ITEM E1 - ATTACHMENT 1
BPAC MEETING 09/23/2015
STAFF REPORT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
TO:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC)
FROM:
Scott Schneider, Senior Civil Engineer
Cecilia Zamora, Associate Engineer
DATE:
August 26, 2015
SUBJECT:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update (BPTP)
ISSUE: 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update (BPTP)
RECOMMENDATION: Review and consider approval of the draft list of bicycle and
pedestrian projects; approve draft policy for uncontrolled crosswalks; review guidelines and
provide comments on colored bike lanes.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Project Prioritization
The Committee has been working on the prioritization of bicycle and pedestrian improvement
projects since June 10, 2015. At the July 22 meeting, the Committee reviewed the draft list of
projects, public comments, and provided staff with valuable feedback. The documents reviewed
by the committee at the July meeting are incorporated to this report as Attachment 1. The revised
draft list (Attachment 2) includes the comments received from the Committee (yellow highlight).
Below is a summary of the comments:


Recommended Class II facilities
o Add bike lanes from the Miller Avenue Streetscape Plan
o Add bike lanes on Ashford Avenue from E Blithedale to Lomita. Consider at a
minimum the north-west direction towards town.
Recommended Class II facilities
o ID 8 – Change segment to “Buena Vista Ave to Boyle Park bicycle route” and
end route at Carmelita/Thalia. Review all comments for this item prior to change
at the August BPAC meeting.
o IDs 7, 9, 11, and 14 – change their class to III+ and bring them to the top of the
list.
BPAC Staff Report
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
08/26/2015
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72

Recommended Intersection/Crossing Improvements
o ID I – move this project to the “Regional Connectivity – Bicycle Improvements”
project list
o ID K – move as a top priority; change language of notes to “evaluate and if
feasible construct a pedestrian facility near…”
In addition to the items above, staff has included other projects pertaining to sidewalk
improvements and safe pathways for schools. Council member Jessica Jackson has urged the
BPAC to include projects into the plan that will lead to the repair or reconstruction of City
sidewalks that are in poor condition. The Mill Valley Safe Routes to School Program has
developed a list of safe pathway projects that will help promote walking and biking to and from
schools. The revised draft list (Attachment 2) includes these new projects (blue highlight). Below
is a summary of the additional projects:



Safe Pathway projects: Throckmorton sidewalk gap closure; class II bike lanes on
shoreline highway; study of one-way direction traffic on Old Mill and Olive Streets;
Sidewalk and high visibility crosswalk on Buena Vista Avenue; ADA ramps and
crosswalk at Ashford Ave/Lomita Dr.; ADA ramps and crosswalk at Fern Ave/Catalpa
Ave.
An annual sidewalk rehabilitation project that recommends the allocation of $100,000
per year for sidewalk repairs and/or reconstruction.
Downtown sidewalk restoration project.
Staff recommends that the Advisory Committee review the revised project lists, continue the
project prioritization process, and consider approval of the revised draft list of bicycle and
pedestrian improvement projects for inclusion into the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation
Update.
Policy for Uncontrolled Crosswalks
The BPAC continued the review of the draft policy at the July 22 meeting, and requested to
continue the item to the next meeting. Staff recommends that the Committee approve the Policy
or provide direction to staff, as appropriate.
Colored Bike Lanes
At the July 22, 2015 meeting, the Committee asked staff to research the application guidelines
and cost for installing solid green bike lanes. The Committee expressed its desire to incorporate a
colored bike lane policy to the BPTP.
Staff reviewed the Urban Bikeway Design Guide developed by the National Association of City
Transportation Officials (NACTO). This document contains a section titled “Colored Bike
Facilities” that provides guidelines on the typical applications and features, as well as on the
benefits and challenges of these facilities (Attachment 3). The tables below summarize the
guidelines and provide the typical costs to install colored bike lanes. Staff compiled cost
estimates from other Marin Cities, Parisi Transportation Consultants, and Transpo Industries,
Inc.
