Policy 6.1 The City will strive to coordinate with SCAG to develop programs that encourage alternative transportation for commuters by collaborating with regional partners.

Policy 6.2 The City shall strive to promote programs that reduce bicycle theft and support efforts to recover stolen bicycles.

Policy 6.3 The City shall strive to develop a wayfinding and signage program for existing and new bikeways.

Policy 6.4 The City shall strive to ensure consistent enforcement of the rules of the road to decrease bicyclist and motorist traffic law violations.

Policy 6.5 The City shall strive to ensure equitable access to the bikeway network for all residents, and support bicycling as an attractive, convenient transportation choice for all demographic groups.

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 177

Programs Overview This section includes a diverse list of programs intended to support the bicycle and pedestrian projects recommended in this plan. Due to a long history of routine accommodation for pedestrians (i.e. sidewalks, crosswalks, dedicated signals, etc.), programs targeting walking are relatively uncommon. Conversely, the historic lack of routine accommodation for bicyclists has fostered confusion about the role of bicyclists in the overall transportation system and has necessitated a diverse list of bicycle-related programs.

Evolving State of Practice in Active Transportation There has been a shift away from the traditionally compartmentalized “Six Es” approach developed by the League of American Bicyclists (Engineering, Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Equity, and Evaluation and Planning), and instead toward a fully integrated and complementary menu of initiatives. By offering such a menu, rather than a prescriptive list, active transportation programming can more accurately address existing conditions and desired outcomes of a given context.

In addition to active transportation program content and organization changes, there has also been a shift in implementation strategies. Physical projects represent the most visible and perhaps most tangible evidence of a great place for bicycling or walking. Programs are increasingly targeted to occur in conjunction with the construction of specific bicycle and pedestrian projects to take advantage of the opportunity that capital project implementation represents for a city to promote bicycling and walking as attractive transportation options.

A new multi-use path, for instance, represents a great opportunity to reach out to the area’s walkers and parents of school-age children, as well as the neighborhood‘s “interested, but concerned” bicyclists. These target groups will be most benefited by directly linking route improvements and supportive programs. In this way, bundling bicycling and walking programs with projects represents a much higher return on investment for both.

The programs recommended are organized as a menu of initiatives, each listed under a broad category to the right. These categories are not definitive, but are merely intended to offer some level of organization to the many program initiatives, most which fall into at least one category.

Existing Programs Bellflower nor Paramount have developed a robust set of programs designed to encourage, educate, and enforce active transportation. This plan encourages both cities to establish partnerships, seek funds, and create programs that will motivate their residents to use multi-modal means of getting to and from their destinations. The following section highlights programs that have been successful in other Southern California towns and cities that can be implemented.

178 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Education/Encouragement/Marketing

Education/Encouragement/Marketing

Community Bicycle Programs - Bike Kitchens

Street Smarts Classes and Bicycle Ambassadors

Community bicycle programs, also known as Bike Kitchens, are commonly formed as grass roots initiatives by community members to provide bicycles, helmets, maintenance, and safety instruction to people as a means of expanding their transportation options and providing people better access to work and services.

This initiative promotes safe bicycling through community-based outreach, which helps bridge the gap between people who want to start riding and the availability of opportunities to help people learn to bicycle safely. Ideally, these classes would be taught by SBBIKE. In addition, city personnel that are certified as League Cycling Instructors (LCIs) can teach these classes.

Bellflower and Paramount can support the creation of a Bike Kitchen within its city boundaries and leverage its resources in coordination with the bicycle route types prioritized in this plan. This combination will help encourage an increase in bicycling mode share, serve as a missing link in the public transit system, reduce GHG emissions and provide additional â&#x20AC;&#x153;greenâ&#x20AC;? jobs related to system management and maintenance.

LCIs are certified to teach Smart Cycling classes to children as well as adults.

Their goal is to help people feel more secure about getting on a bicycle, to create a mindset that bicycles are treated as a vehicle, and to ensure that people on bicycles know how to ride safely and legally.

Bike Kitchen, Bike SLO County Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 179

Participate in Walk and Bike to School Day This one-day October event in more than 40 countries celebrates the many benefits of safely walking and cycling to school. Walking and rolling to school embodies the two main goals of former First Lady Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move! Campaign: to increase children’s physical activity and to empower parents to make these kinds of healthy choices.

Participate in National Bike Month Since 1956, communities from all over the country have celebrated National Bike Month as a chance to showcase the many benefits of bicycling as well as to encourage people of all ages and backgrounds to bicycle more often. The biggest event that takes place during National Bike Month is Bike to Work day.

