Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee 1BMEETING AGENDA

J July 22, 2014 1:30 PM Sonoma County Transportation Authority

SCTA Large Conference Room 490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 206

Santa Rosa, California 95401 ITEM 1. Introductions

2. Public Comment

3. Approval of Meeting Notes: May 27, 2014 – DISCUSSION / ACTION*

4. Roundtable Updates

4.1. Member Updates

4.2. Other Entities’ Updates

5. Safe Routes to School Report Update – Sonoma County DHS – Norine Doherty – PRESENTATION

6. Senate Resolution 17 – Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety - Bernie Album – PRESENTATION*

7. 2015 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update – Janet Spilman – DISCUSSION

8. Local Roads – proposal for SCTA to administer a Sonoma County transportation sales tax measure*

9. Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Program

9.1. Automated Counters – Chris Barney - DISCUSSION*

9.2. Staff Report – Manual Count Locations – Dana Turrey – DISCUSSION / ACTION*

10. Regional Competitive Active Transportation Program (ATP) Call for Projects – applications due July 24, 2014

11. Article of Interest – INFORMATION

11.1. NCHRP Report: Recommended Bicycle Lane Widths for Various Roadway Characteristics

Transportation Research Board

11.2. Protected Bike Lanes Bill Passes CA Senate Transportation Committee StreetsBlog LA

12. Other Business / Comments / Announcements

13. Adjourn – ACTION*Materials attached.

The next S C T A meeting will be held September 8, 2014 The next CBPAC meeting will be held September 23, 2014

Copies of the full Agenda Packet are available at www.sctainfo.org.

DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability that requires the agenda materials to be in an alternate format or that requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this meeting, please contact SCTA at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation. SB 343 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Sonoma County Transportation Authority office at 490 Mendocino Ave., Suite 206, during normal business hours. Pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices should be turned off during the committee meeting to avoid electrical interference with the sound recording system.

COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES

Meeting Notes of May 27, 2014

ITEM 1. IntroductionsMeeting called to order by Vice Chair Eydie Tacata in Chair Wendy Atkins’ absence at 1:38 p.m.

Committee Members: Eydie Tacata, City of Rohnert

Park, Vice Chair; Curtis Bates, City of Petaluma; Sue Kelly, City of Sebastopol; Steven Schmitz, Sonoma County Transit; Geoffrey Skinner, City of Sebastopol; Elizabeth Tyree, Sonoma County Regional Parks.

Guests: Tina Panza, Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition; Katrina Suprise, Sonoma County Department of Health Services.

Staff: Chris Barney, Nina Donofrio, Janet Spilman.

2. Public CommentNone.

3. Approval of Meeting Notes: March 25, 2014 andApril 23, 2014 – DISCUSSION / ACTION*

Approved as submitted.

4. Roundtable Updates

4.1. Member UpdatesCity of Rohnert Park:

Eydie Tacata had nothing new to report.

Sonoma County Transit: Steve Schmitz reported that the Sonoma County Transportation and Public Works Department has submitted a grant application along with Sonoma County Regional Parks expanding the scope of the Class II bicycle paths from Guerneville Road to HallRoad, and including pedestrian facilities.

Elizabeth Tyree added that Regional Parks is requesting funding for a segment of the Bodega BayTrail – Coastal Prairie Trail as a part of this grant application.

Mr. Schmitz announced the purchase of a new striping truck by the County, noting that a good deal

, ,

of striping will be taking place around the County; where possible, given sufficient shoulder on the road, additional Class II pathways will be striped. Hereferred Committee members to contact Jason NuttDeputy Director of Transportation and Public Worksto arrange for striping.

Mr. Schmitz next summarized upcoming pavement projects for this summer, including extending Petaluma Hill Road to Snyder Lane and Bodega Avenue from Petaluma. Class II routes are being built throughout the County.

City of Sebastopol:

Sue Kelly reported that proposals for Highway 116 bicycle lanes are proceeding. TDA-3 funding is being used for the design. The project will be submitted to Caltrans soon.

Street maintenance/resurfacing projects will be taking place this summer.

The Laguna/Highway12 bridge project has remaining issues with an outstanding easement andPG&E utility relocation. Negotiations on the easement have stalled the project for approximatelythe past year.

4.2. Other Entities’ Updates Sonoma County Dept. of Health Services:

Katrina Suprise announced that staff has hired a consultant to do an evaluation of Safe Routes to School and identify the most effective components of this program.

Ms. Suprise added that staff is developing a spectrum of products, including possibly extending Safe Routes to School to high school students.

Sonoma County Regional Parks: Elizabeth Tyree reported on a trail project along a segment of the

2

Bay Area Ridge Trail that will connect Highway 12 to

l

Hood Mountain along Pythian Road. A trail is also being constructed parallel to this trail for pedestriansand bicycles.