2
BPAC Staff Report
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
08/26/2015
Typical
Applications
Conflict areas:
right-turn lanes,
intersections,
driveways,
stop/yield controls
Required
Features
Color:
Green
Recommended
Features
Surface:
skid resistant,
retro-reflective
Optional
Features
Conflict
areas:
solid color or
dashed
pattern
Corridor:
colored bike lanes
except at conflict
areas
Striping:
white lane
at edges
Signage:
“Yield to
Bikes” at
conflict areas
Corridor:
solid color
with gaps at
conflict areas
Benefits
Increases:
cyclists
visibility,
motorists
yielding,
conflict
awareness
Discourages:
illegal parking
Challenges
Maintenance:
re-installation,
color
reflectivity,
road surface,
cleaning
Installation
cost:
Depend on road
surface
condition &
material (table
below)
73
Road Surface/ traffic
Asphalt / high
Asphalt / high
Asphalt / high
Asphalt / low
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
Cost/ft2
Epoxy
MMA (Methyl Methacrylate)
Thermoplastic
Paint or Silica Quartzite
$8-11
$8-11
$10-14
$3-5
Durability on Excellent
Paving Condition
5 years
5 years
5 years
2 years
Per NACTO, there are two different applications for colored bike lanes features. One application
is to provide solid green color or dashed green color at the conflict zones; the other application is
to provide a solid green color along the entire length of the lane except in the conflict zones. The
latter is mainly used in high traffic corridors where vehicles are expected to encroach into the
bike lanes on a regular basis. Continuous colored bike lanes are more costly to install and
maintain than the other option. NACTO emphasizes the importance for any color configuration
to be consistent throughout a corridor.
Per the Committee request, staff developed cost estimates to install continuous green bike lanes
on Miller Avenue between Sunnyside Avenue and Almonte Avenue and on Camino Alto
between Miller Avenue and E. Blithedale Ave. The table below summarizes these costs.
Bike Lane
Corridor
Miller Avenue
Camino Alto
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
Material
Length
(ft)
Width
(ft)
Area
(ft2)
Paint Cost
($/ft2)
Construction Cost
(One Lane Direction)
9875
2720
5.5
5.5
54312.5
14960.0
$3
$3
$162,937.50
$44,880.00
Staff recommends that the Advisory Committee review the NACTO guide, provide comments,
and direct staff as appropriate.
3
BPAC Staff Report
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
08/26/2015
94
95
96
97
98
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Item E.1 package – July 22, 2015
2. Revised draft list of prioritized bicycle and pedestrian projects
3. NACTO Colored Bike Facilities
4
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
1 of 62
STAFF REPORT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TO:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC)
FROM:
Scott Schneider, Senior Civil Engineer
Cecilia Zamora, Associate Engineer
DATE:
July 22, 2015
SUBJECT:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update (BPTP)
ISSUE: 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update (BPTP)
RECOMMENDATION: Review and consider approval of the draft list of bicycle and
pedestrian projects; approve policy for uncontrolled crosswalks
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Project Prioritization
The Committee started the prioritization of bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects at the
June 10, 2015 meeting (Attachment 1). Staff provided the Committee with the draft list of
projects Alta Planning developed based on feedback received from the public via e-mails,
workshops, and the online survey. The Committee requested a copy of the public comments
collected by staff and Alta Planning, and asked to add a specific pedestrian improvement project
to address accessibility around the Mill Valley Golf Course to the draft list. The public
comments and the updated draft list of projects are incorporated in this report as Attachment 2
through 6.
On April 8, 2015 the Committee approved the project selection criteria (Attachment 7) to guide
the prioritization process. The criteria include the following: potential liability, continuity and
gap closure, demand patterns, safety, project readiness, multi-modal integration, separation of
facilities, and cost/benefit analysis.
Staff recommends that the Advisory Committee review the project lists, continue the project
prioritization process based on the selection criteria, and consider approval of the draft list of
bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects for inclusion into the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Update.
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
2 of 62
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Policy for Uncontrolled Crosswalks
The Department of Public Works receives many requests from residents and visitors to improve
existing uncontrolled crosswalks or to install new ones. In an effort to better address these
requests and incorporate a more systematic approach to their evaluation, staff developed a draft
policy for uncontrolled crosswalks in 2014 with traffic engineer David Parisi. The policy focuses
on design considerations, presents standard treatments and recommends conditions for their
application, as well as non-standard countermeasures and the conditions that may warrant their
use.
