HomeMy Public PortalAboutOrd. 1656ORDINANCE NO. 1656
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD
APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2012 -01 TO AMEND THE
CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN IN ORDER TO
INCORPORATE THE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN
WHEREAS, at the public hearing held on January 2, 2013, the City Council
considered all pertinent testimony offered at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, at a public hearing held on December 11, 2012, the City's Planning
Commission studied this issue and forwarded a recommendation that the City Council
approve the proposed General Plan Amendment, and
WHEREAS, the City of Lynwood, with the assistance of the Los Angeles County
Public Health Department and Ryan Schneider & Associates, prepared the proposed
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan in order to develop an official document to
guide the development of policies, programs and facilities that foster cycling and
walking as healthy, environmentally - sustainable transportation alternatives that reduce
traffic congestion and improve character in the community; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
Development Services Department conducted an Initial Study to determine if the
proposed plan will have a significant effect on the environment and prepared a Negative
Declaration based on the finding that there is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LYNWOOD,
CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council finds that the above recitals are true and correct
and are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. The City Council finds and determines as follows:
A. That the proposed amendment is in the public interest, and that there
will be a community benefit resulting from the amendment;
Health Information from the Los Angeles County's Public Health
Department indicates that the City of Lynwood in general faces various
disparities related to health and obesity. The proposed plan serves as an
official policy document guiding the development of policies, programs and
facilities that foster cycling and walking as healthy, environmentally -
sustainable transportation alternatives that reduce traffic congestion and
improve character in the community.
B. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, policies
and objectives of the general plan;
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan is consistent with the
goals, policies and objectives of the City's General Plan. Policy CIR -2.2 of
the Circulation Element seeks to provide a network of bike lanes that
accommodates the safe and efficient movement of cyclists. Additionally,
Policy CIR -2.3 requires a system of sidewalks or pathways in residential
and commercial areas that provides a safe environment for pedestrians.
C. That the proposed amendment will not conflict with provisions of the
zoning code, subdivision regulations, or any applicable specific
plan;
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan is not in conflict with the
City's zoning code, or applicable regulations and /or specific plans. The
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan encompasses a heavily
urbanized area with no changes to the zoning code being proposed. The
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan would not physically divide the
established community and will increase linkages throughout the City by
outlining a more comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network.
D. In the event that the proposed amendment is a change of the land
use policy map; that the amendment will not adversely affect
surrounding properties.
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan will not change the land
use policy map. The projects proposed by the plan are located along
existing street corridors.
Section 3. The City Council finds that the Planning Commission considered
the Initial prepared pursuant to CEQA and appropriately approved a Negative
Declaration based on the finding that there is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect on the environment.
Section 4. The City Council of the City of Lynwood, based upon the
aforementioned findings, approves General Plan Amendment No. 2012 -01, provided
concurrently herewith, amending the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan in
order to incorporate the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan.
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance.
First read at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 2nd day of January, 2012
and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of said Council on the 15th day
of January, 2013.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 15th day of January, 2013.
ATTEST:
Maria Quinonez,'City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Fred Galante, City Attorney
Salvado Alatorre, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
b
/� a , ,,
LJ�[. b4l\,l
J athan Colin, Director
Development Services
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Lynwood, do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Lynwood at its regular meeting held on the 15th day of January, 2013.
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS CASTRO, SANTILLAWBEAS, MORTON,
RODRIGUEZ AND ALATORRE
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
' r
Maria Quinonez, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Lynwood, and Clerk of the City
Council of said City, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a full, true and
correct copy of Ordinance No. 1656 in my office and that said Ordinance was adopted
on the date and by the vote therein stated. Dated this 15th day of January, 2013.
Maria Quinonez, City Clerk
Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Plan
a
< i
T °•)� i t
}A
T w �•�
1
IJr
c
+y
P
a ,
January 2013
ii • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
,.Oq uY.yS.
F 0
0
n ye
+tlFOA;
City of Lynwood
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Plan
City of Lynwood
11330 Bullis Road
Lynwood, CA 90262
310- 603 -0220
Contact: G. Daniel Ojeda, Director of Public Works
Tel.: 310- 603 -0220, Ext. 287
Prepared by:
Ryan Snyder Associates
10501 Wilshire Boulevard, #1910
Los Angeles, CA 90024 -6320
310 - 475 -3895
In association with:
Los Angeles County Department of Public Health
Healthy Policies Initiative, PLACE Program
695 S. Vermont Avenue, 14th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90005
213- 351 -1901
August 2012
Contents • in
Acknowledgements
LYNWOOD MAYOR AND CITY
COUNCIL
• Mayor Salvador Alatorre
• Mayor Pro Tern Ramon Rodriguez
• Council Member Jim Morton
• Council Member Aide Castro
• Council Member Maria T. Santillan -Seas
LYNWOOD CITYSTAFF
• G. Daniel Ojeda
• Josef Kekula
Elias Saikaly
• Leaonna DeWitt
• Octavio Silva
• Jonathan Colin
LYNWOOD PLANNING
COMMISSION
• Ken West (Chair)
• Marvin Aceves (Vice- Chair)
• Bill Younger
• Elizabeth Battle
• Alex Landeros
LYNWOOD TRAFFIC AND
PARKING COMMISSION
• Ana Barraza
• Percy Brown
• Arthur Martinez, Jr.
• Antonio Munguia
• Maria Vierea
iv . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
CONSULTANT TEAM
Ryan Snyder Associates, LLC
• Ryan Snyder, Project Manager
• Herbie Huff
• Chanda Singh
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
HEALTH
• Gayle Haberman
• Alexis Lantz
• Terese Level
• Jessica Lim
• Aurora Lopez
• Uyen Ngo
• Susan Smith
• Chanda Singh
Caltrans Streets & Highways
Code 891.2
Contents . v
Streets and Highways Code 891.2 Bicycle Transportation Account
Page(s)
Requirement
a) The estimated number of existing bicycle commuters in the plan area and the
6 -36
estimated increase in the number ofbicycle commuters resulting from implementation
of the plan.
(b) A map and description of existing and proposed land use and settlement
3 -1, 3 -4
patterns which shall include, but not be limited to, locations of residential
neighborhoods, schools, shopping centers, public buildings, and major employment
centers.
(c) A map and description of existing and proposed bikeways.
5 -1, 6 -30, 6 -8
to 6 -29
(d) A map and description of existing and proposed end -of -trip bicycle parking
6-34,5-1,
facilities. These shall include, but not be limited to, parking at schools, shopping
6 -31
centers, public buildings, and major employment centers.
(e) A map and description of existing and proposed bicycle transport and parking
5-2,6-34
facilities for connections with and use of other transportation modes. These shall
include, but not be limited to, parking facilities at transit stops, rail and transit
terminals, ferrydocks and landings, park and ride lots, and provisions for transporting
bicyclists and bicycles on transit or rail vehicles or ferry vessels.
(f) A map and description of existing and proposed facilities for changing and
5 -1, 6 -34
storing clothes and equipment. These shall include, but not be limited to, locker,
restroom, and shower facilities near bicycle parking facilities.
(g) A description of bicycle safety and education programs conducted in the area
8 -1 to 8 -14
included within the plan, efforts by the law enforcement agency having primary
traffic law enforcement responsibility in the area to enforce provisions of the Vehicle
Code pertaining to bicycle operation, and the resulting effect on accidents involving
bicyclists.
(h) A description of the extent of citizen and community involvement in
Chapter 2
development of the plan, including, but not limited to, letters of support.
(i) A description of how the bicycle transportation plan has been coordinated
3 -10
and is consistent with other local or regional transportation, air quality, or energy
conservation plans, including, but not limited to, programs that provide incentives
for bicycle commuting.
(j) A description of the projects proposed in the plan and a
10-2,10-3
listing of their priorities for implementation.
(k) A description of past expenditures for bicycle facilities and
10 -1
future financial needs for projects that improve safety and
convenience for bicycle commuters in the plan area-
Contents . v
Contents
Acknowledgements iv
1. INTRODUCTION 1 -1
2. PUBLIC OUTREACH
2 -1
Public Workshops
2 -1
School Input Sessions
2 -2
Senior Center Session
2 -6
Other Public Comments
2 -6
3. PLANNING CONTEXT 3-1
City Planning 3 -1
Bikeway Plans of Neighboring Cities 3 -9
Consistency with Regional Plans 3 -10
4. GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS 4 -1
Definitions 4 -1
Goals 4 -1
5. EXISTING CONDITIONS
5 -1
Bikeways
5 -1
Bicycle Parking
5 -1
Bicycle Amenities
5 -1
Links to Other Transportation Modes
5 -2
Ridership
5 -3
Pedestrian Conditions
5 -3
Pedestrian and Bicyclist Crash Analysis
5 -4
Non - Infrastructure Programs
5 -9
6. PROPOSED BICYCLE PROJECTS
6 -1
Bikeway Types
6 -1
Guiding Assumptions for Recommendations
6 -4
Index of Bikeways
6 -7
Physical Projects
6 -8
Bicycle Parking
6 -31
Bicycle Amenities
6 -35
Estimated Number of Existing Bike Commuters and Estimated Increase
6 -36
vi • Lynwood Dicycic and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
7. PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS 7-1
Improvements Guidelines 7 -1
Proposed Projects 7 -7
8. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAMS
8 -1
Community Task Force
8 -2
Enforcement
8 -3
Education
8 -5
Encouragement
8 -9
Evaluation
8 -12
Lynwood Program Implementation
8 -14
9. FUNDING 9 -1
Federal Funding Programs 9 -1
State Funding Programs 9 -6
Local Funding 9 -12
10. IMPLEMENTATION 10 -1
Bikeways Past Expenditures 10 -1
Future Financial Needs 10 -1
Project Priorities 10 -1
Monitoring 10 -5
11. DESIGN GUIDELINES 11 -1
Bikeways Guidelines 11 -1
Freeway On- and Off -Ramp Crossings 11 -13
Signage and Markings 11 -16
Bicycle Parking 11 -19
Additional Treatments and Considerations 11 -24
Pedestrian Design Guidelines 11 -27
Contents . vii
Figures
Figure 11 -1: Bike Path Barrier Post Treatment
11 -3
Figure 11 -2: Bike Lane Sign (Caltrans)
11 -4
Figure 11 -3: Bike Lane Striping and Stencil
11 -5
Figure 11 -4: Bike Lane Treatment at Intersection (MUTCD, AASHTO)
11 -5
Figure 11 -5: Green Bicycle Lanes
11 -6
Figure 11 -6: Buffered Bike Lanes
11 -6
Figure 11 -7: Bike Route Sign
11 -7
Figure 11 -8: Sharrow Stencil
11 -8
Figure 11 -9: Sharrow Placement
11 -9
Figure 11-10: Long Beach Green Sharrow Lane
11 -10
Figure 11 -11: Brookline, MA Sharrow Markings
11 -10
Figure 11 -12: Components of a Bicycle Boulevard (Michele Weisbart)
11 -12
Figure 11 -13: Signage and Striping Treatments for Free -Flow Ramp Intersections
11 -14
Figure 11 -14: Interchanges that Best Accommodate Pedestrians and Bicyclists
11 -15
Figure 11 -15: Numbered Bikeway Sign (MUTCD)
11 -17
Figure 11 -16: Share the Road Sign
11 -17
Figure 11 -17: Glendale Wayfinding Sign
11 -17
Figure 11 -18: Vancouver Street Signs
11 -18
Figure 11 -19: Bicycle Signage and Pavement Markings
11 -18
Figure I1 -20: Bicycle Route with Directional Signage
11 -18
Figure 11-21: "Inverted-U" Bicycle Rack
11 -19
Figure 11 -22: Multi- Bicycle Parking Rack
11 -19
Figure 11 -23: "Bike" Bike Rack
11 -20
Figure 11 -24: Bicycle Lockers
11 -20
Figure 11 -25: Automated Bicycle Parking
11 -20
Figure 11 -26: Bicycle Parking Sign (Caltrans)
I1 -21
Figure 11 -27: Berkeley Bike Station (two -tier racks)
11 -21
Figure 11 -28: Wall- mounted Bicycle Rack (without lock)
11 -22
Figure I1 -29: Bicycle Corral
11 -23
Figure I1 -30: Before and After Road Diet
11 -24
Figure 11 -31: Proper Drainage Grate Design
11 -25
Figure 11 -32: Bicycle Loop Detector Marking
11 -26
viii • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian' iansportatinn Plan
Maps
Map 3 -1: Existing Land Use (Zoning) Map
3 -4
Map 3 -2: Future Land Use (Zoning) Map
3 -6
Map 5 -1: Bicycle - Involved Crashes Resulting in Injury or Fatality, 2006 -2011
5 -7
Map 5 -2: Pedestrian- Involved Crashes Resulting in Injury or Fatality, 2006 -2011
5 -8
Map 6 -1: Proposed Bikeway Network
6 -30
Map 6 -2: Transit Lines and Park -n -Rides
6 -34
Map 7 -1: Locations of Pedestrian Intersection Projects
7 -5
Tables
Table 3 -1: Number of Bicycle Parking Spaces Required
3 -10
Table 5 -1: Comparison of Bicycle - Involved Crash Rates
5 -5
Table 5 -2: Comparison of Pedestrian - Involved Crash Rates
5 -6
Table 6 -1: Proposed Bikeways by Type and Treatment
6 -6
Table 6 -2: Changing Room Requirements
6 -35
Table 10 -1: Bikeway Capital Financial Needs
10 -1
Table 10 -2: Pedestrian Capital Financial Needs
10 -1
Table 10 -3: Short -Term Bikeways
10 -2
Table 10 -4: Medium -Term Bikeways
10 -3
Table 10 -5: Long -Term Bikeways
10 -3
Table 10 -6: Short -Term Intersection Improvements
10 -4
Table 10 -7: Medium -Term Intersection Improvements
10 -4
Table 10 -8: Long -Term Intersection Improvements
10 -5
Table 11 -1: Recommended Bikeway Signage and Markings
11 -16
Contents • ix
1. INTRODUCTION
The Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan represents the beginning of a
new era, one where the City enables its citizens to feel safe and comfortable bicycling and
walking throughout the city. Many Lynwood residents already ride bicycles as their primary
form of transportation, and many more wish to do so. At some point during the day, nearly
every Lynwood resident makes a pedestrian trip. This plan is the guiding document for all
bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, policies, and programs in the City of Lynwood.
By increasing bicycling and walking, the City advances a number of policy goals. First,
bicycling contributes to a healthy and active city, where residents can get exercise as a part
of their daily life. Second, the City seeks to create a multimodal transportation system,
where bicycling is well - linked to transit, and the pedestrian environment is pleasant and
safe. Further, bicycling and walking enables people to travel without polluting the city's air,
creating carbon emissions, or contributing to traffic congestion.
The process of developing this Plan began in June 2011. Los Angeles County Department of
Public Health (DPH) Policies for Livable, Active Communities and Environments (PLACE)
program offered grants to selected cities that wish to create active living policies. Lynwood
and DPH worked together to develop a work plan for this project, and brought a consultant
team together to develop the plan. City staff from the the Public Works Department and
Development Services worked closely with the consultant to set a framework of goals,
policies, and actions for the Plan. Based on the results of community outreach conducted
by DPH, the consultant team developed a draft bikeway network and draft intersection
improvements, and vetted these results with city staff. The consultant team then presented
the draft resultsto the public in a community workshop, and received feedback. After revising
the proposed projects accordingly, the consultant team produced a draft plan for city staff
and the public to review, and made any necessary changes based on community feedback.
This final plan is the product of a process that emphasized stakeholder participation and
public feedback.
By implementing this plan, the City of Lynwood can become a place where people of all
ages and abilities can travel by bicycle. This plan proposes an extensive network of streets
designed to be safe and comfortable for bicyclists. Using this network, people in Lynwood
can reach schools, shopping, jobs, recreational activities, and more. This plan also proposes
improvements to key intersections identified by the public as being unsafe or uncomfortable
for pedestrians. The plan also contains design guidance on future pedestrian infrastructure
such as sidewalks, parkways, and midblock crossings.
1 -1 . Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
In order to be eligible for Bicycle Transportation Account funds, this Bicycle Transportation
Plan contains the following as specified by the California Streets and Highways Code 891.2:
1. Estimated number of existing bike commuters and estimated increase
2. Map and description of existing and proposed land use
3. Map and description of existing and proposed bicycle routes
4. Map and description of existing and proposed bicycle parking
5. Map and description of existing and proposed links to other transportation modes
6. Map and description of existing and proposed facilities for changing and storing
clothes and equipment
7. Description of safety education programs, efforts by law enforcement, and effect on
accident rates
8. Description of public input
9. Description of coordination with other local and regional transportation, air quality,
and energy conservation plans
10. Description of projects and their priorities
11. Description of past expenditures and future financial needs
The Caltrans Table of Contents on page v identifies the pages where each of these can
be found.
Introduction • 1 -2
2. PUBLIC OUTREACH
The City worked with the consultant team and Los Angeles County Department of Public
Health to learn about the local pedestrian and cycling environment, to understand cyclists'
needs, and to set priorities. Lynwood residents have been able to participate in the planning
process in the following ways:
• Provide feedback at public workshops at City Hall
• Attend input sessions at local elementary schools
• Attend an input session at the senior center
• Call, email or fax comments to staff
The following describes the results from the outreach effort in more detail.
Public Workshops
The City invited the public to participate in the planning process through a series of
workshops and meetings. The public was notified about the meetings through multiple
channels including the following:
E -mail
Announcements at church services
• Flyers
The purpose and timing of each workshop is explained further below.
WORKSHOP 1
The first workshop took place on November
14, 2011 from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm at Lynwood
City Hall. City staff and the consultant
team presented the overall scope for the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan,
tentative schedule, example bikeway types,
and recommendations the plan may contain.
Following the presentation, the workshop
attendees asked questions and made
comments. These included:
• Lack of lighting is a key issue
Public Outreach • 2 1
• Bicycle and pedestrian connections to schools and parks are key
• Shirley Ave. and Beechwood Ave. pedestrian crossing needs improvement
• Use of pedestrian scramble near schools and Plaza Mexico may work well
• Would like to see raised crosswalks at elementary schools
• Need better access to I.os Angeles River Bicycle Path
• School crossings need improvements
• The intersection of Atlantic Avenue and Josephine Avenue needs a pedestrian
crossing or access to Burke -John D. Ham Park
• Bicycle treatments are desired on all major streets such as Imperial Highway, Atlantic
Avenue, Long Beach Boulevard, and others
Freeway on- and off -ramps of I -710 and I -105 are difficult for pedestrians to cross
The team addressed questions and took note of concerns and
comments for use in the planning effort.
The next part of the workshop featured a mapping exercise.
Attendees drew desired bikeways, bicycle parking, missing
sidewalks, difficult locations for cyclists, and difficult
pedestrian crossings on large -scale maps of Lynwood. The
team used these maps when proceeding with fieldwork and
the planning effort.
WORKSHOP 2
Lynwood held a second workshop at Greater Emmanuel Temple at 3750 Imperial Highway
on June 2, 2012 to introduce the draft bikeways network and pedestrian improvements to
the public. The goal of the workshop was to solicit widespread opinions on improvement
priorities. Few people attended the workshop, so the intended prioritization exercise was
not completed. The attendees did provide feedback that pedestrian improvements are
needed at Imperial Highway and Ruth Avenue.
School Input Sessions
PRELMINARY INPUT SESSIONS
Department of Public Health staff facilitated mini -input sessions at four elementary schools
in Lynwood in January 2012. The schools were:
• Washington Elementary School
• Will Rogers Elementary School
2 -2. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedesldan Transporlalion Plan
• Marshall Elementary School
• Helen Keller Elementary School
These 15 to 30 minute sessions asked parent and student attendees questions about the
walking and bicycling environment in Lynwood. Questions included:
• How many of you have ridden a bike at least once in the past month in Lynwood?
• How many of you have taken a 20 minute walk in Lynwood inthe past week?
• Where do you go when you walk or bike in Lynwood?
• Why don't you walk and bike in Lynwood?
• Where would you like to walk or bike in Lynwood?
Attendees also participated in a mapping exercise, where they identified intersections and
streets that they perceived to be unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists and described the
irconcern (e.g., no crosswalks, fear of crime, etc.). One hundred three (103) parents and
students participated in the input sessions. A summary of findings follows below.
Key Areas for Walking and Bicycling
• Lynwood Park
• St. Emydius Church
• Library
• Marco Antonio Firebaugh High School perimeter
• 710 Freeway Riverbed Walking Path
• Long Beach Boulevard
• Abbott Road
• Norton Avenue
• California Avenue
• Atlantic Avenue
• Santa Fe Avenue
Deterrents to Walking and Bicycling
• Darkness, lack of lighting, broken and dim lights
• Drug dealing and prostitution
• Street Racing, especially on Sanborn Avenue and San Luis Avenue
• Stray dogs
• Signals are far apart
Public Outreach • 2 -3
• Gang activity
• Public intoxication
Driver disregard for residents /pedestrians; reckless driving
Streets and Intersections with Poor Lighting and Crime
• Burton Avenue and Alm Avenue from Alpine Avenue to Bullis Road
• Alma Street, Elizabeth Avenue, Los Flores Boulevard between Long Beach Boulevard
and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
• Barlow Avenue between Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Norton Avenue
• Pendelton Street between Colyer Avenue and Wright Road
• St. James Avenue between northern city boundary and Imperial Highway
Alley between Lynwood High School and Pine Avenue
Virginia Avenue, Pope Avenue between Elmwood Avenue and Martin Luther King,
Jr. Boulevard
• Beechwood Avenue between Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Jackson Avenue
• Beechwood Avenue and Sanborn Avenue between Atlantic Avenue and Louise
Avenue
• Virginia Avenue, Pope Avenue, Duncan Avenue, and Louise Avenue between
Walnut Avenue and Cortland Avenue
Streets and Intersections with Traffic Safety Concerns
• Generally, more traffic calming measures in residential neighborhoods
• Imperial Highway between Martin Luther King, Jr. Bouelvard and eastern city limit
• Pine Avenue between Abbott Road and Imperial Highway
• Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard for the length of the city
• Long Beach Boulevard between Imperial Highway and southern city limit
• Bullis Road between Walnut Avenue and southern city limit
• Santa Fe Avenue between Cedar Avenue and southern city limit
• Carlin Avenue between Santa Fe Avenue and Long Beach Boulevard
• Norton Avenue between Long Beach Boulevard and Martin Luther King, Jr.
Boulevard
• Euclid Avenue between Santa Fe Avenue and Alpine Avenue
• Sanborn Avenue between Long Beach Boulevard and Birch Street
• Lynwood City Park
• Atlantic Avenue between northern city limit and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard
• Imperial Highway and Pine Avenue
2 -4 . Lyna od Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
. Olanda Street and Harris Avenue
Desired Areas for Improvements
All city parks, including Lynwood Park
Imperial Highway
Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
710 Freeway Riverbed walking path needs improved access
FINAL INPUT SESSIONS
Department of Public Health staff facilitated final mini -input sessions at three elementary
schools in Lynwood in May 2012. Sessions were held at
• Washington Elementary School,
• Marshall Elementary School, and
• Helen Keller Elementary School.
Approximately 60 community members attended the sessions. Staff notified the public of
the meeting through flyer distributions at the following locations:
• Los Angeles County Library (Lynwood branch)
City of Lynwood Youth Center
• Koritas Mini - Market
. Lynwood Senior Center
Public Health staff presented the draft bikeway network map and proposed pedestrian
improvements at key intersections in Lynwood to attendees. Staff wanted to solicit further
feedback from the community, understand if concerns were addressed by the proposed
improvements, and encourage further involvement in the planning process.
Attendees reacted differently at each school. At Washington Elementary School, community
members voiced concern about children crossing at the uncontrolled Pine Street and
Imperial Highway. In addition, attendees brought up concerns about crime and drug use at
Lynwood City Park, and the lack of lighting during the evening at the park and around the
school.
At Marshall Elementary School, session participants were pleased with the proposed
improvements, and were enthusiastic about the Plan. However, community members
voiced concern about the cleanliness of nearby parks due to animal waste, and that they felt
unsafe crossing at key intersections including the following:
Public Outreach • 2 5
• Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Brenton Avenue
• Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Elizabeth Avenue
• Norton Avenue and California Avenue
. Alma Avenue and Long Beach Boulevard
Participants at the Helen Keller Elementary School workshop felt the draft Plan did not
address the intersections closest to their school, including:
• Long Beach Boulevard and Palm Avenue
• Long Beach Boulevard and Carlin Avenue
• Bullis Road and Carlin Avenue
. Bullis Road and Palm Avenue
Participants voiced concern over the intersection geometry and parking at Palm Avenue and
Bullis Road causing blind spots for motorists and pedestrians. Attendees also mentioned
prostitution as a barrier to walking to school.
Senior Center Session
Department of Public Health Staff facilitated an input session at the Lynwood Senior Center
in July, 2012. Sixteen seniors attended. Staff invited the seniors to make comments on the
proposed bikeways and intersection improvements. Seniors' comments included:
• Imperial Highway and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard are good places for bike
routes
Street racing is a problem on Harris Avenue
The intersection of Cortland Street and Muriel Drive is dangerous, with parked cars
blocking sightlines on pedestrian crossings
Seniors also commented that they visit Lynwood Park and Fernwood Park, and that they
like the proposed routes near these parks.
Commissioners' Workshop
On October 16, 2012, the consultant team, City staff, and Department of Public Health staff
presented the Draft Plan to a joint workshop of the Lynwood Planning Commission and
the Lynwood Traffic and Parking Commission. The Department of Public Health described
the plan's funding source, and how active transportation is linked to public health and to
reducing health disparities. The consultant then gave an overview of the content of the
2 -6. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
plan, focusing on the proposed bikeway types and the proposed pedestrian improvements.
Commissioners had the opportunity to ask questions and to review maps of the bicycle
and pedestrian improvements. Commissioners' questions and comments included the
following:
• Concerns about high vehicle speeds on Carlin Avenue
• Desire to explore the possibility of adding angled parking throughout the City in
order to reduce traffic speeds.
• Concern about missing curb ramps within residential areas that impede walking
and biking
• Comment on the need for more pedestrian oriented lighting to increase safety for
walking and biking
• Safety concerns about proposal to add linear park on Carlin Avenue
• Desire to provide additional avenues for public outreach on the proposed plan
including an article in the City Newsletter, poster boards throughout City Hall and
plan presentation at City meetings
• Questions about locations of proposed road diets and their function
Other Public Comments
The City also accepted comments about the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
through email, phone, mail, and fax. Comments included the following:
• Cars, trucks, and buses do not care to share the road
• Studies have shown that getting more cyclists on the road helps increase cycling
sfety; dedicated bike lanes, safety signs, and secure bicycle lockers will hep reach
that goal
• Implementation of the Plan will help Lynwood decrease its carbon footprint, and
increase residents' health
• More frequent street sweeping and maintenance of streets would improve bicycling
in Lynwood (especially along Imperial Avenue and Atlantic Avenue)
Public Outreach . 2 -7
3. PLANNING CONTEXT
Manyother planning documents influence the bikeways system. This Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Plan must fit into the context of other planning endeavors. Related
documents and data are described below.
City Planning
PREVIOUS BICYCLE PLAN
The City does not currently have a bicycle plan, nor has it ever had one in the past.
GENERAL PLAN 2020
The City adopted its most recent General Plan in August 2003.
Community Development Plan (Land Use Element)
The City of Lynwood is 4.9 square miles, and is located south of the City of Los Angeles,
between Interstates 110 and 710. Between 1990 and 2002, the City increased the number
of acres zoned for multifamily housing (R -3) and reduced commercial corridor acreage in
favor of manufacturing. This Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan supports several
General Plan goals including the following:
• Create the potential for a high quality of life for City residents
• Provide a balanced and functional mix of land uses
• Encourage the development of new commercial and retail uses in locations where
they can most efficiently provideresidents with needed products and services
• Promote land uses that capitalize on the opportunities and mitigate the negative
impacts of the City's adjacency to major transportation systems
The City also wishes to create denser development, by encouraging splitting of large
single - family residential lots, increasing density along major arterials, and intensifying
commercial and retail uses near the Lynwood Towne Center. This Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Plan ensures connections along major streets and to dense residential and
commercial development. The availability of these facilities can encourage residents and
visitors to walk or bicycle to their destinations as opposed to driving, leading to better air
quality and decreased congestion. Map 3 -1 shows the zoning in the City. The existing land
uses closely correspond to the zoning shown in Map 3 -1.
3 1 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Circulation Element
The City of Lynwood's Circulation Element section of the General Plan identifies major
transportation systems throughout the City. Regional facilities include two freeway
corridors: Interstate 105 and Interstate 710. Key arterial streets in the City are
• Martin Luther King Boulevard
• Imperial Highway
• Alameda Street
• Long Beach Boulevard
• Atlantic Avenue
In 1997, these arterials had average daily traffic (ADT) volumes of 8,000 to 47,000. The
City hopes to increase development along these arterials without adding more vehicle- trips.
Better bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure will help with this goal.
Minor arterials in the City of Lynwood are Abbott Road, Bullis Road, and California Avenue
These minor arterials were designated as such in recent years, and will appear as such in the
next update of the General Plan.
Key collector streets include
• Norton Avenue
• Beechwood Avenue
• Lynwood Road
• Josephine Street
• Carlin Avenue
• Wright Road
• State Street
The 1997 ADTs on these streets ranged from 900 to 12,900. The public identified many of
these streets as candidates in need of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This Plan takes into
account the ADT data and status of each of these streets, as well as planned future land uses,
to incorporate facilities.
The Circulation Element also includes street sections. Streets in Lynwood range from
2 -lane local streets with a 50' right -of -way, to 6-lane major arterials with 100' right -of-
way, including a 14' -wide center median. Many of Lynwood's streets if planned with these
widths will be able to accommodate bicycle lanes and wider sidewalks without affecting
the number of lanes. However, many of the streets may carry less traffic than they were
designed for, and can be narrowed to include fewer lanes and more facilities for bicyclists
and pedestrians. This Plan takes these factors into account when planning facilities.
Planning Context • 3 -2
`e
n
0
°z
.�i
6
N
Oi �
yi
W
�
�
W
IL
z
J
CL
Z
2
y
W
- BUJ
%
Q
0
UU
Q�w
Z
Z
Lu
N
P
t
2'
z
•.
y
N q f
ifi
;•sr :•^•^^^: Sa :::mraxa °-- ^I+ ^ ^SSa;aa:•aaa ^aaa --axa: ^SSaaaa:ecaa Fi �
°•:
F
�= i$e P?ele
•_.�•
°6a8 A •ieF Asi"e•34'�q i"s ai"7;E =:; =lt ��:; a =;E ...$� °EE'•F —.^ � G �
F.: �z` rai °s..... ......FiiFiz332.i %vig `g: `F`:; :; %s %i
�� � � � %
�F
J O i l
I J i l l 0
2W aia;: caaaaaaaa:
W
°-aec::c- ^-a ^a• ^a s•xax •.aax'aa•- °-sa. •.•Saa as ::-n a- •••__..
i a y aasa
f,!71'Il��llila
a i�a a .ai
ve Y
A
III
E�1°
li'11,
aYa4.lgi!`si §�i f 6F .F� i9�i 1 =FdE 23 3i E -ta
E'.
EYd '€ i i= E.
�.:.... �.
. .YYazaia.:.::::.....
^.38a s.. a... °. °.. .,.... F.'... uo88adi .... °...•••j...d� :.,,. -.i
..f�.. �.. a',.f,
This page deliberately left blank.
3 -5 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Trmn porcatlun Plan
LONG BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN
Lynwood adopted the Long Beach Boulevard Specific Plan in 2006. The Plan sets a
framework to guide all development, with an emphasis on design, development standards,
and right -ofway improvements, for the entire stretch of Long Beach Blvd. within the City.
The objectives of the plan with new development are to:
Revitalize the Boulevard
• Increase transit use
• Instill downtown presence
• Provide a base for economic vitality for the future
The Plan proposes to capitalize on the Green Line Metro station on Long Beach Blvd. and
the 105 Freeway, and develop transit - oriented housing and commercial areas. Section 3.3.5
Pedestrian Connectivity and Safety describes the need for enhanced pedestrian pathways,
and the specific intersections which need additional crosswalks. Crossings at Long Beach
Boulevard and the following locations will either be improved or added:
• Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
• Alma Avenue
• Norton Avenue
• Los Flores Boulevard
• Imperial Highway
• Sanborn Avenue
The circulation section of the Plan advocates uniform sidewalk widths and travel lanes
along the entire length of Long Beach Boulevard. Furthermore, it prescribes that angled
parking is to be provided amidst landscape planters in clusters of 5 to 7 stalls.
The Plan aims to create an environment that supports bicycling. The Plan contains guidelines
for on- street bikeways, as well as bicycle parking and amenities requirements in section
5.3.8. The Plan calls for the implementation of a citywide network, and that bicycle lanes
should be considered on Long Beach Blvd.
Planning Context • 3 -6
MUNICIPAL CODE
Several sections of the municipal code apply to both bicycles and pedestrians, including the
operation and maintenance of facilities, and use of equipment. The following summarizes
the sections of code which pertain to bicyclists and pedestrians.
Bicycles
Section 3 -3 of the City's municipal code pertains to the administration and enforcement of
bicycles. The Code refers to the Chief of Police and the police department, functions which
the City currently contracts to the County Sherriff's Department. The code regulates the
sale, purchasing, and dismantling of secondhand bicycles. In addition, the Chief of Police
is required to snake periodic inspections of bicycles offered for rental to the public.