Local business, nonprofits, and entire city agencies participate by either hosting pit stops where bicyclists can stop to gather healthy food and drinks, or by simply bicycling to work.

Host a Ciclovia, Open Streets, and Other Signature Events A Ciclovía (also ciclovia or cyclovia in English) is a Spanish word that translates into “bicycle path” and is used to describe a temporary event where a street(s) is closed to vehicles for use by people and non-motorized transportation. Ciclovias and open streets events are celebrations of livable streets and communities, encouraging citizens and businesses to get out in the street and enjoy their city through active participation. Ciclovias have gained considerable popularity in the United States in the past five years.

Bike to Work Day, KTUA

While all open streets events are alike in their creation of a people-oriented, car-free space, they are otherwise unique. In some cities, the event occurs once or twice a year, while in others it occurs every Saturday or Sunday throughout the entire summer. Some cities reuse routes, while others, like Los Angeles, host the events in different locations around the city. Open streets events often have a theme of health, exercise and active transportation, and include groups promoting free, healthy activities stationed along the route.

The routes can incorporate new bikeways and preferred routes, encouraging their use. Bellflower and Paramount can coordinate open streets events in the near future to highlight recent improvements.

CicloSDias 2017, Open Streets Event Two-Way Cycle Track Demonstration, KTUA 180 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Pilot Project Program Many cities have found success in conducting pilot project studies to temporarily test proposed improvements. Pilot projects provide the opportunity for the City to analyze the impact and reaction the community may have with a proposed project, especially if the project type is new to the City. Pilot projects can be combined with open streets events previously described, and can stay in place for a couple of weeks to several months.

Education/Enforcement Potential Police Department Education Programs Regarding Bicycle and Pedestrian Concerns The Police Department can take agency specific training from bicyclists and pedestrians through The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) or League of American Bicyclists League Certified Instructor (LCI) training. Appropriate training regarding pedestrian issues and solutions could be provided as well.

Potential Law Enforcement Liaison Program Responsible for Bicycle & Pedestrian Concerns

Traffic Circle Pilot Program, West Hollywood, CA

The City can consider creating a liaison position who would be the main contact for residents concerning bicycle and pedestrian related incidents. This potential liaison could perform the important role of communicating between the law enforcement agency and bicyclists and pedestrians. The potential liaison could oversee the supplemental education of law enforcement officers regarding bicycle and pedestrian rules, etiquette and behavior. The City could consider allocating funding for the training and support of this duty, as well as for necessary bicycle equipment.

Police Bicycle Patrol Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 181

Focus Group Strategies Many law enforcement departments employ focus group strategies to educate drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians about applicable traffic laws and the need to share the road. These focus group strategies are an effective way to expand mobility education. These strategies could be in the form of a brochure or tip card explaining each user’s rights and responsibilities. Focus group strategies may help mitigate the following traffic safety problems: Speeding in school zones Illegal passing of school buses Parking violations – bus zone, crosswalks, residential driveways, time zones Risks to bicyclists during drop-off / pick-up times Lack of safety patrol/crossing guard operations Three-foot passing law

Bicycle Diversion Program A Bicycle Diversion Program allows for adult bicyclists who commit traffic violations to receive reduced fines in exchange for taking a bicycle education class. In 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 902 to create such a program. This legislation has been touted as a boost for both equity and encouragement in cycling. The Bill is intended to promote equity because, in reducing fines, it effectively makes cycling more affordable. The Bill is expected to encourage cycling by treating violations as opportunities to educate people and impart confidence and skills. AB 902 went into effect in 2016, but it will be up to each city and its law enforcement department to adopt diversion programs.

Bicycle Safety Class

Distribute Bicycle Helmets and Lights If law enforcement officers observe a bicyclist riding at night without the proper reflectors or lights, they may give the bicyclist a light along with a note or friendly reminder about the light requirement and its importance. This provides a positive and educational interaction rather than a punitive one. This program could be funded through a safety-oriented grant. Many cities have targeted the end of daylight savings as an ideal time to perform this function.

Helmet giveaway programs are another opportunity for positive education and interaction. Law enforcement departments have conducted public events to hand out helmets, as well as distributing them in the community during patrol when an officer sees a child riding helmetless.

182 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Helmet Giveaway

Law Enforcement Referral Process Design a communication process that encourages students and parents to notify the school and police of the occurrence of a crash or near-miss during school commute trips involving auto, bus, pedestrian, or bicycle transportation. Including not only the Police Department, but also the Planning Department and SRTS stakeholders in this reporting system helps to improve the data collected and generated. The City may be able to enlist the help of law enforcement with many traffic safety duties.