The BPAC reviewed the draft document and provided comments at the January 2014 meeting
(Attachment 8 and 9). Staff is now seeking to incorporate the Uncontrolled Crosswalk Policy
into the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update. Staff recommends that the
Committee approve the Policy or provide direction to staff, as appropriate.
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Staff Report - June 10, 2015
Public Comments from workshops.
Raw data from Public Survey available in Public Works Aide’s Office.
Email comments received.
April 30th Public Workshop Presentation includes comments/survey summary.
Draft List of prioritized bicycle and pedestrian projects
Project Selection Criteria
Draft Policy for Uncontrolled Crosswalks
January 15 and February 22, 2014 Uncontrolled Crosswalks minutes excerpt and staff
report.
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
3 of 62
STAFF REPORT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
TO:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC)
FROM:
Scott Schneider, Senior Civil Engineer
Cecilia Zamora, Associate Engineer
DATE:
June 10, 2015
SUBJECT:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update (BPTP)
ISSUE: 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update (BPTP)
RECOMMENDATION: Review and consider approval of the draft list of bicycle and
pedestrian improvement projects or provide direction to staff as appropriate
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The second BPAC workshop was held on April 30th, 2015, and it provided the public with an
update on the Advisory Committee efforts to complete the Plan. The workshop presentation
included a summary of the BPAC work, a summary of the first workshop and survey data, the
draft list of proposed improvements, and the next steps to complete the update. The BPAC work
summary included the review of the “Share Use Path and Trail Code of Conduct,” the
development of the prioritization criteria and process, as well as the development of the draft
“Plan Goals and Policy” section. The first workshop helped identify over 100 issues, programs,
and policy ideas, and the survey helped identify the bike and walk attention areas, the desire of
additional bike parking, and the desire of additional walk amenities such as sidewalk
connectivity and crosswalk improvements.
The draft list of projects presented to the public included all projects recommended by the public
during the first workshop, the survey, and e-mail correspondence. It was divided into the
following sections: Share-use paths (Class I), On-Road Bicycle Routes (Class II and III),
Sidewalk Improvements, Intersection/Crossing Improvements, and Citywide Improvements.
Many recommended improvements that fell under the same category were grouped together in
the Citywide Improvements Section. For example, during the first workshop, many residents
requested the City to monitor pavement quality and to repair and/or resurface the pavement of
existing bicycle routes. Each resident comment was specific to a street, and the final list grouped
those streets under a larger citywide monitoring/repair program.
Attachment 1 - 7/22/2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
4 of 62
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
The presentation was followed by a project prioritization exercise. Two stations were provided,
one for pedestrian projects and another for bicycle projects. Each station had the list of proposed
improvements, as well as large maps showing the location of the proposed improvements. The
public was directed to place three dots on the three projects on the projects they believed should
be of highest priority. The public was also encouraged to add additional projects to the maps or
list.
Alta Planning has updated the proposed draft list based on the feedback received from the public
during the second workshop. The projects have also been prioritized based on the results of the
prioritization exercise (Attachment A).
Staff recommends that the Advisory Committee review and consider approval of the draft list of
bicycle and pedestrian improvements projects for inclusion in the draft Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Plan Update, or provide direction to staff as appropriate.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft List of Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects
2. Draft Project Maps
3. Staff Report - April 8th, 2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
5 of 62
PROJECT
Mill Valley Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Plan Update
ORGANIZER Scott McDonald, Jill Barnes
SUBJECT
BPAC Meeting Minutes
DATE
May 21, 2014
VENUE
Mill Valley City Hall
TIME
7:00 PM
The meeting loosely followed the following set agenda:
A. Introduction and Overview of Plan Update Process
B. Review of 2008 Plan Elements & Priorities
C. Active Planned Projects & Potential Focus Areas
D. Next Steps
Jill Barnes, Director of Public Works at City of Mill Valley, started the meeting and introduced city staff,
members of the B/PAC, TAM, and Alta Planning + Design. Jill gave a short presentation introducing the
project and the purpose of tonight’s meeting.