The Code regulates certain types of bicycling behavior as well. Sidewalk riding is prohibited,
as well as riding abreast of any other person riding a bicycle. Bicyclists are also required
to obtain a bicycle license from the police department, and attach a license decal to their
bicycle. The license fee is one dollar per three year term. Persons who sell their bicycles
must also report the sale to the City for a license transfer.
The municipal code explicitly states in Section 7 -2.1 that a person riding a bicycle upon a
highway shall be granted all of the rights and subject to the duties applicable to a vehicle.
Article 65 requires bicycle parking spaces for certain uses (see table below). For any use for
which bicycle parking is required, a minimum of four spaces should be required (Ordinance
#1563, §3).
3 -7 • lynw od Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
TABLE 3 -1: NUMBER OF BICYCLE PARKING SPACES REQUIRED
. eag7u@i'ed-S�YaCes - .�O liuto'::.
Residential Uses:
Single Family
0
Multi- family
1 space per each 4 units
Public Assembly and community uses:
Childcare, preschools, senior centers
10
Libraries, auditoriums, museums, galleries,
stadiums, theaters
5
Private schools, private colleges, trade schools
20
Industrial Uses:
Manufacturing and warehousing
10
Office Uses:
Banks, savings and loans
15
General office
10
Medical, dental, and veterinary offices
5
Commercial uses:
Bowling alleys, billiard parlors, roller and ice
rinks, private clubs
10
Health clubs and studios
10
Hospitals and medical centers
10
Hotels and motels
5
Restaurant
10
Retail
10
The bicycle parking standards are as follows:
1. Separation From Automobile Parking: Bicycle parking spaces shall be separated
from automobile parking spaces or aisles by a wall, fence, or curb, or by at least five
feet (5') of open space where parking is prohibited.
2. Aisles: Aisles or walkways providing access to bicycle parking spaces shall be at least
five feet (5') wide.
3. Signs: Signs which are clearly readable from the automobile parking area shall be
displayed to indicate the availability and location of bicycle parking. (Ord. #1563,
§3)
Planning Context • 3 -R
Pedestrians
Section 7 -19 of the code pertains to pedestrians, including the design and designation
of crosswalks, and manner of crossing. The City Traffic Engineer is responsible for
establishing, designating and maintaining crossing devices at all intersections where the
Engineer determines there is a particular hazard for pedestrians crossing the roadway. The
code specifies that no crosswalk (other than at intersections) shall be placed in any block
which is less than 400' in length.
Pedestrians are prohibited from crossing the roadway in the business district other than a
crosswalk. Persons are also prohibited from standing in the roadway other than in a safety
zone or crosswalk if the action interferes with traffic movements.
Section 24.7 -6 addresses sidewalks or "pedestrian ways" as they are defined in the municipal
code. The code specifies that in long blocks, pedestrian ways may be required, and will be
at least 5' in width and paved.
Bikeway Plans of Neighboring Cities
Lynwood shares a border with Los Angeles County unincorporated areas, including the
communities of Walnut Park and Willowbrook, as well as with the cities of Los Angeles,
South Gate, Paramount, and Compton. Of these jurisdictions, only Paramount and
Compton do not have bike plans. Proposed bikeways in the remaining jurisdictions are
reviewed below, so that this plan may ensure connectivity with them.
SOUTH GATE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN (DRAFT)
South Gate borders Lynwood to the north. The City of South Gate is currently in the process
of preparing its Bicycle Transportation Plan. The draft plan proposes bikeways on many
streets that connect to Lynwood, including Stanford Ave., Long Beach Blvd., State St.,
California Ave., Otis St., Alexander Ave., Hildreth Ave., Wright Rd., Tweedy Blvd., and
Sequoia Dr. In almost all cases, this plan continues proposed bikeways on these streets into
the City of Lynwood. The only exception is Stanford Ave., which ends just after it enters
Lynwood.
CITY OF LOS ANGELES BICYCLE PLAN 2010
Although Lynwood shares a small border with the City of Los Angeles, none of the streets
in Los Angeles on which bikeways are proposed continue into Lynwood.
3 -9 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 2011
Similarly, none of the streets in County unincorporated areas on which bikeways are
proposed continue into Lynwood.
Consistency with Regional Plans
METRO BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority "Metro Bicycle
Transportation Strategic Plan" of 2006 proposes bicycle transit hubs and gap closures in the
regional bikeway network. There is a potential transit hub identified in the City of Lynwood,
at the Long Beach station of the Green Line (p. 18).
The Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan (BTSP) also includes policies supportive of
bicycling. Policy II.2 is to expand the number of high quality end -of -trip bicycle facilities
in the county-wide region and to create a network of bike - transit centers. Policy I1I.1 is to
improve bicycle access to existing and future bike- transit hubs. This bicycle and pedestrian
transportation plan includes provisions to achieve those objectives, including proposed
bikeway connections to the Long Beach Green Line Station and the Lynwood Transit
Center. Other policies in the BTSP call for increased promotion and incentives for biking to
work, and youth and adult bicycle education. These are reflected in the proposed programs
in Chapter 8.
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS
This Bicycle Transportation Plan supports regional transportation goals, including those
of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) and the
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) put forth by the Southern California Association
of Governments (SCAG). The Southern California Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) delegates its transportation planning to SCAG through its RTP document, which
identifies goals and objectives that increase active transportation usage, and encourages
the development of local active transportation plans. An emphasis on utilitarian bicycling,
including supporting amenities and infrastructure, is an important aspect of meeting these
goals.
Planning Context • 3 -10
4. GOALS, POLICIES, AND
ACTIONS
The City of Lynwood will use this Plan to create more complete streets that provide safe
travel options for all users. The following goals, policies and actions were developed by City
staff in conjunction with the consultant team and Department of Public Health.
These Goals, Policies and Actions set the philosophical framework for the Plan and provide
a course of action for the City to follow.
Definitions
GOALS
Goals are desired outcomes. They represent the ideal future the City intends to create. They
are often general and abstract.
POLICIES
Policies are specific statements that guide decision making. They follow from the goals, and
they help to achieve the goals. They indicate a commitment to a particular course of action.
ACTIONS
Actions are particular programs, procedures, or techniques that carry out policies. For each
of the actions, this chapter states the parties who will conduct the action and the intended
timeline over which the action will take place.
Goals
1. Create an environment where people of all ages and physical abilities can walk and
bicycle safely and comfortably throughout Lynwood.
2. Increase the number of people walking and bicycling instead of driving.
3. Promote public health and safety within our community.
4. Enhance the economic viability of Lynwood.
5. Become more environmentally sustainable.
Goals, Policies, and Actions • 4 -1
Policies and Actions
POLICY 1: THE CITY WILL DEVELOP A COMPLETE BIKEWAY
NETWORK THROUGHOUT LYNWOOD.
Actions
1. Construct the bikeways proposed in this Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation
Plan over the next 20 years.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Phase 1: 2013 -2020, Phase 2: 2020 -2026, Phase 3: 2026 -2033
2. Ensure the maintenance of the bikeway and roadway system, and prioritize
maintenance for bikeways.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
3. Recognize that bicyclists ride on all streets and all streets should accommodate
bicyclists.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
4. Ensure that bicyclists can activate traffic signals at all vehicle- activated intersections.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Retrofit as each signal is maintained or modified
S. Add destination and way- finding signage along bikeways.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: As bikeways are implemented
6. Install roundabouts, mini - roundabouts, mini - traffic circles, and other treatments to
calm traffic and reduce the need for bicycles to stop, and consider these options in
place of stop signs and traffic signals.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: As bikeways are implemented; on other streets 2033
7. Coordinate and link Lynwood's bikeway network with proposed and existing
bikeways in surrounding jurisdictions.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: As bikeways are implemented
4 2 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
POLICY 2: THE CITY WILL MAKE BICYCLE PARKING AVAILABLE,
SECURE, AND CONVENIENT THROUGHOUT LYNWOOD.
Actions
1. Create design standards for bicycle parking regarding the device type, spacing,
visibility, accessibility, etc.
Responsible party: Development Services Department
Timeline: 2013
2. Add safe, convenient, standardized bicycle parking at parks, schools, libraries, and
other civic buildings where needed.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: 2018
3. Add bicycle parking in the public right -of -way to serve existing uses.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: 2018
4. Encourage existing commercial property owners to install bicycle racks and /or
bicycle lockers on their property.
Responsible party: Development Services Department
Timeline: Ongoing
5. Initiate a bicycle- parking program to create bicycle parking in existing shopping
and neighborhood centers.
Responsible party: Development Services Department
Timeline: 2020
6. Enact comprehensive requirements for safe and convenient bicycle parking in new
developments of all types.
Responsible party: Development Services Department
Timeline: 2013
7. Enact a "bikes in buildings" ordinance to require owners of commercial office
buildings to either provide secure bicycle parking, or permit bicycles to be brought
into offices.
Responsible party: Development Services Department
Timeline: 2013
Goals, Policies, and Auion, • 4 -3
8. Work with Metro to provide and maintain bicycle lockers, racks, and other parking
options at transit stops.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
9. Add bicycle racks to Lynwood Breeze buses.
Responsible party: Lynwood Breeze
Timeline: 2014
10. Conduct periodic surveys to determine where bicycle parking is needed, and
maintain existing bicycle parking.
Responsible party: Development Services Department
Timeline: Ongoing
POLICY 3: THE CITY WILL WORK TO IMPROVE THE SAFETY AND
CONVENIENCE FOR PEDESTRIANS THROUGHOUT LYNWOOD.
Actions
1. Create a priority list and construct new sidewalks where they are missing.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Phase 1: 2013 -2020, Phase 2: 2020 -2026, Phase 3: 2026 -2033
2. Implement capital improvement projects at intersections designed to improve safety
and convenience.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Phase 1: 2013 -2020, Phase 2: 2020 -2026, Phase 3: 2026 -2033
3. Work with property owners to maintain sidewalks.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
4. Develop an ADA Transition Plan.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: 2015
5. Remove barriers to pedestrians with disabilities such as missing sidewalks, missing
curb ramps, misplaced signal poles, missing truncated domes, poorly timed signals,
etc.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Phase 1: 2015 -2022, Phase 2: 2022 -2028, Phase 3: 2028 -2035
4 4 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedeslrim Iransporlalion Plan
6. Implement traffic calming projects that enhance the pedestrian environment.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: 2033
T Add improved pedestrian lighting along streets wherever needed in the City.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: 2033
POLICY 4: THE CITY WILL ACTIVELY ACCOMMODATE AND
ENCOURAGE SAFE AND CONVENIENT BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
UTILITARIAN TRIPS TO SCHOOLS, EMPLOYMENT SITES, STORES,
PARKS, AND OTHER DESTINATIONS THROUGHOUT LYNWOOD
Actions
1. Ensure bikeway and pedestrian network facilities serve all users, including children,
able -body adults, older adults, disabled people, and cyclists of all levels.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
2. Eliminate the prohibition of riding two abreast in the City's municipal code.
Responsible Party: Public Works Department
Timeline: 2013
3. Eliminate the bicycle license requirements in the Cib/s municipal code.
Responsible Party: Public Works Department, Sheriff's Department
Timeline: 2013
4. Carry out promotional efforts to encourage bicycling and walking.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, Recreation and Community Services
Department, Public Relations Department
Timeline: Ongoing
5. Initiate and support promotional rides, bike -to -work days, walk -to- school days,
walking school buses, education events and other activities to encourage more
people to walk and ride bicycles.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, Recreation and Community Services
Department, Public Relations Department
Timeline: Ongoing
Goals, Policies, and Actww • 4 -5
6. Encourage existing employers and commercial landowners to provide bicycle
parking, showers, and clothing lockers for commuters.
Responsible party: Development Services Department
Timeline: Ongoing
7. Assist employers with promotional campaigns to encourage walking and bicycle
commuting.
Responsible party: Public Relations Department
Timeline: Ongoing
8. Conduct targeted promotional efforts to educate cyclists on how to use the bus bike
racks.
Responsible party: Public Relations Department
Timeline: Ongoing
POLICY 5: THE CITY WILL TAKE STEPS TO ENHANCE BICYCLE
AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
Actions
1. Implement planned citywide network of bikeway and pedestrian improvements in
this Plan.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Phase 1: 2013 -2020, Phase 2: 2020 -2026, Phase 3: 2026 -2033
2. Provide bicycle and pedestrian safety education in schools, at worksites, and at
public venues.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, outside education organization
Timeline: Ongoing
3. Publish safe pedestrian behavioral tips, bicycle- riding tips and bikeway maps.
Responsible party: Sheriff's Department
Timeline: 2013
4. Provide information on the City website regarding safe walking and bicycle riding.
Responsible party: Sheriff's Department, City webmaster
Timeline: 2013
4 6 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedeslrian'I iansporlalion plan
5. Work with the Sheriff's Department to ensure enforcement of traffic laws as
applicable to bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists.
Responsible party: Sheriff's Department
Timeline: Ongoing
6. Work with the Sheriff's Department to ensure understanding of safe riding,
pedestrian rights and crash report procedures.
Responsible party: Sheriff's Department, outside education organization
Timeline: 2013
7. Educate bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists about safe use of the streets.
Responsible party: Sheriff's Department, outside education organization
Timeline: Ongoing
8. Work with outside organizations and agencies to provide free helmets and lights to
students and low-income cyclists.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition
Timeline: Ongoing
POLICY 6. THE CITY WILL WORK TO IMPLEMENT EXISTING
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL. (SRTS) PLANS, AND CREATE AND
IMPLEMENT PLANS WHERE THEY DO NOT EXIST IN EACH
LYNWOOD SCHOOL WITHIN THE NEXT 10 YEARS.
Actions
1. Create a citywide SRTS coalition of key stakeholders.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, County Department of Public Health,
Lynwood Unified School District
Timeline: 2013
2. Form SRTS coalitions of key stakeholders at each school.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, County Department of Public Health,
Lynwood Unified School District
Timeline: 2014
3. Complete SRTS plans for each school that includes all "5 Es ": education, engineering,
evaluation, enforcement, and encouragement.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: 2015
Goals, Policies. and Actions • 4 -7
4. Implement a complete network of safe walkways and bikeways that provide access
to schools and enhance connectivity.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Phase 1: 2013 -2020, Phase 2: 2020 -2026, Phase 3: 2026 -2033
POLICY 7: THE CITY WILL ENSURE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT IS
BIKEABLE AND WALKABLE
Actions
1. Enact general plan and zoning code that embodies smart growth principles.
Responsible party: Development Services Department, City Council
Timeline: Upon general plan and zoning code updates, if not already done
2. Enact general plan and zoning code that yields compact and mixed -use development.
Responsible party: Development Services Department, City Council
Timeline: Upon general plan and zoning code updates, if not already done
3. Work with the School District to maintain existing neighborhood schools.
Responsible party: Development Services Department, Lynwood Unified School
District
Timeline: Ongoing
4. Encourage large new development to be designed with small blocks that have
interconnected street networks, both internally and with adjacent development.
Responsible party: Development Services Department, City Council
Timeline: Ongoing
POLICY 8: IMPLEMENT THIS BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
TRANSPORTATION PLAN BY 2033
Actions
1. Create a tiered priority project list based on immediate needs and available funds.
Responsible party: Consultant
Timeline: 2012
2. Aggressively pursue all federal, state, and local funding options; leverage funds to
maximize matching opportunities.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
4 8 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
3. Work with state and federal representatives to continue and expand existing funding
and policies that support walking and bicycling.
Responsible party: City Council
Timeline: Ongoing
4. Seek opportunities to piggyback bikeway and pedestrian projects onto new
development, road resurfacing, restriping, etc.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
5. Prepare and present annual implementation progress report to the City Council.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
6. Update the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan every five years.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Every five years
7. Adopt Living Streets policies, standards and guidelines.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, Development Services Department,
City Council
Timeline: 2015
8. Modify internal procedures when needed to enhance interdepartmental
coordination.
Responsible party: Public Works Department, Development Services Department,
Sheriff's Department
Timeline: 2015
9. Conduct periodic bicycle and pedestrian counts at various locations using
commonly accepted methodologies to determine appropriate upgrades to bicycle
and pedestrian facilities.
Responsible party: Public Works Department
Timeline: Ongoing
Goals, Policies, and AOons • 4 -9
5. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The City of Lynwood does not have any existing bikeways. The City has public bicycle
parking at a few locations throughout the city. The following provides further detail
regarding existing conditions for bicyclists in Lynwood.
Bikeways
As stated above, there are currently no existing bikeways in the City of Lynwood. The closest
existing bikeway is the Los Angeles River bike path, which runs north -south just east of the
City boundary, through the cities of Paramount and South Gate, and through County of Los
Angeles unincorporated land.
Bicycle Parking
Bicycle parking can be provided in two general types: racks and high - security bicycle
parking. Racks are best for short -term needs like quick shopping trips, stops to the library,
post office, and others. Racks are also beneficial in commercial corridors where bicyclists
may want to get a meal or go from store to store. Racks should be placed at dispersed
locations to take advantage of the point -to -point flexibility of the bicycle. Commuters and
those who park for longer times need higher security parking. High- security parking may
consist of lockers, attendant parking, or automated parking.
The Municipal Code Review on page 3 -6 describes the City's bicycle parking requirements
for private development. The City requires bicycle parking at multifamily residential, office,
and commercial development.
All of the existing parking in the City is operated by Metro. There are 8 bike parking racks
at the Long Beach Station of the Metro Green Line. At the park- and -ride adjacent to the
station, which is owned by Caltrans and operated by Metro, there are 4 racks and 4 lockers.
There are no other existing bicycle parking racks or lockers in the public right -of -way in the
City of Lynwood.
Bicycle Amenities
The City of Lynwood currently does not have public showers or clothing lockers for
commuters to use.
The City's municipal code does not contain any requirements for bicycle amenities in new
development.
F- iaing Cumuli., • 5 - t
Links to Other Transportation Modes
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) provides local and
rapid bus service throughout Lynwood, and there is light rail service on the Metro Green
Line, which stops in Lynwood. These services connect Lynwood to much of the greater Los
Angeles region. The City also runs its own local bus service, the Lynwood Trolley.
There are two major transit hubs in Lynwood:
• Long Beach Station of the Metro Green Line, located in the right -of -way of the 105
Freeway at Long Beach Blvd.
• Lynwood Transit Center at the intersection of Bullis Rd. and Martin Luther King,
Jr. Blvd.
The Green Line connects to Redondo Beach to the west, and Norwalk to the east. Metro rail
cars are equipped with designated space for bicycles. There are also 6 bike parking racks at
this station.
The Transit Center connects all four lines of the Lynwood Trolley, as well as Metro Line 612.
One bus line runs at least every 15 minutes during the daytime:
Rapid Bus 760 runs on Long Beach Blvd. and connects to the Metro Green Line to
the south and downtown Los Angeles to the north.
Other bus lines in Lynwood are:
• Circulator 612, which follows a loop through the cities of South Gate and Lynwood
• Local Bus 117, which runs on Atlantic Ave. in the northeast corner of the city
• Local Bus 120, which runs on Imperial Hwy. for most of the length of the city
• Rapid 762, which runs on Atlantic Ave. for the length of the city
• Local 260, which runs on Atlantic Ave. for the length of the city
• Local 251, which runs on California Ave. north of Imperial Hwy.
Metro buses are equipped with racks that can carry two bicycles on the front of each bus.
When the bus is not full, bicyclists may also bring their bikes on board with permission of
the operator.
There is currently no public bicycle parking in Lynwood at bus stops, with the exception of
where the bus routes connect with the transit hubs listed above.
The City of Lynwood operates its own bus service, the Lynwood Trolley. The four lines
5 -2 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian'Iransporlalion Plan
of the trolley, known as A, B, C, and D, cover much of the city. The Trolley buses do not
currently have racks for on -board storage of bicycles.
There is a park- and -ride facility in the City of Lynwood adjacent to the Long Beach Green
Line Station. According to the 2006 Metro Bicycle Transportation Account Compliance
Document, there are 4 bike racks and 4 bike lockers at this station.
Ridership
The 2006 to 2010 Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5 -year estimates show 148
out of 25,073 Lynwood workers age 16 and over commute by bicycle, which is a mode split
of about 0.5 %.
Pedestrian Conditions
Although this Plan does not contain a comprehensive review of all sidewalks, the consultant
team noted through field observations that Lynwood has sidewalks on most of its streets
on both sides. According to the inventory kept by the Lynwood Public Works Department,
there are 30 streets on which sidewalks on one or both sides are missing. Likewise, the City
keeps a partial inventory of curb ramps that identifies 213 corners at 100 intersections that
are missing curb ramps.
Most existing sidewalks meet the minimum standards for ADA compliance. New curb
ramps have been installed, and several older ramps have been retrofitted with truncated
domes for visually- impaired users.
The City lacks comprehensive design standards for sidewalks. Many sidewalks lack a buffer
or furniture zone, and are 5 feet wide. Speeds are high on many of Lynwood's streets,
making wider sidewalks and buffers essential to creating an inviting pedestrian atmosphere.
The Municipal Code (as described on page 3 -9) briefly describes guidelines for crossing
placement, and minimum sidewalk width.
At signalized intersections, the City typically has installed:
• Diagonal curb ramps
• Pedestrian push buttons
• Lateral -line crosswalks
• Pedestrian signals
These devices are important components to improve pedestrian safety; however, there
are measures that can improve safety further, and will also create an inviting walking
environment.
Emsting Conditions • 5 -3
There are few improved uncontrolled crossing locations. At uncontrolled crossings, the City
typically has installed:
• Ladder -style crosswalks
• Pedestrian crosswalk signs
• Advanced pedestrian crosswalk signs
Additional devices are needed to make uncontrolled crossings safer in Lynwood. This is
especially important on multi -lane arterial streets. Chapter 7 of this Plan proposes such
improvements.
Pedestrian and Bicyclist Crash Analysis
The analysis of pedestrian- and bicyclist - involved crashes aims to answer two questions.
First, how many of these crashes have happened in recent years? We limit our analysis
to crashes resulting in injury or fatality. We look for any temporal trends, and compare
the number of crashes to statewide rates. Second, where are crashes occurring? Again, we
limit our analysis to crashes resulting in injury or fatality and look for spatial clusters and
patterns.
HOW MANY CRASHES?
Bicycle
Lynwood Public Works Department Records show that between 2006 and 2011, a six year
period, there have been 95 bicycle- involved crashes resulting in injuries and three bicycle -
involved crashes resulting in fatalities in the city of Lynwood. The fatalities occurred on
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Imperial Hwy., and Atlantic Ave., as shown in Map 5 -1.
Table 5 -1 compares the number of bicycle- involved crashes resulting in injury per 1000
people in Lynwood with the rate in the State of California as a whole, using the four most
recent years for which there is statewide data available.
5 -4 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
TABLE 5 -1: COMPARISON OF BICYCLE- INVOLVED CRASH RATES, CITY OF LYNWOOD
AND STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Source: Calitoria Statewide Integrated Trattic Records 2006 -2009
** Source: American Community Survey Three -Year Estimates
The number of crashes as well as the number of crashes per capita has risen in recent years,
as Table 5 -1 shows. The per capita crash rate in Lynwood is lower than the statewide per
capita crash rate. Without any direct data on how much bicycling is happening in Lynwood,
we cannot say that the lower crash rate means that bicycling in Lynwood is safer. It may also
be the case that there is less bicycling happening in Lynwood.
Pedestrian
Lynwood Public Works Department Records show that between 2006 and 2011, a six
year period, there have been 191 pedestrian - involved crashes resulting in injuries and six
pedestrian- involved crashes resulting in fatalities in the city of Lynwood. The fatalities
occured on Long Beach Blvd., Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., and Cookacre Ave., as shown
in Map 5 -2.
Table 5 -2 compares the number of pedestrian - involved crashes resulting in injury per 1000
people in Lynwood with the rate in the State of California as a whole, using the four most
recent years for which there is statewide data available.
Existing Conditions • 5 -5
Lynwood
California
Year
Number of
Crashes*
Population
Estimate **
Crashes per
L000 people
Number of
Crashes*
Population
Estimate **
Crashes
per 1000
people
2006
7
80,147
0.09
10,352
36,457,549
0.28
2007
11
74,020
0.15
10,646
36,264,467
0.29
2008
12
71,138
0.17
11,814
36,418,499
0.32
2009
16
69,518
0.23
12,150
36,589,387
0.33
Source: Calitoria Statewide Integrated Trattic Records 2006 -2009
** Source: American Community Survey Three -Year Estimates
The number of crashes as well as the number of crashes per capita has risen in recent years,
as Table 5 -1 shows. The per capita crash rate in Lynwood is lower than the statewide per
capita crash rate. Without any direct data on how much bicycling is happening in Lynwood,
we cannot say that the lower crash rate means that bicycling in Lynwood is safer. It may also
be the case that there is less bicycling happening in Lynwood.
Pedestrian
Lynwood Public Works Department Records show that between 2006 and 2011, a six
year period, there have been 191 pedestrian - involved crashes resulting in injuries and six
pedestrian- involved crashes resulting in fatalities in the city of Lynwood. The fatalities
occured on Long Beach Blvd., Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., and Cookacre Ave., as shown
in Map 5 -2.
Table 5 -2 compares the number of pedestrian - involved crashes resulting in injury per 1000
people in Lynwood with the rate in the State of California as a whole, using the four most
recent years for which there is statewide data available.
Existing Conditions • 5 -5
TABLE 5 -2: COMPARISON OF PEDESTRIAN- INVOLVED CRASH RATES, CITY OF LYNWOOD
AND STATE OF CALIFORNIA
* Source: Califoria Statewide Integrated Traffic Records 2006 -2009
** Source: American Community Survey Three -Year Estimates
We do not discern a temporal trend in the number of crashes or the crashes per capita. The
per capita crash rate is higher in Lynwood than the statewide per capita crash rate. Without
any direct data on how much walking is happening in Lynwood, we cannot say that the
lower crash rate means that walking in Lynwood is more dangerous. It may also be the case
that there is more walking happening in Lynwood.
'INHERE ARE THE CRASHES HAPPENING?
Bicycle
Map 5 -1 displays the locations of bicyclist - involved crashes resulting in injury or fatality
for the six most recent years for which there is data available, 2006 -2011. The crashes are
dispersed throughout the city.
Pedestrian
Map 5 -2 displays the locations of pedestrian- involved crashes resulting in injury or fatality
for the six most recent years for which there is data available, 2006 -2011. Many of the
crashes took place on Long Beach Blvd., California Ave., and Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
5 -6 • Lynwood Bicycle and Ndestrian'1'ransportation Plan
Lynwood
California
Year
Number of
Crashes*
Population
Estimate **
Crashes per
1000 people
Number of
Crashes*
Population
Estimate **
Crashes
per 1000
people
2006
38
80,147
0.47
13,482
36,457,549
0.37
2007
25
74,020
0.34
13,663
36,264,467
0.38
2008
31
71,138
0.44
13,405
36,418,499
0.37
2009
42
69,518
0.60
13,083
1 36,589,387
10.36
* Source: Califoria Statewide Integrated Traffic Records 2006 -2009
** Source: American Community Survey Three -Year Estimates
We do not discern a temporal trend in the number of crashes or the crashes per capita. The
per capita crash rate is higher in Lynwood than the statewide per capita crash rate. Without
any direct data on how much walking is happening in Lynwood, we cannot say that the
lower crash rate means that walking in Lynwood is more dangerous. It may also be the case
that there is more walking happening in Lynwood.
'INHERE ARE THE CRASHES HAPPENING?
Bicycle
Map 5 -1 displays the locations of bicyclist - involved crashes resulting in injury or fatality
for the six most recent years for which there is data available, 2006 -2011. The crashes are
dispersed throughout the city.
Pedestrian
Map 5 -2 displays the locations of pedestrian- involved crashes resulting in injury or fatality
for the six most recent years for which there is data available, 2006 -2011. Many of the
crashes took place on Long Beach Blvd., California Ave., and Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
5 -6 • Lynwood Bicycle and Ndestrian'1'ransportation Plan
^n
W
L
N
(0
i
V
d)
O
C
•
• l�P
f•.
• Pb� /ln
calibmia Ave.
• • •
• • •
•
�aaa Feare.
•
I5
RUmeda St
e
• •
me N��
V _
E
d W QQ V
Y Y� F
5
G
N
v
t
N
m
i
V
0
>
o �
1
O m
N
M A
°1
u
■ v
O 0-
C
r
Z
wy �
e
•
e
•
• � • • Pbrmng
Ofortlu Me. ' /
i8.e •eo ��oa ®o. j
z
V
ty p o s v
3 -
N j' �ta Fp FVp.
e
a,,,,paa sc•
r
3
's
Non - Infrastructure Programs
Non - infrastructure programs can be categorized according to the 4 non- infrastructure Es
of a bicycle - friendly community These are:
Education
• Encouragement
• Enforcement
Evaluation
The City of Lynwood does not currently conduct any programs related to bicycling or
walking. Chapter 8 of this plan proposes new programs that the city could undertake.
Existing Cnndlliune • 5 -9
6. PROPOSED BICYCLE
PROJECTS
In order to encourage bicycling among Lynwood residents and visitors, this Plan
recommends comprehensive physical projects to improve conditions for bicyclists, as well
as a host of programs to ensure the community is engaged, encouraged, and educated.
This Plan recommends a comprehensive on- and off- street bicycle network. The proposed
projects are suitable for many different skill and comfort levels. There are on- street bike
lanes and bike routes for more experienced cyclists, and paths and bicycle boulevards for
novice cyclists. The City will increase the number and location of short- and long -term
bicycle parking available at key destinations throughout Lynwood. A key objective of Plan
implementation will be to facilitate travel to transit links by bicycle. This Plan recommends
new ordinances to ensure new development includes amenities such as showers and clothing
lockers for bicycle commuters.
The City hopes bicycling will become a way of life for its residents, and plans to implement
a suite of programs to guide the process.
Bikeway Types
The proposed network includes each of the following
bikeway types.
BIKE PATH
A bike path provides for bicycle travel on a paved
right -of -way completely separated from a street
or highway. Some also provide for the travel of
pedestrians and /or other users, and these are referred
to as multipurpose paths. Bike paths are often planned
along uninterrupted linear rights -of -way, such as
rivers and rail rights -of -way. In California, these are
referred to as Class I Bike Paths.
CYCLE TRACK
A cycle track is a physically separated bicycle facility that runs within a roadway. They
can allow bicyclists to travel in both directions on one side of the road. A physical barrier,
Proposed Bikeways . 6 -1
such as planters, bollards, or a curbed and
landscaped area, separates bicycle traffic from
vehicle traffic. At intersections, a separate
phase for bicyclists must be installed. Cycle
tracks are not technically considered a traffic
control device and so there is no restriction on
their use in either the California or the Federal
MUTCD. The California Traffic Control
Devices Committee ( CTCDC) is currently
reviewing cycle tracks.
BIKE LANES
Bicycle lanes are a striped lane for one -way
bicycle travel on a street or highway. They can
be colored or buffered, as described below. In
California, these are referred to as Class II Bike Lanes.
Colored Bike Lanes
Colored bike lanes are simply bike lanes with colored pavement underneath the standard
bike lane markings as required by the California MUTCD. The primary goal of colored
pavement is to enhance the bikeway by making it more visible. The colored pavement also
narrows the feel of the street, having a traffic calming effect.
To date, the colored pavement marking is not a standard item per the California MUTCD. It
is approved on an interim basis at the federal and the state level. in order to implement these
colored bike lanes, the City will need to notify the CTCDC each time it uses the colored
pavement.
Colored and Buffered Bike Lane
in Los Angeles, CA
6 2 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Buffered Bike Lanes
A painted buffer area, usually between the bike
lane and the adjacent travel lane, provides some
space between bicycles and motor vehicles.
The buffer may also go between parked cars
and the bike lane. Although it is somewhat
unclear, California code appears to allow for
up a painted buffer of 2 feet or less in width
where there is on- street parking, with no width
restrictions where there is no on- street parking.
The CTCDC is currently reviewing this issue.
Road Diets with Bike Lanes
This plan recommends a series of "road diets" A road diet is the removal of at least one
travel lane. Road diets are recommended in order to reallocate existing pavement and
right -of -way to other uses including bikeways, sidewalks, landscaping, etc. The road diets
recommended in this plan make it possible to accommodate bikeways.
A bike route is a preferred travel route for
bicyclists, on which a separate lane or path
is either not feasible or not desirable. The
rightmost lane of a bicycle route is shared by
bicyclists and cars. The lane is marked with
signs and sharrows. In California, these are
referred to as Class III Bike Routes.
Sharrows
A sharrow, or shared -lane arrow, is a Type B Sharrows in Long Beach, CA
marking used to indicate the preferred
path of travel for bicyclists in a lane that
bicyclists and motorists share. The sharrow
reminds motorists that they may encounter people on bikes, and that people on bikes may
occupy the full travel lane. The sharrow also encourages bicyclists to ride in the center of the
lane, away from opening car doors. The sharrow is an approved marking per the MUTCD.
Type B Sharrows
The "Type B" Sharrow is a more prominent
way to implement the sharrow marking.
There are several ways to do this. Long
Beach, CA has painted a green swath
underneath the sharrow, as shown in the
photo. Brookline, MA uses large sharrows
spaced close together with longitudinal
lines flanking the path of bicycle travel. This
is also referred to as a "lane within a lane"
treatment.