City of Sebastopol:

Geoffrey Skinner reported that the BAC met with City Council in response to the Council’s direction inJanuary to identify walking and bicycling routes at the end of the Joe Rodota Trail connecting to Ives Park. Two routes were identified and recommended;one is for bicycles and one is for pedestrians. BAC isworking with City staff on a pilot temporary signage program for three different walking routes from the Downtown Plaza. Staff is still awaiting delivery of directional signs; this is anticipated to take place thissummer.

City of Petaluma:

Curtis Bates announced that staff will be presenting an update to the Safe Routes to School Infrastructure Plan to City Council June 15. Also on the agenda will be an application for a Class I bicycle path from the airport to Pleasanton Park.

SMART is preparing for significant activity; e.g. the Haystack Bridge. Staff negotiated with SMART to install a Class I path beneath the bridge.

Class II lanes are being installed on Lakeville Highway and gap closures are being filled in with OBAG grant funding. Mr. Bates explained to Steve Schmitz how the path under the Haystack Bridge wilfunction.

Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition:

Tina Panza reported that more than 40 schools responded to a recent survey, citing significant interest in Safe Routes to School.

Ms. Panza announced that walking audits were conducted in Windsor and that on April 29 the Windsor Public Works Department decided to apply for funding as a result of those walking audits. She invited anyone interested to attend an educational session with students, and requested that Committee members “like” the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition on Facebook.

The following agenda item was addressed out of order:

7. South Santa Rosa Safe Routes to SchoolReport – Sonoma County DHS see attachment here– http://sctainfo.org/agenda.htm#cbac –DISCUSSION* Ms. Suprise gave an overview of the performance ofSRS within South Santa Rosa schools.

Data collected included student interest in walking/biking; parental beliefs about active transportation; engineering improvements made in different school districts to encourage more active transportation; and the greatest barriers to active transportation. Mode shift was also measured – staff

,

.

e

surveyed students as to how they got to school on agiven day.

The evaluation was conducted in partnership with the Public Works Department and local law enforcement.

Results did show an increase in the number of students walking and bicycling to school since SRS began and that parents now have a more positive view of active transportation.

Ms. Suprise summarized infrastructure improvements that were made in response to parents’ concerns for safety and security; e.g., at Bellevue Elementary School.

Ms. Suprise noted the importance of having a school-based administrator on site to encourage sustainability of the Program.

5. 2015 Comprehensive Transportation PlanUpdate – DISCUSSION*

Ms. Spilman reported that Goals, Objectives, Policies, and Strategies are still being evaluated anddeveloped at the Advisory Committee level (PAC and TAC) and invited anyone interested to attend these meetings.

The TAC is also reviewing Project Performance Evaluation, which Chris Barney is taking the lead in developing.

Ms. Spilman noted the need to discuss the bicycle project list and organize the list into tiers. MTC is updating countywide transportation plan guidelines and seeking an improved and more standardized public outreach effort, as well as consistent performance analysis.

For project performance, methodologies will be developed whereby bicycle projects on the project list can be categorized, and several projects could be grouped under one category.

Further discussion involved compliance with Title VIand the request by the Board in include economic vitality as an additional goal, and to address tourism

6. Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Program –Automated Counters – Chris Barney -DISCUSSION*

Mr. Barney announced that four infrared counters and four tube counters are anticipated to be delivered in July. He noted that testing will take place this summer (in July and August) to ensure th

3

accuracy of data. A field testing plan has been developed to include learning how to install the equipment and what types of locations are the most

s

)

s f

r

s

effective for taking bicycle and pedestrian counts.

In response to Ms. Tacata’s question regarding howstrollers and wheelchairs would be counted, Mr. Barney explained that manual counting will take place simultaneously with the equipment count to compare the data and check it for accuracy.

Mr. Barney summarized preliminary test locations afollows: (1) the Joe Rodota Trail; (2) Santa Rosa Creek; (3) Stony Point Road; (4) the Transit Mall; (5Santa Rosa Junior College; and (5) Humboldt Bicycle Boulevard. The 2014 bicycle count is scheduled to roll out in the fall, but the priority now iinstallation and testing of the count equipment. Stafprojects using the counters for the fall 2014 bicycle/pedestrian count. Staff plans on using the counters to gather data at one location for each jurisdiction; therefore, Mr. Barney encouraged Committee members to consider where they would like data collected The equipment will also be available for jurisdictions to check-out when it is notbeing used for the SCTA count program.

Discussion followed regarding vandalism; Mr. Barney noted staff concerns with tube counters, andthat these will not be used at the Transit Mall because of the damage from buses rolling over them, and the challenge in getting accurate counts at this location due to the high volume of pedestrianactivity.