Scott McDonald, Project Manager from TAM, spoke briefly about TAM’s involvement with the project. He
introduced Michael Jones from Alta Planning + Design.
Michael, Principal at Alta Planning + Design, talked about his experience living and working in Marin and the
momentum of bicycling over recent years. He walked through a number of recent projects in Mill Valley and
fielded some technical questions. Alex Sweet, Planner at Alta Planning + Design, joined Michael to discuss the
project schedule and solicit feedback on general issues and opportunities.
The following notes include questions and comments from the public. Similar comments are grouped
together.
Shared Path
Regarding a shared use path:
1. Can each jurisdiction determine use regulations?
2. Do pedestrians need to use the gravel along the side of the path?
3. Do we improve safety on the path?
Data Collection
•
•
Funding depends on the number of people who bike and walk.
How do you capture utilitarian bikers and high school bikers?
Enforcement
•
•
•
•
•
In the California Vehicle Code, all cities can have their own set of rules about riding 2-abreast
Camino Alto Pass – can we mandate single file riding?
How do we keep facilities usable because of double parked cars?
We want Office Johnson back again for enforcement.
Bicyclists don’t obey rules of the road. It feels scary to drive.
Attachment 2 - 7/22/2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
6 of 62
•
•
There is an issue with enforcement – everyone tickets in Sausalito, so bikes stop at all
the stop signs.
We need more cops on the street to ticket and enforce.
Facility Recommendations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sharrows on Throckmorton: Elma to Miller Avenue
Contra lane Lovell Ave – Corte Mader to Olive or Old Mill St
More bike parking, BPAC is adding bike corrals
Downtown plaza area – needs crosswalks and bulbouts – a way to package the projects into one.
Untapped potential – separated facilities
In Corte Madera there are green sharrows that raise awareness. Can we do something similar?
W Blyethdale – parallel segment to create bike/ped only trail.
Ashford Avenue – drag strip. All need to get to bike path. Rugged existing bike path connection that
nobody uses. It would be great to repave it.
Sycamore Avenue
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sharrows are currently recommended for Sycamore Ave, and City staff are asking for funding. Alta to
request project from Jill Barnes.
I support green sharrows on Sycamore Ave.
Sycamore Ave is terrible for Middle School students, especially between La Goma St and Nelson Ave.
Sycamore Park – consider making safer for kids, currently bumper to bumper traffic.
Sycamore Ave – ask for spot speed enforcement.
Mill Valley Traffic Calming Process – consider for Sycamore Ave.
Process
•
•
•
•
When an improvement needs to be made – what is the process?
What is the mechanism to improve existing ROW and existing facilities?
The shoulders and lanes are full of litter. We need better maintenance for bike lanes.
B/PAC would like to illustrate the CIP list of projects.
Bike/Pedestrian Connections and Cut-Through Paths
•
•
•
•
•
•
Consider pedestrian access through Boyle Park.
Buena Vista Ave – dangerous, winding, blind turns, kids on bikes, nannies, pool services, tennis club.
Consider a shared use path through tennis club? Golf Course?
You can’t get around the golf course. There is an old SRTS (safe route to school) proposal to
cantilever a sidewalk?
Joe – I live behind the golf course. The only way in and out is along Buena Vista Ave. I would like to
see a multiuse path through the golf course as an alternative to Buena Vista.
Boyle Park – cross golf course connection
Miller Avenue
•
•
Vehicle speed is a big issue on Miller Ave, especially at the Lumberyard property.
Consider a circular bus going around Miller Ave.
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
7 of 62
Schools
•
•
•
Schools are major source of congestion. We need to connect the dots to schools, parks, recreation
facilities so kids can walk and bike on their own.
Think about the kids going to Old Mill – Lovell Ave should be two-way for bikes and include signage.
Would like one way for cars and two-way for bikes
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
8 of 62
Mill Valley Bike/Pedestrian Plan Update
Mill Valley
Community Meeting #2
November 13, 2014
Mill Valley Community Center
7:00pm
Mayor Stephanie Moulton-Peters told a personal story and introduced the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan Update.