BICYCLE BOULEVARD
A bicycle boulevard is a signed bicycle
route that functions as a through street for
Bicycle Boulevard in Vancouver, BC
Proposed Bikeways • 6 3
bicyclists, and not for motor vehicles. Every 'h mile to a mile, a diverter prevents motor
vehicles from driving on these streets for long distances. This keeps traffic volumes low
and the streets pleasant to ride on. The diverters can be physical features at intersections
that require cars to turn right of left. They can also take the form of signal phasing and lane
striping at intersections that requires cars to turn, while cyclists may continue traveling
straight. Bike boulevards can also include features such as mini circles to replace 4 -way
stops, or 2 -way stops that allow through bicycle traffic on the boulevard while stopping
cross - traffic.
CHOICE OF TREATMENT
The type of treatment depends on the street or right -of -way, width, adjacent land uses, traffic
volumes, and traffic speeds. When exclusive right -of -way exists, bike paths are planned.
Bike lanes are planned on streets that have enough width to accommodate them. Road diets
are planned to create space for bike lanes on multi -lane streets where traffic volumes allow.
Improvements to bike lanes are planned where enough space exists to widen bike lanes or
to stripe buffers. Bike routes are planned on streets where network connectivity is needed,
but insufficient space exists for bike lanes, or where traffic volumes do not call for bike
lanes. Bicycle routes can be distinguished in multiple ways including the use of signage and
pavement markings, such as sharrows. Bicycle boulevards are planned on residential streets
with low traffic volumes that contribute to network connectivity.
Guiding Assumptions for
Recommendations
The following factors should be considered guidelines, and will be modified and interpreted
as necessary for a given situation. The City will use its judgment if it chooses to plan
additional bikeways in the future or modify the proposed bikeways due to engineering
constraints. The City will also use appropriate experimental processes and guidelines when
implementing devices such as bicycle boxes, pavement wayfinding signs, B -type sharrows,
colored bike lanes, etc.
Lane Widths
. Minimum travel lane width of lo'
• Minimum width of 7' for parking lanes
Bikeway Type
• Minimum width of a bike lane is 5, but prefer to use 6' as the standard wherever
possible
• Where bike lanes do not fit, but network connectivity is necessary, bike routes with
6 4 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
sharrows will be planned
• Propose bike paths to create connections in the network along existing or potential
rights -of -way such as waterways and rail lines
• California code appears to allow for up to a 2' -wide painted buffer where there is
on- street parking, with no limit where there is no on- street parking
- Buffers are painted between the travel lanes and bike lane and/or between on-
street parking and striped bike lanes to provide extra comfort to the cyclist
where roadway width permits
• Where average daily traffic (ADT) is high, in central areas of the city, at confusing
intersections, and at appropriate freeway off and on- ramps, use colored bike lanes
to ensure the bikeway is prominent to motorists
• Consider traffic circles to replace stop - controlled intersections to improve bikeways
where appropriate
Painted buffers greater than 2' in width are legal in California if they are placed outside of a
bicycle lane where there is no on- street parking. If there is on- street parking, the City may
want to go through an experimental process with the California Traffic Control Device
Committee (CTCDC) to install buffers wider than 2' Some jurisdictions, such as the City
of Los Angeles, have developed striping plans that they believe comply with the California
MUTCD and California Vehicle Code, allowing them to install wide painted buffers without
going through an experimental process. The striping plans include breaks in the buffers.
Colored bike lanes have interim approval from the Federal Highway Administration.
Colored bike lanes have interim approval from the CTCDC. The City simply needs to notify
the state in order to implement colored bike lanes.
B -type sharrows will also have to go through the experimental process with the CTCDC.
The City will consider installation and maintenance costs prior to implementation. B -type
sharrows require more materials than other treatments, and will be implemented at key
locations first to evaluate cost - effectiveness. Directional signage will be crucial to create
a legible network. The City will explore experimental directional pavement markings and
signs.
Proposed Dikways • 6 5
This plan proposes 19.3 miles of Class III bike routes, 9.6 miles of Class II bike lanes, 3.4
miles of Class I bike paths, and 1.4 miles of cycle tracks. The following table shows proposed
bikeways by type and class.
TABLE 6 -1: PROPOSED BIKEWAYS BY TYPE AND TREATMENT
Proposcd Bikeway Type
Cycle Track
CaJifornia(.IassSy�tem
l
Miles Proposed
1.4
-Bicycle Path
1
3.4
Colored and Buffered Bi-
cycle Lane
2
1.7
Colored Bicycle Lane
2
1.1
Buffered Bicycle Lane
2
6,2
-Bicycle Lane
2
0.6
Bicycle Route with Type B
Sharrows
3
4.0
-Bicycle Boulevard
3
1.8
Bicycle Route with Shar-
rows
3
13.5
TOTAL
34.9
6 -6 • Lynw od Ricyde and Pedestrian Trmspnrution Plan
Index of Bikeways
The following index provides an alphabetical list of the bikeway projects, including their
project number in parentheses. They are presented in detail according to their geographical
location.
(22)
Abbott Rd.
6 -20
(32)
Agnes St.
6 -25
(1)
Alameda St.
6 -8
(13)
Alexander Ave.
6 -18
(17)
Atlantic Ave.
6 -19
(7)
Birch St.
6 -13
(12)
Bullis Rd.
6 -16
(6)
California Ave.
6 -13
(33)
Carlin Ave.
6 -26
(18)
Duncan Ave. - F.1 Granada Ave.
6 -19
(29)
Fernwood Ave. / Plaza Mexico
6 -23
(15)
Harris Ave. - Sanborn Ave. - Pine St. - Beechwood Ave. - Harris Ave.
6 -18
(10)
Imperial Hwy.
6 -14
(30)
Josephine St.
6 -25
(31)
Josephine St.
6 -25
(25)
Le Sage St.
6 -21
(5)
Long Beach Blvd.
6 -12
(24)
Los Flores Blvd.
6 -21
(36)
Lynwood City Park
6 -28
(27)
Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard
6 -22
(23)
Norton Ave.
6 -21
(34)
Olanda St.
6 -27
(11)
Otis St. / Imperial Hwy.
6 -15
(28)
Platt Ave.
6 -22
(16)
Sampson Ave. - Pendleton Ave. - Jackson Ave.
6 -18
(26)
Sanborn Ave.
6 -21
(9)
San Luis Ave.
6 -14
(2)
Santa Fe Ave.
6 -9
(21)
Sequoia Dr.
6 -20
(8)
Spruce St. / Fir St.
6 -14
(3)
State St.
6 -9
(4)
State St./ Santa Fe Ave.
6 -10
(14)
Thorson Ave. - Thorson Alley
6 -18
(20)
Tweedy Blvd.
6 -20
(19)
Wright Rd.
6 -19
(37)
Wright Road - Los Angeles River
6 -29
(35)
Yvonne Burke John D. Ham Park
6 -28
Proposed Bikeways . 6 7
Physical Projects
Proposed bikeways are detailed below. Each table shows the existing and proposed condition
of the route.
The proposed recommendations detail the bikeway type (bike lane, bike route) as well as
any special treatments for that bikeway. This may include, for example, the addition of a
buffer to a bike lane, the addition of colored bike lanes, or a reduction in the number of
mixed flow travel lanes to reallocate pavement space (road diet).
NORTH -SOUTH ROUTES
FROM: 1103 rd St.
To: South city limit
EXISTING PROPOSED
4 lanes with left- turn lanes at intersections . Add 12' cycle track with 2 -3' buffer
59' wide . All signalized intersections will require
bicycle phase in signal and some removal
of turning lanes
. Coordinate with adjacent cities
. Option: bike lanes
6 8 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
FROM: Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
TO: 110th St.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 4lanes with on- street parking and median/
center -turn lane
• 35' wide on each side of the median
Add 8' buffered bike lanes
FROM:
I10th St.
To:
Los Flores Blvd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 2 lanes with on- street parking
• 77' wide
Add wide buffered bike lanes
Option: add median
FROM:
Los Flores Blvd.
To:
Fernwood Ave.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking
• 43' wide
Add sharrows
Option: remove center stripe and
add 5' bike lanes
FROM: Tweedy Blvd.
To: Long Beach Blvd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 4lanes with on- street parking
* 56' wide
. Road diet to two lanes with center-
turn lane and on- street parking
• Add 6' colored bike lanes
Propoud Bikeways • 6 -9
6 -10. Lynwood Blcyde and Pedestrian Transportalfon Plan
(4) STATE
FROM:
ST. / SANTA FE AVE. (CONT.)
Lynwood Rd.
Weber St.
To:
EXISTING
PROPOSED
2 lanes with center -turn lane and on- street
• Remove center -turn lane and add 8'
parking
buffered bike lanes
a 51' wide
a Option: Add Type B sharrows instead
of removing center -turn lane
FROM:
Weber St.
To:
South city limit
EXISTING
PROPOSED
a 4 lanes with center -turn lane and on- street
• Road diet to two lanes with center -
parking
turn lane and on- street parking
67' wide
. Add 9' buffered bike lanes
• Right -of -way shared with the City of
a South of El Segundo Blvd., add 4' of
Compton
parkway to sidewalks
Proposed Bikeways • 6 -11
FROM: North city limit
To: Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 4 lanes with center -turn lane and on- street
parking
• 70' wide
• Add Type B sharrows
FROM:
Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
To:
Los Flores Blvd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 4 lanes with median / center -turn lane and
on- street parking
• 36' wide on either side of the median
Add 8' colored, buffered bike lanes
FROM:
Los Flores Blvd.
To:
Lynwood Rd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 6 lanes with median / center -turn lane and
on- street parking
• 40' on either side of the median
• Increased width and changing configuration
approaching and underneath 105 Freeway
Add Type B sharrows
FROM:
Lynwood Rd.
To:
South city limit
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 4 lanes with median / center -turn lane and
on- street parking
• 36' wide on either side of the median
Add 8' colored, buffered bike lanes
6 12 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transpnrlation Plan
(6) CALIFORNIA "E.
FROM: North city limit
To: Imperial Hwy.
ERISTING
PROPOSED
4 lanes with on- street parking
. Road diet to two lanes with center-
* 60' wide
turn lane and on- street parking
centerline to mark a 10' southbound
• Add 6' wide colored bike lanes
FROM:
Imperial Hwy.
To:
Platt Ave.
ERISTING
PROPOSED
2 lanes with on- street parking
• Add sharrows
Some parking is restricted during peak hours
7FROM1.: 7Fernwood Hwy.
Ave.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
2 lanes with on- street parking
• Add sharrows
• 31' - 35' wide
• Stripe T's for 7' parking area and a
Perpendicular parking at Lynwood City Park
centerline to mark a 10' southbound
travel lane, in order to create some
room between the parking and the
northbound travel lane
Option: restripe perpendicular
parking to reverse -in angled parkin
Pwpomd Bikeways • 6 -13
FROM: Abbott Rd.
To: Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
ERISTING I PROPOSED I
2 lanes with on street parking
• 51' wide
• Add 5' -wide colored bike lanes with
2' buffers
• Add interspersed landscaped curb
extensions to inset parking
• Option: add 14' median instead of
bike lanes to achieve traffic calmine
(10) IMPERIAI.HWY.
FROM: Lynwood City Park
To:
Platt Ave.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 1 lane with on- street parking
• Add sharrows northbound
• 21' wide
• Add 6' southbound contra -flow bike
• Narrows to 17' with no parking at Lynwood
lane
City Park
intersection project 16J
FROM:
Platt Ave.
To:
Josephine St.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 2 lanes with on- street parking
Add sharrows
• 25'- 30' wide
• 41' wide underneath 105 Freeway
FROM: Abbott Rd.
To: Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
ERISTING I PROPOSED I
2 lanes with on street parking
• 51' wide
• Add 5' -wide colored bike lanes with
2' buffers
• Add interspersed landscaped curb
extensions to inset parking
• Option: add 14' median instead of
bike lanes to achieve traffic calmine
(10) IMPERIAI.HWY.
FROM: l Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
To: Ruth Ave.
ERISTING
PROPOSED
• 4 lanes and center -turn lane
Add 6' -wide colored bike lanes
• 70' wide
in conjunction with pedestrian
intersection project 16J
6 14 . Lynw )d Ricyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
IMPERIAL
ON: Otis St.
FROM: North city limit
To: Imperial Hwy.
EXISTING PROPOSED
•'2 lanes with on- street parking
• Add 9' wide buffered, colored bike
• 56' wide
lanes
• Add signal at intersection with
Imperial Hwy.
• Direct southbound cyclists to turn
left from Otis St. to Imperial Hwy.
with signs and pavement markings
ON: Imperial Hwy.
FROM: Otis St.
To: Bullis Rd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 4 lanes with center -turn lane
• Add 8' colored, buffered bicycle lanes
• 74' wide
• Direct northbound cyclists to turn
left from Bullis Rd. to Imperial Hwy.
and to turn right onto Otis St. with
signs and pavement markings
Proposed Rikcways • 6 15
6 -16. Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
FROM: Imperial Hwy.
To: Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
ERISTING
PROPOSED
3 lanes (2 lanes northbound, 1 lane
Add 6' bike lanes
southbound) with on- street parking on the
southbound side only
49' wide
FROM:
I Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
To:
Platt Ave.
ERISTING
PROPOSED
• 4 lanes with center -turn lane / median and
• Road diet to two lanes with center -
on- street parking
turn lane / median and on- street
• 56' wide, or 24' on either side of the median
parking
Add 7' bike lanes
FROM:
Platt Ave.
To:
South city limit
ERISTING
PROPOSED
2 lanes with center -turn lane, and on- street
• Add Type B sharrows
parking
• 49' wide
6 -16. Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Existing Proposed
Proposed Bikeways • 6 -17
FROM: North city limit
To: Abbott Rd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking and center-
turn lane
• 50' wide
. Remove center -turn lane and add
buffered bike lanes
FROM: Josephine St.
To: South city limit
EXISTING
PROPOSED
2 lanes with on- street parking Add sharrows and appropriate
36' wide intersection treatments
Ongoing construction project south of Where the route turns, direct cyclists
Agnes St. with signs and pavement markings
FROM: North city limit
To: Imperial Hwy.
FROM: Los Flores Blvd.
PROPOSED
To: Agnes St.
. Add sharrows and appropriate
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking
. Add sharrows and appropriate
• 34'- 41' wide
intersection treatments
• Where the route turns, direct cyclists
with signs and pavement markings
FROM: North city limit
To: Imperial Hwy.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking
. Add sharrows and appropriate
. 31' wide
intersection treatments
• Existing signal at Jackson Ave. and Imperial
- Where the route turns, direct cyclists
Hwy.
with signs and pavement markings
6 18 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
(17) ATLANTICAVE.
FROM: North city limit
To:
South city limit
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 4 lanes center median and on- street parking
. Add Type 13 sharrows
. 31'- 34' wide on either side of the median
. Option: remove 3rd northbound lane
. 3rd northbound lane and additional ROW
between Olanda St. and Clark St.
between Olanda St. and Clark St.
FROM: Los Flores Blvd.
To: Fernwood Ave.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking
. 41' wide
. Existing 4 -way stop at Century Blvd.
Add sharrows and appropriate
intersection treatments
FROM: Los Flores Blvd.
To:
McMillan St.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking
. Bicycle boulevard
. 38'- 41' wide
• Add sharrows
. Connects to proposed bicycle boulevard on
. Add traffic calming measures
Los Flores Blvd.
Proposed Bikeways • 6 -19
EAST-WEST ROUTES
FROM: Long Beach Blvd.
To: State St.
EXISTING PROPOSED
4lanes with on- street parking . Option One: road diet w/ colored
60' wide bike lanes
• Proposed bikeway in South Gate • Option Two: add back -in angled
parking and sharrows on one side,
have bike lane on other side
FROM: West city
To: East city 1
EXISTING PROPOSED
• 2 lanes with on- street parking . Add sharrows
• Connects to planned bicycle boulevard in • Add bike signal at Long Beach Blvd.
South Gate . Add median refuge crossing
treatment or roundabout at State St.
ther King, Jr. Blvd.
imit
71anes
XISTING
PROPOSED
street parking
. Road diet to two l anes with center--
* 67'- 70' wide
turn lane and on- street parking
• Add interspersed wide median
islands (approximately 40' by 200')
• Add 8' buffered bike lanes
6 -20 . Lynw ud Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
(23) NORTON AVE.
FROM: Santa Fe Ave.
To: Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 2 lanes with on- street parking
Add sharrows and appropriate
• 31'- 3'' wide
intersection treatments
• Existing signals at Long Beach Blvd. and
Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
FROM: Harris Ave.
To: Wright Rd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
2 lanes with on- street parking
• Add sharrows and appropriate
28' wide
intersection treatments
• Several two -way stops
• Add bike signal at Atlantic Ave.
Bullis Rd.
Harris Ave.
721anes
EXISTING
PROPOSED
with on- street parking
• 33' wide
Add sharrows and appropriate
intersection treatments
(26) SANBORN AVE.
FROM: Long Beach Blvd.
To: Birch St.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 2 lanes with on- street parking
Add sharrows and appropriate
• 22 -26' wide
intersection treatments
Proposed Bikeways • 6 -21
FROM: I Alameda St.
To: 11-710 Freewav
EXISTING PROPOSED
4 lanes with on- street parking . Add 8' buffered bike lanes
6 lanes with on- street parking between . Remove 3rd travel lane between
Norton Ave. and Imperial Hwy. Norton Ave. and Imperial Hwy.
71 -75' wide . Consider adding median between
84' wide between Alameda St. and Santa Fe Alameda St. and Santa Fe Ave.
Ave.
6 22 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
(29) FERNWOOD AVE. / PLAZA MEXICO
FROM: Alameda St.
To: Imperial Hwy. -
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking on the north
.
Bicycle path on adjacent right -of -way
side only
.
On- street bicycle route between
. 32' wide
Lorraine St. and Alameda St.
. Approximately 90' right -of -way south of
.
Short -term: add bicycle route
street
. A parcel interrupts the right -of -way between
Lorraine St. and Alameda St.
FROM:
Imperial Hwy.
To:
State St.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking on the north
.
Bicycle path on adjacent right -of -way
side only
(alignment will have to circumvent
. 32' wide
utility box)
. Right -of -way south of the street
•
Add bike signal at State St.
.
Short -term: add sharrows
FROM:
State St. at Fernwood Ave.
To:
Long Beach Blvd. at Sanborn Ave.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• Plaza Mexico parking lot has existing access
.
Work with Caltrans to acquire
routes connecting Fernwood Ave. on the
right -of -way along north side of 105
west and Sanborn Ave. on the east
freeway to create path from State St.
• Existing signal at Sanborn Ave. to cross Long
through parking lot
Beach Blvd.
•
Add signs and pavement stencils to
guide bicyclists through parking lot
to exit at Sanborn Ave.
.
Replace speed bumps with speed
humps in parking lot
.
Will require coordination with
landowners
.
Connects to Fernwood Ave. at
California Ave. via Sanborn Ave. and
California Ave. proposed bikeways
Proposed Bikeways . 6 -23
FROM: California Ave.
To: Copeland St.
EXISTING PROPOSED
2 lanes with on- street parking on the north
side only
. Add sharrows and appropriate
intersection treatments
FROM:
I Copeland St.
To:
Atlantic Ave.
EXISTING PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking on the north
side only
. Caltrans right -of -way on the north side of
the 105 freeway parallels street
Work with Caltrans to acquire
right -of -way along north side of
105 freeway for bicycle path east of
Copeland St.
FROM:
Atlantic Ave.
To:
East city boundary
EXISTING PROPOSED
2 lanes with on- street parking on the north
side only
. Add sharrows and appropriate
intersection treatments
6 -24 . Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
JOSEPHINE
PROM: State St.
To: Harris Ave.
EXISTING PROPOSED
2 lanes with on- street parking . Add sharrows and appropriate
32' - 44' wide intersection treatments
Existing signals at Long Beach Blvd. and • Add traffic calming measures
Bullis Rd.
ve.
ve.
71anes
XISTING
PROPOSED
street parking
Add sharrows an d appropriate
• 25' - 55' wide (becomes much wider east of
intersection treatments
Muriel Dr.)
• Existing speed humps between Bullis Rd.
and Long Beach Blvd.
Pruposed Bikeways • 6 -25
FROM: Santa Fe Ave.
To: Bullis Rd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 2 lanes with on- street parking
Add sharrows and appropriate
31' - 40' wide
intersection treatments
FROM:
Bullis Rd.
To:
Olanda St.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
4 lanes with center -turn lane and on-
. Road diet to two lanes with on- street
street parking
parking
74' wide
• Add 40' median with bicycle path and
• ADTs as of 1/97: 3,500 - 7,500
linear park
• Add special intersection treatment for
crossing (see pedestrian chapter)
• Add bicycle phase and protected left turn
phase to signal at Atlantic Ave.
6 -26. Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Carlin Avenue could look like this after implemenation of the proposed median treatments.
FROM: Carlin Ave.
To: Wright Rd.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
. 2 lanes with on- street parking
Add sharrows and appropriate
. 33' wide
intersection treatments
. Connects to proposed bikeways on Carlin
Ave. and Wright Rd.
Pr.pused Bikeways • 5 -27
PARK BIKEWAYS
FROM: Agnes St.
To: Toseohine St.
EXISTING PROPOSED
Existing signal at Agnes St. I • Bicycle path through park
• Existing sidewalk parallel to Atlantic Ave.,
and existing right -of -way in alignment with
Josephine Ave.
• Connects to proposed bikeways on Agnes St.
and Josephine St.
�(36) LYNWOODCITY PARK
FROM; Spruce St. parking lot Birch St.
To: Cesar E Chavez Ln.
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• Sidewalks in park
Widen and add signage to create
multipurpose path to connect to
proposed bikeways on Sanborn Ave.
and Birch St., parking lot, and St.
Francis Medical Center
6 28 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
BRIDGE CONCEPTS
. North of Louise Ave.
es River, west bank
7Accessto
XISTING
PROPOSED
ver bicycle path at Imperial
• Add bridge over I -710 from Wright
Hwy. requires navigating high volumes of
Rd. to Los Angeles River
fast-moving traffic, as well as freeway on-
, Pave new path on the west bank from
and off- ramp merging lanes
Imperial Hwy. to new bridge
• North of Imperial Hwy, bicycle path is on
. Coordinate with LA County Flood
west bank of river
Control District to improve crossing
• South of Imperial Hwy., bicycle path is on
of the river at Imperial Hwy.
east bank
. Bridge project will require
• Cyclists cross from one bank to another via
coordination with LA County Flood
the sidewalk on the south side of Imperial
Control District and Caltrans
Hwy.
. As an alternative to this project,
the City also has the option to
coordinate with the City of South
Gate to construct a river access point
at the I -710 off -ramp at Abbott Rd.,
as described in the Draft South Gate
L
Bicycle Transportation Plan.
6 -29 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian'fransporlalion Plan
^L T
W
L
`^ v
rc� Y
C QO
N v
_V CL
m
p +-
O
/
5
1
z
1
A,
Jfgy
I ` nb14Bi`•�, ,..,wgs4�
1 SI •� .�Y w.�g� ''
1 /
1
s 41
m /1
I
W II 91 i I
.... �y....
.,_1 a
>�I al yyyP/ `wl
11.
I JI
I
I
:Ilf
:
t
1 I
1
i k
: 1
I
I I
I :
hy� /
I
I
I {/
r /
I
/
/
I
'p/•19 4�eafi 6uol �
I 1
k' 1
J
/ = n-Ge Avej.��
E
D 6
e e A 8
g ¢ E
—
J
j s
g g e e s s g o Q
• 1 1 I
• I I 1 I
• 1 I 1
• • 1 I I I
3
1
z
1
A,
1
- /
I
W II 91 i I
.... �y....
.,_1 a
>�I al yyyP/ `wl
11.
I JI
I
I
:Ilf
:
t
1 I
1
i k
: 1
I
I I
I :
hy� /
I
I
I {/
r /
I
/
/
I
'p/•19 4�eafi 6uol �
I 1
k' 1
J
/ = n-Ge Avej.��
E
D 6
e e A 8
g ¢ E
—
J
j s
g g e e s s g o Q
• 1 1 I
• I I 1 I
• 1 I 1
• • 1 I I I
3
Bicycle Parking
The City will add bicycle parking racks in the public- right -of -way. The City will also
work with schools, developers, business owners, and owners of multi - family residential
developments to install bicycle parking.
PARKING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY
The City will seek funds for an ongoing bicycle parking program so it can add parking as
needed in the public right -of -way. This will fund:
• the planned parking described below
• parking requested by citizens or business owners
parking in locations where bicycles are regularly seen locked to trees, parking
meters, or other fixtures
The City plans to add parking in the public right -of -way along transit lines, and at transit
stations, especially since these overlap with the proposed bikeway network. Map 6 -2
identifies transit lines and stations. There are 97 bus stops in the City of Lynwood. In order
to provide one rack at each stop, the City will need about 100 racks.
The City plans to add parking in commercial corridors. Commercial zoning is shown in
Map 3 -1 on page 3 -4. Commercial corridors include:
• Long Beach Blvd.
• Atlantic Ave.
• portions of Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
• portions of Imperial Hwy.
Most of these commercial corridors are also served by a transit line shown in Map 6 -2.
When sufficient demand exists, bicycle parking in these corridors can be implemented as
bicycle corrals, which are bicycle racks placed in an on- street parking space.
The City also plans to add parking racks at parks, which are also shown in Map 6 -2. In order
to install 2 racks at smaller parks, and 7 racks at the larger parks, the City will need about
20 racks.
PARKING AT SCHOOLS
Lynwood will work with the Los Angeles Unified School District and private schools to
Pruposed Bikeways • 6 -31
ensure that there is sufficient and secure bicycle parking available to all students in K -12
schools, with a special focus on those in middle and high schools. Map 6 -2 shows the
locations of these schools. There are 13 elementary schools, three middle schools, and three
high schools. High schools and middle schools should have parking for at least 30 bicycles;
elementary schools should have parking for at least 10 bicycles. The City will need about
280 racks for schools. As demand increases, the City can add more racks as needed.
PARKING AT PRIVATE BUILDINGS
As described on page 3 -7, the City requires bicycle parking for multifamily residential,
office, and commercial development. In addition, the 2010 California Green Building
Standards Code, adopted by the City, requires the following:
Short -term bicycle parking. If the project is anticipated to generate visitor traffic, it must
provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 100 feet of the visitors' entrance, readily
visible to passers -by, for 5% of visitor motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum
of one two -bike capacity rack.
Long -term bicycle parking. Buildings with over 10 tenant - occupants must provide secure
bicycle parking for 5% of motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum of one space.
Public schools and community colleges must provide secure bicycle parking for 15% of
occupants (students, teachers and staff). Acceptable parking facilities shall be convenient
from the street and may include:
• Covered, lockable enclosures with permanently anchored racks for bicycles;
• Lockable bicycle rooms with permanently anchored racks; and
• Lockable, permanently anchored bicycle lockers.
Additional information on recommended bicycle accommodations may be obtained from
Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates. The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals
also recently released a guide to bicycle parking.
The City should consider passing a "bicycles in buildings" ordinance, such as New York's
2009 "Bicycle Access to Office Buildings" law (Local Law No. 52 for 2009). Bicycling is a
great way to get to work, but often barriers exist at the workplace, including the lack of
a safe, secure place to store bicycles or private prohibitions on bikes in buildings. When
commuters are allowed to bring bicycles into the workplace, they may be more likely to
bicycle to work. City staff should determine appropriate parameters for Lynwood.
6 -32. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
6 -33 • Lynwood 6icyde and Pedesirian'Cranspurlatwn Plan
w
a
C
z
u
s
a
z
.a
H
i
6
d
H
O
a
Bicycle Amenities
As mentioned in Chapter 3, the City currently does not require bicycle amenities in its
municipal code. In order to encourage more bicycling and bicycle commuting, the City
will consider an ordinance or developer mandate to require showers and clothing lockers
in new work sites and retail establishments of significant size. The 2010 California Green
Building Standards Code recommends the following:
Changing rooms. For buildings with over 10 tenant - occupants, provide changing/
shower facilities for tenant - occupants only in accordance with Table 6 -1 or
document arrangements with nearby changing/ shower facilities. For public schools
and community colleges, provide changing /shower facilities for the "number of
administrative/ teaching staff" equal to the "number of tenant occupants" shown
in Table 6 -1.
TABLE 6 -2: CHANGING ROOM REQUIREMENTS
Occupants
EP
Re . quired
0 -10
0
0
11 -50
1 unisex shower
2
51 -100
1 unisex shower
3
101 -200
1 shower stall per
4
ender
Over 200
1 shower stall per
One 2 -tier locker for
gender for each 200
each 50 additional
additional tenant-
tenant - occupants
occupants
1. One 2 -tier locker serves two people. Lockers shall be lockable with either padlock or combination lock.
2. Tenant spaces housing more than 10 tenant- occupants within buildings sharing common toilet facilities
need not comply; however, such common shower facilities shall accommodate the total number of tenant -
occupants served by the toilets and include a minimum of one unisex shower and two 2 -tier lockers.
The City will work with organizations such as Bikestation to provide showers, clothing
lockers, and changing facilities near the Green Line station at Long Beach Boulevard and
the 105 Freeway. The City will also work to provide self- service bicycle repair stations at
all of the park- and - rides, at the Green Line Statione, and Plaza Mexico. The stations can
include a bike stand and basic tools such as air pumps, wrenches, and tire levers.
Proposed Bikeways . 6 -35
Estimated Number of Existing Bike
Commuters and Estimated Increase
The 2006 to 2010 Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5 -year estimates show 148
out of 25,073 Lynwood workers age 16 and over commute by bicycle, which is a mode split
of about 0.5 %.
The City sets a goal of 5% of all commute trips to be made by bicycle when this plan is fully
implemented 20 years from now. Lynwood's plan is ambitious; however, other cities that
have become bicycle - friendly, and have supported bicycles through policy, engineering,
encouragement, enforcement, education, and evaluation campaigns, have seen roughly this
level of increase.
6 -36 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportatinn Plan
7. PEDESTRIAN
IMPROVEMENTS
Improvements Guidelines
The following improvements are recommended at key intersections and streets throughout the City
of Lynwood to improve the safety and attractiveness of the pedestrian environment.
Several overarching principles were followed when recommending improvements. The City can
incorporate these when conducting other capital improvements including new development and
redevelopment, as well as incorporate them into existing or new policies.
1. Shorten pedestrian crossings. Reduced crossing distances create a safer walking
environment by reducing the time that pedestrians are exposed to potential conflicts with cars
and bicyclists. Road diets, refuge islands, and curb extensions are examples of devices to use.
2. Reduce curb radii. Large curb radii allow cars to speed around corners, creating potential
safety hazards for pedestrians crossing the street. By reducing the radii, cars must slow down
before turning, and will be more likely to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalks.
3. Send pedestrians in the direction of travel: Ramps at corners in the direction of travel help
reduce conflict and shorten crossing distances.
4. Create and add buffers to sidewalks: Buffers can take many shapes and forms including
planted parkway strips, street furnishings, on- street parking, bikeways, and others. They provide
a barrier between pedestrians on the sidewalk and moving traffic, creating a more comfortable
walking environment.
5. Provide refuges: Crossing islands, including median gaps, allow pedestrians to cross one
direction of travel at a time, and improve crossing safety.
6. Slow traffic speeds: Pedestrians are very vulnerable users, and have an 85% chance of death
if hit at 40 mph. Slow traffic speeds create a more comfortable walking environment, improve
safety, and encourage pedestrian activity.
7. Create public space: Bulb -outs, curb extensions, and sidewalk buffers allow for space to
enhance the pedestrian environment with public art, landscaping, outdoor dining, and seating.
This creates a more interesting walking environment and can promote outdoor activity.
By following these general principles, the City will be able to create a more pedestrian - friendly
environment incrementally.
Pedestrian Improvements. 7 -1
These recommendations are conceptual, but will work with careful engineering design
considerations.
The City should check drainage prior to implementing proposed curb extensions (bulb -outs,
tapered curb - extensions, etc.). Costs of drainage modifications maybe reduced by using sustainable
streetwater management techniques using infiltration, such as rain gardens, permeable concrete,
and bioswales.
All improvements planned at freeway on- and off -ramps will require coordination and approval
from Caltrans. All improvements planned at rail transit stations will require coordination and
approval from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
7 -2. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
LINEAR PROJECTS
7-7
1) Abbott Road between Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Atlantic Avenue 7 -7
2) Long Beach Boulevard from North City Limit to South City Limit 7 -8
3) San Luis Avenue between Abbott Road and Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard Traffic Calming
Project 7 -9
INTERSECTION PROJECTS
7-10
7) Abbott Road and Alexander Avenue
7 -18
8) Abbott Road and Atlantic Avenue
7 -19
43) Agnes Street and Atlantic Avenue
7 -56
40) Banning Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue
7 -53
45) Carlin Avenue and Atlantic Avenue
7 -58
44) Carlin Avenue and Thorson Avenue
7 -57
10) Elizabeth Avenue and California Avenue
7 -21
42) Fernwood Avenue and Atlantic Avenue
7 -55
39) Fernwood Avenue and Bullis Road
7 -52
18) Imperial Highway and Atlantic Avenue
7 -30
14) Imperial Highway and Long Beach Boulevard
7 -26
15) Imperial Highway and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
7 -27
a16) Imperial Highway and Ruth Avenue
7 -28
13) Imperial Highway and State Street
7 -25
22) Imperial Highway Eastbound and 710 Freeway Northbound Off -Ramp
7 -35
21) Imperial Highway Eastbound and 710 Freeway Northbound On -Ramp
7 -34
20) Imperial Highway Eastbound and 710 Freeway Southbound Off -ramp
7 -33
19) Imperial Highway Eastbound and 710 Freeway Southbound On -ramp
7 -32
41) Josephine Street and Bullis Road
7 -54
38) Josephine Street and Long Beach Boulevard
7 -51
37) Long Beach Boulevard Northbound and 105 Freeway Eastbound On -ramp
7 -50
32) Long Beach Boulevard Northbound and 105 Freeway Westbound Off -Ramp
7 -45
33) Long Beach Boulevard Northbound and 105 Freeway Westbound On -ramp
7 -46
36) Long Beach Boulevard Southbound and 105 Freeway Eastbound Off -ramp
7 -49
35) Long Beach Boulevard Southbound and 105 Freeway Eastbound on -ramp
7 -48
31) Long Beach Boulevard Southbound and 105 Freeway Westbound on -ramp
7 -44
29) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Atlantic Avenue
7 -42
26) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Beechwood Avenue (Muriel Drive)
7 -39
24) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Bullis Road
7 -37
6) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and California Avenue
7 -17
4) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Capistrano Avenue
7 -14
30) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Duncan Avenue
7 -43
27) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Harris Avenue
7 -40
5) Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and Long Beach Boulevard
7 -16
34) Midblock Green Line Station Crossing on Long Beach Boulevard between 105 Freeway On-
and Off -Ramps
7 -47
11) Norton Avenue and California Avenue
7 -22
Pedestrian Improvements . 7 -3
12) Norton Avenue, San Luis Avenue, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
7 -23
9) Pendleton Ave. and Atlantic Ave.