7. Article of Interest – Information

7.1. TRB – Monitoring Bicyclist and PedestrianTravel and Behavior (March 2014) - http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/circulas/ec183.pdf

7.2. TRB - Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Guide: Recommendations and Case Study (April 2014) - http://www.trb.org/PedestriansAndBicyclist/Blurbs/170496.aspx

7.3. Want a Healthier City? Prescribe Biking. http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2014/04/want-healthier-city-prescribe-biking/8795/

7.4. UC BerkeleyTech Transfer Complete Streets Workshop (Fehr & Peers) – June 10-11 in San Francisco - http://www.sfbayite.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/ITS-Berkeley-TechTransfer-Complete-Streets-2014.pdf

7.5. SF Dept of Public Health – Health Impact Assessment Training – July 14-17 in

Oakland https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?ndplr=1&pli=1&formkey=dFZVMHI5TWdaNWRCZnhrdERlaFNTeGc6MQ#gid=0 ; http://www.sfphes.org/services/hia-training

7.6. Bike Share Program Expanding to East Bay: http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Bike-share-program-looking-to-expand-to-East-Bay-5381235.php

8. Other Business / Comments / AnnouncementsMs. Spilman announced that there will not be an SCTA/RCPA Board meeting in June. The next Board meeting is scheduled for July 14.

9. Adjourn – ACTION3:10 p.m.

4

2013-2014 SR-17 Eva~s (Sf, DeSauinier (S)

99 - Introduced 8/12/13

WHEREAS, colfisions causing injuries and fatalities to ·pedestrians and bicyclists are increasing throughout California,· according to the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS). The:ir data reports a four percent inqease in pedestrian casualties (to 625 people in 2011) and·.a 13 '. percent increase in bicyclist casualties (to 114 people in 2011); *

WHEREAS, according to the 2011/2012 Califor.nia health lntervjew Survey (CHRIS), in California 12.6% of children are overweight, 55.4% teen adults are overweight or obese, and 35% of adults are overweight and 24.8% of adults are obese.

WHEREAS, educati~n programs recommended by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

l

t l l

f

and the Safe Routes To School (SRTS) National Partnership are proven tb prev~nt injuries anddeaths by helping all road users make educated and informed decisions regarding safebehavior as pedestrians, bicyclists, skateboarders, and drivers, of motorvehicles; and

WHEREAS, According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), theCalifornia School Board Administration (CSBA), FHWA, OTS and · the SRTS NationaPartnership, a"detailed safety skills curriculum included at key grade levels, such as third, sixth,and ninth grades, with ongoing reinforcement at all grades, will ensure that all sch()ol childrenwill be provided the opportunity to learn the rules of the road related to the responsibilities andrights for pedestrians, bicyclists, and skateboarders; and

WHEREAS, SRTS National Partnership, CDC, NHTSA, FHWA, and OTS publications suggesthat the inclusion of curriculum in the State of California frameworks for health and' physicaeducation designed for all children with involvement of parents and community members wilreduce the incidence of pedestrian, bicycle, and skateboard accidents when the curriculum forsafety instruction is implemented; and

WHEREAS, the National Center for Safe Routes to School (SRTS) DNC Highway SafetyResearch Center reported in January 2013 that for 2010, 2011, and 1012 only 436 schools(.05%) of the 9,324 California public schools was awarded a limited grant that included somekinds of safety educatJon activities. The number of schools that may have elected to providepedestrian or bic;:ycle safety education without a SRTS grant is indetermin<:lble. 1.t may beconcluded that the vast majority of students in California schools do not receive pedestrian,bicycle or skateboard safety education.

WHEREAS, According to OTS, when considering traffic fatalities, California has adopted theslogan "Toward Zero Deaths, Every 1 Counts"; now, therefore, be. it

Resolved by the Senate of the State of California, That the Senate encourages the State oCalifornia to promote a comprehensive and sustainable program, such as the existing

5

·gurriculum for pedestrian and , bicycle safety now in use in most , of sc.hools of the Coun'x ot .

Marin and other schools locat~d throughout tjle uri,ited , States, a'nd endor§e increa~edpedestrian, bicycle, and skateboard safety education programs~ and be itfurther ' '

. Resolved, That the Senate encourages parents and teachers to; ensure that chfldreil le'arn·defensive walking, bike riding, and skateboarding in traffic, including wearing a .helmet whenbike riding or skateboarding, and learning the risks of using any electroniG device o~

headphones when walking, bike riding, or skateboarding or driving, and how to navigatedifferent types of traffic; and be it further

Resolved, That the Sena.te ,enco,urages the State Department of Education develop a standardcurriculum for and require all teachers be trained to teach bicycle <;ind pedestrian safety; and beit further

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate transmit copies of this resolution to the author forappropriate distribution.

6

Staff ReportTo: SCTA Board of Directors

From: Suzanne Smith, Executive Director

Item: 4.5.2 Amended – Local Roads – proposal to place a ¼ cent sales tax measure for local roads on the November 2014 ballot

Date: July 14, 2014

Issue: What is the status of efforts led by the County of Sonoma to place a ¼ cent sales tax measure for local roads on the ballot in November 2014? What role, if any, should SCTA play in this effort?

Background: The County of Sonoma has released a long term roads plan to address the condition of unincorporated roads. The report identifies roadway types, conditions and funding needs to improve pavement condition. As part of this effort there has been a discussion of a possible ¼ cent sales tax measure being placed on the ballot in November 2014.