Jill Barnes introduced the B/PAC members in attendance. She stated that the bicycle and pedestrian
master plan update includes eight cities in Marin County, as well as a plan for the County as a whole.
Ms. Barnes said that goal of the update for Mill Valley is to increase connections between schools,
shops, and neighborhoods; make the experience of walking and bicycling more fun; increase
awareness between all users; and make walking and bicycling in Mill Valley safer. She then told those
in attendance the format of the workshop and invited Alexandra Sweet of Alta Planning + Design to
give a presentation.
Ms. Sweet introduced the members of the project team, including Scott McDonald (Senior Planner for
Transportation Authority of Marin), Dan Dawson (Transportation Planner for The County of Marin),
Michael Jones (CEO of Alta Planning + Design), and Kyle James (Planner for Alta Planning + Design).
Ms. Sweet began the presentation by describing the history of bicycle and pedestrian master plans in
Mill Valley, emphasizing that the City was not creating a new plan, but rather updating the master plan
from 2008. She noted that the updated plan would help develop a vision for Mill Valley by identifying
and prioritizing community needs and helping position the City for funding. The primary goals of the
plan, she stated, are to update existing maps, enhance the pedestrian component of the 2008 plan, and
identify regional and multi-jurisdictional gaps in connectivity.
Next, Ms. Sweet reviewed some common bicycle and pedestrian terminology, including the differences
between Class I, Class II, Class III, and Class IV bicycle facilities, before showing the bicycle network
proposed in the 2008 bicycle and pedestrian plan.
Scott Schneider from the City of Mill Valley walked the audience through some of the projects that
were proposed in the previous plan, and Mr. Dawson from Marin County Department of Public Works
talked about county projects that are currently in the works.
Ms. Sweet continued the presentation with a discussion about feedback already received from the
City’s online survey and the value of programs and policies in creating a quality bicycle and pedestrian
environment. She instructed those in attendance to consider program ideas, policy ideas, and bicycle
and pedestrian issues during the break-out session. The attendees were asked to mark up the maps
Mill Valley Bicycle / Pedestrian Plan Update
Community Meeting #2 - Meeting Minutes
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
9 of 62
located around the room with location specific issues and opportunities, noting that every comment
was considered seriously. Before beginning the break-out session, Ms. Sweet reminded everyone that
if they remembered a project or idea after the meeting, that they could submit it through the online
survey.
A summary of the comments are listed below.
1. Where Loring Avenue meets Shoreline Highway - especially for cars on Loring Avenue wishing
to turn left onto Shoreline Highway - motorists can’t see vehicles and bicyclists coming down
the Highway because of trees/bushes in the yard of houses across the street. It is worse in the
summer when the tree canopy is most full. Consider trimming back the trees.
2. Miller Avenue - very bumpy; the new bike lane is graded but not repaved.
3. There is no shoulder on Shoreline Highway at the major intersection going from TamalpaisHomestead Valley to Mill Valley.
4. Camino Alto – too many cracks on the curves inbound; tires can get caught in them.
5. Loring Avenue and Shoreline Highway (from Tam Junction) – hairline curve with lots of traffic
creates a conflict with bikes.
6. W. Blithedale from King Street to Lovell Avenue - needs bike path on road.
7. Corte Madera Avenue to Escalon Octopus Fire Rd. – Restore paving for bikes.
8. Roque Moraes Drive from E. Blithedale to path through Bayfront Park - close bike network gap
with Class III bike lane.
9. Redwood Highway Frontage Road between Belvedere Drive and Seminary Drive - convert
Class III to Class II.
10. Redwood Highway Frontage Road – consider directing bikes/peds behind the gas station using
the Strawberry recreation path that exists but needs widening.
11. Better bike route signage (larger) directional for loop route.
12. Bicycle lanes would improve safety on uphill side of Sequoia Valley Road.
13. Left-turn from Shoreline Highway to Flamingo Road – bike detection does not work.
14. East Strawberry Drive - consider sharrows.
15. Where sharrows have been approved, increase the frequency of pavement markings to make it
very clear.