7 -20
28) Sanborn Avenue and Atlantic Avenue
7 -41
23) Sanborn Avenue and Birch Street
7 -36
25) Shirley Avenue and Beechwood Avenue
7 -38
3) State Street, Tenaya Avenue, and Long Beach Boulevard
7 -12
1) Tweedy Boulevard and Long Beach Boulevard
7 -10
2) Tweedy Boulevard and State Street
7 -11
7 -4. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Tranaportalion Plan
H
.O
v
Q:
:n
�L
^^W
- S
ryGr h
^b�gheNV
f
�p
5 �t�
Cale
"1 r
z'Kale�S l
I
��-
� Y
m 3 y
Lp(
E
E
F
9
This page intentionally left blank.
7 -6 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Proposed Projects
LINEAR PROJECTS
1) ABBOTT ROAD BETWEEN
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.
AND ATLANTIC AVENUE
-BOULEVARD
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 4 lanes with on- street parking
Raod diet to 2 lanes with center-turn lane,
and wide buffered bike lanes
• Add dispersed median islands in center -turn
lane
................. 11 ..............
PARKING
W111111i
Pedestrian Imprmements • 7-7
2) LONG BEACH BOULEVARD FROM NORTH CITY LIMIT TO
SOUTH CITY LIMIT
EXISTING PROPOSED
• History of bike- and pedestrian - involved Apply treatments from intersection project
crashes 38) Josephine Street and Long Beach
• Many pedestrians want to cross Long Beach Boulevard as a prototype at minor cross -
Blvd.: there are pedestrian generators like streets. This would incorporate the following
retail stores and restaurants located along elements:
Long Beach Blvd. on both sides " Zebra- stripe crosswalks, advanced stop
bars, and audio signals
• Bulb -outs where feasible
• Reduced curb returns where bulb -outs
are not feasible
• Consideration of protected left -turn
phases and removal of pedestrian
pushbuttons with automatic walk phases
Prioritize intersection projects 1), 3), 5), 14),
and 31) - 37), which cover the intersections
of Long Beach Blvd. with major cross - streets
and freeway on- and off -ramps
7 -8 . Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestnan Transportation Plan
Pcdestrim Lnpmve.mts . 7 -9
INTERSECTION PROJECTS
7 10 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Improvements. 7 -11
3) STATE STREET, TENAYA AVENUE, AND LONG BEACH
BOULEVARD
ExISTING
• Complex 3 -way signalized intersection
• Ten pedestrian pushbuttons
• Five lateral -line crosswalks (no marked
crosswalk to cross eastbound and westbound
State St., east of Long Beach Blvd.)
• Bus stops on Long Beach Blvd. (northbound,
near side, south of Tenaya Ave.; southbound,
near side, north of State St.)
• Tenaya Ave. has 3 lanes with on- street
parking
• Long Beach Blvd. has 4 lanes, center -turn
lane, and on- street parking
• State St., east of Long Beach Blvd.: 2 lanes
with hatched area westbound; 1 lane with
on- street parking eastbound; center island
between travel directions
• State St., west of Long Beach Blvd.: 1 lane
with on- street parking westbound; curbed
island between Tenaya Ave. and westbound
State St.
7 -12 , Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
PROPOSED
• Intersection is planned for realignment;
design and implementation are subject to
change
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to State St.
crossings, east of Long Beach Blvd. (2)
• Add curb extensions to north and south
sides of State St. northbound, east of Long
Beach Blvd. to square intersection, ensuring
enough room for bicycle lanes (2)
• Add advanced yield marking to State St.
northbound crossing, east of Long Beach
Blvd. (1)
• Add advanced yield sign, advanced
pedestrian sign, and pedestrian sign to State
St. northbound crossing, east of Long Beach
Blvd. (3)
• Add curb extension to north side of island
on State St. southbound, east of Long Beach
Blvd., removing hatched area (1)
• Add countdown signals to cross State St.
southbound (between island and NE corner),
east of Long Beach Blvd. (2)
• Add cut through (1) or ramps with truncated
domes (2) to State St. island, east of Long
Beach Blvd.
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all other
existing crossings (5)
• Add bus bulbs to bus stops on Long Beach
Blvd. (2)
• Add bulb -outs to all crossings of Tenaya
Ave.; to cross Long Beach Blvd., south of
Tenaya Ave. on SW corner; to cross State St.
southbound, west of Long Beach Blvd.; to
cross Long Beach Blvd. on NW corner, north
of State St. (S)
• Add audio signals (12)
• Add advanced stop bars
STATE STREET, TENAYA AVENUE, AND LONG BEACH
BOULEVARD (CONT.)
%' !` F 7 T7�
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -13
4) MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND CAPISTRANO
AVENUE
EXISTING PROPOSED
• 2 -way stop on Capistrano Ave.
• Lateral -line crosswalk to cross Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd. east of intersection
• Diagonal ramps to cross Capistrano Ave. on
NW and NE corners
• No ramps on SW and SE corners
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes, on-
street parking
• Capistrano Ave. has 2 lanes, on- street
parking
7 -14 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Remove parking on both sides of the street
at and east of existing crossing of Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Add crossing islands to east crossing of
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and taper lanes
around islands (1 pair)
Add small bulb -outs to cross Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd. on NE and SE corners with
reduced curb return to cross Capistrano Ave.
(2)
Add zebra stripe crosswalks to crossing of
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. (1)
Add rectangular rapid flash beacons to east
crossing (1 set)
Add advanced yield markings to east crossing
approaches(2)
Add advanced yield signs to east crossing
approaches(2)
Add advanced pedestrian signs to east
crossing approaches (2)
Add pedestrian crossing signs to east
crossing (2)
Add diagonal ramp with truncated domes
on SW corner (1)
• Option: Add road diet on Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd. to 2 lanes, center -turn lane,
and parking
• Option: Depending on ADTs, this crossing
may need to be sienalized
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -15
5) MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND LONG BEACH
BOULEVARD
EXISTING
• Signalized intersection
• Lateral -line crosswalks
• Pushbuttons
• Countdown signals
• Diagonal ramps; NW and NE ramps are
flush with curb
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes,
center -turn lane, on- street parking
• Long Beach Blvd. has 4 lanes, center -turn
lane, on- street parking; right -turn lane
northbound, near side; center median, south
of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.; parking
north of intersection is far from intersection
on the west side
• Bus stops southbound, near side; northbound
far side
• Long Beach Blvd. has permissive / protected
left -turns
7 -16 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
PROPOSED
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
(4)
• Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Modify protected / permissive left -turn on
Long Beach Blvd. to protected left -turns
• Add audio signals to all crossings (8)
• Add bulb -outs to NE corner to both
crossings; to NW corner to cross Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd (3)
• Reduce curb return on NW corner to cross
Long Beach Blvd. (1)
• Add median nose on Long Beach Blvd.,
south of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. (1)
• Narrow driveway on SW corner on Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd. and add bulb -outs to
cross both directions (2)
• Add bulb -out to SE corner to cross Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd. with reduced curb
return to cross Long Beach Blvd. (1)
Remove
6) MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND CALIFORNIAg
AVENUE
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Signalized intersection • Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
• Countdown signals (4)
• Lateral -line crosswalks • Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Diagonal ramps on all; truncated domes on • Add audio signals (8)
NW and NE corners
• California Ave. has 4lanes, on- street parking
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 2 lanes
westbound, 3 lanes eastbound, and parking
westbound; eastbound, near side splits into 3
lanes just prior to intersection
• Bus stops eastbound, far side; northbound,
far side
• Add bulb -outs on NW corner to cross both
directions; to SE corner to cross California
Ave.; to SW corner to cross California Ave.;
to NE corner to cross Martin Luther King Jr.
Blvd. (5)
• Add bus bulb to NE corner to cross California
Ave. (1)
• Reduce curb return on SW and SE corners to
cross Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. (2)
• Narrow driveway on NE corner on Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd.
• Option: Remove 3rd lane on Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd. and add bulb -outs to SE corner
to cross Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. (1)
Pedestrian improvements . 7 -17
7-18 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
1 8) ABBOTT ROAD NTIC AVENUE°
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Signalized intersection • Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
• Lateral -line crosswalks (4)
• Diagonal ramps with truncated domes • Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Countdown signals • Add audio signals to all crossings (8)
• Pushbuttons • Remove or relocate pushbuttons (8)
• Abbott Rd. has 4 lanes, center -turn lane, and • Add bulb -outs on NE and NW corners to
parking cross in both directions; to SW corner to
Atlantic Ave. has 4 lanes, center -turn cross Abbott Rd. (5)
lane, and parking; center median north of • Add bus bulb to SW corner to cross Atlantic
intersection Ave. (1)
• Permissive lefts on all • Narrow northbound, near side driveway (1)
• Bus stops on Atlantic Ave. northbound, near • Reduce curb - return on SE corner (2)
side; southbound, far side
7 -19 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
EXISTING
• 2 -way stop for Pendleton Ave.
• Pendleton Ave. has 2 lanes with on- street
parking
• Atlantic Ave. has 4 lanes with on- street
parking, median and left -turn lanes at the
intersection
• Yellow lateral -line crosswalk to cross Atlantic
Ave. on north side
• Old -style school crossing sign at Atlantic
Ave. crosswalk
• Textured crosswalk to cross Pendleton Ave.
on west side
• Advanced stop bar on west crossing of
Pendleton Ave.
PROPOSED
Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to cross Atlantic
Ave. on the north side, and to both crossings
of Pendleton Ave. (3)
Add bulb -outs to all crossing faces of
Pendleton Ave. (4)
Add bulb -outs to north crossing faces of
Atlantic Ave. (2)
Replace south /eastbound left -turn lane on
Atlantic Ave. with crossing islands (1 pair)
Replace old -style school crossing signs with
new style school crossing signs (2)
Add school crossing ahead warning signs to
Atlantic Ave. crossing (2)
Add rectangular rapid flash beacons to
Atlantic Ave. crossing (1 full set)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -20
EXISTING I PROPOSED
• T- intersection; Elizabeth Ave. ends
California Ave.
• Stop - control on Elizabeth Ave.
• Elizabeth Ave. has 2 lanes, parking
• California Ave. has 4 lanes, parking
• Catch basin on NW corner
at • Add road diet on California Ave. to 2 lanes,
center -turn lane, parking, and bicycle lanes
(from bicycle plan)
• Add advanced pedestrian crossing signs (2)
• Add overhead crosswalk illumination (4)
• Add yellow zebra - stripe crosswalk to cross
California Ave., north of Elizabeth Ave.; and
to cross Elizabeth Ave. (2)
• Add advanced stop bar to Elizabeth Ave.
crossing (1)
• Add bulb -outs to cross California Ave. on
NW and NE corners (will require moving of
catch basin on NW corner) (2)
• Add crossing islands in center -turn lane (1
pair)
• Add advanced yield markings to approach
(2)
• Add advanced yield signs to approach (2)
• Add advanced pedestrian crossing signs to
approach (2)
• Add pedestrian crossing signs at crossing (2)
• Add rectangular rapid flash beacons at
crossing (I set)
• Add school -zone pavement markings to
California Ave., southbound approach (1)
Option 1
Add single -lane roundabout (1)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -21
7 -22 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
2) NORTON AVENUE, SAN LUIS AVENUE, AND MARTIN
LUTHER KING IR. BOULEVARD
EXISTING
Signalized
5 -way intersection
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes,
center -turn lane, parking; right -turn slip lane
southbound with island to turn onto Norton
Ave. westbound, near side; 3 lanes and no
parking northbound, south of Norton Ave.
• San Luis Ave. has 2 lanes, parking, right -
turn slip lane southbound stop - control with
island to turn on Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
northbound
Norton Ave. has 2 lanes, parking
• Yellow, lateral -line crosswalks to cross all
(including slip lanes), except to cross Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd., south of Norton Ave.
(6)
• Countdown signals with pushbuttons to
cross all except slip lanes, and to cross Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd., south of Norton Ave.
(8)
• Diagonal ramps on all corners and islands
for all crossings except no ramps to cross
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. in direction of
crossing on islands (9)
PROPOSED
• Remove Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. right -
turn slip lane southbound; fill in area to
create direct connection to sidewalk
• Add audio signals (10)
• Add countdown signals where missing (3)
Norton Avenue crossings
Add bulb -outs on NE, SE, and SW corners
(3)
• Add yellow zebra- stripe crosswalks (2)
• Add advanced stop bars (2)
San Luis Avenue crossings
Add yellow zebra - stripe crosswalks to
crossing of San Luis Ave. and right -turn slip
lane (2)
• Add bulb -outs to NE island and NE corner
(2)
• Reconfigure geometry of right -turn slip lane
to create tighter, 90 degree turn
• Add advanced stop bar to right -turn slip lane
approach and San Luis Ave. southbound (2)
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. crossings
• Add new yellow zebra - stripe crosswalk south
of Norton Ave. (1)
• Upgrade north crosswalk to yellow zebra -
stripe (1)
• Add bulb -out to southbound, far side for
new crossing to inset parking (1)
• Add tapered curb extension to NW corner
(existing island) (1)
• Reduce curb return on SE corner (1)
• Add advanced stop bars (2)
Option: Replace signal with roundabout
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -23
NORTON AVENUE, SAN LUIS AVENUE, AND MARTIN LUTHER
7 -24. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -25
7 -26• Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
IMPERIAL HIGHWAY AND MARTIN LUTHER
ExISTING
• Signalized intersection
• Diagonal ramps with truncated domes
• Countdown signals
• Pedestrian pushbuttons
• Lateral -line crosswalks
• Protected and permissive left -turns allowed
from Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
• Imperial Hwy. has 5 lanes, center -turn lane;
on- street parking northbound, north of
intersection only
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes,
center -turn lane, on- street parking
• Bus stops on Imperial Hwy. (northbound and
southbound, far side) and on Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd. (eastbound and westbound, far
side)
PROPOSED
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
(4)
• Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Add audio signals to all crossings (8)
• Add protected left -turn phase on Imperial
Hwy.
• Change to protected left -turn phase only on
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
• Add more time to crossing
• Remove pushbuttons
• Add bus bulbs to cross Imperial Hwy. on NE
corner by removing short extra portion of
curb lane just north of intersection; to cross
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. on SE corner; to
cross Imperial Hwy. on SW corner (3)
• Add bulb -out to cross Martin Luther King Jr.
Blvd. on NE corner (1)
• Option: Remove 3rd lane on Imperial Hwy.
and extend curbs
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -27
7 -28 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -29
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• Signalized intersection
.
Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
• Lateral -line crosswalks
(4)
• Diagonal ramps
•
Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Countdown signals
•
Modify protected /permissive left -turns on
• Pushbuttons
Atlantic Ave. to protected left -turns
• Atlantic Ave. has 4 lanes with center -turn
•
Add audio signals to all crossings (8)
lane with protected /permissive left- turns;
•
Remove pushbuttons (8)
right -turn lane northbound; right -turn
•
Add tapered curb extension on SW corner
pocket southbound
to cross Imperial Hwy. with reduced curb-
• Imperial Hwy. has 4 lanes with center -turn
return to cross Atlantic Ave. (1)
lane with protected left- turns; center curb
.
Remove right -turn lane northbound Atlantic
east of intersection
Ave., near side; narrow driveway closest to
• Bus stops on Atlantic Ave. southbound, far
intersection; add tapered curb extension on
side; northbound far side
SE corner to cross Atlantic Ave. (1)
• Bus stops on Imperial Hwy. westbound far
•
Remove driveway on Atlantic Ave., near side
side
with redevelopment
•
Reconfigure driveway of Union 76 gas
station on eastbound Imperial Hwy., far side
to be exit only; add bulb -out on SE corner to
cross Imperial Hwy. (1)
•
Add bus bulb on NE corner to cross Atlantic
Ave. (1)
Add tapered curb extension on NE corner to
cross Imperial Hwy. (1)
.
Replace right -turn pocket southbound
Atlantic Ave. (NW corner) with curb
extension to narrow crossing distance across
Atlantic Ave. (110 feet)
•
Add bus bulb on NW corner to cross Imperial
Hwy. (1)
7 -30. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
pedestrian Improvements • 7 -31
19) IMPERIAL HIGHWAY EASTBOUND AND 710 FREEWAY
SOUTHBOUND ON-RAMP
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Unsignalized crossing of freeway on -ramp • Add large curb extension on west side
• Lateral -line crosswalk and remove curb from east side to square
• On -ramp has two lanes prior to marked intersection
crosswalk • Prohibit freeway on -ramp entrance from
• Right -turn slip lane as well as turns from curb lane
curb lane allowed, multiple cars can enter • Move lane split from one to two lanes further
freeway on -ramp from both lanes south, after marked crosswalk
• Perpendicular curb ramps • Allow single -lane entrance from right -turn
lane
. Add zebra- stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
Add perpendicular ramps with truncated
domes (2)
Add advanced pedestrian sign prior to
crossing (1)
. Add pedestrian sign at crossing (1)
7 -32 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
20) IMPERIAL HIGHWAY EASTBOUND AND 710 FREEWAY
UND OFF-
EXISTING
• Unsignalized crossing of freeway off -ramp
• Lateral -line crosswalk
Perpendicular ramps; east ramp has
truncated domes
PROPOSED
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
• Add advanced yield marking to approach (1)
• Add advanced yield sign prior to crossing (1)
• Add advanced pedestrian sign prior to
crossing (1)
• Add pedestrian sign at crossing (1)
• Add tapered curb extension to south side
curb to narrow lane (1)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -33
21) IMPERIAL HIGHWAY EASTBOUND AND 710 FREEWAY
NORTHBOUND ON -RAMP
EXISTING
• Unsignalized crossing of freeway on -ramp
• Lateral -line crosswalk
• Single -lane entrance to on -ramp from right -
turn slip -lane
• Perpendicular ramps; west ramp has
truncated domes
7 34 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian' transportation Plan
PROPOSED
• Add zebra- stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
• Add advanced yield marking to approach (1)
• Add advanced yield sign prior to crossing (1)
• Add advanced pedestrian sign prior to
crossing (1)
• Add pedestrian sign at crossing (1)
• Add tapered curb extension to south side
curb to narrow lane (1)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -35
SANBORN AVENUE AND BIRCH STREET
EXISTING
• Sanborn Ave. t- intersection at Birch St.
• 3 -way stop
• Yellow lateral -line crosswalk south of
intersection to cross Birch St.
Advanced stop bar at Birch St. crossing
• Pylons to protect crossing between head -in
parking on Birch St.
• Sanborn Ave. has 2 lanes
• Birch St. has 2 lanes, parallel parking
southbound, perpendicular parking
northbound
7 -36 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
PROPOSED
• Add zebra- stripe crosswalk to cross Sanborn
Ave. (1)
• Add bulb -out to SW corner to cross Birch St.
with reduced curb return to cross Sanborn
Ave. (1)
• Add raised crosswalk with culverts to cross
Birch St. (1)
• Add bulb -out islands on east side just into
the street on either side of the crosswalk at
Birch St. crossing (2)
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND BULLIS
EXISTING
• Signalized intersection
• Countdown signals
• No pedestrian pushbuttons
• Bus stops on Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
(eastbound, near side and westbound, far
side)
• Diagonal ramps; truncated domes on NE
ramp
• Bullis Rd. has 4 lanes and center -turn lane,
south of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
• Bullis Rd. has 2 lanes northbound, 1 lane
southbound, and center -turn lane, north of
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes and
center -turn lane; on- street parking east of
Bullis Rd. only
PROPOSED
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
(4)
• Add audio signals to all crossings (8)
• Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Add bus bulbs on Martin Luther King Jr.
Blvd. on NW and SW corners (2)
• Add tapered curb extensions to cross Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd. on NE and SE corners
(2)
Pedestrian Improvements . 7 -37
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 2 -way stop on Shirley Ave. . Add yellow zebra - stripe crosswalks to cross
• Shirley Ave. and Beechwood Ave. have 2 Beechwood Ave., north of Shirley Ave., and
lanes with on- street parking to cross Shirley Ave. (3)
• Yellow lateral -line crosswalk to cross • Add 6' -wide crossing islands to Beechwood
Beechwood Ave. north of Shirley Ave. Ave. crossing (1 pair)
No ramp on SE corner
• Diagonal ramp with truncated domes on SW
corner
• Diagonal ramps on NW and NE corners
• Small school crossing sign at Beechwood
Ave. crossing
• In- pavement flashers with pedestrian
pushbuttons for Beechwood Ave. crossing
7 38 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
• Add advanced yield markings to Beechwood
Ave. approaches (2)
• Add advanced yield signs to Beechwood Ave.
approaches(2)
• Add advanced pedestrian signs prior to
marked crossings on Beechwood Ave. (2)
• Add pedestrian signs to Beechwood Ave.
crossings (2)
• Add bulb -outs to cross Beechwood Ave.
north of Shirley Ave., and to all crossings of
Shirley Ave. (6)
• Add advanced stop bars to Shirley Ave.
26) MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND
`BEECHWOOD AVENUE (MUIHELDRIVE)
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• 2 -way stop control on Beechwood Ave. • Add advanced stop bars to Beechwood Ave.
• No ramps on all corners approaches (2)
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes and • Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to cross
on- street parking Beechwood Ave. (2)
• Bus stops on Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. • Add bulb -outs to all Beechwood Ave.
(eastbound and westbound, near side) crossings (4)
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalk on Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd., west of Beechwood Ave. (1)
• Add crossing islands to Martin Luther King
Jr. Blvd. crossing (1 pair)
• Add bulb -out to cross Martin Luther King Jr.
Blvd. on SW corner (1)
• Add rectangular rapid flash beacons to
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. crossing (1 set)
• Add advanced yield markings to Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd. crossing approaches (2)
• Add advanced yield signs and advanced
pedestrian crossing signs prior to Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd. crossing (4)
• Add pedestrian signs to Martin Luther King
Jr. Blvd. crossing (2)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -39
,7) MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND HARRIS
1.
VENUE
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Signalized . Add yellow zebra - stripe crosswalks to all
• Yellow hatched crosswalks to cross Martin crossings (4)
Luther King Jr. Blvd . Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Yellow lateral -line crosswalks to cross Harris • Add audio signals to all crossings (8)
Ave. . Add bus bulbs on Martin Luther King Jr.
• Pushbuttons to cross Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. (2)
Blvd. • Add bulb -outs to rest of crossings (6)
• Countdown signals . Remove pushbuttons (8)
Diagonal ramps Option: Road diet on Martin Luther King
• Bus stops on Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. on Jr. Blvd., add crossing islands and other
NW and SE corners, far sides pedestrian treatments
• Harris Ave. has 2 lanes, parking
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes,
parking
7 -40. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
EXISTING
• 2 -way stop on Sanborn Ave.
• Atlantic Ave. has 4 lanes, center -turn lane,
center median (drops at intersections), on-
street parking
• Diagonal ramps
PROPOSED
• Add new zebra - stripe crosswalk on north
side to cross Atlantic Ave. (1)
• Add zebra -stripe crosswalks to cross Sanborn
Ave. (2)
• Add bulb -outs to new crossing of Atlantic
Ave. (2)
• Add bulb -outs to cross Sanborn Ave. (4)
• Add advanced stop bars to Sanborn Ave.
approaches (2)
• Replace southbound left -turn lane with
crossing islands (1 pair)
• Add rectangular rapid flash beacons to
Atlantic Ave. crossing (1 set)
• Add advanced yield markings to Atlantic
Ave. crossing approaches (2)
• Add advanced yield signs to Atlantic Ave.
crossing approaches (2)
• Add advanced pedestrian signs to Atlantic
Ave. crossing approaches (2)
• Add pedestrian signs at Atlantic Ave.
crossing (2)
• Option: Check recent ADTs; this intersection
may need to be signalized
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -41
29) MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND ATLANTIC
AVENUE
EXISTING
PROPOSED
• Signalized intersection
. Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
• Countdown signals
(4)
• Pedestrian pushbuttons
• Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Bus stops on Atlantic Ave. (northbound and
• Add audio signals to all crossings (8)
southbound, far side) and on Martin Luther
• Remove or relocate all pushbuttons (8)
King Jr. Blvd. (westbound, far side)
. Add bulb -outs to NE, SE, and SW corners to
• Atlantic Ave. has 4 lanes, center -turn lane,
cross Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., and on SE
and on- street parking
and NW corners to cross Atlantic Ave. (5)
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes,
• Add small bulb -out on NE corner to cross
center -turn lane, and on- street parking
Atlantic Ave. before driveway entrance (1)
• Diagonal ramps; truncated domes on NE
• Reduce curb return on SW corner to cross
and SE corners only
Atlantic Ave., and on NW corner to cross
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. (2)
7 -42 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
30) MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD AND DUNCAN
EXISTING I PROPOSED
Stop- controlled intersection
• Duncan Ave. is off-set
• Duncan Ave. has 2 lanes and on- street
parking
• Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. has 4 lanes,
center -turn lane, and on- street parking
School crossing
• Flashing red stop lights in all directions
Yellow lateral -line crosswalks in all directions
except to cross Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.,
west of Duncan Ave.
Diagonal ramps with truncated domes on all
except perpendicular ramp to cross Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd., east of Duncan Ave.,
on south side
• Add bulb -outs to cross Duncan Ave. on all
corners (4)
• Add bulb -out on NE corner to cross Martin
Luther King Jr. Blvd. (1)
• Add large bulb -out from SE corner to
crossing east crossing, to cross Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd. (1)
• Replace existing marked crossings with
yellow zebra -stripe crosswalks (3)
• Add advanced stop bars to all approaches
with marked crossings (3)
• Remove center -turn lane on Martin Luther
King Jr. Blvd., and add crossing islands (1
pair)
• Add advanced yield marking prior to
eastbound Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
approach (1)
• Add advanced yield sign prior to eastbound
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. approach (1)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -43
31) LONG BEACH BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND AND 105
FREEWAY TBOUND ON -RAMP
U - --
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Unsignalized crossing of 105 freeway on- Square intersection with large curb extension
ramp on north side that wraps around to narrow
• Long Beach Blvd. has 3 lanes southbound, right -turn lane, and removing south side
with large right -turn slip -lane to enter curb to create single -lane entrance, close to
freeway 90 degree turn
• Right -turn slip -lane splits into two lanes just Move lane split from one to two lanes further
before marked crosswalk west, after marked crosswalk
• Lateral -line crosswalk • Add zebra - stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
• Perpendicular ramps • Add perpendicular ramps with truncated
domes (2)
Add advanced pedestrian sign prior to
crossing (l)
• Add pedestrian sign at crossing (1)
7 -44 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -45
33) LONG BEACH BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND AND 105
FREEWAY WESTBOUND ON- P
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Unsignalized crossing of freeway on -ramp • Add large curb extension on south side
• Lateral -line crosswalk and remove curb from north side to square
• On -ramp has two lanes prior to marked intersection
crosswalk • Prohibit freeway on -ramp entrance from
• Right -turn slip lane as well as turns from curb lane
curb lane allowed, multiple cars can enter • Move lane split from one to two lanes further
freeway on -ramp from both lanes east, after marked crosswalk
• Perpendicular curb ramps • Allow single -lane entrance from right -turn
lane
Add zebra - stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
Add perpendicular ramps with truncated
domes (2)
Add advanced pedestrian sign prior to
crossing (1)
Add pedestrian sien at crossine (1)
7 -46 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
34) MIDBLOCK GREEN LINE STATION CROSSING ON LONG
BEACH BOULEVARD BETWEEN 105 FREEWAY ON- AND OFF -
RAMPS
EXISTING I PROPOSED
• Long Beach Blvd. has 6 lanes and center
median
• Many bus stops on either side of street at
station
• No existing marked crossing
• Underneath 105 freeway
• Add pedestrian activated signal to cross
Long Beach Blvd. at Green Line station, mid -
block (1)
• Add median gap to allow for pedestrian
through traffic (1)
• Add perpendicular ramps with truncated
domes (2)
• Add truncated domes in median gap (2)
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
• Add advanced stop bars to both approaches
(2)
• Add lighting (overhead and other)
• Add audio signals to crossing (2)
• Add countdown signals to crossing (2)
• Project will require Los Angeles County
Metropolitan Transportation Authority and
Caltrans approval
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -47
35) LONG BEACH BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND AND 105
FREEWAY EASTBOUNDON-RAJW
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Unsignalized crossing of 105 freeway on- • Square intersection with large curb extension
ramp on north side, and removing south side curb
• Large right -turn slip -lane to enter freeway to create single -lane entrance, close to 90
degree turn
• Right -turn slip -lane splits into two lanes just
before marked crosswalk • Move lane split from one to two lanes further
• Lateral -line crosswalk
west, after marked crosswalk
• Perpendicular ramps • Add zebra - stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
• Add perpendicular ramps with truncated
domes (2)
• Add advanced pedestrian sign prior to
crossing (1)
Add pedestrian shm at crossinv (1)
7 -48 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
LONG BEACH BOULEVARD SOUTHBOUND AND 105
TWAY EASTBOUND OFF - RAMP
EXISTING
• Signalized intersection
• Pushbuttons for all crossings, as well as
mid- crossing on southern Long Beach Blvd.
crossing
• North crossing of Long Beach Blvd.
prohibited
• Lateral -line crosswalks for three other
crossings
• Center median with large nose on Long
Beach Blvd., south of off -ramp
Off -ramp has 3 lanes
• Long Beach Blvd. north of off -ramp has 5
lanes, center -turn lane, and bus loading lane
northbound only
Long Beach Blvd. south of off -ramp has 4 .
lanes, center median, and on- street parking
PROPOSED
Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
(3)
Add countdown signals to all crossings (6)
Add audio signals to all crossings (6)
Add advanced stop bars to off -ramp, east side
of street, and Long Beach Blvd. northbound
approaches(3)
Add bulb -out to cross Long Beach Blvd. with
reduced curb - return to cross off -ramp on
SW corner (1)
Reduce curb return on NE corner to cross
drive (1)
Add perpendicular ramps with truncated
domes to cross east side drive (2)
Add truncated domes where missing (2)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -49
37) LONG BEACH BOULEVARD NORTHBOUND AND 105
FREEWAY EASTBOUND ON -RAMP
EXISTING
• Unsignalized crossing of freeway on -ramp
• Lateral -line crosswalk
• Freeway on -ramp splits into two lanes east of
marked crosswalk
• Perpendicular curb ramps
7 -50 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
PROPOSED
• Square intersection by adding curb extension
to south side, and removing curb from north
side of on -ramp
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalk to crossing (1)
• Add perpendicular ramps with truncated
domes (2)
• Add advanced pedestrian sign prior to
crossing (1)
• Add pedestrian sign at crossing (1)
Pedestrian Imprw meets • 7 -51
7 -52 . Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
LNG AV F"E AND SANTA FE AVENGE """
EXISTING I PROPOSED
• 2 -way stop on Banning Ave. • Add bulb -outs to all corners except on NE
• Lateral -line crosswalk with in- pavement and NW corners to cross Santa Fe Ave. (6)
flashers, pushbuttons, and audio signal to • Add zebra- stripe crosswalks to all crossings
cross Santa Fe Ave., south of intersection except to cross Santa Fe. Ave. north of
• Diagonal ramps intersection (3)
• Santa Fe Ave. has 4 lanes, center -turn lane, ' Add advanced stop bars to Banning Ave. (2)
on- street parking • Add advanced yield markings to Santa Fe
• Banning Ave. has 2 lanes, on- street parking Ave. (2)
Add advanced yield signs to Santa Fe. Ave.
(2)
Add advanced pedestrian signs and
pedestrian signs at crosswalk on Santa Fe
Ave. (4)
Add crossing islands in center -turn lane on
Santa Fe Ave. (1 pair)
Add rectangular rapid flash beacons
to Santa Fe Ave. crossing (1 set)
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -53
7 -54 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Pedestrian Improvements • 7 -55
EXISTING
• Signalized intersection
• Agnes St. ends at entrance to Yvonne Burke -
John D. Ham Park
• Agnes St. has 2 lanes, center -turn lane, and
on- street parking
• Atlantic Ave. has 4 lanes, center -turn lane,
and on- street parking
• Diagonal ramps with truncated domes
• Countdown signals
• Poorly placed pushbuttons
• Lateral -line crosswalks to cross Agnes St.
west of Atlantic Ave., and to cross Atlantic
Ave., north of Agnes St.
• Diagonal hatched marked crossing to cross
park entrance
• Crossing island pair at park entrance crossing
• No crossings permitted on Atlantic Ave.,
south of Agnes St.