In the past few weeks a draft ballot question and expenditure plan have been crafted and input from each jurisdiction is being sought by July 18. County staff have developed a draft version of this proposal, known as the Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act; it is attached but does not include detail for the jurisdictions yet. Cities are being asked to develop a paragraph to describe how they would use the funds generated through this measure on the roadway system.

The deadline for a measure to be placed on the ballot is August 8, 2014 so the County Board of Supervisors are likely to agendize the measure either July 29 or August 5; or possibly both if needed.

Policy Impact: SCTA staff has had discussion with County staff and offered to use the Measure M structure and SCTA staff and Citizens Advisory Committee to help administer the sales tax should the effort be successful in November. This offer was made without SCTA Board direction and staff is seeking guidance as to whether this is a role the SCTA Board would welcome or defer.

As currently drafted, the SCTA is called out in the proposed expenditure plan as the administering agency responsible for budgets, allocations, audits, annual reports, citizen oversight, maintenance of effort review, etc. Should the SCTA choose not to serve in this capacity it would likely fall to the County of Sonoma to fully administer the program.

The Measure M sales tax that the SCTA administers is at the mid-point of its 20-year life. The SCTA Board has had discussions in the past about when to consider renewing or extending Measure M and what those funds might be used for but no specific timeframe or expenditure plan has been crafted or deliberated.

Fiscal Impact:

7

e

The fiscal impact of the SCTA accepting the role of sales tax measure administrator would be tied primarily to staff time required to manage the tasks described above, accounting and audit functions and public reporting efforts. This work would be offset by up to a 1% set aside to the SCTA for the administration and citizen oversight portion of the measure; approximately $200,000 annually.

Measure M functions would likely be mimicked for much of this effort should the SCTA take it on. Therwould be a fairly high level of activity and higher costs for the first year of implementation (cooperative agreements, initial strategic plan, Board of Equalization engagement, etc.) and then it would settle in toa more routine work effort that would be in alignment with the estimated $200,000 available from the new tax measure for these purposes.

The cost of the election will be borne by the County of Sonoma, not the SCTA.

Staff Recommendation: Authorize the SCTA to be named as the entity responsible for implementing the sales tax measure andprovide direction to staff to assist the jurisdictions to the degree requested in completing the expenditure plan.

8

   

 

   

 

 

                              

                             

                               

                                   

                       

       

              

    

   

                                   

                               

               

                                   

                        

   

          

      

          

                                                

                                                

                                              

                                           

                                             

                                           

                                                

                                                

                                              

                                             

                                                  

                                       

                   

                 

 

DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

Ballot Question:

Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act: Shall Measure X, the Sonoma County Road Safety

and Improvement Act, be implemented with a quarter‐cent sales tax for 20 years to maintain, resurface

and pave local streets and roads; fill potholes; improve traffic flow and mobility; and enhance safety,

with an annual audit conducted to ensure that funds are spent as mandated by the voters including the

authority to issue bonds to finance the projects if needed?

Full Text of Measure ‐‐‐:

SONOMA COUNTY ROAD SAFETY AND IMPROVEMENT ACT

EXPENDITURE PLAN

I. Executive Summary

The Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act will dedicate money from a ¼ cent sales tax to

each city and the unincorporated County for the sole purposes of maintaining local streets and roads,

filling potholes, improving traffic flow and enhancing safety.

The funding will be distributed directly to each city and the County of Sonoma on a quarterly basis based

on a population and road mile formula as described in Table 1.

Table 1

Jurisdiction Population/ Road Mile Share (1)

Estimated Annual Amount ‐ Year 1

Estimated Amount Over 20 Years (2)

Cloverdale 1.54% $ 308,612 $ 8,286,241

Cotati 1.20% $ 239,281 $ 6,424,692

Healdsburg 2.06% $ 412,843 $ 11,084,832

Petaluma 9.50% $ 1,899,943 $ 51,013,473

Rohnert Park 6.00% $ 1,200,833 $ 32,242,369

Santa Rosa 27.41% $ 5,481,679 $ 147,183,082

Sebastopol 1.25% $ 249,510 $ 6,699,348

Sonoma 1.77% $ 353,781 $ 9,499,014

Windsor 4.50% $ 899,645 $ 24,155,479

County of Sonoma 43.77% $ 8,753,872 $ 235,041,469

Admin/Citizen Oversight 1.00% $ 200,000 $ 5,370,000

Totals 100.00% $ 20,000,000 $ 537,000,000

(1) Formula is 50% population and 50% road miles

(2) 20‐year estimate assumes 3% annual growth annual

II. Oversight   and  Administration  

9

   

 

                             

                           

                                 

         

                             

                                   

  

                           

                                 

                              

     

 

 

 

 

                               

                         

                            

   

                               

                                     

                         

           

           

                                 

                               

                               

                                   

                         

 

DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

The implementation of the Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act will be the responsibility

of the Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA). The SCTA is comprised of twelve elected

officials; a representative from each of the nine cities in Sonoma County and three members of the

Sonoma County Board of Supervisors.