Los Angeles has a successful program called the LA Bike Map that allows bicyclists to submit incidents, see them displayed instantly, and study the overall pattern, dynamically, in one place. A similar program could be created for the SBCAG region to analyze patterns and determine solutions.

Enforcement of Traffic and Parking Laws Through Citations and Warnings The City could coordinate targeted enforcement of problem areas throughout the year, such as during the first two weeks of school. Targeted enforcement is an intensive, focused effort that communicates the need of following traffic and parking laws that may otherwise pose danger to walking and bicycling.

Participation in Traffic Safety Programs: Traffic Garden, SRTS Task Force, etc.

The City could support the creation of a traffic garden, also referred to as a traffic park or safety village. A traffic garden is a specially-designed park or schoolyard where children can learn traffic laws and how to safely navigate streets as either pedestrians, bicyclists, or drivers. Children that participate in traffic gardens can use bicycles or pedal-powered cars to navigate the mock streets. Teachers, parents, and instructors alike provide guidance on how to safely cross the street, how to interact with bicyclists and pedestrians, and how to navigate a traffic circle. The City could partner with the Paramount Unified School District and the Bellflower Unified School District to create a traffic garden in a parks, or in an elementary or middle school yard.

champions, school members, City staff, or local advocates such as SBBIKE or COAST. Their primary mission would be to work alongside the community, appropriate city officials, and the school district to implement SRTS programs and projects.

Finally, bicycling and walking safety education and promotion programs may reduce the need for heavy investments in enforcement. Enforcement should be viewed as another component of an education program and as a effective way to reduce the number of bicyclist and walker accidents and injuries. For example, posted speed limits should be enforced because high motor vehicle speeds make bicyclists and pedestrians feel unsafe, discourage people from bicycling or walking, and increase collision severity.

Tracking and Monitoring Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel Create City Staff Mobility Coordinator/ Grant Coordinator Position The City could create an Active Transportation Coordinator position, continuing to demonstrate the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commitment to cycling, walking, and creating complete streets. An active transportation coordinator can help coordinate between City departments to ensure projects planning consistency and cooperation. A coordinator would manage programs and implement projects listed in the bicycle and pedestrian master plan, and would be responsible for updating the plan in a timely manner. This includes maintaining a prioritized list of improvements, updating cost estimates, and identifying appropriate funding sources. This investment in staff is often returned since this position usually is responsible for finding, evaluating, securing and tracking reporting requirements for State and federal funding for active transportation projects.

Creating a Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Task force would aid in developing programs and projects that foster the want and need for safely and comfortably walking to and from school. The task force can be comprised of parent

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 183

Create a Transportation Safety Advisory Committee The City could create a Transportation Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC).

Some cities have created bicycle and pedestrian or active transportation advisory committees. A TSAC may support the City with implementation of projects, policies, and programs for all modes of transportation. The TSAC may help City staff, volunteers, and advocates to continue efforts to improve walking and bicycling. This group may act as a community liaison and address issues concerning local bicycling and walking.

Conduct Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts and Review Collision Data The City could conduct regular bicyclist and pedestrian counts to determine baseline mode share and subsequent changes. Conducting counts would allow the City to collect information on where the most bicycling and walking occurs, which helps in prioritizing and justifying projects when funding is solicited and received. Counts can also be used to study bicycling and walking trends throughout the City and would support performance measures and metrics tracking. Having count data would provide opportunities for the following analyses to be conducted: Changes in volumes before and after projects have been implemented Prioritization of local and regional projects Research on clean air change with increased bicycle use Direction of travel Counts should be conducted employing National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project (NBPD) protocols. Employing NBPD methodology allows cities to be able to estimate existing and future bicycle and pedestrian demand and activity in a consistent manner to those employed for motor vehicle counts.

For consistency, counts should be conducted at the same locations and at the same times every year. Specific locations should be determined by Public Works, Police Department, and advisory committee input such as members from SBCAG, Santa Barbara County, and UCSB. California Active Transportation Program (ATP) program administrators have expressed interest in having grant recipients verify that physical improvements have resulted in increased bicycling and walking, and funding for counts could be included as part of grant funding applications.

184 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Bicycle Counter in Vancouver

Conducting counts during different seasons within the year may be beneficial to understanding the differences in bicycle and pedestrian traffic volumes based on seasonal weather. In addition, bicycle and pedestrian counts should be collected as part of any existing traffic counts. Results should be regularly recorded for inclusion in the bicycle and pedestrian report card.

Police Departments can collect and tracks collision data. Regular traffic collision reports should be presented to Public Works department. Traffic collisions involving bicyclists and pedestrians should be reviewed and analyzed regularly to develop plans to reduce their frequency and severity. Any such plans should include Police Department involvement and should be monitored to determine their effectiveness. Number of collisions results should be recorded in the bicycle and pedestrian report card which is further discussed below.