• Bus stops on Atlantic Ave. (northbound, far
side; southbound, near side)
7 -56. Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
PROPOSED
• Add zebra - stripe crosswalks to all crossings
(4)
• Add bulb -outs to all crossings of Agnes St.,
and to cross Atlantic Ave. on SW corner (4)
• Add tapered curb extension to cross Atlantic
Ave. on SE corner (1)
• Add bus bulbs at bus stops on Atlantic Ave.
(2)
• Relocate all pushbuttons (8)
• Add advanced stop bars to all approaches (4)
• Narrow park entrance by widening crossing
islands at park entrance (1 pair)
• Add countdown signals to cross Atlantic
Ave., south of Agnes St. (2)
Pedestrian Imprmcmcnts • 7 -57
7 -5d . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
8. BICYCLE AND
PEDESTRIAN PROGRAMS
Cities that implement programs that support bicycling and walking see greater shifts in behavior
among residents than cities that implement physical projects alone. Capital improvement projects
that change the physical environment are extremely important; making the physical environment
safe and attractive is necessary before there will be discernible shifts in the modal split. However,
programs will sustain long -term behavioral change among Lynwood residents.
Programs are grouped into four primary categories; each targets different issues that affect walking
and bicycling.
Enforcement programs deter unsafe behaviors of drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists, and encourage
all road users to obey traffic laws and share the road safely. Enforcement is one of the complementary
strategies that will enable more residents to walk and bike safely.
Education activities include teaching pedestrian,
bicyclist, and traffic safety, and creating awareness of
the benefits of a healthy and safe walking and bicycling
environment.
Encouragement programs generate excitement
about walking and bicycling. They can help spread
the message that walking and bicycling are not only
beneficial for health, social, and economic reasons,
but are enjoyable as well. Encouragement strategies
are especially important when working with youth.
Evaluation is used to determine if goals are being
met, help direct resources, and expand programs and
efforts. Conducting regular evaluations will be key to understanding the efficacy of programs.
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC) recommends six concepts to guide program
development.
1. Make walking and bicycling "try- able'. Give people a chance to "try out" walking and
bicycling instead of driving for something they do regularly. This could be by organizing
a group walk or ride to school, or providing walking route maps for a citywide event, etc.
2. Communicate the behavior ou want to see. Bumper stickers, billboards, banners, signs,
pamphlets, and public service announcements can all convey messages to encourage travel
by foot or bicycle.
8 -1 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
3. Reward behavior. Provide incentives and gifts to motivate people to try walking or bicycling
for a trip. These strategies are especially effective for school children. People are more likely
to continue walking or bicycling once they've tried it.
4. Make it convenient. Design walk and bike - friendly places throughout the City; prioritize
improvements to key destinations such as downtown, routes to school, and along commercial
corridors.
5. Institutionalize support for walking and bicycling. policies that support bicycling
and walking will help guide programs and ensure ideas have staying power.
6. Capitalize on other agendas. Making walking and bicycling part of the solution to a wider
range of issues the community faces such as obesity, environmental concerns, and economic
depression, can help grow the walking and bicycling movement.
Following these principles will help Lynwood
develop a well- rounded program.
Community Task Force
The City should first consider organizing a formal
community task force that meets regularly to
discuss walking and bicycling issues. Through the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan process,
Lynwood staff and County Department of Public
Health staff engaged many parents, students, and
business - owners. These stakeholders can form the
base task force. Task force members can also include:
• City staff from Public Works, Planning, Parks and Recreation
• Students
• Parents
• Teachers
• Principals
• Law Enforcement
• Fire Department
• Local bicycle and pedestrian organizations
• Neighborhood business owners
• Hospital / Public Health staff
There are several reasons to organize a high - level, community -led task force.
1. Identify key problems. Who better than Lynwood residents, business - owners, and employees
to identify the barriers to walking and bicycling? This group will be able to discuss specific
issues and locations in Lynwood that may serve as barriers to walking and bicycling.
Working as a team, the task force can then address problems with a multi- faceted approach.
Programs • 8-2
2. Craft messaging. Successful campaigns and messaging are typically those crafted by and for
the community itself. Key stakeholders will know what messaging will resonate with their
peers.
3. Organize the community By including a diverse set of stakeholders in the task force, each
member will be able to relay messages to his or her constituents. This will help increase the
level of public participation.
4. Promote the programs. Stakeholders will feel ownership over much of the programming,
and will likely want to promote the cause. Members can spread the message and encourage
the rest of the community to get involved.
Examples of programming by type (enforcement, education, encouragement, evaluation) that have
been successful in other communities are outlined below. With the assistance of the task force,
Lynwood should customize a comprehensive program for itself.
Enforcement
Enforcement activities bring the community together to promote safe walking, bicycling, and
driving. Law enforcement plays a key role in this effort; however, residents and youth can get
involved as well.
As a first step, the City should convene a meeting with local law enforcement. Officers have
first -hand knowledge of unsafe behavior and locations. In addition, mutual understanding of
the purpose, direction, and benefits of an enforcement campaign between the law enforcement,
staff, and community will be critical. A law enforcement representative should be a part of the
community task force.
The second step is to identify unsafe behaviors and locations. These can range from speeding
vehicles to bicycles riding the wrong direction. Outreach at schools, events like "National Night
Out;' or with the established community task force, can help identify hot spots and issues. This will
assist law enforcement and community members in shaping a campaign.
LAW ENFORCEMENT METHODS
Law enforcement use a variety of methods to enforce driver, pedestrian, and cyclist behavior.
Active education campaigns should coincide with targeted enforcement. If officers plan to target
speeding, a media campaign informing citizens to slow down and obey the posted speed limit will
complement the effort. Enforcement methods include
I. Speed Trailers and Active Speed Monitors. Speed trailers and active speed monitors display
the speed of oncoming vehicles. Speed trailers are portable, whereas speed monitors are
installed at permanent locations. Both devices help officers track motorist speed, display
current speed to motorists, and create awareness of the posted speed limit. Devices should
be placed at known locations with reported speeding, and should be used in conjunction
8-3 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
with random ticketing operations.
2. Traffic Complaint Hotline. Lynwood residents can report non- emergency traffic violations
to law enforcement if there is an established traffic complaint hotline. Officers can target
problem areas more effectively with records of traffic complaints. This also allows the
community to engage efficiently with officers.
3. Photo Enforcement. Automated photo enforcement takes a real -time photo of traffic to
record vehicle speeds and behaviors. It can be used to document speeders and those who
drive dangerously through crosswalks. Often the presence of cameras alone can help curb
dangerous behavior. The use of cameras will require a complimentary public education
campaign, and should be evaluated by the City Attorney prior to use.
4. Pedestrian Deco. Officers can conduct random pedestrian decoy operations at locations
where motorists do not yield to pedestrians crossing in a crosswalk. A plain - clothes officer
crosses the crosswalk in front of an approaching vehicle (where the vehicle has enough
time to stop). Another officer waits nearby to ticket any motorists that do not yield to the
pedestrian. These operations can also serve as an educational tool. The City should work
with local law enforcement to announce the pedestrian decoy operation and campaign
prior to enforcement.
5. Sneed Enforcement in School Zones. Strict enforcement of speed laws in school zones can
improve the safety for children walking and bicycling to school. A `zero tolerance' policy for
speeders in school zones, and an increase in fines for drivers who violate the posted school
zone speed limit, are both potential approaches.
6. Presence. The presence of officers at random locations throughout the City can be an
enforcement tool in and of itself. Drivers' fear of getting ticketed can serve to correct
behavior.
Other Personal Safety Concerns. During community outreach sessions, Lynwood residents
said they do not walk or allow their children to walk alone due to fear of gang violence, public
intoxication, and prostitution. Law enforcement can increase patrol in areas identified by
residents. Officers should work with the community to create an enforcement strategy that
addresses these concerns.
COMMUNITY ENFORCEMENT
Residents have an important part to play in enforcement initiatives. Community members can
work with officers to assist with catching repeat offenders, letting officers know where there are
problems, and setting examples for friends and neighbors.
Student Safety Patrols. Student safety patrols enhance enforcement of drop -off and pick-
up procedures at schools by increasing safety for students and traffic flow efficiency for
parents. Having a student safety patrol program at a school requires approval by the school
and a committed teacher or parent volunteer to coordinate the student trainings and
patrols. Before beginning a program, school officials should be contacted for approval of
the program and to determine how liability issues will be addressed.
Program.., • 8 -4
2. Corner Captains. The corner captain program is effective
in neighborhoods with short, grid -like blocks, with clear
sight lines from street to street. The program is effective in
neighborhoods where lack of adult supervision is a barrier to
walking and bicycling. Neighbors or parents agree to stand
at a corner of a route to school during the start or end of the
school day to supervise kids as they walk to or from school.
With short blocks and clear sight lines, students will be seen
the entire length of the block. Corner captains should wear
reflective vests.
3.
Neighborhood Speed Watch / Radar Lending Program. If
speeding is a problem, law enforcement officers can lend
their speed radar guns to students or residents to check
speeds of passing vehicles. The student or resident records
the license plate number of any speeding vehicles, and law
enforcement will send a speeding notice warning to the motorist. A group of organized
neighbors can also commit to periodically monitoring streets for speeding vehicles.
4. Pace Vehicle. Residents can set the pace on streets in their neighborhood by driving no
faster than the posted speed limit. On streets with only one lane in each direction, this will
effectively force other motorists to drive slower. Many communities distribute stickers that
say "Neighborhood Pace Car - Drive the Speed Limit;' which residents can place on their
rear windshield.
5. Crossing Guards. Adult school crossing guards can assist students on their walk to school
by ensuring students only cross when it is safe. Crossing guards should be trained (there are
numerous outside agencies that conduct crossing guard training), and should wear bright,
reflective vests at all times.
Education
DEFINE THE PROBLEMS AND GOALS
Much like enforcement campaigns, defining education - related problems and goals should be the
first step prior to programming. Some of the key education problems have already been identified
as part of this planning process. For example, Staff has seen numerous bicyclists riding the wrong
direction. It is likely that law enforcement has found motorists speeding on neighborhood streets,
or not yielding to pedestrians at unmarked crossings. Some examples of common pedestrian and
bicycle - related problems that can be addressed through education are
• Drivers don't yield to pedestrians in crosswalks
• Children do not know how to cross safely
• Commuters are unaware of alternative ways of traveling to work
• Developers, designers, and engineers are not using the best design practices for pedestrians
and bicyclists
8 -5 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pede uim Transportation Plan
Pedestrians and drivers do not know what legal crossings for pedestrians are, and when
drivers should yield to crossing pedestrians
After the community and city staff identify the key education - related problems, they can create
goals and objectives. If possible, they should be measurable. For example, if there is a low driver
yield -rate to pedestrians at a certain crossing, the City can a set a goal to increase the yield rate after
education programs have been instituted.
IDENTIFY THE AUDIENCES
Educational programs must be tailored to specific
audiences in order to effectively address the behaviors the
programs seek to modify. For example, a child bicyclist
will need different education on how to ride than an adult
bicyclist. Similarly, different messaging will resonate with
teen drivers than an adult drivers. The most common
audiences that will benefit from education programs
include
1. Road users -drivers (young, adult, older), bicyclists
and pedestrians (children, teens, adults /parents/
neighbors, seniors)
2. Commuters and employers
3. Officials and policy makers - engineers, planners, council members, law enforcement
4. Visitors
For each group, the City should consider when and how the audience should receive the
information, and the demographic factors that may affect how the audience understands /perceives
the information. Descriptions of educational campaigns and programs that have been successful
and other communities are described below. Each should be tailored to Lynwood's specific issues
and audiences.
CITYWIDE CAMPAIGNS
1. "Everybody Walks" Campaign Every trip, no matter what mode is ultimately used, begins
and ends with a walking trip. It could be walking from one's home to the car, walking to
a transit station, or walking to a bicycle parking station. The City should consider a broad
pedestrian awareness campaign including promotional materials and media announcements.
Depending on the type of media used to disburse information, the campaign could include
information such as
• Easy ways to incorporate walking into daily activity
• Health benefits of walking
• Website / telephone number for more information
• Rules of the road
Programs • 8 -6
2. Public Service Announcements. Lynwood can promote and educate residents about walking
and bicycling through frequent public service announcements (PSAs) on local channels.
Organizations such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Safe
Kids Coalition, and California Office of Traffic Safety, have existing PSAs that Lynwood can
use. Lynwood can incorporate its own logos and slogans into these PSAs. Lynwood's mayor
or council members could also record their own radio or television announcements for
broadcast. Los Angeles' Mayor recently recorded PSAs alerting motorists to give a bicyclist
3 feet when passing, and stressing the importance of wearing a helmet while riding. Topics
could include
• Pedestrian education for seniors
• Driver education about pedestrians
• Drivers running red lights
• Bicyclists riding safely
3. Bicycle and Walking Maps and Guides. Attractive maps with bicycle and walking routes
to destinations in Lynwood can serve as an educational tool. The guide should showcase
how easy it is to get around Lynwood through alternative modes, and include tips on safe
bicycling and walking. The guide should be distributed at kiosks throughout the City, and
at local bicycle shops.
4. Print and Media Campaign. Lynwood can incorporate educational messages such as "STOP!
It could be someone you love in the crosswalk" or "Use the other pedal and slow down"
into media coverage, events, street banners, maps, posters, stickers, guides, etc. Lynwood
should work with the community to craft messaging that addresses specific educational
goals. Messaging should be multilingual if necessary.
S. Signs / Pavement Markings. Educational signage and pavement markings such as "look
both ways" at crossings, and "riding the wrong way" signs on sidewalks can help spread
educational messages. Depending on the type of sign or marking, the City may need to go
through an experimental process with the California Traffic Control Device Committee
(CTCDC) and /or Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
6. Enforcement Education. The City should work with local law enforcement to consider
creating a Diversion Program. This program serves as "traffic school" for any road user that
violates rules concerning walking and bicycling. Rules concerning bicyclist and pedestrian
behavior are often misunderstood. The program should specifically address motorists on
how to interact with bicyclists and pedestrians, and clarify misconceptions. Huntington
Beach is one of the only cities in Southern California that has a diversion program; it can
serve as an example for Lynwood.
COMMUTERS AND EMPLOYERS
1. Bike -Buddy Program. The City should work with employers to start a "bike -buddy
program' This program would pair experienced cyclists with new cyclists to bicycle to
work together. The City could offer organized skills training prior to the program's kick -off
8 -7 • Lynwood Biryde and Pedestrim rrmsporialion Plan
to teach bicycling safety skills to all employees.
2. Economic. Health. and Environmental Benefits. The City should create a presentation to
education employers on the potential economic, health, and environmental benefits if their
employees walked and bicycled instead of drove. Employers of a certain size must meet
certain air quality goals based on how their employees commute to work. They also must
pay if they exceed these thresholds. Employers have much to gain by changing driving trips
to walking /bicycling trips.
YOUTH SPECIFIC
1. Safe Routes to School. Safe Routes to School
(SRTS) refers to a variety of programs aimed
at promoting walking and bicycling to school,
and improving traffic safety around schools.
The program takes a comprehensive "5 E"
approach (as defined in this chapter) with
specific engineering, education, encouragement,
enforcement, and evaluation. The programs
involve partnerships among school staff, parents,
students, city staff, school districts, neighbors, and law enforcement. The National Center
for Safe Routes to School has in -depth programming information. Integrating educational
messages into a comprehensive SRTS program can be a very effective way to kick -start a
citywide program. Specific education tools include
• Pedestrian skills training for 1st and 3rd graders
• Bicycle skills training for 3rd and 5th graders
• Messaging to parents about safe driving, walking and bicycling habits
• Creating drop -off and pick -up procedures
• Incorporating information about walking and bicycling into classroom subjects such as
math or science (e.g., calculate average walking speeds or distances)
• Assemblies or classroom sessions about safety
2. Teen Driving, Cycling, and Pedestrian Education Teens need different educational messages
than adults or children. The City should work with local teen - organizations, or schools
to facilitate a participatory process whereby teens create educational messages. Youth
Participatory Action Research (YPAR) is an effective way to assist youth to create visuals,
videos, or campaigns for safety among their peers. The California Department of Public
Health has guides on YPAR and youth -led projects.
3. Personal Safety. Youth should go through a personal safety educational course to address
topics such as bullying, alcohol, drugs, gangs, etc. The City should work with local law
enforcement to address specific concerns of residents.
Programs • 8 -8
ADULT ROAD USERS
1. Skills Training. The City should work with organizations such as Sustainable Streets to offer
free bicycling skills training on the weekends. The League of American Bicyclists has lists of
League Certified Instructors who can also teach courses on bicycle safety.
2. City Webp2,e and Mailers. The City should create a designated webpage for bicycle and
pedestrian programs, events, and education. The page should have a link to this Plan, maps,
and safety tips. The City can also distribute road, bicycle, and pedestrian safety tips in utility
bills to all residents.
3. BiTvcle Shop Courses. The City can work with local bicycle shops to promote bicycle safety
skills courses. The bicycle shop could also help spread the word for education courses
through its clientele list.
4. Senior Center Presentations. Seniors often rely on walking and transit as their primary
modes of transportation. Lynwood should work with local senior centers to provide activities
related to safe walking for seniors. The City's program should also focus on safe driving for
seniors. Many seniors do not want to give up driving even when it may be unsafe because it
is perceived as a loss of independence. Educational messaging should address this concern.
OFFICIALS AND POLICYMAKERS
1. Training for Law Enforcement. Law enforcement officers are first - responders to pedestrian
and bicycle - involved collisions. Due to the complexity of pedestrian and bicycle- involved
crashes, fault is often assigned incorrectly, and relevant information mis- recorded (or
omitted). Officers should receive special training to understand how to record and respond
to pedestrian and bicycle- involved crashes. In addition, more cities have officers on bicycles
as part of regular enforcement. Officers that patrol on bicycles should receive special skills
training.
2. Walk and /or Bicycle Audits. Lynwood can lead regular walking and bicycling audits as part
of outreach strategies for new development projects, or as a comprehensive SRTS program.
A walk / bicycle audit leads interested stakeholders on a set course walk / ride to discuss
openly how comfortable the area is, concerns, and what can be done to improve the area.
Educational components to the audit include discussing safety at specific locations and safe
riding / walking tips before the audit.
3. Public Transit and Taxi Driver Training. Operators of buses and taxis should receive special
training on how to interact with bicyclists and pedestrians. Bus operators should also know
how to operate bicycle racks on the bus.
Encouragement
Encouragement strategies promote walking and bicycling as fun activities, and generate excitement
and interest. Encouragement programs play a key role in making walking and bicycling "the norm'
8-9 • Lynwood Biryde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
By showcasing how fun and easy it can be to walk and bicycle, there is an opportunity to shift the
perceptions of the community.
Encouragement programs should target the same audiences as education campaigns. Many
encouragement programs are most successful when paired with existing institutions - such as at
schools or large businesses.
Strategies to encourage walking and bicycling are limited only by imagination. They can be anything
creative such as contests, rides, special districts, etc. Getting the community involved to create
messaging and programs will be essential to program success. Activities that can serve as a model
to kick -start Lynwood's encouragement programs are described below.
CITYWIDE CAMPAIGNS
1. Public Art. Public art, such as murals and sculptures, have been used to promote ideals
and inform the community of important issues. The City can solicit help from local artists,
children, and volunteers to create art that would encourage residents to live physically active
lives.
2. Mobile Walk Exhibit. The City could organize a traveling exhibit promoting walking and
bicycling. The exhibit could have photo displays of new facilities around Lynwood, videos
promoting walking and bicycling, maps and guides, etc. This kiosk could be present during
community events and local festivals.
3. First Friday Walks The City could initiate a campaign to walk in the evening as a community
the first Friday of every month. This will help create awareness, make it fun to walk together
as families and neighbors, and the City could provide central meeting points or music
during the event in the Downtown area.
4. Two -Wheel Tuesdays. The City can work with community members to start a designated
day that encourages residents to ride their bicycles together to work or for short trips. The
City can promote the days through its website, and offer incentives such as free food or
snacks at parks throughout Lynwood for those who
arrive by bicycle.
5. Ciclovia. Started in Columbia, a ciclovia is a regular
closing of a network of streets for exclusive use by non -
motorized users. The CicLAvia in Los Angeles draws
over 100,000 people during each event. Streets are
public space - this event helps residents see a new use for
streets, and gets them used to walking and bicycling in a
safe environment without cars. Volunteers are needed to
support the event.
6. Equipment Giveaways Lynwood can work with local
law enforcement to create a program to give away found
bicycles to low- income residents. In addition, the City
can start a helmet, lights and bicycle fund.
Programs • 8 -10
Bike - Friendly Business District (BFBD). Long Beach began the first BFBD program in
2010. The program encourages merchants and their customers to replace cars with bicycles.
The City works with local business owners in certain retail districts to offer incentives such
as discounts for bicyclists, free bike valet, free bike tune -ups, bicycle parking, and special
stickers. This creates an incentive the community to arrive by bicycle, and works well for the
merchants who often see an increase in the number of customers.
8. Bicycle Sharing. A bicycle sharing program is a service in which bicycles have been
purchased by the jurisdiction or in partnership with an outside organization to provide
bicycles at certain locations for shared use by the community. Many cities throughout the
United States and internationally have had extreme success with bicycle sharing programs.
These programs are especially useful when there may be a large tourist population, or for use
in the central business district. The number, location, and type of bicycle, and the payment
system, is essential for the program's success.
YOUTH SPECIFIC
1. "Walk and Roll" Wednesdays. City staff can work with parents and teachers at local
elementary schools to establish a designated walk and bicycle to school day. Tokens such
as bicycle lights or stickers can be given to those students that participate by walking or
bicycling to school on the specified day. As part of this regular walking and bicycling day,
the City can also participate on International Walk to School Day.
2. Walking School Buses. Walking school buses are organized walking groups, where adults
"pick up" walkers along a specific route at specific locations. This way, children are supervised
during their walk to school. Students have great fun walking together and talking before the
school -day begins. This program also can free up time for parents who typically have to
drop -off and pick -up their child everyday.
3. Mileage Club. School administrators can create a mileage club competition for the most
number of miles walked or bicycled by a student, classroom, or school. Prizes can be given
to the group that accrues the most miles over a set period of time.
4. Bicycle Trains. Similar to walking school buses, bicycle trains are organized bicycling
groups. An adult supervises and leads a bicycling group of children to or from school.
COMMUTERS / EMPLOYERS
1. Commuter of the Month. Employers could organize a "commuter of the montH' competition
for the employee that commutes to work using alternative modes of transportation the most
trips of the month. Prizes can vary.
2. Bike to Work Month. May is National Bicycle Month, and the City can piggy -back on
this designated month with various activities for employers and employees. For example,
employers can organize a bicycle to work day or week, with events at the employment site
or prizes for those who commute by bicycle.
3. Parking Cash-out. California law requires employers of a certain size who provide subsidized
8 -11 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
parking to offer cash allowances in lieu of the parking space. The explicit purpose of this law
is to encourage getting to work by alternative modes. The City should work with employers
to hold an informational workshop, complete with skills training, guides of how to get to
work via transit, walking, or bicycling, and how to participate in parking cash -out, as an
educational and encouragement program.
Evaluation
Evaluation is used to determine whether goals and objectives are being met. The benefits of
conducting regular program and project evaluations will ensure underlying problems are being
addressed, will help set reasonable expectations, identify changes to improve the program,
determine whether the program has the desired results, and help make adjustments to the program
as needed. Evaluation can take many forms, from formal pedestrian counts to attitudinal surveys.
In addition, evaluation is a very important part of garnering additional funding for bicycle and
pedestrian projects.
BASELINE DATA COLLECTION
Collecting baseline data about attitudes toward walking and bicycling, how people travel throughout
Lynwood, infrastructure deficiencies, and crash data, will help inform program development. The
following are pieces of data the City should consider collecting, evaluating, and incorporating
results into policy and capital improvement project decisions.
1. Attitudinal surveys. Survey questions such as "what deters you from walking and bicycling ?"
or "what mode do you use for short trips ?" aim to understand attitudes toward walking and
bicycling, and common concerns. These surveys can be done citywide, or as part of a SRTS
program for parents.
2. Mode of travel survey. This survey asks what mode a respondent used for a certain trip.
Mode of travel surveys are commonly done in schools as part of SRTS to find out how many
children walked, bicycled, were driven, etc. This will help city staff understand the current
state of walking and bicycling.
3. Walking and bicycling route assessment The City can choose to evaluate walking and
bicycling conditions on key streets. This Plan has already evaluated existing conditions for
bicyclists on several streets, and walking conditions at many intersections. The City should
consider conducting systematic evaluations.
4. Pedestrian and Bicycle Counts Counting numbers of bicyclists and pedestrians around
the City can help staff prioritize improvements. These counts can also be included in travel
demand models. The Southern California Association of Governments is developing a
count methodology which should be available for use by jurisdictions in 2013.
5. Crash Data. Analyzing crash data for type of crash, parties involved, and location will give a
picture of safety of bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists. This data can also help set priorities.
Program., • 5 -12
PROGRAM - SPECIFIC EVALUATION
Another type of evaluation is to define goals and then corresponding objectives and measurements
to achieve those objectives. For example, suppose the Cityplans to install bulb -outs at an intersection
with the objective to slow approaching vehicles and decrease pedestrian - involved crashes. Prior
to installation, staff can measure vehicle approach speeds, and analyze the volume of pedestrian
crashes. Periodically after installation, staff can measure these same factors. Analysis of these data
will help inform how effective the treatment was, and further applications.
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center in collaboration with Safe Routes to School experts
identify several key goals, objectives, and measurements on saferoutesinfo.org. Examples include
1. Install Sidewalks
• Objective: Get Sidewalk improvements on city plan within 1 year
• Measure: Presence of sidewalk improvements on city plan
• Objective: Complete gaps in sidewalks along routes to schools within 2 years.
• Measure: Presence and quality of sidewalks
2. Encourage Speed Reduction
• Objective: Hold one news conference and deliver informational fliers to all parents regarding
speed awareness campaign
• Measure: Number of news conferences and fliers distributed
• Objective: Reduce average speeds in school zones to 25 mph within 1 year
• Measure: Speed of vehicles near schools; number of citations
8-13 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Lynwood Program Implementation
The programs identified in this section should be modified and tailored to conditions in Lynwood.
The City commits to starting a comprehensive program with initial steps, and will modify its
programming with recommendations from this Plan as time goes on. The City will seek additional
outside funding to continue and enhance programming in coming years.
From outreach conducted as part of this planning effort, the City found that it needs to address
reckless driving, personal safety concerns, and education of motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
The table below identifies planned actions and a timeline for implementation during the year
following the adoption of this Plan.
Programs • 8-14
Month
Activity
1
1 2
3
4
5
6 7
8
9
10
11 1 12
Convene community task force
Pedestrian deco
" Everybody Walks" Campaign
Adult and Youth Skills
Training
Ciclovia
Pedestrian and Bicycle Counts
Programs • 8-14
9. FUNDING
This section of the Plan describes the variety of federal, state, and local sources that can fund
the implementation of this Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan. The City currently
pursues several sources of federal and state grant funding aggressively. The City could apply
for further funds in often under - utilized programs. The implementation chapter provides a
ranked project - phasing that will aid the City in deciding which projects to build first.
A variety of potential funding sources, including local, state, regional, and federal funding
programs, maybe used to construct the proposed bicycle improvements. Most of the Federal
and State programs are competitive, and involve the completion of extensive applications
with clear documentation of the project need, costs, and benefits. Local funding for projects
can come from sources within jurisdictions that compete only with other projects in each
jurisdiction's budget.
A detailed program -by- program explanation of available funding along with the latest
relevant information follows.
Federal Funding Programs
MAP -21
The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP -21), passed in June 2012,
sets the framework for spending federal transportation revenue. Provisions of the previous
transportation bill, the Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA -LU), will be in force until October 2012, at which time the new
law will go into effect.
MAP -21 consolidates the three main programs that contained dedicated funding for biking
and walking under SAFETEA -LU. These were Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to
School, and Recreational Trails. Theyare now a single category, Transportation Alternatives.
Under MAP -21, bicycling and walking projects are eligible for the following core programs:
National Highway Performance Program (NHPP), Surface Transportation Program
(STP), Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), and Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality Improvement (CMAQ), Metropolitan Planning, and Transportation Alternatives.
MAP -21's Transportation Alternatives combines the following SAFETEA -LU programs:
Transportation Enhancements (now known under MAP -21 as Transportation Alternatives,
a project category within the Transportation Alternatives program), Safe Routes to School,
and Recreational Trails. Transportation Alternatives program funds are drawn from NHPP,
STP, CMAQ, and Metropolitan Planning, and are dedicated funds by and large for bicycling,
walking, and safety for all users. Biking, walking, and trails projects are also eligible for a
handful of other programs such as Scenic Byways funds, Transportation, Community, and
9 -1 . Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
System Preservation Program (TCSP), and Tribal High Priority Projects
The Cardin - Cochran amendment to MAP -21 requires 50% of all program funding to be
distributed by population directly to local metropolitan planning organizations. The rest
of the funding is administered by the States. Thus, MAP -21 funding is administered by the
California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) and the local metropolitan planning
organization (MPO). In the past, this has been the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation
Authority (Metro), but the law may be interpreted such that the Southern California
Association of Governments will play the role of local MPO.
MAP -21's approach to distribution of funds among the states is based upon the amount
of funds each state received under SAFETEA -LU's core programs. A primary difference
from SAFETEA -LU is that states have the ability to transfer 50% of any apportionment
to another formula program, except no transfers are permitted of Metropolitan Planning
funds or funds suballocated to areas based upon population.
Generally, Caltrans distributes funding through each district's Local Assistance Program.
Previously, Los Angeles County Metro was responsible for allocating all discretionary
federal, state and local transportation funds to improve all modes of transportation for
Los Angeles County, though that may change under MAP -21. Metro has done so primarily
through the Call for Projects (CFP) program. The CFP is a competitive process by which
these discretionary funds are distributed to regionally significant projects every other year.
There are seven categories in which projects are competitively ranked, including categories
for bikeways improvements and pedestrian improvements. The CFP process is part of the
larger Los Angeles County Transportation Improvement Program.
Each state has its own method for distributing federal funds. The funding allocation
process employed by Caltrans for core programs under SAFETEA -LU typically combined
some form of state programming with some distribution of funds to regions or local MPOs.
Neither Caltrans nor Metro yet knows how funds from the various programs of MAP -21
will be distributed.
More information can be found at:
http://www.fhwa.dot-gov/map21/summaryinfo.cfm
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is reauthorized under MAP -21, and
received a substantial increase in funding relative to SAFETEA -LU. It aims to achieve a
significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious accidents through the implementation
of infrastructure - related highway safety improvements. These improvements may be on any
public road or publicly owned bicycle and pedestrian pathway or trail, and can include
the use of devices such as traffic signals, curb extensions, and crosswalks. In 2009, $1.296
billion in funds was available nationwide.
Funding . 9 2
MAP -21 allows each state to use HSIP funds for education and enforcement activities, as
long as those activities are consistent with the state's Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP).
California completed its SHSP in September 2006, and created an Implementation Plan in
April 2008. MAP -21 also requires states to focus funds on improvements for pedestrians
and the elderly if crashes among these groups are not below a threshold level.
Applications are submitted electronically, and must demonstrate that the proposed
engineering improvments will increase the safety of the proposed project area. These are
calculated in the application program using Crash Reduction Factors with accompanying
financial values. Project areas which have a prior history of injuries or fatalities are more
likely to be funded.
More information can be found at:
http: / /www. dot. ca .gov /hq /LocalPrograms /hsip.htm
http:/ /safety.fhwa. dot .gov/ safetealu /fact_sheets /ftsht1401.cf n
http: / /www. bikele ague. org /resource s/ rep orts/ pdfs /highway_safety_improvement
program.pdf
Recreational Trails Program
The Recreational Trails Program is reauthorized under MAP -21. The California State Parks
and Recreation Department administered Recreational Trails Program (RTP) funds under
SAFETEA -LU, and will likely continue to administer the state's half of the funds under
MAP -21. RTP annually funds recreational trails, including bicycle and pedestrian paths.
Cities, counties, districts, state agencies, federal agencies and non -profit organizations
may apply. A 12 percent match is required. Federal, state, local and private funds may be
used to match the grant. There is no limit to the grant request; however, there are different
requirements within the grant application depending on whether the project requires more
or fewer than $100,000.
More information can be found at:
Tel. (916) 653 -7423
localservices @parks.ca.gov
http : / /www.parks.ca- gov / ?Page_id =24324
http://www.fliwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/
Transportation, Community, and System Preservation Program (TCSP)
This program is reauthorized under MAP -21. It provides federal funding for projects that
improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce the impact on the environment,
and generally investigate the relationships between transportation, community and system
preservation. Eligible projects include improving conditions for bicycling and walking,
better and safer operations of existing roads, new signals, and development of new
programs. States, MPOs and local jurisdictions are eligible to apply for the discretionary
grants. Grantees must annually report on the status of the project and the degree to
which the project is attaining the stated goals. The report must include quantitative and
qualitative assessments. The Federal Highway Administration administers the program,
9 -3 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
and distributed approximately $29 million nationwide in FY 2012. The FHWA solicits a call
for grant applications annually.
More information can be found at:
http:// www .fhwa.dot.gov /tcsp /index.httnl
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)
The Land and Water Conversation Fund is reauthorized under MAP -21. States receive
individual allocations of LWCF grant funds based upon a national formula, with state
population being the most influential factor. States initiate a statewide competition for the
amount available annually. The State then receives, scores, and ranks applications according
to certain project selection criteria so that only the top- ranked projects (up to the total
amount available that year) are chosen for funding. Chosen applications are then forwarded
to the National Park Service for formal approval and obligation of federal grant monies.