The SCTA will be responsible for developing an annual budget and distributing the Sonoma County Road

Safety and Improvement Act funds to each jurisdiction. The SCTA will develop the first budget by July 1,

2015.

The Citizens Advisory Committee established under the original ordinance that created the SCTA will

serve as an independent oversight body that will advise the SCTA and the public on the administration of

the Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act via an annual audit and annual reports.

III. Goals and Objectives

The Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act seeks to provide a stable and secure funding

source directly to local governments in order to improve roadways through maintenance, repair,

enhancement and safety measures such as re‐paving, pothole filling, bicycle and pedestrian safety and

roadway reconstruction.

The goal of the Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act is to increase the Pavement

Condition Index to very good in all of the cities and the County. This will improve driver safety, improve

bicycle and pedestrian safety and mobility, reduce accidents, improve traffic flow and reduce

maintenance costs to cars and trucks.

IV. How the Funds Will Be Spent

Each city and the County will receive funding annually. With a stable funding source that cannot be used

for other purposes or be taken away by other governments, the jurisdictions can prepare street and

road maintenance and improvement plans based on their highest priority and need. Each entity will be

required to provide an annual reporting letter to the SCTA defining how the funds were spent and how

they meet the requirements of the Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement Act.

a. The   County  of   Sonoma  will  focus  its   share   of   funding  on   

b. The   City  of  Cloverdale   will  focus  its  share   of   funding  on  

c. The   City  of  Cotati   will   focus   its  share   of   funding  on   

d. The   City  of  Healdsburg  will   focus  its   share   of   funding  on   

e. The   City  of  Rohnert   Park   will  focus  its   share   of   funding  on  

f. The   City  of  Petaluma  will  focus  its  share   of   funding  on     

g. The   City  of  Santa   Rosa   will   focus  its   share   of   funding  on      

h. The   City  of  Sebastopol   will   focus  its   share   of   funding  on  

i. The   City  of  Sonoma  will   focus   its  share  of   funding  on  

j. The   Town  of  Windsor   will  focus  its  share   of   funding  on  

10

   

 

 

 

   

 

                                     

 

 

                       

                         

                       

 

                             

         

 

                         

                         

                 

                       

                     

                     

                       

                         

                   

                                 

                     

                           

                            

                       

                  

                         

                              

                           

                 

                           

                       

                          

                         

                           

             

 

DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

V. Implementation Guidelines

A. The duration of the tax will be 20 years, beginning on April 1 2015 and expiring on March 31,

2035.

B. Environmental reporting, review and approval procedures as provided for under the National

Environmental Policy Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, or other applicable laws will

be adhered to as a prerequisite to the implementation of any project.

C. Use of the retail transactions and use tax under this Transportation Expenditure Plan will be

subject to the following restrictions:

1. The tax proceeds must be spent for the purposes of funding the transportation

programs and projects as allowed in the Sonoma County Road Safety and Improvement

Act and may be not used for other purposes.

2. The additional funds provided to governmental agencies by the Road Safety and

Improvement Act shall not supplant existing local revenues being used for

transportation purposes. The SCTA will require that local jurisdictions maintain their

existing commitment of local funds for transportation purposes or face penalties. Each

local jurisdiction shall be responsible for identifying which of their accounts have local

funds for transportation purposes. For these purposes, expenditures would be

calculated per fiscal year. A fiscal year is defined as July 1 through June 30. The baseline

amount is the average of transportation fund expenditures from FY11/12 through

FY13/14 which will be converted to a percentage of general fund expenditure from that

same period of time. Expenditures for each subsequent year will be compared to the

baseline to determine that the same percentage of general fund expenditures is

occurring. Baseline percentages and subsequent year percentages of discretionary fund

expenditures on transportation shall be provided to SCTA by each jurisdiction no later

than February 15, starting in February 2016. This is to allow agency audits to be

completed prior to submittal. After submittal the SCTA will report to the public how

each jurisdiction has met the maintenance of effort requirement.

3. The SCTA is charged with a fiduciary duty in administering the tax proceeds in

accordance with the applicable laws and this Sonoma County Road Safety and

Improvement Act. Receipt of tax proceeds may be subject to appropriate terms and

conditions as determined by the SCTA in its reasonable discretion, including, but not

limited to, the right to require recipients to execute funding agreements and the right to

audit recipients’ use of the tax proceeds.

D. Actual   tax   proceeds   may   be  higher   or   lower   than   estimated  in   this   Sonoma   County   Road  Safety  

and   Improvement   Act  over  the  20‐year  term.   The   Sonoma   County  Road  Safety   and  

Improvement   Act   expenditure   plan   is   based   on  the   percentage   distributions   to   each  jurisdiction  

and   the   dollar   values   included   are   estimates   only.   Actual  tax   proceeds   will   be   programmed  

11

   

                         

       

 

                             

                           

                         

                         

                              

                               

   

 

 

                           

                           

                                 

                               

                           

                                

                       

                         

                               

                               

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

annually in accordance with the percentage distributions in the Sonoma County Road Safety and

Improvement Expenditure Plan.