Bicycle Friendly Application Update Bicycle Friendly Community/Neighborhood Designation is part of an official program offered by the League of American Bicyclists intended to provide communities with guidance on becoming more bicycle friendly and to offer recognition for their achievements. Like the report card described in the last section of this chapter, applying for Bicycle Friendly Community designation provides a standard by which both cities can measure its progress. From the LAB’s own website: “The Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) program provides a roadmap to improve conditions for bicycling and the guidance to make your distinct vision for a better, bikeable community a reality. A community recognized by the League as Bicycle Friendly welcomes bicyclists by providing safe accommodation for bicycling and encouraging people to bicycle for transportation and recreation.”

Develop a Bicycle and Pedestrian Report Card The City could develop a bicycle and pedestrian report card, a checklist used to measure the success of plan implementation, as well as effort made, within the City. The report card could be used to identify the magnitude of accomplishments in the previous year and general trends. The report card could include, but not be limited to, keeping track of system completion, travel by bicycle or on foot (counts), and safety.

The City can use the report card to track trends, placing more value on relative than absolute gains (in system completion, mode share, and safety). For example, an upward trend in travel by bicycle or on foot would be viewed as a success, regardless of the specific increase in the number of bicyclists or walkers. Safety should be considered relative to the increase in bicyclists and walkers. Sometimes crash numbers go up simply because cycling and walking increases, at least initially. Instead, measure crashes as a percentage of an estimated overall mode share count.

A major portion of the report card would be an evaluation of system completion. An upward trend would indicate that the City is progressing in its efforts to complete the bicycle and pedestrian network identified in this document.

The report card could be developed to use information collected as part of annual and ongoing evaluations, as discussed in the previous sections. The report card is not intended to be an additional task for Public Works staff, but rather a means of documenting and publicizing the City’s efforts related to bicycle and pedestrian planning. If an Transportation Safety Advisory Committee is appointed by the City, it can be a committee task to review the report card and adjust future goals accordingly. The report card can also be used as a tool to track Vision Zero progress.

In addition to quantifying accomplishments related to the bicycle and pedestrian master plan, the City should strive to quantify other efforts. These may be quantified as money spent, staff hours devoted or other in-kind contributions.

The quantified effort should be submitted as a component of the bicycle and pedestrian report card. Some cities publish their report cards online.

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 185

Infrastructure Maintenance Bicycle and pedestrian use does not impact pavement nearly as heavily as motor vehicles do. However, bicyclists and pedestrians are more sensitive to pavement irregularities than drivers and require a smooth surface. Pavement maintenance should focus on maintaining a surface free of potholes, cracks and lifts, such as those often caused by adjacent tree roots along Class I multiuse paths, especially asphalt paths.

Besides maintaining pavement quality, debris will need to be periodically removed from separated bikeways. As the City’s active transportation system is implemented, especially Class I multi-use paths and Class IV cycletracks, specialized maintenance equipment will be needed to fit within them because they are usually narrower than standard vehicle lanes. Most cities employ compact street sweepers designed for this purpose, with adjustable pickup brushes that can be aligned to match the width of specific bikeways.

Evolving State of Mobility During the development of this TMP, many cities throughout the country, especially in Southern California, were experiencing a new way of transportation: bike-share and scooter-share. Even though bike-share had already been established in other major cities such as New York and Washington D.C., these mobility options were relatively new in the region. Even more remarkable was the rise of dockless bike-share and scooter-share. Companies such as Lime and Bird have created a diverse fleet of mobility options that rely on today’s technology.

Lime Dockless Electric-Assist Bicycle

Transportation throughout towns and larger cities is always in an evolving state. Thankfully, there are several resources available by notable groups that help breakdown the complexity of embracing these mobility options. The National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), PeopleForBikes, and the Better Bike Share Partnership are just a few examples of resources that both cities can refer to if they wish to explore these mobility options for their community. These resources provide valuable information on the successes and failures of mobility endeavors, and how it’s affected those communities.

Understanding the overall balance of a city’s infrastructure, mobility devices, and the programs available to their community, will be key to establishing a successful environment where people have the option to walk, hike, or ride to their destinations.

186 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Bird Dockless Electric Scooter

Signage and Wayfinding Guidelines Wayfinding is a fundamental part of a functional and comprehensive bicycling, walking, and trail network.

Effective wayfinding systems create well-structured corridors and pathways that help travelers to: 1.

2.

3.

4.