Bike paths and recreational trails are eligible uses of this money. Cities, counties, recreation
and park districts, and any other entity that has the authority to develop or maintain a
public park is eligible to apply. This program is a reimbursement program, and the applicant
is expected to initially finance the entire project. A one for one match is required, and
federal funds cannot be used as a match, except Community Development Block Grants.
The California State Parks Department administered the state funds under SAFETEA -LU.
More information can be found at:
http://www.parks.ca.gov/?Page_id=21360
COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG)
The CDBG entitlement program allocates annual grants to larger cities and urban counties
to develop viable communities by providing decent housing, a suitable living environment,
and opportunities to expand economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate -
income persons. Every year the local governments receive federal money for a wide variety
of community improvements in the form of CDBG funds. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
are eligible uses of these funds. CDBG funds only pay for projects in areas of economic
need. No match is required.
More information can be found at:
http://www.hud-gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/
RIVERS, TRAILS, AND CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
(RTCA)
The Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program is the community assistance arm
of the National Park Service. RTCA provides technical assistance to communities in order
to preserve open space and develop trails. The assistance that RTCA provides is not for
Funding. 9 -4
infrastructure, but rather building plans, engaging public participation, and identifying
other sources of funding for conservation and outdoor recreation projects.
More information can be found at:
http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/rtca/index.htm
http: / /www.nps.gov /ncrc / programs /rtca /contactus /cu_apply.html
9 -5 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedcstrian Transportation Plan
State Funding Programs
Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 (SB 82 1)
TDA Article 3 funds —also known as the Local Transportation Fund (LTF) —are used by
cities within Los Angeles County for single -time planning, and annual construction of
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Each city in Los Angeles County receives TDA Article 3
funds from Metro according to population.
TDA Article 3 funds may be used for the following related to the planning and construction
of bicycle and pedestrian facilities:
• Engineering expenses leading to construction
• Right -of -way acquisition
• Construction and reconstruction
• Retrofitting existing bicycle facilities to comply with the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA)
• Route improvements, such as signal controls for cyclists, bicycle loop detectors,
rubberized rail crossings, and bicycle - friendly drainage grates
• Purchase and installation of bicycle facilities, such as improved intersections, secure
bicycle parking, benches, drinking fountains, changing rooms, rest rooms, and showers
adjacent to bicycle trails, employment centers, park- and -ride lots, and /or transit
terminals accessible to the general public
Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA)
The State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) is an annual statewide discretionary
program that is available through the Caltrans Bicycle Facilities Unit for funding bicycle
projects. Available as grants to local jurisdictions, the BTA emphasizes projects that benefit
bicycling for commuting purposes. Agencies may apply for these funds through the Caltrans
Office of Bicycle Facilities. Applicant cities and counties are required to have an approved
bicycle plan that conforms to Streets and Highways Code 891.2 to qualify and compete
for funding on a project -by- project basis. Cities may apply for these funds through the
Caltrans Office of Bicycle Facilities. A local match of 10% is required for all awarded funds.
Every year $7.2 million is allocated for bicycle projects statewide. The Non - motorized
Transportation Plan establishes a regional network from which local plans can build upon
for local- serving bicycle and pedestrian routes. Once a jurisdiction has an approved bicycle
plan that meets the requirements of the Street and Highways Code 891.2, they may apply
for the Caltrans grant.
More information can be found at:
http : / /www.dot.ca.gov /hq /MassTrans /State- TDA.html
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/Loca]Programs/bta/btawebPage.htm
Funding • 9 -6
Safe Routes to School (SR2S)
The Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program is separate from the federal Safe Routes to
School Program. This program, initiated in 2000, is meant to improve school commute
routes by improving safety to bicycle and pedestrian travel through bikeways, sidewalks,
intersection improvements, traffic calming, and ongoing programs. This program funds
improvements for elementary, middle, and high schools. A local match of 10% is required
for this competitive program, which allocates approximately $24.25 million annually, or $40
million to $50 million in two -year cycles. Each year the state legislature decides whether to
allocate funds to the program. Caltrans administers SR2S funds through its district offices.
More information can be found at:
http: / /www. dot. ca. gov /hq /LocalPrograms /saferoutes /saferoutes.htm
Office of Traffic Safety (OTS)
The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) seeks to reduce motor vehicle fatalities and
injuries through a national highway safety program. Priority areas include police traffic
services, alcohol and other drugs, occupant protection, pedestrian and bicycle safety,
emergency medical services, traffic records, roadway safety, and community-based
organizations. The OTS provides grants for one to two years. The California Vehicle Code
(Sections 2908 and 2909) authorizes the apportionment of federal highway safety funds to
the OTS program. Bicycle safety programs are eligible programs for OTS start -up funds.
City and county agencies are eligible to apply, as are councils of governments. There is no
set maximum for grants, and no match is required; however, contributions of other funds
may make projects more competitive.
More information can be found at:
http: / /www.ots.ca.gov /Grants /Apply /Proposals_2011.asp
http: / /www.dot.ca.gov /hq /traffops /saferesr/
Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEMP)
EEM Program funds are allocated to projects that offset environmental impacts of modified
or new public transportation facilities, including streets, mass transit guideways, park -n-
ride facilities, transit stations, tree planting to mitigate the effects of vehicular emissions,
off -road trails, and the acquisition or development of roadside recreational facilities. Every
year $10 million dollars is available, with individual grants limited to $350,000. Cities,
counties, Councils of governments, state agencies, and non -profit organizations may apply.
No match is required; however, additional points will be given for matching funds. The
State Resources Agency administers the funds.
More information can be found at:
http://www.resources.ca.gov/eem/
9 -7 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transpomfion Plan
AB 2766 Subvention Program
AB 2766 Clean Air Funds are generated by a surcharge on automobile registration. The
South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) allocates 40% of these funds to
cities according to their proportion of the South Coast's population for projects that improve
air quality. The projects are up to the discretion of the city and may be used for bicycle or
pedestrian projects that could encourage people to bicycle or walk in lieu of driving. The
other 60% is allocated through a competitive grant program that has specific guidelines for
projects that improve air quality. The guidelines vary and funds are often eligible for a variety
of bicycle and pedestrian projects. The Mobile Source Review Committee administers the
discretionary funds.
More information can be found at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/localgovt/AB2766.htm
http: / /www.agmd.gov /trans /ab2766.html
Per Capita Grant Program
The Per Capita Grant Program is intended to maintain a high quality of life for California's
growing population by providing a continuing investment in parks and recreational
facilities. Specifically, these funds are for the acquisition and development of neighborhood,
community, and regional parks and recreation lands and facilities in urban and rural areas.
Eligible projects include acquisition, development, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration,
and enhancement projects, and the development of interpretive facilities for local parks and
recreational lands and facilities. Per Capita grant funds can only be used for capital outlay.
They may be used for bike paths and trails. This grant is given to local governments based
on their population. Some cities have used up their full allocation, while others have not.
Regional parks and open space districts also receive these funds. The California State Parks
Department administers the grant funds.
More information can be found at:
http : / /www.parks.ca.gov / ?page_id =22333
Funding. 9 -8
Roberti- Z'Berg -Harris (RZH) Grant Program - Proposition 40
Funds from the Roberti- Z'berg- Harris Urban Open Space and Recreational Grant Program
are to be used for:
• High priority projects that satisfy the most urgent park and recreation needs, with
emphasis on unmet needs in the most heavily populated and most economically
disadvantaged areas within each jurisdiction
• Projects for which funding supplements rather than supplants local expenditures for
park and recreation facilities and does not diminish a local jurisdictions efforts to
provide park and recreation services
• Block grants allocated on the basis of population and location in urbanized areas
Need -basis grants to be awarded competitively to eligible entities in urbanized areas
and in non - urbanized areas
Eligible projects include:
• Acquisition of park and recreation lands and facilities
• Development /rehabilitation of pack and recreation lands and facilities
• Special Major Maintenance of park and recreation lands and facilities
• Innovative Recreation Programs
Bike paths and recreational trails are eligible. Cities, counties, and recreation and parks
districts may apply for these funds. The maximum grant request is $250,000 per project,
and no match is required. The California State Parks Department administers the funds.
More information can be found at:
http: / /www. parks .ca.gov /default.asp ?page_id =22329
9 -9 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Trannspmtation Plan
Proposition 84 - Statewide Park Program
The Statewide Park Act awards grants on a competitive basis to the most critically under -
served communities across California for the creation of new parks and new recreational
facilities. Altogether, $368 million will be given in two funding cycles. The first funding
cycle in 2009 awarded $184 million. Grants range from $100,000 to $5 million. No match
is required. Bikeways and trails can be funded with this program, and they need not be in
a park.
The creation of new parks in neighborhoods where none currently exist will be given priority.
These new parks will meet the recreational, cultural, social, educational, and environmental
needs of families, youth, senior citizens, and other population groups.
Cities, counties, districts with a park and recreation director, councils of governments, joint
power authorities, or nonprofit organizations are eligible to apply for these funds. The
California State Parks Department administers the Statewide Park Program funds.
More information can be found at:
http://www.parks.ca.gov/?Page—id=26025
Proposition 84 — Urban Greening Project Grants
In 2006 California voters passed Proposition 84 to expand recreational facilities and to fund
environmental quality projects. Of this, $70 million was set aside to fund urban greening
projects that reduce energy consumption, conserve water, improve air and water quality,
and reduce global warming gases. This money will be dispersed in three funding cycles.
The first cycle ended in April 2010. Cities, counties, and nonprofit organizations are eligible
to apply for these funds. No matching funds are required, but they are encouraged. Bike
paths and recreational trails are eligible uses of this money. The State of California Strategic
Growth Council administers this program.
More information can be found at:
http://www.resources.ca.gov/bonds—Prop84—urbangreening.htmi
http://sgc.ca.gov/urban—greening—grants.html
Funding • 9 40
Wildlife Conservation Board Public Access Program
The Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB) provides grants for the development of facilities
for public access to hunting, fishing, or other wildlife- oriented recreation. These monies can
be used for trail head development and boardwalks, among others. Support facilities such
as restrooms and parking areas are also eligible for funding. A 50% match is the preferred
amount for the funds. The program typically has $1 million for local assistance grants
available annually.
More information can be found at:
http: / /www.wcb.ca.gov /Access /index.htmi
Transportation Planning Grant Program
The Transportation Planning Grant Program has two grant programs which can aide the
planning and development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The Environmental Justice:
Context Sensitive Planning (EJ CTP) Grant is to promote the involvement of low- income
and minority groups in the planning of transportation projects. The program requires a
local match of 10% with a 5% in -kind contribution maximum. The Community Based
Transportation Planning (CBTP) program funds coordinated transportation and land use
planning projects that encourage community involvement and partnerships. These projects
must support livable and sustainable community concepts. The Office of Community
Planning, part of Caltrans's Division of Transportation Planning, is responsible for managing
the program and receives approximately $3 million annually for each program. Grants are
available up to $300,000 for the Community Based Transportation Planning grant, and
$250,000 for the Environmental Justice Context Sensitive Planning Grant. MPOs, Regional
Transportation Planning Agencies, cities, counties, and transit agencies are all eligible to
apply for funding.
More information can be found at:
http:// www .dot.ca.gov /hq /tpp /grants.html
For EJ CTS - Tel. (916) 651 -6889
For CBTP - Tel. (916) 651 -6886
9 -11 . Lynwood bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Local Funding
Proposition C Local Return
Proposition C, the Los Angeles County 1/2 cent sales tax, returns 20% of revenue to the
cities according to population. The money may be spent on a variety of transportation
projects, including bicycle projects. Some of the Proposition C funding is programmed
through the Metro Call for Projects (see SAFETEA -LU section above).
Measure R Local Return
A portion of this Los Angeles County 1/2 cent sales tax revenue returns to the cities according
to population. The money may be spent on a variety of transportation projects, including
bicycle projects. Of the $40 billion which will be collected over the 30 years from Measure
Ws passage in 2008, $5.91 billion (approximately 15 %) will be returned to local jurisdictions
for improvements such as street resurfacing, rehabilitation and reconstructions, bikeways,
pedestrian improvements, and streetscapes. Cities may spend this money as they choose
from these categories. The distribution of funds varies by year.
More information can be found at:
http: / /www.metro.net /projects /measurer/
Resurfacing and Repaving
Local jurisdictions should take advantage of opportunities to add bicycle lanes and other
markings upon resurfacing and repaving of streets. While other lanes are restriped, the
bike facilities can be painted as well. This requires close coordination with the Planning or
Community Services Department and Public Works so that low cost bicycle upgrades are
not left out of street maintenance projects.
New Construction
Future road widening and construction projects are one means of providing bike lanes,
pedestrian improvements, and trails. To ensure that roadway construction projects provide
appropriate measures where needed, it is important that an effective review process or
ordinance is in place to ensure that new roads meet the standards and guidelines presented
in this Plan. Developers may also be required to dedicate land toward the widening of
roadways in order to provide for enhanced bicycle mobility.
Funding • 9 -12
Impact Fees and Developer Mitigation
Impact fees maybe assessed on new development to pay for transportation projects, typically
tied to vehicle trip generation rates and traffic impacts generated by a proposed project. A
developer may reduce the number of trips (and hence impacts and cost) by paying for on-
or off -site bikeway improvements that will encourage residents to bicycle rather than drive.
In -lieu parking fees may also be used to contribute to the construction of new or improved
bicycle parking facilities. P.stablishing a clear nexus or connection between the impact fee
and the project's impacts is critical in avoiding a potential lawsuit. Local jurisdictions have
the option to create their own impact fee and mitigation requirements.
Benefit Assessment Districts
Bike paths, bicycle lanes, bicycle parking, and related facilities can be funded as part of a
local benefit assessment district. However, defining the boundaries of the benefit district
may be difficult since the bikeways will have citywide or regional benefit. Sidewalks, trails,
intersection crossings, and other pedestrian improvements can also be funded through
benefit assessments.
Property Taxes and Bonds
Cities and counties can sell bonds to pay for bikeways and pedestrian facilities, as well as
any amenities related to these facilities. A super- majority of two- thirds of voters in that
jurisdiction must vote to levy property taxes to repay the bonds.
Business Improvement Districts
Bicycle and pedestrian improvements can often be included as part of larger efforts of
business improvement and retail district beautification. Similar to benefit assessments,
Business Improvement Districts (BIDS) collect levies on businesses in order to fund area-
wide improvements that benefit businesses and improve access for customers. Thesedistricts
may include provisions for bicycle improvements such as bicycle parking or shower and
clothing locker amenities, sidewalk improvements, and pedestrian crossing enhancements.
9 -13 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
User Fees
Bicycle lockers and automated bicycle parking can be paid for with a user fee. Since the
amount of revenue this fee would generate is difficult to predict, this funding source would
require an alternative backup source.
Parking Meter Revenues
Cities can fund various improvements through parking meter revenues. The ordinance that
governs the use of the revenues would specify eligible uses. Cities have the option to pass
ordinances that specify bicycle or pedestrian facilities as eligible expenditures.
Adopt -a -Path Program
Maintenance of bicycle paths and recreational trails could be paid for from private funds in
exchange for recognition, such as signs along the path saying "Maintained by (name) ". In
order for this funding source to be sustainable, a special account can be set up for donors
to pay into.
General Funds
Cities and counties may spend general funds as they see fit. Any bicycle, pedestrian, or
trails project can be funded completely through general funds, or general funds can be used
as a local match for grant funds.
Funding • 9 -14
10. IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter outlines an implementation strategy for Lynwood, and provides planning -level cost
estimates for proposed bicycle and pedestrian projects.
Bikeways Past F,xPenditures
The City has no past expenditures on bikeways.
Future Financial Needs
TABLE 10 -1: BIKEWAY CAPITAL FINANCIAL NEEDS
TABLE 10 -2: PEDESTRIAN CAPITAL FINANCIAL NEEDS
Intersection Improvements 1 $2,830,000
Any sidewalk improvements will require additional capital.
The City also has ongoing costs for planning, engineering, and other miscellaneous functions, and
hopes to continue the bicycle and pedestrian education, encouragement, and enforcement program
at a cost of $50,000 per year.
In addition, the City will need to set aside special budget for maintenance of proposed new facilities.
Facilities must be maintained in order to stay effective. Treatments such as colored bicycle lanes
and b -type sharrows will require more paint and maintenance than the typical bike lane or sharrow
treatment. The City will ensure maintenance budget is set aside prior to implementing these types
of bikeways.
Project Priorities
This Plan will be implemented as funds become available to the City. Projects are prioritized
into three categories: Short Term, Medium Term, and Long Term, according to the following
criteria:
Preferences expressed by the community at the public workshops and through comments
Implementation . 10 -1
Bikeways
$13,400,000
r
Bicycle Parking
$130,000
TOTAL
$13,530,000
TABLE 10 -2: PEDESTRIAN CAPITAL FINANCIAL NEEDS
Intersection Improvements 1 $2,830,000
Any sidewalk improvements will require additional capital.
The City also has ongoing costs for planning, engineering, and other miscellaneous functions, and
hopes to continue the bicycle and pedestrian education, encouragement, and enforcement program
at a cost of $50,000 per year.
In addition, the City will need to set aside special budget for maintenance of proposed new facilities.
Facilities must be maintained in order to stay effective. Treatments such as colored bicycle lanes
and b -type sharrows will require more paint and maintenance than the typical bike lane or sharrow
treatment. The City will ensure maintenance budget is set aside prior to implementing these types
of bikeways.
Project Priorities
This Plan will be implemented as funds become available to the City. Projects are prioritized
into three categories: Short Term, Medium Term, and Long Term, according to the following
criteria:
Preferences expressed by the community at the public workshops and through comments
Implementation . 10 -1
received from the public via email and personal contact
• City staff preferences
• Destinations served
• History of bicycle- involved or pedestrian- involved crashes
• Current availability and /or suitability of right -of -way
• Likelihood of attracting large numbers of users
• Connectivity with the regional bikeway system
• Links to other transportation modes
• Cost effectiveness
The City will also seek to implement bikeways based on opportunity, such as when streets are
resurfaced, or other street projects are taking place. The colored bike lanes at the intersection
of Imperial Highway and Ruth Avenue should be implemented in conjunction with the
pedestrian project at that location.
The following tables identify all the projects grouped according to their priority category. The
projects are not ranked within each priority category.
TABLE 10 -3: SHORT -TERM BIKEWAYS
102 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Bikeway
Santa Fe Ave.
Cost/Range
$22,600
State St.
$41,100
State St. / Santa Fe Ave.
$1,939,200
Long Beach Blvd.
$143,000
Bullis Rd.
$58,200
Thorson Ave. - Thorson Alley
$8,900
Harris Ave. - Sanborn Ave. - Pine St. -
Beechwood Ave. - Harris Ave.
$30,800
Atlantic Ave.
$49,500
Duncan Ave. - El Granada Ave.
$23,400
Wright Rd.
$89,200
Abbott Rd.
$3,171,900
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
$171,900
Platt Ave.
$18,900
Josephine St.
$26,500
Josephine St.
$4,300
Agnes St.
$6,800
Yvonne Burke John D. Ham Park
$130,400
TOTAL.
$5,937,000
102 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
TABLE 10 -4: MEDIUM -TERM BIKEWAYS
Bikeway
California Ave.
Cetst/Rangte
$56,100
Birch St.
$22,300
Spruce St. / Fir St.
$13,300
Otis St. / Imperial Hwy.
$235,200
Alexander Ave.
$3,400
Sampson Ave. - Pendleton Ave. - Jackson Ave.
$8,200
Sequoia Dr.
$2,200
Norton Ave.
$20,600
Los F,ores Blvd.
$108,100
Le Sage St.
$10,600
Sanborn Ave.
$6,300
Lynwood City Park
$237,900
San Luis Ave.
$322,000
TOTAL
$1,046,000
TABLE 10 -5: LONG -TERM BIKEWAYS
Alameda St.
t
$137,500
Tweedy Blvd.
$24,800
Fernwood Ave. / Plaza Mexico
$2,040,000
Carlin Ave.
$2,606,500
Olanda St.
$2,500
Wright Rd. - Los Angeles River
$1,594,000
Imperial Hwy.
$10,500
TOTAL
$6,416,000
Implementation, 10 -1
TABLE 10 -6: SHORT -TERM INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection
Cost/Range
$61,900
Abbott Rd. and Atlantic Ave.
Cost/Range
$73,100
Carlin Ave. and Atlantic Ave.
$81,100
Imperial Hwy. and Atlantic Ave.
$84,100
Imperial Hwy. and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
$49,600
Josephine St. and Long Beach Blvd.
$70,100
Martin Luther Kin Jr. Blvd. and Atlantic Ave.
$68,600
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and Bullis Rd.
$50,400
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and California Ave.
$71,900
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and Long Beach Blvd.
$58,100
Midblock Green Line Station
$217,650
Norton Ave., San Luis Ave., and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
$101,350
Pendleton Ave. and Atlantic Ave.
$74,000
State St., Tenaya Ave., Long Beach Blvd.
$50,600
Tweedy Blvd. and Long Beach Blvd.
$61,600
Tweedy Blvd. and State St.
$75,400
TOTAL
$1,187,600
TABLE 10 -7: MEDIUM -TERM INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection
Abbott Rd. and Alexander Ave.
Cost/Range
$61,900
Agnes St. and Atlantic Ave.
$69,600
Elizabeth Ave and California Ave. (Cost estimate for repaving
included in Bikeways Cost Estimate table)
$54,050
Fernwood Ave. and Atlantic Ave.
$68,100
Imperial Hwy. and Long Beach Blvd.
$47,100
Imperial Hwy, and Otis St.
$230,150
Imperial Hwy. and Ruth Ave.
$129,200
Imperial Hwy, and State St.
$78,600
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and Beechwood Ave. (Muriel Dr.)
$67,400
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and Capistrano Ave.
$45,800
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and Duncan Ave.
$50,650
Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and Harris Ave.
$76,100
Norton Ave. and California Ave. (Cost estimate for repaving
included in Bikeways Cost Estimate)
$73,900
Sanborn Ave. and Atlantic Ave.
$74,900
Sanborn Ave. and Birch St.
$37,750
TOTAL
$1,165,200
10 4 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
TABLE 10 -8: LONG -TERM INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection
Banning Ave. and Santa Fe Ave.
Cost/Range
$74,900
Carlin. Ave. and Thorson Ave. (Cost estimate for
repaving included in Bikeways Cost Estimate table)
$57,300
Fern_wood Ave. and Bullis Rd.
$44,900
Imperial Hwy. EB and 710 Fwy. NB off -ramp
$1,350
Imperial Hwy, EB and 710 Fwy. NB on -ramp
$11,100
Imperial Hwy. EB and 710 Fwy. SB off -ramp
$11,100
Imperial Hwy. EB and 710 Fwy. SB on -ramp
$22,350
iosephine St. and Bullis Rd.
$69,900
Long Beach Blvd. NB and 105 Fwy. EB on -ramp
$22,350
Long Beach Blvd. NB and 105 Fwy. WB off -ramp
$12,450
Long Beach Blvd. NB and 105 Fwy. WB on -ramp
$22,350
Long Beach Blvd. SB and 105 Fwy EB off -ramp
$33,400
Long Beach Blvd. SB and 105 Fwy. EB on -ramp
$22,350
Long Beach Blvd. SB and 105 Fwy. WB on-ramp
$22,350
Shirley Ave. and Beechwood Ave.
$51,650
TOTAL
$479,800
Monitoring
The City will monitor the progress of Bicycle Plan Implementation. One of the best ways to
do this is by conducting regular counts of bicyclists. The Southern California Association of
Governments is in the process of establishing a baseline methodology for bicycle counts and a
database of baseline activity in Los Angeles County. The City should employ this methodology.
The following provides general guidance to the City to conduct counts.
Results of counts should be made available to the public. In order to gain meaningful
information from bicycle counts, it will be important to conduct the counts:
• At numerous locations that represent overall travel behavior
• During the week and on the weekend
• All hours of the days when cyclists are likely to ride, with emphasis on peak periods if
resources are scarce
. During at least two times of the year
Implementation • 10 -1
• At the same times every year
• At the same places every year
• With the same methodology every year
• On representative normal days; not holidays, etc.
Locations
Bicycle counts should be conducted at a variety of locations. Intersections are best since they
capture cyclists on two streets. It will be most useful to conduct counts at a number of locations
that present a different picture. Some should be at the intersection of two bikeways to see if the
bikeway network is working, or if bikeways are on the proper streets. Others maybe conducted
at future bikeways so that the impact of the bikeway can be assessed over time. It will also
be useful to know about travel on very busy streets that are not bikeways, as well as on quiet
streets that are not bikeways.
The number of count locations can be determined in many ways, but is typically based on
the current population. Lynwood should continue to monitor these established locations. The
highest volume interesctions should be included in subsequent counts. The City should also
prioritize improvements along these streets.
Prior to planned large future developments, new bikeways, and other bikeway improvements,
Lynwood should consider adding appropriate count locations to further understand the impact
of infrastructure improvements and development on bicycling.
In addition, small streets may also be selected without bikeways as representative streets to
indicate how many people cycle on streets with few cars.
Full counts should be conducted at these specified locations. The City should recruit and
encourage volunteers to participate in the count.
Times
Cyclists should be counted at all times when they are likely to be present. This may be 7:30 am
to 7:30 pm, or extended hours. The counts should be broken into time intervals of 15, 30, or 60
minutes. To capture the greatest number of commuting cyclists, counts should be conducted
during the am and pm peak hours, similar to vehicle peak - period counts.
Days of the Week
Counts should be conducted on typical days. One weekday, Monday through Thursday, should
represent typical weekday behavior. They should also be done on at least one weekend day.
Saturdays may even differ from Sundays. The most accurate will count on both days, but
selecting one should be sufficient. Counts should be conducted on representative days, where
the weather is typical for Lynwood (no rain), and there are no unusual events. Counts should
10 6 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedeslrian'rransportatlnn Plan
not be done during Bike to Work Week because the event may skew the numbers. If the City
wants to see how effective Bike to Work Week is, it could add this week for additional counts.
Times of the Year
Cyclists often ride more during summer than other months. Selecting one month to conduct
counts in the summer, then one another time of year should yield representative results. June
may be a representative summer month because fewer people travel in June than July or August.
Another count in the fall, winter, or spring could represent typical non - summer months.
Regular Counts
Bicycle counts should be done regularly. Ideally, they will be done during the same weeks every
year, or comparable weeks. They should use the same count sheets and overall methodology. It
will be best to use the same weekend days as well. In other words, if one is done on a Saturday
in June, the next time the counts are done in June they should be on a Saturday.
Tallying
Those conducting the manual counts should have tally sheets that enable them to record and
compile all the desired information easily. Tally sheets should come with instructions.
Example count fmm.
Implementation • 10 -1
Motor Vehicle Counts
For additional information, motor vehicles counts could be conducted at, or about, the same
time as the bicycle counts atthe bicycle count locations. This would enable the City to determine
the percentage of vehicles that are bicycles at those locations. They could also be averaged to
approximate a citywide percentage.
10 -8 . Lynwoud 6icydc and Pedestrian Transpurtadon Plan
11. DESIGN GUIDELINES
This chapter describes general design guidelines for the facilities identified in this plan.
'the City will need to follow standard manuals such as the California Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices, Highway Design Manual, American Association of State Highway
and 'Transportation Officials' "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets,"
National Association of City Transportation Officials' Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and
others. The City may have to amend its own street design guidelines in order to implement
certain facilities. Lynwood should take precaution and research the newest bikeway design
guidelines and engineering treatments prior to constructing a facility.
Bikewav Guidelines
DEFINITIONS
Bicycle
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials' (AASHTO)
(1999) definition of a bicycle is "every vehicle propelled solely by human power which any
person may ride, having two tandem wheels, except scooters and similar devices. The term
'bicycle' also includes three- and four - wheeled human - powered vehicles, but not tricycles
for children.'
Class I
Referred to as a bike path, shared -use path, or multi - purpose trail.
Provides forbicycle travel on apaved right-of-way completely separated
from any street or highway. Other users may also be found on this
type of facility.
Class II
Referred to as a bike lane. Provides a striped lane for one -way bicycle
travel on a street or highway.
Class III
®Referred a bike route. Provides for shared use with pedestrian or
' motor vehicle traffic.
I I • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
DESIGN
The following guidelines present the recommended minimum design standards and other
recommended ancillary support items for shared use paths, bike lanes, and bike routes.
Where possible, it maybe desirable to exceed the minimum standards for shared use paths or
bike lane widths, signage, lighting, and traffic signal detectors. These guidelines cover basic
concepts. The Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 and the AASHTO Guide for
the Development of Bicycle Facilities contain more detailed standards and guidance and
should be followed.
Class I Bike Path Facilities Design Recommendations
1. All Class I bike paths should conform to the design guidelines set forth by Caltrans.
2. Class I bike paths should generally be designed as separated facilities away from
parallel streets. They are commonly planned along rights -of -way such as waterways,
utility corridors, railroads, and the like that offer continuous separated riding
opportunities.
3. Both AASHTO and Caltrans recommend against using most sidewalks for bike
paths. This is due to conflicts with driveways and intersections. Where sidewalks
are used as bike paths, they should be placed in locations with few driveways and
intersections, be properly separated from the roadway, and have carefully designed
intersection crossings.
4. Bike paths should have a minimum of eight feet of pavement, with at least two feet of
unpaved shoulders for pedestrians /runners, or a separate tread way where feasible.
A pavement width of 12 feet is preferred.
5. Multi -use trails and unpaved facilities that are not funded with federal transportation
dollars and that are not designated as Class I bike paths do not need to be designed
to Caltrans standards.
6. Class I bike path crossings of roadways should be carefully engineered to
accommodate safe and visible crossing for users. The design needs to consider the
width of the roadway, whether it has a median, and the roadway's average daily
and peak -hour traffic volumes. Crossings of low- volume streets may require simple
stop signs. Crossings of streets with Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of approximately
15,000 should be assessed for signalized crossing, flashing LED beacons, crossing
islands, or other devices. Roundabouts can be a desirable treatment for a bike path
intersecting with roadways where the bike path is not next to a parallel street.
7. Landscaping should generally consist of native vegetation that consumes little water
and produces little debris.
8. Lighting should be provided where commuters will likely use the bike path in the
late evening.
Design • 11 2
9. Barriers at pathway entrances should be clearly marked with reflectors and be ADA
accessible (minimum five feet clearance). See Figure 11 -1.
10" _
_Post
- -O t
4 -irx b ye3!ow stripe — ''/
Figure I l -I: Bike Path Barrier Post Treatment
10. Bike path construction should take into account vertical requirements and the
impacts of maintenance and emergency vehicles on shoulders.
Cycle Tracks
Cycle tracks, also known as protected bike lanes, are bikeways located on or adjacent to
streets where bicycle traffic is separated from motor vehicle traffic by physical barriers, such
as on- street parking, posts /bollards, and landscaped islands. They can be well suited to
downtown areas where they minimize traffic conflicts with pedestrians. Streets selected
for cycle tracks should have minimal pedestrian crossings and driveways. They should also
have minimal loading/unloading activity and other street activity. The cycle tracks should
be designed to minimize conflicts with these activities as well as with pedestrians and
driveways.
Cycle tracks can be provided on new facilities, but they require more width than other types
of bikeways. They are best suited for existing streets where surplus width is available; the
combined width of the cycle track and the barrier is more or less the width of a travel lane.
The area to be used by bicycles should be designed with adequate width for street sweeping
to ensure that debris will not accumulate. Cycle tracks tend to work most effectively where
there are few uncontrolled crossing points with unexpected traffic conflicts.
Cycle track concerns include treatment at intersections, uncontrolled midblock driveways
and crossings, wrong -way bicycle traffic, and difficulty accessing or exiting the facility at
midblock locations. There is some controversy regarding the comparative safety of cycle
tracks. Recent studies have concluded that cycle tracks are as safe as other treatments when
high usage is expected and when measures such as separate signal phases for right- turning
motor vehicle and through cyclists, and left- turning cyclists and through motor vehicles,
are deployed to regulate crossing traffic.
11 -3 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Class II Bike Lane Facilities Design Recommendations
The following guidelines should be used when designing Class II bikeway facilities.
These guidelines are provided by the Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000,
the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and the Caltrans Traffic Manual.
1. Class II Bike Lane facilities should conform to the minimum design standard of 5
feet in width in the direction of vehicle travel adjacent to the curb lane. Where space
is available, a width of 6 to 8 feet is preferred, especially on busy arterial streets, on
grades, and adjacent to parallel parking.
2. Under certain circumstances, bike lanes may be 4 feet in width. Situations where
this is permitted include the following.
- Bike lanes located between through traffic lanes and right turn pockets at
intersection approaches (see Figure 11 -2)
- Where there is no parking, the gutter pan is no more than 12" wide, and the
pavement is smooth and flush with the gutter pan
- Where there is no curb and the pavement is smooth to the edge
3. "Bike Lane" signage, as shown in Figure 11 -2, shall be posted after every significant
intersection along the route of the bike lane facility. Directional signage may also
accompany this sign to guide bicyclists along the route. If a bike lane exists where
parking is prohibited, "no parking" signage may accompany bike lane signage.
on na
BIKE LANE
Figure I1 -2: Bike Lane Sign (Caltrans)
4. Bike lanes should be striped with a solid white stripe of width at least 6 inches and
may be dashed up to 200 feet before the approach to an intersection. This design of
a dashed bike lane allows for its dual use as a right -turn pocket for motor vehicles.