E. The Sonoma County Transportation Authority will prepare a Strategic Plan prior to July 1, 2015,

which will identify funding criteria consistent with the goals and objectives of the Sonoma

County Road Safety and Improvement Act expenditure plan. The Strategic Plan will included

general procedures for project sponsors to initiate a project and identify an implementation

schedule and the programming of funds for each listed project. The Strategic Plan will be

updated at least every five years during the term of the Sonoma County Road Safety and

Improvement Act.

F. The County of Sonoma is authorized to bond for the purposes of advancing the commencement

of or expediting the delivery of transportation programs or projects. The County of Sonoma may

issue limited tax bonds, from time to time, to finance any program or project in the Sonoma

County Road Safety and Improvement Act as allowed by applicable law and as approved by the

SCTA, and the maximum bonded indebtedness shall not exceed the total amount of proceeds of

this retail transactions and use tax, estimated to be $537 million in 2014 dollars. All costs

associated with the issuance of bonds, including debt service payments, issuance costs, interest,

reserve requirements, and insurance shall be accounted for within that program category in

which the bond proceeds were used. Such bonds will be payable solely from the proceeds of the

retail transactions and use tax and may be issue any time before expiration of the tax.

12

Name:

Location:

Date: Start Time: End Time:

Day of Week:

Counters installed:

Device Count

Female Male Female Male Other Single 2 3+

00-:15

15-:30

30-:45

45-:60

Total

Sensor Mounting Height: Notes:

Approximate Air Temp:

Approximate Facility Width:

Facility Type (Class 1, 2, 3, etc):

Bicycles Pedestrians Ped. Groupings

Automated Counter Field Validation Form

13

EC Actual EC Actual EC Actual EC Actual EC Actual EC Actual EC Actual EC Actual

Baseline Walking Walking

Baseline Biking 10 MPH

Group Spacing (2 persons) 0 ft

1 ft

2 ft

3 ft

4 ft

5 ft

Group Size 1

2

3

4

5

Pedestrian Speed Stopped

Jogging

Running

Bicyclist Speed 5 MPH

15 MPH

20 MPH

25 MPH

Distance from Counter 0-1 ft

Pedestrians for Infrared 2-3 ft

Bikes for Tube Counters 4-5 ft

6-7 ft

8-9 ft

10 -13 ft

Counter Height

Counter Type

Counter Location

Automated Bicycle/Pedestrian Counter Controlled Evaluations

Test Pass

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

14

Step

Check

When

Complete Notes

1. Check all equipment for proper operation

2. Be familiar with installation and operation procedures (review manual,

installation videos)

3. Bring necessary accessories such as batteries, locks, nails, magnetic key,

laptop for count verification.

4. Bring measuring tape for tube spacing/counter height verification.

5. Identify count duration

6. Identify desired data that will be collected

7. Specify the counter-placing location and adjust as necessary in the field

8. Install and secure counters/sensors securely

9. Start and test counter operation

10. Periodically check the counter especially during poor weather

conditions.

11. Perform field validation/manual counts during different time periods

during the count period.

12. Perform controlled tests during the count period.

13. Retrieve count data and upload into count database.

14. Retrieve counters from the field.

15. Check collected data for outliers and errors.

16. Apply correction factors where appropriate.

17. Evaluate collected data.

18. Report on results.

Count Location: Installation Date:

Name:

Automatic Count Preparation Checklist

15

Staff Report To: CBPAC

From: Dana Turrey, Transportation Planner

Item: 2014 Bicycle/Pedestrian Count Program

Date: July 22, 2014

Issue: SCTA is continuing its manual bicycle and pedestrian count program in the fall of 2014. Staff requests that the CBPAC provide input on priority data collection locations.

Background: SCTA has conducted bicycle and pedestrian counts since 2009. Manual count data has

been used to estimate countywide and more localized non-motorized travel trends, provide data for grant applications and planning documents, to provide data to help determine the need for non-motorized facilities, to help identify conflict areas, and to validate the non-motorized portions of the Sonoma County Travel Model. The implementation of new automated counters will allow for longer-term counts and a higher level of data validation. To supplement the data provided by automated counters, SCTA will continue to collect manual counts in 2014 to track additional locations and providecomplementary data such as travel patterns at intersections.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Locations:

SCTA has procured automated bicycle and pedestrian counters (Eco-counters) to be utilized as a shared resource among the jurisdictions. Five locations have been identified to test the new equipment

in Santa Rosa and Sonoma County. The field testing program will conclude in September, 2014, at which time installation of Eco-counters may begin. Staff requests that the CBPAC identify locations where the Eco-counters should be deployed.