16. Camino Alto to get to the Mill Valley Community Center – Consider a painted crosswalk near
the path through Freeman Park. It would be more direct and safe if there is a crosswalk there.
17. On the right-hand turn on Lomita Drive onto Blithedale Avenue leaving Whole Foods pedestrians have a flashing yellow light to cross with and cars are backed up. They should have
a longer red light.
18. Park Avenue and Sycamore Avenue - improve crosswalks; existing one is hidden behind a
tree/cars and the other isn’t yet painted.
19. Sidewalks on Ricardo Road.
Mill Valley Bicycle / Pedestrian Plan Update
Community Meeting #2 - Meeting Minutes
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
10 of 62
20. Sidewalks on Belvedere Drive.
21. New crosswalk at Miller Avenue and Camino Alto.
22. Provide a pedestrian trail on the ridge above and parallel to the Alta Fire Road with a spur
down to Tennessee Valley Road.
23. Need a safe crossing from Belvedere Drive to E. Strawberry Drive
24. Need sidewalks and lighting behind the new Porsche dealership.
25. Improve pedestrian path to connect Strawberry to the Mill Valley multi-use path.
26. Need to lengthen the time to cross the Frontage Road from De Silva Island Drive to the
overpass.
27. On West Blithedale Avenue, construct sidewalks between Eldridge Avenue and King Street.
28. Tiburon Boulevard and Richardson Drive – feels unsafe; needs improvement of dedicated
right-turn lane from Tiburon Boulevard onto E. Strawberry Drive; need safe crosswalk from
Belvedere Drive across E. Strawberry Drive.
29. Crossing guard needed at Marin Avenue and Belvedere Drive.
30. Crossing the Redwood Highway Frontage Road to De Silva Island Drive - dangerous, especially
crossing on-ramp. Install flashing lights on crosswalk along Frontage Road at crossings.
31. Complete sidewalk along Belvedere Drive in Strawberry.
32. Need to add a crossing guard at De Silva Island intersection.
33. Re-pave Sausalito to Mill Valley multi-use path.
34. Build the north/south Greenway along Bridgeway.
35. Barbara at Redwoods – “Future plans” multi-use path in Marsh.
36. Open the Alto Tunnel to bikes and pedestrians; essential to link communities with nonmotorized transportation. The people who chose to purchase property along a public right-ofway should not defeat the broader good to re-open the Alto Tunnel to bike/ped transportation.
37. Do not waste $30 million to open the Alto Tunnel.
38. Create a pedestrian bike walkway along Glen Drive and Buena Vista Avenue.
39. Consider a bi-directional multi-use path on the south side of Tiburon Boulevard to connect E.
Strawberry Drive to Greenwood Way.
40. Re-pave Mill Valley – Sausalito Path from E. Blithedale Avenue to Almonte Boulevard
41. Need a dedicated bike/ped lane at the De Silva Island Drive underpass for safer separation
between the freeway and the frontage road. This is the best option to improve the connection
between Mill Valley and Strawberry. Forget the bike/ped overpass. Consider a bi-directional
multi-use path to connect Strawberry to Mill Valley multi-use path. Caltrans owns this but does
not maintain it.
42. Proposed Good Earth Development - they want to build a park/green space that will prevent
cars from cutting through (Walgreens to Flamingo). This will just spill more traffic to adjoining
streets and create vehicle/bike conflicts.
43. Better lighting on paths.
Mill Valley Bicycle / Pedestrian Plan Update
Community Meeting #2 - Meeting Minutes
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
11 of 62
44. US 101 on-ramp from Tiburon Boulevard is dangerous.
45. Need a connector to fill the gap on Tiburon Boulevard between E. Strawberry Drive and
Blackfield Drive
46. Free right turn lane off Tiburon Boulevard.
47. Widen bridge at east end of Harbor Cove Way and add better directional signage at Harbor
Cove and East Strawberry Drive
48. There is no legal way to get across E. Strawberry Drive from Belvedere Drive to Tiburon
Boulevard.