5. Stencils shall also be used within the lane on the pavement that read "bike lane"
and include a stencil of a bicycle with an arrow showing the direction of travel (see
Figure 11 -3).
Design . 11 4
Figure l l -3: Bike Lane Striping and Stencil
6. Bike lanes with two stripes are more visible than those with one and are preferred.
The second stripe would differentiate the bike lane from the parking lane where
appropriate.
7. Where space permits, intersection treatments should include bike lane `pockets' as
shown in Figure 11 -4.
8. Loop detectors that detect bicycles should be installed near the stop bar in the bike
lane at all signalized intersections where bicycles are not reasonably accommodated.
Signal timing and phasing should be set to accommodate bicycle acceleration speeds.
Figure 11 -4: Bike Lane Treatment at lntersection(MUTCD,
AASHTO)
11 5 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
RWR
J6 .«M
Rdd at beghnhg of
nght -tum iam
Colored Bicycle Lanes
Green bicycle lanes are short lanes that are used where right -turn pockets direct motorists
through a bicycle lane to turn right. The green lane makes it obvious to motorists that they
are crossing the bicycle lane and makes them more likely to be cautious and to look for
bicycles.
Figure I 1 5: Green Bicycle Lanes
Green bicycle lanes can be used as continuous treatment as well (Figure 11 -5), not only
in conflict zones. The treatment has been approved on an interim basis by the Federal
Highway Administration and the California Traffic Control Device Committee. Lynwood
would need to notify the state if it chooses to use this treatment.
Buffered Bike Lanes
Buffered bike lanes provide a painted divider between the bike lane and the travel lanes.
This additional space can improve the comfort of cyclists as they dolt have to ride as close
to motor vehicles. Buffered bike lanes can also be used to narrow travel lanes, which slows
traffic. An additional buffer may be used between parked cars and bike lanes to direct
cyclists to ride outside of the door zone of the parked cars. Buffered bike lanes are most
appropriate on wide, busy streets. They can be used on streets where physically separating
the bike lanes with cycle tracks is undesirable for cost, operational, or maintenance reasons.
Figure 11 -6: Buffered Bike Lanes
Design. 11 -6
Class III Bike Routes
Bike routes have typically been designated as simple signed routes along street corridors,
usually local streets and collectors. With proper route signage, design, and maintenance,
bike routes can be effective in guiding bicyclists along a route suited for bicycling without
having enough roadway space to provide a dedicated Class II bike lane. Class III Bike Routes
can be designed in a manner that encourages bicycle usage, convenience, and safety There
are a variety of other improvements that can enhance the safety and attraction of streets for
bicyclists. Bike routes can become more useful when coupled with such techniques as the
following:
• Route, directional, and distance signage
• Wide curb lanes
• Sharrow stencils painted in the traffic lane along the appropriate path of where a
bicyclist would ride in the lane
• Accelerated pavement maintenance schedules
• Traffic signals timed and coordinated for cyclists (where appropriate)
• Traffic calming measures
The following design guidelines should be used with the implementation of new Class III
Bike Route facilities:
Proper "Bike Route" signage, as shown in Figure 11 -7, should be posted after every
intersection along the route of the bikeway. This will inform bicyclists that the bikeway
facility continues and will alert motorists to the presence of bicyclists along the route.
Directional signage may accompany this sign as well to guide bicyclists along the route.
Figure 11 -7: Bike Route Sign
1 1 -7 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
This Plan recommends using the sharrow stencil (Figure I1 -8) as a way to enhance the
visibility and safety of new Class III Bike Route facilities. The stencil should be placed
outside of on- street vehicle parking to encourage cyclists to ride away from parked cars'
open doors. Stencils should also be placed at one or two locations on every block or more
frequently on long blocks.
Figure 11 -8: Shure. Stencil
Design • 11 -8
Figure 9C407. Shared Roadway Bicycle Marking
3
3
G
E
E
a
aru
`3
mE$
33
1WWM 203mm 229 mm
3
(4 In) (6 in) (9 in)
mS
_
`3
102
m
—
i
(i n)
23
p
76 mm (3 in)
Win
E6
mm
(7 in)
InInn.
i \
I7 NI I I
(7.S In)
\' 1
3
Ww
u3
mS
29
`3
3
E
E4
rvCl
36 mm 26 m
3 m
(1d N) 410ni
165mm
216 mm
(6.5 NI
619 mm (24 m)
(6.5 in)
All rounded comers
991 mm I39 ")
152 mm x 152 mm grid
25 mm (1 in) radius
(6 in x 6 in)
NO SCALE
Figure 11 -8: Shure. Stencil
Design • 11 -8
Based on California MUTCD, Section 9C.103(CA) Shared Roadway Bicycle Markings, the
standard states: "The shared roadway bicycle marking shall only be used on a roadway
(Class III Bikeway (Bike Route) or Shared Roadway (No Bikeway Designation)) which has
on- street parallel parking. If used, shared roadway bicycle markings shall be placed so that
the centers of the markings are a minimum of 3.3 meters (11 feet) from the curb face or
edge of paved shoulder"
On two lane roadways, this minimum 11 -foot distance will allow vehicles to pass bicyclists
on the left within the same lane without encroaching in the opposite lane of traffic. On
multi -lane roadways, installing the sharrows marking more than 11 feet from the curb will
move the bicyclist farther from the "door zone"
Sharrow markings should be placed in straight lines to allow the bicyclist to travel in a
straight line. This often means the sharrow markings are in the center of the lane, greater
than the minimum guide of 11 feet from the curb. Sharrow markings should be placed
outside the "door zone" where on- street parking is provided.
Placing the sharrows between tire tracks, as shown in Figure 8 -9, increases the life of the
markings and decreases long -term maintenance costs.
Figure I t -9: Sharrow Placement
11 -9 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Ransportation Plan
B -Type Sharrows
The City of Long Beach is presently experimenting with green coloring of travel lanes (see
Figure 11 -10) with sharrows. The wide green stripe sends a strong signal to cyclists as to
where they should ride, and communicates to motorists that bicyclists are legitimate users
of the entire travel lane. Although no standards are established, multi -lane streets with
narrow curb lanes are likely the most appropriate to apply this treatment. This treatment
has not yet been approved as part of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (CA MUTCD). Until it is approved, the City would have to use this treatment
under a sanctioned experimental process.
Figure 11 -10: Long Beach Green $harrow Lane
Brookline, Massachusetts uses large sharrows placed close together with an additional outer
marking.
Figure 11 -11: Brookline, MA Sharrow Markings
Design • I I -10
Bicycle Boulevards
A bicycle boulevard is a street that prioritizes through bicycle traffic and discourages
through motor vehicle traffic. Traffic calming devices control traffic speeds and slow or
prohibit through trips by automobiles. Traffic controls limit conflicts between automobiles
and bicyclists and give priority to through bicycle movement at intersections. One key
advantage of bicycle boulevards is that they attract cyclists who do not feel comfortable on
busy streets and prefer to ride on lower traffic streets.
Successful bicycle boulevard implementation requires careful planning with residents and
businesses to ensure acceptance.
I I l • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Components of a bicycle boulevard are depicted in Figure 11 -12.
Cyclist activates
signal by
push button
El
c
Traffic signal ®...'.
allows bikes to
One -way choker
cross arterial
prohibits motor
vehicle traffic
from entering
bike boulevard
Traffic circle
acts as traffic
calming device
Stop signs turned /J
tofavorthrough
movement on
bike boulevard
e
Median opening Raised median
allows bicyclists prevents motor
to cross arterial - -"r vehicle traffic
from cutting
through
Figure I1 -12: Components of a Bicycle Boulevard (Michele Weisbart)
Design • 11 -12
Freeway On- and Off -Ramp Crossings
Interchanges are not always designed to accommodate bicyclists safely and comfortably
across a freeway. The California Highway Design Manual (HDM) classifies freeway
interchanges into 13 types, and the guide, "Complete Intersections: A Guide to Reconstructing
Intersections and Interchanges for Bicyclists and Pedestrians;' published by Caltrans in
2010, categorizes which of these types accomodate bicyclists and Pedestrians. Interchange
configurations where ramps are at a near right angle provide the best accommodation
because vehicles are forced to slow down before turning.
It 13 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
SHORT -TERM TREATMENTS
In the short -term, striping and signage can improve conditions for bicyclists crossing the
710 and 105 freeways. Figure 11 -13 shows two options that improve safety and comfort at
free -flow ramp intersections.
OR
Stripe bicycle lane to allow
bigllsts to cross ramp traffic
atWdegreeangle
(mfy appmgbce M oa mmp
lanes become thmugh Imm,
Widen outside lane /shoulder enough to
provide bicycle lanes through intersection
(4 toot minmunI Warwilmutgutter
pan 5 root minimum JioulM WIh
goner pan)
Consider STOP signs or signals
to allow pedestrians to cross
Install yield line and yield
here pedestrian sign
�v
li ST Stripe high visibility crosswalks
Consider pedestrian - activated
Flashing beacons
-- Typical bicyclist's line oftowel
....... Typical pedednan's line ofhavel
Figure I I -13: Signage and Striping Treatments for Free -Flow Ramp Intersections (Souree: Complete intersections, Cal trans 2010)
Dcslgn. it 14
s�
Install yield line and yield
here to pedestrians sign
Stripe bicycle lanes to the left
4
of right -turn only lanes
i#
Construct single, rather than
[
4
dual right -turn only lanes
5
i
16
-- Typical bicyclist's line oftowel
....... Typical pedednan's line ofhavel
Figure I I -13: Signage and Striping Treatments for Free -Flow Ramp Intersections (Souree: Complete intersections, Cal trans 2010)
Dcslgn. it 14
LONG -TERM TREATMENTS
In the long -term, an interchange can be reconstructed to eliminate free flow lanes and
reconfigure intersections so that on and off ramps meet the crossroad at or near 90 degrees.
Complete Intersections indicates that there are six interchange types that are best suited to
accommodate pedestrian and bicyclists. These are shown in Figure 11 -14.
TYPE L -1 TYPE L -2 TYPE L -3
-.. iTs
TYPE L -6 TYPE L -7 TYPE L -8
Figure 11 -14: Interchanges that Best Accommodate Pedestrians and Bicyclists (Source: Figure 502.2, Caltrans Highway Design Manual)
t t -lS - Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Signage and Markings
Bikeway signage should conform to the signage standards identified in the Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices ( MUTCD, 2009) and the California MUTCD 2010. These
documents give specific information on the type and location of signage for the primary
bikeway system. The table below provides guidance on some of the most important signs.
TABLE 114: RECOMMENDED BIKEWAY SIGNAGE AND MARKINGS
Bicycle Crossing
For motorists at a
B on Y
N/A
Wl 1 -15 with
W1 I- 15P
bikeway crossing
(optional)
At the far side of
Bike Lane
significant arterial
B O°
R81
R3 -17
intersections
STOP Ahead
Where a STOP sign is
B,R
W3 -1
W3 -1
obscured
on Y
Signal Ahead
Where signal is obscured
B,R,G
W3 -3
W3 -3
Where a pedestrian
Pedestrian Crossing
walkway crosses a
B on Y
W11-2
W11-2
bikeway
At intersections
Won
G7
D1 -1b, D1 -2b,
Directional Signs
where access to major
D1 -3b, D1 -1c,
destinations is available
G
G8
D1 -2c, D1 -3c
Right Lane Must Turn
Right;
Where a bike lane ends
B on
N/A
R3 -7
Begin Right Turn Here,
before an intersection
W
R4 -4
R4 -4
Yield to Bikes
Where there is need to
Share the Road
warn motorists to watch
B on Y
W16 -1 with
W16 -1P with
for bicyclists along the
Wll -1
WI1 -1
highway
Where travel lanes are
Bicycles May Use Full
too narrow for bicyclists
B on
Lane
and motor vehicles to
W
R4 -11
R4 -11
travel side by side
Design, 11 16
A numbered bike route network may be devised as a convenient way for bicyclists to
navigate through the City, analogous to the way in which the numbered highway system
guides motorists efficiently through the roadway network This could be used on all classes
of bikeways. An example of a numbered bikeway sign is shown in Figure 11 -15.
Figure 11 -15: Numbered Bikeway Sign (MUTCD)
Figure I1 -16 below shows an example of a "Share the Road" sign.
Figure I 1 -16: Share the Road Sign
The City of Lynwood should launch a wayfinding system to guide bicyclists to their
destinations. Glendale, CA recently began installing wayfinding signs along their network,
as shown below. Signs will be typically placed at decision points along routes within the
City's bicycle network, which may include the intersection of two or more bikeways and at
key locations leading to and along bikeways.
Figure 11 17: Glendale Wayfinding Sign
Vancouver, British Columbia, marks street signs with bicycles if they are a bicycle route as
shown below in Figure 11 -18.
11 -17, Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Figure 11 -18: Vancouver Street Signs
Directional Signage
It is important to provide information to cyclists where bike routes turn, or where bikeways
intersect. This can be done with both signs and pavement markings as shown below. Lynwood
can enhance typical Class III routes with directional Signage and pavement markings. These
markings allow the cyclist to understand how the route continues, especially if it is one
which may be less direct.
Figure 11 -19: Bicycle Signage and Pavement Markings
Figure 11 -20: Bicycle Route month Directional Signage
Design. 11 -I8
Bicycle Parking
Bicycle parking is a critical component of the network and facilitates bicycle travel,
especially for commuting and utilitarian purposes. The provision of bicycle parking at
every destination ensures that bicyclists have a place to safely secure their mode of travel.
Elements of proper bicycle parking accommodation are outlined below.
1. Bike racks provide short -term parking. Bicycle racks should offer adequate support
for the bicycles and should be easy to lock to. Figure 11 -21 displays a common
inverted -U design that does this. Figure 11 -22 depicts a multi- bicycle rack that
works well. Figure 11 -23 shows an innovative concept in which the bike rack itself
looks like a bicycle.
Figure 11 2 h °lnverted -U" Bicycle Ric"
Figure 11 -22: Muhi Ricycle Parking Rack
11 -19 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Figure 11-23: "Bike" Bike Rack
2. Inverted -U racks placed next to each other (as shown in the right -hand photo of
Figure I1 -21) should be placed at least 36 inches apart (48 inches is recommended),
so bicycles can be loaded on both sides of the rack.
3. Long -term parking should be provided for those needing all day storage or enhanced
safety. Bicycle lockers offer good long -term storage, as shown in Figure 11 -24.
Bicycle lockers should be approximately 6' x 2' x 4, and should consider the needs
of folding and recumbent bicycles. Attendant and automated parking also serves
long -term uses as shown in Figure 11 -25.
Figure 11 -24: Bicycle lockers
Figure 11 -25: Automated Bicycle Puking
Design. 11 20
4. Bicycle parking should be clearly identified by signage, such as that shown in Figure
11 -26. Signage shall also identify the location of racks and lockers at the entrance to
shopping centers, buildings, and other establishments where parking is not provided
in an obvious location, such as near a front door.
PARKING
Figure I1 -26: Bicycle Parking Sign (Caltrans)
5. Bicycle parking should be located close to the front door of buildings and retail
establishments in order to provide for the convenience, visibility, and safety of those
who park their bicycles. The City should consider the "wheels to heels" transition.
Every bicyclist must become a pedestrian when entering a building; the City should
place bicycle parking in locations that facilitate this process, and discourage sidewalk
riding in pedestrian- oriented districts.
6. At transit stations and in dense housing complexes, two -tier racks can be used. These
racks allow bicycles to be loaded on the top or bottom, with a lever that swings
to the ground to allow for top rack loading. Individual racks are also staggered in
height such that bicycle handlebars will not hit each other. The racks are placed very
closely together (approximately 16" apart).
Piguo, 1 I -27: Berkeley Bike Station (two -tier racks)
11 -21 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Staggered wall- mounted bicycle racks can be used inside in small offices, commercial
areas, and apartment complexes. Extra precaution should be taken for security
including locked entry to the storage area, as well as locks on the rack itself. If
staggered in height, bicycles can be placed every 16" apart. The figure below does
not include a locking mechanism, which is recommended.
Figure 11 -28: Wall- mounted Bicycle Rack (without lock)
8. Bicycle lockers should have informational signage, placards, or stickers placed on
or immediately adjacent to them identifying the procedure for how to use a locker.
This information at a minimum should include the following:
- Contact information to obtain a locker at City Hall or other administrating
establishment
- Cost (if any) for locker use
- Terms of use
- Emergency contact information
9. Bicycle lockers should be labeled explicitly as such and shall not be used for other
types of storage.
10. Bicycle racks and storage lockers should be bolted tightly to the ground in a manner
that prevents tampering.
Design . 11 22
11. Bike corrals are created when a local jurisdiction replaces on- street auto - parking
spaces with rows of bicycle racks. They should be used where bicycle parking is in
high demand.
Figure t1 -29: Bicycle Corral
11 -23 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Additional Treatments and Considerations
ROAD DIET
A "road diet" describes the reallocation of pavement space by removing one or more lanes
of travel to add other types of facilities. Typical road diets change streets with four lanes
(two lanes of travel in each direction) to two lanes with a center two - way -left -turn lane
and bicycle lanes. Some road diets may be necessary to create a specified on- street bicycle
facility. Road diets can be implemented during street re- pavings or re- surfacings. Not only
do they allow for the installation of bicycle lanes, but they often present an opportunity to
improve the pedestrian environment as well. They also provide a traffic calming effect. The
City will need to conduct outreach and notification for any suggested road diets. Road diets
will also require council approval. A typical road diet is shown below in Figure 11 -30.
Figure 11 -30: Before and After Road Diet
Design • I 1 -2a
DRAINAGE GRATES
Care must be taken to ensure that drainage grates are bicycle -safe. If not, a bicycle wheel
may fall into the slots of the grate, causing the cyclist to tumble. Replacing existing grates
or welding thin metal straps across the grate perpendicular to the direction of travel is
required to make them bicycle safe. These should be checked periodically to ensure that the
straps remain in place. Grates with bars perpendicular to the roadway must not be placed
at curb cuts, because wheelchairs could also get caught in the slot. Figure 11 -31 shows the
appropriate types of drainage grates that should be used.
Figure I1 -31: Proper Drainage Grate Design
11 -25 . i.ynw od Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
/11111111 111111
•'• •;'•'•'
ta" .: +.�
111111111111111
111111111111111
i�.lR•A•1.1
,•••.,
'.•:•:d•.•:
IGIi111i111111
111111111111111
111111 111 111111
Figure I1 -31: Proper Drainage Grate Design
11 -25 . i.ynw od Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
LOOP DETECTORS
Figure 11 -32: Bicycle Loop Detector Marldng
Loop detectors at signalized intersections should be
designed to detect when a bicycle rides or stops over
them. Loop detectors at the signalized intersections of
minor streets (minor arterials or collectors) should
have priority when retrofitting existing detectors where
the minor approaches do not call a green phase during
every signal cycle. In the long run, all signalized
intersections should provide loops or other detection
device to detect cyclists to provide for enhanced
seamless travel. The State of California passed a new
law that became effective in 2009 requiring local
jurisdictions to add bicycle- sensitive loop detectors to
all new signals and those that are replaced. The general specifications are that a detection
area of 6' by 6' be created behind the limit line, and that bicyclists be given enough time to
travel through the intersection with the clearance time calculated using a speed of 14.7 feet
per second plus 6 seconds for start -up. Painting the loop detectors and adding a bicycle
stencil can help to notify cyclists as to where they need to be to trip the detectors.
Design • 11 -26
Pedestrian Design Guidelines
Walking requires two important features in the built environment: people must walk along
streets and they must get across streets. Crossing a street should be easy, safe, convenient, and
comfortable. While pedestrian behavior and crossing design affect the street crossing experience,
motorist behavior (whether and how motorists yield to pedestrians) is the most significant factor
in pedestrian safety.
A number of tools exist to improve pedestrian safety, to make crossing streets easier, and walking
along streets more comfortable and inviting. Effective traffic management can address concerns
about traffic speed and volume. A motorist driving more slowly has more time to see, react, and
stop for a pedestrian. The number of pedestrians also influences motorists; in general, motorists are
more aware of pedestrians when more people walk.
Providing marked crosswalks is only one of the many possible engineering measures. According to
Charles Zegeer of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC), when considering how
to provide safer crossings for pedestrians, the question should not be: "Should I provide a marked
crosswalk ?" Instead, the question should be: "What are the most effective measures that can be
used to help pedestrians safely cross the street ?" Deciding whether to mark or not mark crosswalks
is only one consideration in creating safe and convenient pedestrian crossings.
In addition, providing adequate sidewalk width and amenities can increase pedestrian comfort and
safety. Land uses play an important part in sidewalk design, and dictate appropriate widths for each
zone in the pedestrian way.
This section describes the majority of measures available to improve pedestrian crossings and
sidewalks, including marked and unmarked crosswalks, raised crossing islands and medians,
lighting, sidewalk design, and streetscape enhancements. The measures are arranged in alphabetical
order for crossings first, then for sidewalks.
The estimated costs in this section are planning - level, and will vary greatly depending upon the
specific existing conditions, treatments, and jurisdiction.
11 -27 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Pleas
Accessible Pedestrian Signal
Audio signal at signalized intersection tells pedestrians
when it is safe to cross.
Key Design Features
• Provide pedestrian signal information to
those who cannot see the pedestrian signal
head across the street
• Provide information to pedestrians about
the presence and location of pushbuttons,
if pressing a button is required to actuate
pedestrian timing
• Provide unambiguous information about
the WALK indication and which crossing is
being signaled
• Use audible beaconing only where necessary
• Two poles should be installed for APS
speakers, located close to departure location
and crosswalk
• Ensure accessibility to for pushbutton
placement
Applications
• ADA requires newly constructed or altered
public facilities to be accessible, regardless of
the funding source
• Installed by request along a specific route of
travel for a particular individual, or group of
individuals who are blind or visually impaired
Description
A device that communicates information
to pedestrians in nonvisual format such
as audible tones, verbal messages, and /or
vibrating surfaces. These signals provide
accessibility to those who have visual
impairments. Verbal messages are generally
preferred to tones.
Benefits
• Creates a more accessible pedestrian
network
• Assists those who are visually
impaired
• Can contain additional wayfinding
information in messages
• More accurate judgments of the
onset of the WALK interval
• Reduction in crossings begun
during DONT WALK
• Reduced delay
• Significantly more crossings
completed before the signal changed
Approximate Cost
• $400 to $600 per signal
Dcmgn • 11 29
Advanced Stop Bar
Key Design Features
• Vehicle stop line moved 4 to 6 feet further
back from the pedestrian crossing
Applications
• Can be used at any signalized or stop -
controlled intersection
• Presence of advanced stop bar is more
important on roadways with higher speeds
(30 mph and greater)
• Should be included at all crossings of road
with four or more lanes without a raised
median or crossing island that has an ADT
of 12,000
11 -29 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
A placing of the stop limit line for vehicle
traffic at a traffic signal behind the crosswalk
for the added safety of crossing pedestrians.
Benefits
• Keeps cars from encroaching on
crosswalk
• Low cost, effective device
• Improve visibility of through
cyclists and crossing pedestrians for
motorists
• Allows pedestrians and motorists
more time to assess each other's
intentions when the signal phase
changes
Approximate Cost
Little cost if done with new paving
/ repaving
$100 to $200 per stop bar
Car stops at advanced stop line, prior to crosswalk.
Advanced Yield Line
Pedestrian steps out W
sees second car not
stopping, steps back
r
I
First car stops for pedesetdan
opening up sign triangle to
include second lane
f
br
I
#i I
Car
Key Design Features
• Advanced yield line should be placed 20
to 50 feet in advance of crosswalks along
with "Yield here to pedestrians" sign placed
adjacent to the markings
Applications
• Crosswalks on streets with uncontrolled
approaches
• Right -turn slip lane crossings
• Midblock marked crosswalks
• Presence of advanced yield line are most
important on multi -lane streets
Description
A placing of the yield line (shark's teeth) for
vehicle traffic in advance of a crosswalk at
uncontrolled locations.
Benefits
• Inexpensive treatment
• Improves sight visibility of
pedestrians and motorists when
used correctly
• Helps reduce potential of multiple -
threat crashes
• Yielding vehicle does not screen the
view of motorists in the pedestrian's
next lane of travel
• Reduce likelihood that vehicle
travelling behind yielding vehicle
will cross centerline and strike
pedestrian
Approximate Cost
Little cost if done with new paving
/ repaving
$100 to $200 per yield line
point to motorists.
Dcsign • 1 130
Countdown Signal
Key Design Features
• Unsure that signals are visible to pedestrians
• When possible, provide a walk interval for
every cycle
• Pedestrian pushbuttons must be well
positioned and within easy reach for all
approaching pedestrians
Applications
• Should be placed for each crossing leg at
signalized intersections
11 81 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian'rr nsportation Plan
Description
A walk signal that provides a countdown
to the next solid "don't walk" signal phase
in order to provide pedestrians with
information on how much time they have
to cross.
Benefits
• Indicates appropriate time for
pedestrians to cross
• Provides pedestrian clearance
interval
Approximate Cost
• S300 to $1,000 per signal
Pedestrian countdown signal shows there me 12
seconds left to cross before signal will turn.
Crosswalk Markings
Key Design Features
• Locations should be convenient for pedestrian
access
• Used in conjunction with other measures
such as advance warning signs, markings,
crossing islands, and curb extensions
• Place to avoid wear due to tires
Applications
• Enhances all marked crossings
• Necessary at marked midblock and
uncontrolled crossing locations
Description
High - visibility crosswalks — continental,
zebra- stripe, piano key, or ladder style,
should be provided at any intersection where
a significant number of pedestrians cross.
They are most important at uncontrolled
crossings of multi -lane streets.
Benefits
Indicate preferred pedestrian
crossings
• Warn motorists to expect
pedestrians crossing
• Higher visibility than typical lateral -
tine marked crosswalks
• Can be placed to minimize wear
and tear (between tire tracks)
Approximate Cost
• $300 to $600 for each leg of an
intersection, depending on roadway
width
crossing is visible from farther away.
Design • 11 32
Curb Extensions
Key Design Features
Curb extensions sited at corners or midblock
Extends out to approximately align with
parking (typically l' to 2' less than parking
lane width)
• Reduced effective curb radius
• Can be tapered at approach in cases where
there is no on- street parking
Description
A segment of sidewalk, landscaping, or curb
that is extended into the street at the corner,
and usually associated with crosswalks. A
curb extension typically extends out to align
with the edge of the parking lane. They can
be placed at locations where there is no on-
street parking by tapering the extensions to
the approach.
Benefits
• Shortens pedestrian crossing
• Reduces curb radius, slowing
turning vehicles
• Provides traffic calming
• Improves sight visibility for
pedestrians and motorists
• Provides space for landscaping,
beautification, water treatment,
furnishings, signs, etc.
• Often can provide space for
perpendicular curb ramps
• Should not block travel or bicycle lanes Approximate Cost
• Paired with bicycle lanes, curb extensions can • $5,000 to $15,000 depending on size
increase the effective curb radius for larger and shape
vehicles . Varies with design and jurisdiction
• Bulb -outs are a type of curb extension that
has a distinct bulb -shape that extends into the
on- street parking lane (see above graphic)
Applications and Considerations
Areas with high pedestrian traffic (downtown,
mixed -use areas) where traffic calming is
desired
Jurisdiction must evaluate placement on case -
by -case basis, taking into account drainage,
signal pole modification, lane widths,
driveways, and bus stops
1 1.33 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian'l'ransportation Plan
Curb Ramps
Diagonal Curb Ramp Perpendicular Curb Ramp
Key Design Features
• Where feasible, ramps for each crosswalk at
an intersection are preferable
• Tactile warnings will alert pedestrians to the
sidewalk /street edge
• Curb ramps must have a slope of no more
than 1:12 (must not exceed 25.4 mm /0.3 m (1
in /ft) or a maximum grade of 8.33 percent),
and a maximum slope on any side flares of
1:10
Applications
• Curb ramps must be installed at all
intersections and midblock locations where
pedestrian crossings exist, as mandated by
federal legislation (1973 Rehabilitation Act
and 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act)
• Priority locations for curb ramps are in
Downtown, near transit stops, schools, parks,
medical facilities, and near residences with
people who use wheelchairs
Description
A ramp and landing that allows for a smooth
transition between sidewalk and street
via a moderate slope. The Americans with
Disabilities Act requires wheelchair access
at every street corner. On streets with low
traffic volumes and short crossing distances,
diagonal ramps may be acceptable.
Benefits
• Double curb ramps make the trip
across the street shorter and more
direct than diagonal ramps
• Provide compliance with ADA
when designed correctly
• Improve pedestrian accessibility for
those in wheelchairs, with strollers,
and for children
Approximate Cost
• $800 to $3,500 per ramp
Perpendicular ramps with truncated domes assist
sight - impaired and wheelchair users.
Design • I 1 34
Intersection Geometry Modifications
Key Design Features
Consider removing one or more legs from
the major intersection and creating a minor
intersection further up or downstream (if
there are more than two streets intersecting)
• Close one or more of the approach lanes to
motor vehicle traffic, while still allowing
access for pedestrians and bicyclists
• Introduce pedestrian islands if the crossing
distance exceeds three lanes (approximately
44 feet)
• General use, travel lanes, and bike lanes may
be striped with dashes to guide bicyclists and
motorists through a long undefined area
Applications
Every reasonable effort should be made to
design or redesign the intersection closer to
a right angle
It 35 • Lynwond Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
Geometry sets the basis for how all users
traverse intersections and interact with
each other. Intersection skew can create an
unfriendly environment for pedestrians.
Skewed intersections are those where two
streets intersect at angles other than right
angles. Intersection geometry should be as
close to 90 degrees as possible.
Benefits
• Skewed intersections are undesirable
• Slows turning vehicles by making
angles more accute
• Shortens pedestrian crossing
distances
• Improves sight visibility
Approximate Cost
• Varies
Lighting
Key Design Features
• FHWA HT -08 -053, The Information
Report on Lighting Design for Mid -block
Crosswalks, found that a vertical illumination
of 20 lux in front of the crosswalk, measured
at a height of 5 feet from the road surface,
provided adequate detection distances in
most circumstances.
• Illumination just in front of crosswalks creates
optimal visibility of pedestrians
• Crosswalk lighting should provide color
contrast from standard roadway lighting
Applications
• Ensure pedestrian walkways and crosswalks
are well lit
• Use uniform lighting levels
• When installing roadway lighting, install on
both sides of wide streets
• Consider pedestrian vs. vehicular scale for
lighting (each has a different application)
Description
Lighting is important to include at all
pedestrian crossing locations for the
comfort and safety of the road users.
Lighting should be present at all marked
crossing locations. Lighting provides cues
to drivers to expect pedestrians earlier.
Benefits
• Enhance safety of all roadway users,
particularly pedestrians
• Enhance commercial districts
• Improve nighttime safety
Approximate Cost
• $2,000 per standard light pole
• $5,000 to $7,000 for decorative light
poles
Well -lit crosswalk in Denmark
Dc,ign . 11 36
�1
Key Design Features
• FHWA HT -08 -053, The Information
Report on Lighting Design for Mid -block
Crosswalks, found that a vertical illumination
of 20 lux in front of the crosswalk, measured
at a height of 5 feet from the road surface,
provided adequate detection distances in
most circumstances.
• Illumination just in front of crosswalks creates
optimal visibility of pedestrians
• Crosswalk lighting should provide color
contrast from standard roadway lighting
Applications
• Ensure pedestrian walkways and crosswalks
are well lit
• Use uniform lighting levels
• When installing roadway lighting, install on
both sides of wide streets
• Consider pedestrian vs. vehicular scale for
lighting (each has a different application)
Description
Lighting is important to include at all
pedestrian crossing locations for the
comfort and safety of the road users.
Lighting should be present at all marked
crossing locations. Lighting provides cues
to drivers to expect pedestrians earlier.
Benefits
• Enhance safety of all roadway users,
particularly pedestrians
• Enhance commercial districts
• Improve nighttime safety
Approximate Cost
• $2,000 per standard light pole
• $5,000 to $7,000 for decorative light
poles
Well -lit crosswalk in Denmark
Dc,ign . 11 36
Medians
it 3
Key Design Features
• Raised median with center area for
landscaping
• Provide frequent breaks in median to assist
crossing pedestrians
• Minimum of 6' wide, but usually as wide as
center -turn lane
Applications
Raised medians and crossing islands are commonly
used between intersections when blocks are long
(500 feet or more in downtowns) and in the following
situations:
• Speeds are higher than desired
• Streets are wide
• Traffic volumes are high
• Sight distances are poor
• Raised islands have nearly universal
applications and should be placed where
there is a need for people to cross the street
• To slow traffic
11 -37 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
Raised medians are the most important,
safest, and most adaptable engineering
tool for improving many street crossings.
A median is a continuous raised area
separating opposite flows of traffic.
Benefits
• Separate traffic flows
• Slows traffic
• Breaks crossings into shorter
segments
• Provides space for landscaping and
beautification
Makes street feel narrower
• Allows pedestrians to cross during
a gap in one direction of traffic at a
time
Approximate Cost
• $10 to $12 / square foot for concrete
Will vary with landscaping
Places pedestrians in correct orientation to cross.
Midblock Crossing
Key Design Features
• High - visibility crosswalk marking
• Crossing islands, median gap, or short
crossing
• Advanced crossing and crossing signs
• Advanced yield markings and signs
• Signs
• Rapid -flash beacons where traffic volumes
and street width merit
• Pedestrian activated signals should be used
for streets with high speeds and volumes
Applications
• Decision to mark a crosswalk at an
uncontrolled location should be guided by an
engineering study
• Consider vehicular volumes and speeds,
roadway width and number of lanes, stopping
sight distance and triangles, distance to the
next controlled crossing, night time visibility,
grade, origin- destination of trips, left turning
conflicts, and pedestrian volumes.