The manual count program for 2014 will include a maximum of 10 count locations. To distribute the data collection equally and track trends over the years, staff recommends that one previously counted location be chosen from each jurisdiction. Manual count locations may overlap with automated count locations if it is valuable to collect travel pattern data at important intersections in addition to longer-term directional travel near those intersections. Two count location lists are attached for reference: 1) count locations and data collected from 2009 through 2013, and 2) locations where counts were collected in 2013. Staff requests that the CBPAC prioritize data collection locations and chose one manual count location for each jurisdiction.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Collection:

There is no budget for outside help with manual counts for 2014. SCTA staff will solicit volunteers fromthe Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition and others to help collect data. Data will be collected manually using the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project (NBPDP) methodology, which has been recommended by MTC and used by SCTA to collect data in the previous years. NBPDP offers a standardized data collection form and methods to count bicycles and pedestrians effectively. For moreinformation on the NBPDP see: http://bikepeddocumentation.org/.

16

The following information is gathered at data collection intersections:

• Pedestrians and cyclists per 15 minute interval

• Travel direction for bicycle and pedestrian travel

• Intersecting street names and surrounding buildings

• Physical features of the intersection, such as crosswalks and raised medians

• Intersection controls (stop signs and signals)

• Lane configurations (shared lanes, exclusive right turn lanes)

• Pedestrian/bicycle signals (whether it is audible or has a countdown).

Data is collected for AM (7-9 AM) and PM (4-6 PM) peak periods, on an average day (normal weather conditions, no special events, etc.).

Policy Impacts: None Fiscal Impacts: Staff time is required to process and archive count data.

Staff Recommendation: Provide input on automated and manual count location priorities.

17

SCTA 2009 - 2012 Bicycle/Pedestrian Count Program - Intersection Counts

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Location Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped

STREET NAME CROSS STREET CITY AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PMBrookside Dr. Cloverdale Blvd. Cloverdale Citrus Fair Dr. Cloverdale Blvd. Cloverdale School St. Cloverdale Blvd. Cloverdale

10 9 31 22 7 15 28 164 20 51 30 13 14 142 63

11 25 55 37 4 10 108 26

Old Redwood Hwy. E. Cotati Ave. Cotati Old Redwood Hwy. Hwy. 116/Commerce Cotati

11 13 24 28 11 5 22 32 6 22 12 18 11 16 8 30

9 11 29 80 6 6 17 10

10 3 7 6 12 26 13 36

Airport Blvd. Skylane Blvd. (Santa Rosa) County Arnold Dr. Verano Ave. (El Verano) County Fulton Rd. River Rd. (Fulton) County

7 13 27 16

Graton Rd. Ross Rd. (Graton) County 10 25 48 57 Hwy. 12 Boyes Blvd. County 9 62 21 56 128 159 13 57 91 130 12 19 61 78 22 41 77 95 Hwy. 116 Mirabel Rd (Forestville) County 4 7 19 15 1 4 10 4 Main St. Armstrong Woods Rd. (Guerneville) County 15 91 67 209 11 39 86 188 9 15 51 249 Old Redwood Hwy. Mark West Springs Rd. (Larkfield) County 25 39 23 13 Moscow Rd. Bohemian Hwy. (Monte Rio) County Petaluma Hill Rd. Snyder Ln. (Rohnert Park) County 8 n/a 0 n/a

40 22 73 29

Petaluma Hill Rd. E. Cotati Ave. County 8 4 3 0 Petaluma Hill Rd. Adobe Rd (Penngrove) County 2 8 32 10 10 13 0 2 14 31 29 8 Rohnert Park Expressway Stony Point Rd. County 13 8 0 0West County Trl. Mill Station Rd. County 14 19 5 28 Center St. Matheson St. Healdsburg 13 17 32 89 17 36 184 693 16 51 115 826 Chiquita Rd. Grove St. Healdsburg 4 15 28 67Healdsburg Ave. Front St. Healdsburg 12 9 26 46 10 29 14 17Healdsburg Ave. Matheson St. Healdsburg 19 28 505 565 Healdsburg Ave. Mill St. and Vine St. Healdsburg 14 36 37 71 6 26 24 21 A St. Howard St. Petaluma 4 21 23 62 2 14 30 64 East D. St. Copeland St. Petaluma 30 71 38 58 32 36 59 63 44 42 49 66 East Washington St. Copeland St. Petaluma 16 45 46 114 13 30 42 62 East Washington St. N. McDowell Blvd./Hwy. 101 Petaluma 116 20 48 242 23 20 36 111 n/a 59 n/a 108 23 39 34 66 Lynch Creek Trl. Petaluma River Petaluma 20 29 20 53 Lynch Creek Way N. McDowell Blvd. Petaluma 10 25 19 25 Petaluma Blvd. S. D St. Petaluma 12 15 72 93 Copeland Creek Dr. Snyder Ln. Rohnert Park 28 70 37 104 69 64 106 102 Country Club Dr. Southwest Blvd. Rohnert Park 39 39 35 39 Rohnert Park Expressway Petaluma Hill Rd. Rohnert Park 14 10 69 103 11 16 0 3 5 9 1 5Rohnert Park Expressway Snyder Ln. Rohnert Park 25 49 28 31 18 35 13 25 Rohnert Park Expressway Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park 21 30 26 81 15 30 28 60 23 32 31 68 27 31 42 79 15 31 54 75 Guerneville Rd. Range Ave. Santa Rosa 14 n/a 30 n/a 29 46 59 80 Humboldt St. College Ave. Santa Rosa 48 109 46 57 Joe Rodota Trl. Dutton Ave. Santa Rosa n/a 103 n/a 62 45 98 41 28 64 97 48 67 65 111 61 78 Joe Rodota Trl. Prince Memorial Grnwy. Santa Rosa 96 143 38 112 69 130 34 75 Joe Rodota Trl South Wright Rd. Santa Rosa Mendocino Ave. 7th St. Santa Rosa n/a 79 n/a 239