49. Paved trail behind the car wash/gas station on Ricardo Road/Redwood Highway not good.
Crooked and turns to gravel.
50. Please improve safety of pedestrian overcrossing. Add flashing lights in crosswalk or more
pedestrian crossing up closer to Ricardo (then there is only one lane each way to cross). Would
need bike lane from crossing to pedestrian overpass.
51. Small section of the bike path by Mill Valley Middle School by bridge/Mill Valley bike path to
Hamilton Drive.
52. Widen, grade, and sign the bridge at the end of the cul-de-sac on Harbor Cove connecting to the
shared use path near Greenwood Cove.
53. Clear foliage by Tam High where Gomez meets Homestead at corner where the apartment
building has foliage that is so dense that cars, bikes, and pedestrians are totally blind to
oncoming traffic. The homeowners report accidents there and have requested speed bumps as
a result.
54. For cars approaching Gomez Way on Homestead Boulevard and wishing to turn onto Gomez
Way, the sightline for oncoming Homestead Boulevard traffic is very short. It is hard for traffic
coming up Gomez Way to stop on the steep hill; I suggest installing a stop sign on Homestead
Boulevard coming from the back side of Tam.
55. Make a dedicated right turn lane to Mill Valley Middle School from Camino Alto to avoid traffic
backup at drop-off/pick-up time.
56. Make another lane to improve traffic to US 101 South. The backup of cars on East Blithedale
Avenue to the highway is bad for all – pedestrians, bike riders, and cars.
57. Horse Hill from Corte Madera – huge blind spot south bound at 1st curve. Remove shrubs (not
just cut back).
58. Loring Avenue and Shoreline Highway – sight distance issues. Cut back vegetation.
59. Parking lot stop signs on Sycamore Avenue and across from Mill Valley Middle School –
suggestion to make ‘stop’ time specific per traffic patterns. For example, stop during hours x to
x or yield signs or less stop signs. If police will be enforcing and ticketing here during school
morning and eve drop off and pick-up.
60. Richardson Drive and Ricardo Road intersection – we call this the “Funky 5 Way”. Need to
tighten up and make more pedestrian friendly for walking to school.
61. Bollards need at Flamingo Road and Marin Avenue to help students get into school. Also need
speed limit sign.
Mill Valley Bicycle / Pedestrian Plan Update
Community Meeting #2 - Meeting Minutes
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
12 of 62
62. Consider a roundabout or speed humps along Marin Avenue between Maple Street and Laurel
Street.
63. Re-pave Montford Avenue near Janes Street
64. Sycamore Avenue east of Camino Alto – different solutions vs stop signs in front of parking lot
– discouraging.
65. Curb cut blocked by cars.
66. Paint red curb.
67. Strawberry recreation path is the only governing body for this unincorporated area. It would
be very useful for Dan or another representative, to keep the Strawberry Recreation District
informed of this process tonight and the progress of projects along with proposals and
timeline. In Strawberry, we see several upgrades and active planning happening in Mill Valley,
but feels like nothing is happening in Strawberry. It would be helpful to let people know of all
the brainstorming and potential upgrades.
68. Support and encourage Marin Trolleys. Trolleys can take bike riders the long distances. Bikes
can be the short haul feeder to and from the trolleys. A trolley system will increase bike use.
69. Homeowners should keep hedges from encroaching on sidewalks.
70. Education needed for kids.
71. Keep foliage cut back along roads – example: 25 Loring Avenue between Homestead Boulevard
and 5 corners. This property is on a curve and has allowed foliage to grow up so the corner is
totally blind. Another blind corner is on Vernal Avenue right before the connection with
Greenhill Road. Major removal done on corner house so that house intrudes into roadway and
the landscaping created a blind corner. As the landscaping matures, it will get worse.
72. Post the three foot law on banners over Blithedale Drive and Miller Avenue and on flashing
beacons.
73. Need to enforce no parking in the bike lane on Seminary Drive east of Seminary Cove Drive.
74. Growing number of electric motor assisted bicycles – they are really moving fast on multi-use
paths – need a policy to control them?
75. If the community is so opposed to bike registration, how can bicyclists be better enforced to
follow road rules?