Identify their location Assure that they are traveling in the desired direction Navigate junctions and other decision-making points Identify their destination upon arrival

The following wayfinding system guidelines address active transportation corridors and pathways and how it can improve the experience for people already riding and walking as well as to help encourage people to begin riding and walking altogether. Wayfinding signage design is intended to readily orient users to their location. It is likely that wayfinding signage will occur along the network’s existing and proposed routes, as well as within zone with high usage such as shopping centers, schools, and parks.

The guidelines closely follow San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) “Best Practices in Developing and Implementing Bicycle Wayfinding Signage” (October 2014) and “Wayfinding Design Guidelines” (October 2015). Although these two documents are intended primarily for bicycling wayfinding, the principles discussed can be applied to create a successful wayfinding signage program for both pedestrians and cyclists. The content discussed in SANDAG’s guidelines can also be applied to any city wishing to begin a wayfinding signage programs as the principles and ideas in the document are generally universal and supported by professionals and other municipalities.

Destination Driven Wayfinding signage guides users to the destinations displayed on the signage. Destinations noted on wayfinding signage should be immediately recognizable and meaningful to the majority of users. As users approach a given sign, it presents a set of destinations accessible from that point. Destinations also serve a broader role by painting a general picture of the route, the areas it serves, and the terminus. Signage also provides useful orientation information for people are not going to the destination.

They can use the signage to approximate their path to their own destination.

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 187

Destination Hierarchy Destinations should be assigned a hierarchal level based on their regional significance. Major destinations such as cities should be listed in the highest level meanwhile local destinations such as parks and community centers should be in the lowest levels.

Tier I Up to five miles Cities

Tier II Up to two miles Airports, colleges, neighborhoods/districts, transit centers, regional landmarks, etc.

Tier III Up to one mile Major bikeways, high schools, regional parks, hospitals, etc.

Tier IV Up to one-half mile Community Centers, elementary/middle schools, local parks, public facilities, etc.

Naming Routes Naming routes simplifies navigation. Routes such as bikeways that follow only one street can be named after the street, but corridors with many turns often require a broader name. One approach is to name routes based on key attributes such as level of difficulty or the terminus.

Information Hierarchy Because our eyes tend to scan information from top to bottom and left to right, wayfinding signs should be arranged as a hierarchical information flow that takes this into account. This means that the most important information should be near the top and left and displayed in the largest size. Information of lesser importance is placed below that and in smaller sizes, located toward the right and bottom portions of the sign.

188 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

The Four D’s In the context of a route wayfinding signage system, fundamental information includes designation, destination, direction, and duration. Each individual sign should first designate itself as a piece of route wayfinding information, typically with a recurring and prominent icon or text, such as the City’s active transportation or parks logo. This information is displayed prominently at the top of the sign.

People using a sign first need to identify the destination most relevant to them before they proceed to direction or distance information. Destination information is generally presented along the left side of the sign. Direction and distance information are shown on the same line as the destination.

Directional arrows should be prominent.

Sign Types There are four basic route wayfinding sign types: confirmation, decision, turn and off-route. Each type has a unique purpose, location, and message. The first three sign types direct people along a designated route network. The fourth sign type directs them onto the route network from adjacent streets.

Confirmation: Indicates to users which designated corridor or pathway they are on Includes destinations and distance or time, but no arrows May be stand-alone or be combined with decision signs Decision: Marks junctions of two or more corridors or pathways Informs users of designated routes to access desired destinations Displays both destinations and arrows Intended to be used in sets or combined with confirmation signs When combined, confirmation signs should be mounted above decision signs. Decision signs should be mounted in order of distance from destinations listed, with closest first Turn: Indicates where a corridor or pathway turns, either from one street onto another street or through a difficult or confusing area Off-route: Informs people that are currently not on a designated corridor or pathway that one exists nearby

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 189

A large key map that displays all routes in the network can also be implemented. The map can be combined with “You Are Here” labels to help users orient themselves or help them decide on a new destination. These maps can be located at major intersections, where two or more corridors or pathways meet, or at popular local destinations such as community centers and parks.

On a street, wayfinding signs are placed in both directions unless the street is one-way or the route only travels in one direction. Typically, a mile of route will include four to five wayfinding signs in each direction.

Predictability and Redundancy Users should become familiar with the signs’ position, shape, color, and font. Consistently repeating these features helps users anticipate where signs will be placed and the messages the signs will convey. The City’s logo and colors should consistently be applied across the network’s signage system.

Designing for Human Scale Signs need to be designed for immediate legibility from the perspective of a person riding a bicycle or walking. Factors like a rider’s intended lane position or height can inform sign design.