• On multi -lane roadways, marked crosswalks
ALONE are not recommended under the
following conditions: ADT > 12,000 w/o
median; ADT > 15,000 w/ median; or speeds
> 40 mph. Add devices such as advanced stop
bar, crossing islands, etc.
Description
A crosswalk designed at a mid -point
between intersections. These are best suited
where there is a long distance (greater than
400 feet) between crosswalks on retail
streets, in front of schools, etc. Intersections
without traffic signals or STOP signs are
considered uncontrolled intersections.
Benefits
• Brings both sides of the street closer
for pedestrians
• Enhances visibility of pedestrians
• Informs drivers to expect
pedestrians, and directs pedestrians
to cross at specified locations
• Deters pedestrians from dashing
across street at random
Approximate Cost
Varies based on devices used
Design. 11 38
Neighborhood Traffic Circle
Key Design Features
• The design of neighborhood traffic circles
is primarily confined to selecting a central
island size to achieve the appropriate design
speed of around 15 to 20 mph
• Neighborhood traffic circles should generally
have similar features as roundabouts,
including yield -on -entry and painted or
mountable splitter islands
• Can replace stop - controlled intersections in
residential areas
Applications
• Neighborhood traffic circles should be used
on low- volume, neighborhood streets
• Larger vehicles can turn left in front of the
central island if necessary
• Curb radius should be tight; may impede
some large vehicles from turning
• Landscaped circles often require agreements
from adjacent residents and maintenance
11-39, Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
Neighborhood traffic circles, sometimes
called "mini - circles" are small circles that
are retrofitted into local street intersections
to control vehicle speeds within a
neighborhood. Typically, a tree and/or
landscaping are located within the central
island to provide increased visibility of the
roundabout and enhance the intersection.
Benefits
• Create continuous, slow vehicle
speeds
Better for bicyclists than stop -
controls
• Improves traffic flow
• Allows space for landscaping and
beautification, as well as stormwater
recapture
• Reduces crashes
Approximate Cost
• $6,000 to $12,000 for mini - circle
with landscaping
Canada.
Pedestrian Crossing Islands
r
Key Design Features
• Raised, curbed islands that flank marked
crosswalk
• Do not block through path
• Separate directions of vehicle travel
Applications
• Any bi- directional street with adequate width
• Especially important on uncontrolled multi-
lane streets
Description
A defined area in the center of the street
that is raised and provides a refuge area for
pedestrians crossing a busy street. They
can be used at any street crossing, but are
most important at uncontrolled crossings
of multi -lane streets.
Benefits
• Allows pedestrian to cross one
direction of traffic at a time
• Slows vehicles
• Provides refuge if crossing time is
insufficient
Approximate Cost
• $4,000 for pair of small crossing
islands
Pedestrian crossing islands in a Downtown
De gn.I1 -40
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
B
Pmcaad
with Caution
Push the
Buttouto
c.e,•
slow Down
�nF
e�.k's�ee�l
Wait
Prepare
to stop
Continue to
Wait
STOPI
�•.a,.uunln
Cnswnikl
�
start Crossing
Proceed with
sTOio
if C1..
AClear
Continue
Crossing
KouOdown 51gnn11
Prece•d if
Clasr
push the
Button to
Cross
Key Design Features
• Minimum of 20 pedestrians per hour is
needed to warrant installation
• Should be placed in conjunction with signs,
crosswalks, and advanced yield lines to
warn and control traffic at locations where
pedestrians enter or cross a street or highway
• A pedestrian hybrid beacon should only be
installed at a marked crosswalk
Applications
Installations should be done according to
the MUTCD Chapter 4F, `Pedestrian Hybrid
Beacons." The California MUTCD has not yet
approved the beacons for use. Cities should
follow the formal experimental process to use
these.
I 1 -41 • Lynwood Bicycic and Pedestrian transportation Plan
Description
A pedestrian hybrid beacon is used to
warn and control traffic at an unsignalized
location so as to help pedestrians cross a
street or highway at a marked crosswalk.
Benefits
• Can be used at a location that does
not meet traffic signal warrants or at
a location that meets traffic signal
warrants but a decision has been
made to not install a traffic control
signal
• Additional safety measure and
warning device at uncontrolled
location
• Remain dark until activated
Approximate Cost
• $30,000 to $100,000
Pedestrian hybrid beacon on four lane street with
high speeds and volumes.
Pedestrian - activated Pushbutton
Key Design Features
• Should be located as close as possible to top
of curb ramps without reducing the width of
the path
• Buttons should be at a level that is easily
reached by people in wheelchairs near the top
of the ramp.
• U.S. Access Board guidelines recommend
buttons raised above or flush with their
housing and large enough (a minimum of 2
inches) for people with visual impairments to
see them.
• Buttons should also be easy to push
Applications
Areas where there are few pedestrians
Midblock crossings at locations where
signalized crossing is needed
Description
Pedestrian - activated traffic controls require
pedestrians to push a button to activate a
walk signal. Where significant pedestrian
traffic is expected, pedestrian- activated
signals are generally discouraged. The
"WALK" signal should automatically come
on.
Benefits
• Provides for smoother traffic flow
if there are few pedestrians, and
no need to provide walk signal for
every cycle
Approximate Cost
• $400 to $1,000 / pushbutton
Pedestrian pushbutton
D,,ign • 11 42
PUFFIN Crossing
Key Design Features
• Curbside detector monitors pedestrian's
presence in crossing
• Signal mounted at the near road side, set
diagonally to road edge
• Lights closer to user assists visually impaired
persons
Adds 4 seconds to "walk" sign, then another
4 seconds if necessary (if pedestrians are still
in crosswalk)
Applications
Locations where pedestrians crossing walk
more slowly than 3.5 feet / second such as
senior centers and near schools
. Signalized intersections
11 -43 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
Pedestrian user - friendly intelligent
(PUFFIN) crossings detect pedestrians and
hold the signal red for motor vehicles until
the pedestrian has crossed. they are most
appropriate at locations where a significant
number of senior citizens or disabled people
cross.
Benefits
• Detects whether pedestrians are still
in crosswalk before signal changes
• Overall crossing time determined
by presence of pedestrians
Approximate Cost
• $1,000 to $2,000 per crossing
Railroad Crossings
Key Design Features
• Pedestrian gates
• Channelization of pedestrians through gates
and across tracks
• Edge lines across tracks
• Warning flashers
• Signs
• Audible signals
• Tactile devices prior to railroad tracks
Applications
• All railroad crossings where there are existing
streets and pedestrian crossings
• More details can be found in Pedestrian
Rail Crossings in California, Richard Clark,
California Public Utilities Commission
(PUC), May 2008.
• Must follow PUC guidelines and be approved
by PUC
Description
Pedestrian crossings of railroad tracks
apply a special set of tools. In California,
the California Public Utilities Commission
should approve the design before
application.
Benefits
• Enhances safety at railroad crossings
(nearly 500 pedestrians are injured
or killed at crossings annually)
Approximate Cost
Varies
Pedestrian crossing of railroad in Glendale,
California.
Design • if 44
Raised Crosswalk
Key Design Features
• Trapezoidal in shape on both sides and have a
flat top where the pedestrians cross
• Level crosswalk area must be paved with
smooth materials
• Texture or special pavements used for
aesthetics should be placed on the beveled
slopes, where they will be seen by approaching
motorists
• Often require culverts or another 'means of
drainage treatment
Applications
• Areas with significant pedestrian traffic and
where motor vehicle traffic should move
slowly, such as near schools, on college'
campuses, in Main Street retail environments,
and in other similar places
• Effective near elementary schools where they
raise small children by a few inches and make
them more visible
11 -45 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Trmsporution Plan
Description
A crosswalk that has been raised in order
to slow motor vehicles and to enhance the
visibility of crossing pedestrians.
Benefits
Increases visibility of pedestrian,
especially to motorists in large
vehicles
• Traffic calming
• Continuous level for pedestrians
Approximate Cost
$15,000 to $25,000 depending on
drainage accommodation
Raised crosswalk on campus.
Rectangular Rapid -Flash Beacons
Key Design Features
• Placed at crosswalk and in center median /
crossing island
• Crosswalk sign with arrow
• Wig -wag flickering flash pattern mounted
between crossing sign and arrow pointing to
crosswalk
Applications
• Approved for interim use by the California,i
Traffic Control Device Committee ( CTCDC)
• City should go through approprite CTCDC
steps to use
• Use of RRFBs should be limited to locations
with the most critical safety concerns, such
as pedestrian and school crosswalks at
uncontrolled locations
Description
The RRFB uses rectangular- shaped high -
intensity LED -based indications, flashes
rapidly in a wig -wag "flickering" flash
pattern, and is mounted immediately
between the crossing sign and the sign's
supplemental arrow plaque.
Benefits
• Increases motorist compliance to
yield to pedestrians crossing at
uncontrolled marked locations
Provides additional visibility to
crosswalks
• Visible at night and during the day
Approximate Cost
• $23,000 per set (including island
units)
RRFBs at uncontrolled crossing location.
lk,,g" . 1 146
Reduced Curb Radius
Key Design Features
Default design vehicle should be the passenger
(P) vehicle; initial corner radius is between
15 and 25 feet
• Larger design vehicles should be used only
where they are known to regularly make
turns at the intersection (such as in the case
of a truck or bus route)
• Design based on the larger design vehicle
traveling at near 5 mph or crawl speed
Consider the effect that bicycle lanes and on-
street parking have on the effective radius,
increasing the ease with which large vehicles
can turn
Applications
All corners
11 -47 • Lynwood alcyde and Pedoslrian Transportation Plan
Description
The geometry of the corner radius impacts
the feel and look of a street. Tight corner
radii create shorter crossing distances, and
provide a traffic calming effect.
Benefits
• Slower vehicular turning speeds
• Reduced pedestrian crossing
distance and crossing time
• Better geometry for installing
perpendicular ramps for both
crosswalks at each corner
• Simpler and more appropriate
crosswalk placement that aligns
directly with sidewalks on the other
side of the intersection
Approximate Cost
$2,000 to $7,000
Right -turn Channelization Islands
Key Design Features
• Provide a yield sign for the slip lane
• Provide at least a 60- degree angle between
vehicle flows
• Place the crosswalk across the right -turn lane
about one car length back from where drivers
yield to traffic on the other street
• Typical layout involves creating an island
that is roughly twice as long as it is wide. The
corner radius will typically have a long radius
(150 feet to 300 feet) followed by a short
radius (20 feet to 50 feet)
• Necessary to allow large trucks to turn into
multiple receiving lanes
Applications
• Right -turn lanes should generally be avoided
as they increase the size of the intersection,
the pedestrian crossing distance, and the
likelihood of right- turns -on -red by inattentive
motorists who do not notice pedestrians on
their right
• Heavy volumes of right turns (approximately
200 vehicles per hour or more)
Description
A raised channelization island between the
through lanes and the right -turn lane is a
good alternative to an overly large corner
radius and enhances pedestrian safety and
access. Allow pedestrians to cross fewer
lanes at a time.
Benefits
• Allow motorists and pedestrians
to judge the right turn /pedestrian
conflict separately
• Reduce pedestrian crossing
distance, which can improve signal
timing for all users
• Balance vehicle capacity and truck
turning needs with pedestrian safety
• Provide an opportunity forlandscape
and hardscape enhancement
. Slows motorists
Approximate Cost
. $10 to $12 / square foot
Design • 11 -4H
Roundabouts
Key Design Features
• Deflection encourages slow traffic speeds,
• Landscaped visual obstruction in the central
island discourage users from entering the
roundabout at high speeds
• Central island should not contain attractions
• Each leg of a roundabout has a triangular
splitter island that prevents drivers from
turning left (the "wrong -way ")
Truck
Applications
Before starting the design of a roundabout it is very
important to determine the following:
• Number and type of lane(s) on each approach
and departure as determined by a capacity
analysis
• Design vehicle for each movement
• Presence of on- street bike lanes
• Right -of -way and its availability for
acquisition if needed
Existence or lack of sidewalks
• Approach grade of each approach
• Transit, existing or proposed
• Roundabouts can be applied at nearly all
intersections, but are more legible for single -
lane approaches
1 149 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
A roundabout is an intersection design that
can replace traffic signals. Users approach
the intersection, slow down, stop and /or
yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk, and
then enter a circulating roadway, yielding
to drivers already in the roundabout. The
circulating roadway encircles a central
island around which vehicles travel
counterclockwise.
Benefits
• Reduce conflicts, all forms of crashes
and crash severity (particularly left -
turn and right -angle crashes)
• Little to no delay for pedestrians
• Improved accessibility for bicyclists
• Approximately 30% more vehicle
capacity than signals (allowing
possible reduction in number of
lanes and roadway width)
• Reduced maintenance and
operational costs, delay, travel time,
Approximate Cost
• Varies greatly depending on
drainage accommodation
Single -lane roundabout in La Jolla, California.
5•pw.m4 rdewa�L•
m, trn ma."
m.. walb�
Slcw apmtlawt
spmr n4W
\�
Tui..p-.
I.ngM hack
spwh,hrwgho.n
t
Key Design Features
• Deflection encourages slow traffic speeds,
• Landscaped visual obstruction in the central
island discourage users from entering the
roundabout at high speeds
• Central island should not contain attractions
• Each leg of a roundabout has a triangular
splitter island that prevents drivers from
turning left (the "wrong -way ")
Truck
Applications
Before starting the design of a roundabout it is very
important to determine the following:
• Number and type of lane(s) on each approach
and departure as determined by a capacity
analysis
• Design vehicle for each movement
• Presence of on- street bike lanes
• Right -of -way and its availability for
acquisition if needed
Existence or lack of sidewalks
• Approach grade of each approach
• Transit, existing or proposed
• Roundabouts can be applied at nearly all
intersections, but are more legible for single -
lane approaches
1 149 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
A roundabout is an intersection design that
can replace traffic signals. Users approach
the intersection, slow down, stop and /or
yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk, and
then enter a circulating roadway, yielding
to drivers already in the roundabout. The
circulating roadway encircles a central
island around which vehicles travel
counterclockwise.
Benefits
• Reduce conflicts, all forms of crashes
and crash severity (particularly left -
turn and right -angle crashes)
• Little to no delay for pedestrians
• Improved accessibility for bicyclists
• Approximately 30% more vehicle
capacity than signals (allowing
possible reduction in number of
lanes and roadway width)
• Reduced maintenance and
operational costs, delay, travel time,
Approximate Cost
• Varies greatly depending on
drainage accommodation
Single -lane roundabout in La Jolla, California.
Scramble Phase
Key Design Features
• Signs indicating scramble is permitted
• Countdown signals
• Markings indicating diagonal cross
• Allow pedestrians to cross straight and
reduces delay
Applications
• Exclusive pedestrian phases may be used
where turning vehicles conflict with very high
pedestrian volumes and pedestrian crossing
distances are short
• Should be used in areas with high pedestrian
volumes such as near shopping centers,
downtown, university crossings, turning
movements, etc.
Description
Provides a separate all- direction red phase
in the traffic signal to allow pedestrians to
cross linearly and diagonally. They are most
appropriate in retail districts with heavy
volumes of both pedestrians and motor
vehicles, and /or many vehicle turning
movements.
Benefits
• Reduces pedestrian delay for those
crossing both directions
• Reduces pedestrian - vehicle
conflicts by providing an all -
pedestrian crossing phase
• Does not necessarily eliminate
regular walk phase
Approximate Cost
. Varies
Signal Timing / Phasing
Af
Key Design Features
• Signal progression at speeds that support the
target speed of a corridor
• Short signal cycle lengths
• Ensure signals detect bicycles
• Place pedestrian signal heads in locations
where they are visible
• Time the pedestrian phase to be on automatic
recall
• Where few pedestrians are expected, place
pedestrian pushbuttons in convenient
locations, using separate pedestals if
necessary.
• Include adequate pedestrian crossing time of
3.5 feet per seconds or more
• Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) allows
pedestrians to begin crossing while all
directions of traffic have red signal
• Protected left -turn phases are preferrable to
permissive movements
Applications
• City must follow standard warrants in the
California MUTCD
11 -51 • I.yne d Bicycle and Pedestrum 1 *ranapnrtation Plan
Description
Signals provide control of pedestrians
and motor vehicles. Signals can be used
to control vehicle speeds by providing
appropriate signal progression on a
corridor. Traffic signals allow pedestrians
and bicyclists to cross major streets with
only minimal conflict with motor vehicle
traffic. Signalized intersections often have
significant turning volumes, which conflict
with concurrent pedestrian and bicycle
movements.
Benefits
• Reduces pedestrian - vehicle
conflicts by providing separate
phases for travel
• Limiting permissive turning
movements at signalized
intersections improves safety for
pedestrians
• Walk signals timed at 3.5 feet /
second reduce conflicts; less where
large numbers of seniors or disabled
pedestrians crossing
Approximate Cost
• New signals cost $100,000 to
$250,000
• Improvements to timing and
phasing can be done at little cost
Traffic signal with pedestrian countdown signal
and restricts right -turns on red.
Signs
4A
AHEAD
Key Design Features
• Placed with adequate sight distance and
according to MUTCD standards
• Should not block pedestrian view or obstruct
pathways
• Kept free of graffiti and in good condition
• Should have adequate nighttime reflectivity
Applications
• Overuse of signs can create noncompliance
and disrespect
• Signs should be placed at locations where
appropriate to enforce certain types of
behavior
Uncontrolled crossings
• Commonly used signs are advanced
pedestrian crossing sign in advance of marked
uncontrolled crossing; pedestrian crossing
sign at uncontrolled crossing; and advanced
yield signs.
Description
Signs alert motorists to the presence of
crosswalks and pedestrians. Center signs
can help slow traffic. These are placed
according to the CA MUTCD.
Benefits
• Provide important information
• Give motorists advance warning
• Regulatory signs require certain
driver actions and can be enforced
Approximate Cost
$50 to $150 / sign
• $150 for sign installation
Pedestrian crossing sign indicating location of
marked pedestrian crossing.
Deign - 1 152
Speed Feedback Signs
Key Design Features
• Must be placed in conjunction with speed
limit sign
• Should flash "SLOW DOWN" message if
driver is going above speed limit
Applications
• Place in school zones or corridors where
speeding is a known issue
11 -i3 . Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Pleas
Description
Alerts motorists when they are going over
the speed limit. They are most appropriate
where motor vehicles commonly speed and
there are pedestrians or bicyclists.
Benefits
• Heighten awareness of speed limits
• Establish lower speed limit during
school crossing times
• Alert drivers of their actual speed
and posted speed
• Can record traffic counts and speeds
Approximate Cost
$8,000 to $10,000 per sign
Access Management
Sidewalks
Key Design Features
` v
Y
ov
When possible, new driveways should be
minimized and old driveways should be
eliminated or consolidated, and raised
medians should be placed to limit left turns
into and out of driveways
Applications
• New development
• Redevelopment
• Where driveways make sidewalk inaccessible
based on ADA guidelines
Description
Most conflicts between users occur at
intersections and driveways. The presence of
many driveways in addition to the necessary
intersections creates manyconflicts between
vehicles entering or leaving a street and
bicyclists and pedestrians riding or walking
along the street.
Benefits
• Number of conflict points is reduced
• Pedestrian crossing opportunities
are enhanced with a raised median
• Universal access for pedestrians
is easier, since the sidewalk is less
frequently interrupted by driveway
slopes
• Result in more space available for
higher and better uses.
• Improved traffic flow may reduce
the need for road widening
Approximate Cost
• Varies
Design . it 54
x - - * --
Ir
'�
%
i $
Key Design Features
` v
Y
ov
When possible, new driveways should be
minimized and old driveways should be
eliminated or consolidated, and raised
medians should be placed to limit left turns
into and out of driveways
Applications
• New development
• Redevelopment
• Where driveways make sidewalk inaccessible
based on ADA guidelines
Description
Most conflicts between users occur at
intersections and driveways. The presence of
many driveways in addition to the necessary
intersections creates manyconflicts between
vehicles entering or leaving a street and
bicyclists and pedestrians riding or walking
along the street.
Benefits
• Number of conflict points is reduced
• Pedestrian crossing opportunities
are enhanced with a raised median
• Universal access for pedestrians
is easier, since the sidewalk is less
frequently interrupted by driveway
slopes
• Result in more space available for
higher and better uses.
• Improved traffic flow may reduce
the need for road widening
Approximate Cost
• Varies
Design . it 54
Streetscape Features
Sidewalks
Key Design Features
• Street furniture should be carefully placed to
create an unobstructed path and sight lines
for pedestrians
• Good - quality street furniture will show that
the community values its public spaces and is
more cost - effective in the long run
• Include plans for landscape irrigation and
maintenance at the outset
• Ensure adequacy of overhead clearances
and detectability of protruding objects for
pedestrians who are blind or visually impaired
Create a theme
• Placemaking
• Sustainable drainage
Applications
• Focus improvements in downtown areas and
commercial districts
• Landscaping should focus on native plants
that will not require excessive watering or
maintenance
• Shade- giving trees or shelters are important
in jurisdictions that have high temperatures
11 -55 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Description
Well- designed walking environments
are enhanced by urban design elements
and street furniture, such as benches,
bus shelters, trash receptacles, and water
fountains. Landscaping and streetwater
management can create a more beautiful
and sustainable environment.
Benefits
• Enhance the pedestrian
environment
• Enliven commercial districts by
providing improved public space
• Encourages visitors and residents
to walk to destinations rather than
drive
Approximate Cost
Varies
Street furniture and landscaping in Portland,
Oregon.
Sidewalk Design
Sidewalks should provide a comfortable space for pedestrians between the roadway and adjacent
land uses. Sidewalks along city streets are the most important component of pedestrian mobility.
They provide access to destinations and critical connections between modes of travel, including
automobiles, transit, and bicycles. General provisions for sidewalks include pathway width, slope,
space for street furniture, utilities, trees and landscaping, and building ingress /egress.
Sidewalks in the public right -of -way are generally constructed of concrete, with construction
details regarding materials, procedures, and design specified in the Standard Specifications for
Public Works Construction ( SSPWC), along with its companion SSPWC Standard Plans. However,
sidewalks may also be constructed and maintained of other materials such as rubber, decomposed
granite, or other hard unyielding surface.
Besides pedestrian mobility, sidewalks also add to people's outdoor enjoyment of landscape, urban
forest, and streetscapes.
Sidewalk maintenance is also important since trees and large shrubs and plant life are common near
and around sidewalks, and root systems sometimes lift sidewalks and create vertical displacements.
These vertical displacements must be controlled and maintained to a maximum of one inch.
Sidewalks include four distinct zones: the frontage zone, the pedestrian (aka walking) zone, the
furniture zone, and the curb zone. The minimum widths of each of these zones vary based on
street classifications as well as land uses. The table at the end of this section recommends minimum
widths for each zone for different street types and land uses.
lk,.gn • 11 -56
Frontage Zone
The frontage zone is the portion of the sidewalk located immediately adjacent to buildings,
and provides shy distance from buildings, walls, fences, or property lines. It includes space for
building - related features such as entryways and accessible ramps. It can include landscaping as
well as awnings, signs, news racks, benches, and outdoor cafe seating. In single family residential
neighborhoods, landscaping typically occupies the frontage zone.
Pedestrian Zone
The pedestrian zone, situated between the frontage zone and the furniture zone, is the area dedicated
to walking and should be kept clear of all fixtures and obstructions. Within the pedestrian zone, the
Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) is the path that provides continuous connections from the public
right -of -way to building and property entry points, parking areas, and public transportation.
This pathway is required to comply with ADA guidelines and is intended to be a seamless pathway
for wheelchair and white cane users. As such, this route should be firm, stable, and slip- resistant,
and should comply with maximum cross slope (transverse) requirements (2 percent grade). The
walkway grade (longitudinal) shall not exceed the general grade of the adjacent street. Aesthetic
textured pavement materials (e.g., brick and pavers) are best used in the frontage and furniture
zones, rather than the PAR. The PAR should be a minimum of 4 feet, but preferably at least 5 feet
in width to provide adequate space for two pedestrians to comfortably pass or walk side by side. All
transitions (e.g., from street to ramp or ramp to landing) must be flush and free of changes in level.
The engineer should determine the pedestrian zone width to accommodate the projected volume
of users. In no case will this zone be less than the width of the PAR.
Non - compliant driveways often present significant obstacles to wheelchair users. The cross slope
on these driveways is often much steeper than the 2 percent maximum grade. Driveway aprons that
extend into the pedestrian zone can render a sidewalk impassable to users of wheelchairs, walkers,
and crutches. They need a flat plane on which to rest all four supports (two in the case of crutches).
To provide a continuous PAR across driveways, aprons should be confined to the furniture and
curb zones.
Furniture Zone
The furniture zone is located between the curb line and the pedestrian zone. The furniture zone
should contain all fixtures, such as street trees, bus stops and shelters, parking meters, utility
poles and boxes, lamp posts, signs, bike racks, news racks, benches, waste receptacles, drinking
fountains, and other street furniture to keep the pedestrian zone free of obstructions. In residential
neighborhoods, the furniture zone is often landscaped. Resting areas with benches and space for
wheelchairs should be provided in high volume pedestrian districts and along blocks with a steep
grade to provide a place to rest for older adults, wheelchair users, and others who need to catch
their breath.
11 .57, Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian' Transportation Plan
Curb Zone
The curb zone serves primarily to prevent water and cars from encroaching on the sidewalk. it
defines where the area for pedestrians begins, and the area for cars ends. It is the area people using
assistive devices must traverse to get from the street to the sidewalk, so its design is critical to
accessibility.
Other Sidewalk Guidelines
• Landscaped buffers or fences should separate sidewalks from off - street parking lots or off -
street passenger loading areas.
• Pedestrian and driver sight distances should be maintained near driveways. Fencing and
foliage near the intersection of sidewalks and driveways should ensure adequate sight
distance as vehicles enter or exit.
• Where no frontage zone exists, driveway ramps usually violate cross slope requirements. In
these situations, sidewalks should be built back from the curb at the driveway as shown in
the adjacent photo.
• Construction tolerances require less than one quarter inch (1/4 ") vertical displacement
between panel levels
• Sidewalks should be maintained so that a one inch (1 ") vertical displacement is not exceeded.
Design • 11 58
Land Use
Sidewalks will vary according to the type of street. A local street with residences will require different
sidewalk dimensions than a major arterial with commercial establishments. The descriptions below
indicate the type of pedestrian activity expected at each of the specified land uses. The matrix in the
following section provides specific minimum requirements for the four sidewalk zones according
to combinations of land use and street classifications.
Single Family Residential
These streets are typically quieter than others and generally do not carry transit vehicles or high
volumes of traffic. Pedestrians require a pleasant walking environment within these neighborhoods,
as well as to access land uses and transit on nearby streets. Of the four sidewalk zones, the furniture
zone is often the widest, to provide room for street trees.
Townhouse / Multifamily Residential
These streets support greater volumes of pedestrians. Streets with transit service require good
pedestrian links to bus stops. The pedestrian zone should be wider than in low /medium density
residential.
11 -59 . Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Planned Business / Light Commercial
These streets often have grocers, laundromats, drug stores, and other neighborhood - serving retail
establishments. Sidewalks in neighborhood commercial areas should accommodate pedestrians
walking from residences to stores. Of the four sidewalk zones, the pedestrian zone should be
the widest, with a generous frontage zone to provide room for features next to buildings such as
newspaper boxes, These sidewalks should also be designed with the understanding that cars will
cross sidewalks as they enter and exit commercial driveways.
Medium / Heavy Commercial and Hospitals
These streets have retail, office, civic, and recreational uses concentrated along major streets. Transit
service runs along these streets and pedestrians need buffers from traffic. Of the four sidewalk
zones, the pedestrian and furniture zones are favored. These sidewalks also should be designed
with the understanding that a significant number of cars will cross sidewalks as they enter and exit
commercial driveways.
Manufacturing
These streets are zoned for manufacturing, office warehousing, and distribution. Pedestrian volumes
are likely to be lower here given that these land uses typically employ fewer people per square foot
than general commercial areas. Employees will need good sidewalks to get to work.
Design • 11 -60
Plaza Mexico Downtown
Plaza Mexico serves as Lynwoo&s premier destination, and is a pedestrian- oriented area. This is
where the greatest numbers of pedestrians are encouraged and expected. Plaza Mexico serves as
the retail, restaurant, and entertainment center of a community. This area will need the widest
sidewalks, the widest crosswalks, the brightest street lighting, the most furnishings, and other
features that will enhance the pedestrian environment. Of the four sidewalk zones, the pedestrian
and frontage zones will be favored, with a furniture zone wide enough for street trees. Plaza Mexico
could welcome pedestrians from adjacent neighborhoods, and become more of a "town center" by
adding some new development up to the sidewalks on adjacent streets. The photosimulation below
shows what Plaza Mexico could look like with improvements.
11 61 • Lynwood Bicyde and Pedestrian Transporlatlon Plan
Public Facility
Public facilities streets, particularly streets near schools, libraries, and civic centers, require special
attention and treatment. High pedestrian volumes are expected during peak times, such as school
pick -up and drop -off, and during the morning and evening commute hours. Sidewalk design should
accommodate these peak travel times and include adequate furniture zones to buffer pedestrians
from the street. Public facilities are located in various types of streets ranging from local streets to
boulevards with transit service.
Design • 11 -62
The following table lists minimum widths for the frontage, pedestrian, furniture, and curb zones,
as well as minimum total widths. These minimums should not be considered the design width; in
many cases, wider zones will be needed.
Frontage: 18"
Frontage: 18"
Pedestrian: 5'
Pedestrian: 5'
v b Not applicable Furniture: 4; 6' -8' at bus stops
Furniture: 4'
and where large trees are desired
5 z Curb: 6"
Curb: 6"
Min. Width: l l'
Min. Width: 11'
.[
Frontage: 18"
Pedestrian: 6'
Frontage: 18"
Frontage: 18"
0 a
Furniture: 5, 6' -8' at bus stops
Pedestrian: 6
Pedestrian: 6'
o x
and where large trees are
Furniture: 5; 6' -8' at bus stops
Furniture: 4; 6' -8' at bus stops
3
desired
and where large trees are desired
and where large trees are desired
o
F
Curb: 6"
Curb: 6"
Curb: 6"
Min. Width: 13'
Min. Width: 13'
Min. Width: 12'
w
Frontage: 18"
Frontage: 18"
Pedestrian: 6'
Pedestrian: 6'
Furniture: 5, 6' -8' at bus stops
P
Furniture: 4, 6' -8' at bus stops
P
c
b r�
Not applicable
and where large trees are desired
and where large trees are desired
mCurb:
6"
Curb: 6"
w
Min. Width: 13'
Min. Width: 12'
A
'a
o
Frontage: l8°
Frontage: 18"
m
u
Pedestrian: 6'
Pedestrian, 6'
Z ,g
Furniture: 5, 6' -8' at bus stops
Furniture: 5; at bus stops
:a
and where large trees are
and where large a trees are desired
trees
Not applicable
"
v
desired
Curb: 6"
Curb: 6"
C
Min. Width: 13'
o
Min. Width: 13'
V
Frontage:18"
Frontage: 18"
Frontage: 18"
m
Pedestrian: 5'
Pedestrian: 5'
Pedestrian: S'
c
�
Furniture: S'
Furniture: 4'
Furniture: 4'
Curb: 18"
Curb: 18"
Curb: 18"
W
"J
Min. Width: 13'
Min. Width: 12'
Min. Width: 12'
11 -63 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
Design • 11 -64
Frontage: 30", 8' with cafe
«°
seating
Frontage: 30 ", 8' with cafe seating
Frontage: 30 ; 8' with cafe seating
°
o
Pedestrian:
Pedestrian: 6'
Pedestrian: 6'
A
Furniture: 5, 6' -8' at bus stops
Furniture: 5, 6' -8' at bus stops
Furniture: 5'
o
and where large trees are
and where large trees are desired
desired
Curb: 6"
Curb: 6"
Curb: 6"
Min. Width: 14'
a
Min. Width: 14'
Min. Width: 14'
Pedestrian: 8'
Pedestrian:
Frontage: 30"
Frontage: 18"
Furniture: 5, 6' -8' at bus stops
Pedestrian: 8'
Pedestrian: 6'
and where large trees are
Furniture: 5, 6' -8' at bus stops
Furniture: 5; 6' -8' at bus stops
desired
and where large trees are desired
and where large trees are desired
cCurb:
6"
Curb: 6"
Curb: 6"
a
Min. Width: 16'
Min. Width: 16'
Min. Width: 13'
Design • 11 -64
General Guidelines
For those few areas not covered by the table of, the following list provides general guidelines for
sidewalks:
• The recommended minimum frontage zone width is 18 inches.
• The recommended minimum pedestrian zone width is 5 feet.
• The recommended minimum curb zone width is 6 inches or 18 inches where pedestrian or
freight loading is expected and may conflict with obstacles in the furniture zone.
• The recommended minimum furniture zone width is 4 feet and 6 feet to 8 feet where bus
stops exist.
• Low curbs (3 to 4 inches high) reduce the division between the traveled way and the sidewalk.
They are favored in areas with significant pedestrian traffic. Low curbs also improve the
geometry and feasibility of providing two perpendicular curb ramps per corner.
• Some judgment may be needed on a case -by -case basis to establish actual widths of each of
the four zones.
11 -65 • Lynwood Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Design • 11 -66