44 64 9 12

18

Mendocino Ave. College Ave. Santa Rosa 55 84 68 81 n/a 86 n/a 140 Mendocino Ave. Pacific Ave. Santa Rosa 39 63 120 117 97 83 333 209 68 85 353 328 53 109 225 176 Mendocino Ave. Steele Ln. Santa Rosa 39 76 53 155 32 61 50 130 48 50 76 114 Petaluma Hill Rd. Kawana Springs Rd. Santa Rosa 21 16 37 49 Santa Rosa Ave. 2nd St. Santa Rosa 38 68 148 422 39 77 234 576 38 66 279 602 47 58 148 189 34 72 267 436 Sonoma Ave. Brookwood Ave. Santa Rosa 65 88 113 118 Sonoma Hwy. (Hwy 12) Calistoga Rd. Santa Rosa 11 25 12 24 Stony Point Rd. Santa Rosa Creek Santa Rosa 71 155 60 97 Stony Point Rd. Sebastopol Rd. Santa Rosa 31 55 57 91 Yulupa Ave. Bethards Dr. Santa Rosa 16 30 35 79 18 22 69 110 North Main St. Analy Ave. Sebastopol South Main St. Burnett St. Sebastopol Petaluma Ave. Joe Rodota Trl. Sebastopol

20 10 59 211 10 16 150 87

21 41 341 34 16 31 53 291 49 33 121 132

16 12 35 246 n/a 63 n/a 56

21 35 54 83 22 10 101 175 32 41 73 69

21 50 169 63 15 13 133 224

East Napa St. Broadway Sonoma Newcomb St. Broadway Sonoma Newcomb St. 2nd St. W. Sonoma

27 n/a 86 n/a 4 51 92 485 25 66 102 975 24 32 97 224 28 36 89 72 13 52 37 54

21 23 96 512 51 23 131 25

Old Redwood Hwy. Conde Ln./Windsor River Rd. Windsor 10 5 25 25 33 20 44 51 24 47 57 87Old Redwood Hwy. Starr Rd. Windsor 16 25 6 29 Windsor Rd. Windsor River Rd. Windsor 17 50 31 245 52 84 184 189 39 19 105 76 Brooks Rd. Foothill Dr. Windsor 19 16 125 28

Count Locations 15 20 21 53 22

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped Bike Ped

Total 994 2525 1243 6341 1341 5007 3307 6623 1432 4475 AM 495 951 409 2259 365 1110 1294 2829 576 1940 PM 499 1574 834 4082 976 3897 2013 3794 856 2535 Average 66.3 168.3 62.2 317.1 63.9 238.4 62.4 125.0 65.1 203.4 Location # 15 20 21 53 22

19

2013 Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Locations JURISDICTION LOCATION

Cotati COMMERCE BLVD. & HWY 116 Cotati HWY 116 & REDWOOD RD. Healdsburg HEALDSBURG AVE. & FRONT ST. Healdsburg HEALDSBURG AVE. & MILL/VINE ST. Rohnert Park SNYDER LN. & COPELAND CREEK PATH Rohnert Park COMMERCE BLVD. & RP EXPRESSWAY Sebastopol N. MAIN ST. & ANALY AVE. Sebastopol S. MAIN ST. & BURNETT ST. Cloverdale CLOVERDALE BLVD. & CITRUS FAIR ST. Cloverdale CLOVERDALE BLVD. & SCHOOL ST. Petaluma E. WASHINGTON ST. & COPELAND ST. Petaluma EAST D ST. & COPELAND ST. Windsor OLD REDWOOD HWY & CONDE LN. Windsor BROOKS RD. & FOOTHILL DR. Sonoma BROADWAY ST. & EAST NAPA ST. Sonoma BROADWAY ST. & NEWCOMB ST. Sonoma County: Guerneville HWY 116/MAIN ST. & ARMSTRONG WOODS RD. Sonoma County: Boyes Hot Springs HWY 12 & BOYES BLVD. Santa Rosa MENDOCINO AVE. & STEEL LN. Santa Rosa MENDOCINO AVE. & PACIFIC AVE. Santa Rosa SANTA ROSA AVE. & 2ND ST. Santa Rosa DUTTON AVE. & JOE RODOTA TRAIL

20