However, the cardinal design consideration is speed. Based on guidance from Portland, Oregon, people riding bicycles should be able to see an upcoming sign from about 100 feet away. Cyclists should not have to stop to read a sign, so signs must clearly convey their message, ideally within a seven second envelope. The following principles help to achieve this goal: Text Signs should be visible from roughly 100 feet away, so capital letters should be 2 to 2.5 inches tall. Signs should be mixed-case rather than all upper case, and minimize the number of lines of text (five maximum recommended).

Contrast and Proximity There should be high contrast between text and background colors. Related pieces of information should be grouped and assigned similar sizes and shapes.

Consistency and Repetition Signs should maintain a consistent color, font, and iconographic scheme. City should strive to position signs at consistent heights and locations on standard mounting devices.

190 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Simplicity and Legibility Signs should use the shortest, most concise phrasing whenever possible. Consider using icons to supplement text for people not fluent in English.

Distance Measurements Confirmation, decision, and off-bike route signs should convey distances measured spatially (miles) or temporally (minutes), or both.

Sign Design and Color The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) establishes standards for traffic signs and related traffic control devices and MUTCD-compliant signs are familiar to nearly all roadway users.

The MUTCD should therefore govern sign design and placement technical aspects, such as dimensions, font size and ground clearance. However, signs do not have to be bland to accomplish this goal.

Route wayfinding signs often include some aesthetic cues and place a stronger emphasis on graphic design.

Sign Materials Signs can be manufactured from a variety of substrate materials, including wood, metals, plastics and fiberglass. The message or artwork is usually either painted or printed (usually by silk screening) or applied as adhesive vinyl film. Some commonly used substrates are described below, but in general, most small to medium sized directional signs are now made of aluminum substrate panels covered with printed adhesive vinyl overlay, on one or both sides, which are often digitally printed.

Aluminum Common substrate for routine, small signs. Message usually silk screened onto substrate. Easily and significantly damaged by bullets and other forms of vandalism, but has good weather resistance. Medium initial and replacement costs.

Aluminum-clad plastic Similar in character to aluminum signs. The plastic core adds strength. This substrate is highly durable and light weight, making it ideal for kiosk panels or other signs mounted with a backing. Moderate cost.

Aluminum-clad plywood Similar in character to aluminum signs. Plywood backing adds support to the aluminum to provide stability/rigidity for larger size signs. Moderate to high initial and replacement costs.

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 191

Porcelain enamel on steel

Plastics

This material is highly resistant to scratches, impacts and weathering. Most often used on interpretive signs, it offers a very appealing appearance, but at a high initial and replacement cost. It lends itself well to graphic displays. High cost, but has a lifetime of 20 years or more.

Sign making can involve a variety of plastics:

Engraved or acid etched metals, aluminum and stainless steel have a long service life, are generally good or very good in their resistance to weather, and fair or poor in their resistance to scratching or impact. Medium to high initial and replacement cost.

Acrylic, or Plexiglas, is a hard, rigid material that withstands abrasion well but breaks easily. It is often used as a clear protective covering over another sign.

Polycarbonate, or Lexan, is similar to the acrylic panel but is softer, with a greater flex. Its softness makes it more likely to be marred by dust and blowing sand.

Polyethylene and polypropylene are fairly common materials suitable for most routine sign applications. They are soft materials that have sufficient rigidity to stand up as small signs, but not so rigid that they are easily broken.

They come in basic colors, and accept paint (silk screening) well. Generally, they weather well, but their softness makes them easy prey to vandals wielding sharp or pointed instruments. Initial and replacement costs are low.

High-density overlay (HDO) plywood

Carsonite

Marine-quality, 3/4-inch plywood with one side covered with a high density, slick material (the overlay), to which adhesives cling quite strongly. Commonly used as the substrate for pressed-on materials such as reflective vinyl. It weathers well, and holes in the vinyl can be easily repaired.

Carsonite is a patented material that combines fiberglass and epoxy resins to make a strong but flexible substrate. Used most often in a thin, vertical format that may be useful for confirmation signs between destinations. Its hard, impervious surface is best used as a substrate for decals, although silk screening is possible. Very resistant to impact and weather with low initial and replacement costs.

Fiberglass embedment In this process, an image is embedded in a fiberglass/epoxy-resin panel. While initial image cost is high, additional copies can be cheaply made at the time of the original and put aside for later embedment at relatively low cost to replace a damaged or stolen original. The fiberglass resists scratching, impact and weathering very well. High initial cost, but long lived.

Metal

192 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

Sign Mounting and Placement As a general rule, signs should be mounted in consistent, conspicuous locations. Clear sightlines, free of vegetation and other obstructions, need to be maintained between the path of travel and the signs. Along roadways, best practice is to mount wayfinding signs on their own poles. It is recommended that there be a minimum seven foot clearance between the ground and the bottom of the sign. Signs should never be mounted to traffic signals, lighting, utility or transit stop poles.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Chapter 9B should be consulted for shared-use path signage placement guidance. For consistency, signage on other facilities, such as natural surface trails, should also generally follow these guidelines.

Sign Implementation Define the route network to be signed, including trunk and connecting routes, as well as route names (if desired) 1. Establish a master list of destinations and assign each to a hierarchical level, if needed 2. Establish signage design and placement guidelines 3. Display destinations and route network together on maps 4. Divide the routes into segments bookended by major destinations. These destinations will be used as control locations (termini) when creating signs 5. Identify junctions, turns and other decision points where turn or decision signs will be necessary 6. Prepare signage plan, including placement and content of individual signs.

Ideally, create a GIS database to manage content and location details for each sign, and to support future system management 7. Prioritize implementation 8. Implement signs

Chapter 5: Policies and Programs | 193

194 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

06 CHAPTER 6 Funding

Potential Infrastructure Funding Sources Federal, state, and local government agencies invest billions of dollars every year in the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s transportation system. Only a fraction of that funding is used to develop policies, plans, and projects to improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians. Even though appropriate funds are available, they are limited and often hard to find. Desirable projects sometimes go unfunded because communities may be unaware of a fundâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existence or may apply for the wrong type of grant. In addition, there is competition between municipalities for the limited available funds.

Whenever federal funds are used for bicycle and pedestrian projects, a certain level of State and/or local matching funding is generally required. State funds are often available to local governments on similar terms. Almost every implemented active transportation or complete street program and infrastructure in the United States has had more than one funding source and it often takes a good deal of coordination to pull the various sources together.

According to the publication by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), An Analysis of Current Funding Mechanisms for Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs at the Federal, State and Local Levels, where successful local bicycle

196 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

infrastructure programs exist, there is usually an active transportation coordinator with extensive understanding of funding sources. Cities such as Seattle, Portland, and Tucson are prime examples. City staff are often in a position to develop a competitive project and detailed proposal that can be used to improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians within their jurisdictions. Some of the following information on federal and state funding sources was derived from the previously mentioned FHWA publication.

Table 5-1 identifies potential funding opportunities that may be used from design to maintenance phases of projects. Due to trends in Low Impact Development (LID) and stormwater retention street designs, funding sources for these improvements not only increase the chances for first and last mile improvements, but can also be incorporated into streetscape and development projects. The funding sources are arranged into federal, State, local, and private categories. The right side of the table lists both typical and atypical approaches to address each funding source. Many funding sources can be accessed through atypical project approaches such as including an urban forestry, LID, or culture and history component.

Table 6-1: Funding Sources FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Federal Funding Sources Land and Water Conservation Fund (LCWF)

U.S. National Park Service/California Department of Parks and Recreation

Urban Community Forestry Program

U.S. National Park Service

Surface Transportation Program (STP) Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/ Caltrans

Transportation Alternative Program (TAP)

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Recreational Trails Program

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/ Regional agency may also contribute

EPA Brownfields Clean Up and Assessments

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Sustainable Communities Planning Grant and Incentive Program Urban Revitalization and Livable Communities Act

U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

Community Development Block Grants ACHIEVE, Communities Putting Prevention to Work, Pioneering Communities

•

• • • • • •

Center for Disease Control and Prevention

Urban and Community Forest Program Community Forest and Open Space Conservation

• • • • • • •

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service

• •

• •

First and Last Mile

• • • • • • • • •

Urban Forestry

•

Back to Nature

Low Impact Development

•

•

•

• •

• • • •

Culture and History

• • • • • • • • Chapter 6: Funding | 197

TABLE 6-1: Funding Sources (Cont.)

FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Department of Housing and Urban Choice Neighborhoods Implementation Grants Development, Office of Public and Indian Housing National Center for Safe Routes to School Safe Routes to School, Mini-grants and Caltrans Metropolitan and Statewide and Nonmetropolitan Transportation Planning Urbanized Area Formula Grants Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities

Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

Formula Grants for Rural Areas TOD Planning Pilot Grants

198 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

• • • • • • • •

• • • •

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • •

First and Last Mile

• • • • • • • •

Urban Forestry

Back to Nature

Low Impact Development

•

• • •

•

Culture and History

TABLE 6-1: Funding Sources (Cont.)

FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

State Funding Sources Land and Water Conservation Fund (LCWF) Statewide Park Program Prop 84 Round 2 Recreational Trails Program Proposition 117 - Habitat Conservation Nature Education Facilities

California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR)

Watershed Program Stormwater Flood Management Prop. 1E Roberti-Z’Berg-Harris (RZH) Grant Program Prop 40 Aquatic Center Grants

Department of Boating and Waterways

Community Based Transportation Planning, Environmental Justice and Transit Planning Active Transportation Planning Grants (ATP) Regional Improvement Program Safe Routes to School Programs(SR2S)

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • •

• • • • • •

Urban Forestry

• • •

Back to Nature

Low Impact Development

•

•

• • • • • •

• • • • •

Culture and History

•

• • • • Chapter 6: Funding | 199

TABLE 6-1: Funding Sources (Cont.)

FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Traffic Safety Grants

California Office of Traffic Safety

Local Partnership Program - Competitive and Formulaic

California Transportation Commission (SB 1 funds)

Coastal Conservancy Grants

California Coastal Conservancy

Non-point Source Pollution, Watershed Plans, Water Conservation (Props 13, 40, 50 and 84) Sustainable Communities Planning, Regional SB 375 Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation (EEMP) California River Parkways and Urban Streams Restoration Grant Strategic Growth Council Urban Greening Program

State Water Resources Control Board Strategic Growth Council/Dept of Conservation California Natural Resources Agency and Caltrans California Natural Resources Agency/ Department of Water Resources California Natural Resources Agency

California Cap and Trade Program

Cal EPA, Air Resources Board

Urban Forestry Program (Leafing Out, Leading Edge and Green Trees Grants)

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)

200 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

•

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

•

• • • •

Urban Forestry

• • • • • •

Back to Nature

• • • • • •

Low Impact Development

• • • • • • •

Culture and History

• •

TABLE 6-1: Funding Sources (Cont.)

FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Local Funding Sources Special Habitat Conservation Programs Special Parks and Recreation Bond Revenues

Regional MPOs/Local Cities

Special Transportation Bonds and Sales Tax Initiatives Advertising Sales/Naming Rights Community Facilities District (CFD) Infrastructure Financing District (IFD) Facilities Benefit Assessment District (BFA) Easement Agreements/Revenues Equipment Rental Fees Facility Use Permits Fees Fees and Charges/Recreation Service Fees Food and Beverage Tax

Local Jurisdictions

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

Urban Forestry

Back to Nature

Low Impact Development

• • •

• • • •

• • •

• • •

•

•

•

•

• • • •

•

• • • •

Culture and History

• • • • • • • •

Chapter 6: Funding | 201

TABLE 6-1: Funding Sources (Cont.)

FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

General Fun General Obligation Bonds Intergovernmental Agreements Lease Revenues Mello Roos Districts Residential Park Improvement Fees Local Jurisdictions Park Impact Fees Traffic Impact Fees In-Lieu Fees Pouring Rights Agreements Private Development Agreements Surplus Real Estate Sale Revenues

202 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

• • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • •

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • •

• • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Urban Forestry

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Back to Nature

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Low Impact Development

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Culture and History

• • • • • • • • • • • •

TABLE 6-1: Funding Sources (Cont.)

FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Revenue Bond Revenues Sales Tax Revenues Transient Occupancy Tax Revenues

Local Jurisdictions

Wastewater Fund Reserves Utility Taxes Business Improvement Districts (BID) Maintenance Assessment Districts (MAD)

Non-profits, Business Organizations or City

Property Based Improvement Districts (PBID) Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) Various Sports Field Grants

Various Agencies, Foundations and Corporations

Community Health Initiatives

Kaiser Permanente

America’s Historical Planning Grants

National Endowment for the Humanities

Corporate Sponsorships Private Corporations Private Sector Partnerships

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

First and Last Mile

• • • • •

•

Urban Forestry

• • • • •

Back to Nature

• • • •

•

• • • • • •

• • • •

Low Impact Development

• • •

• •

• •

Culture and History

• • • •

•

• • •

Chapter 6: Funding | 203

TABLE 6-1: Funding Sources (Cont.)

FINDING, FRAMING AND FUNDING A PROJECT

FUNDING USES

Non-Profit Partnerships

Non-Profit Corporations

Foundation Grants

Private Foundations

Private Donations Private Individuals Irrevocable Remainder Trusts Targeted Fund-raising Activities

Local Jurisdictions

204 | Bellflower-Paramount Active Transportation Plan

• • • • •

• • • • •

Atypical Approaches Implementation

FUNDING ORIGIN

Maintenance and Operations

FUNDING SOURCE

CIP Development

Typical Approaches

• • • • •

First and Last Mile

Urban Forestry

Back to Nature

•

•

•

• • •

• • •

• • •

Low Impact Development

• • • • •

Culture and History

• • • • •