76. More emphasis on pedestrian safety. It seems all discussion is geared to accommodating
bicyclists. But more energy should be spent on assuring a safe environment for broad range of
pedestrians. Bicyclists speed so pedestrians have no time to respond. I’m on multi-use paths
two hours per day. Speeding bicyclists come close to seriously injuring children, elderly, moms,
dog walkers. Consider speed bumps! Textured pavement. Move enforcement. Above all –
educate bicyclists that their “bike path” is not one any longer – it’s for everyone to share. Love
the roundabout! Great start! Stops still being ignored by bicyclists though… and we need
something to show bikers approach.
77. Not enough enforcement citywide. Since police can’t be at stops 24/7 to ticket bicyclists who
run lights and stops and Mill Valley is opposed to bike registration – how will bicyclists be
enforced?
78. Sharrows – need public education so people know that it shows the recommended area of the
road for the bike to ride.
Mill Valley Bicycle / Pedestrian Plan Update
Community Meeting #2 - Meeting Minutes
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
13 of 62
79. Insert bicycle regulations into driver’s handbook at the DMV.
80. Lobby state to allow cities to reduce car speed limits. 25 mph is way too fast for Sycamore Ave.
81. Crack down on distracted drivers (cell phone use).
82. Consider measured response and focus to bike path stop sign ticketing on path at Sycamore
across from Mill Valley Middle School. Stop signs in front of driveway?! If you plan to actively
ticket we will take a different route. Consider yield or other ‘safe’ solution.
83. Speed enforcement in Tam Valley – stop signs at Laurel, Maple, Bell, Northern.
84. Stop sign camera in Tam Valley.
85. Large speed notice in road on Laurel, Maple, Marin, Northern, and Bell.
86. Need a policy that applies to construction, public and private, to identify opportunities to
combine driveways, minimize obstructive landscaping, and finance bike/ped facilities.
87. Public outreach program to increase and enforce bicyclists to obey road rules is not enough.
Bicyclists know they can’t be held accountable unless police are there.
88. A good example is the constant stream of bicyclists who go up Corte Madera St. (wrong way on
a one-way street).
89. Ticket people who park on sidewalks.
90. Consider a three path system with two one-way bike lanes and a bidirectional bike path.
91. Need a policy on the Mill Valley Path to require walkers as well as bicyclists to keep one ear
unobstructed by earbuds.
92. On Mill Valley Bike Path new Roundabout – There are signs asking bikes to walk the bike. No
one does this and in my opinion it is not necessary. If instead you used 5mph signs this is
reasonable and will remove tension for not following signs.
93. Please enforce no parking in the bike lanes on Seminary Drive between Chapel Drive and Great
Circle Drive.
94. Corte Madera should be two ways for bikes to avoid busy Blithedale Drive.
95. Class III on Shell Road is a Class II. Still moving forward on Lomita in uphill direction on both
sides?
96. Redwood Highway Frontage Road may have existing Class II segments.
After the break-out sessions, all attendees were instructed to re-assemble and review some of the
feedback given. Mr. Jones noted that there was a focus on the Strawberry area, including
overcrossings, under-crossings, and bicycle lanes on frontage roads. Additional comments included
sight distance, crosswalk, pavement condition, distracted driving and bicycling, and trail etiquette
issues. Ms. Sweet closed the meeting by thanking everyone for attending, noting that the online survey
would be open for three more weeks, and that the next workshop is scheduled for March to review the
project team’s recommendations.
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
14 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
Between Belvedere Dr and Milland Dr
off Redwood Highway Frontage, a 1/4 Check for Class 2
way north of Milland Drive
City of Mill Valley map
Bike
Marin County
Bridge adjacent to De Silva Island
Drive and Hwy 101
City of Mill Valley map
Bike/Ped
Marin County
This is the best option to improve for
connecting MV to Strawberry. Forget
Bridge adjacent to Del Silva Island
the bike/ped overpass. Consider a biDrive and Redwood Highway Frontage
directional multi-use path to connect
Strawberry to MV, multi-use path.
City of Mill Valley map
Bike/Ped
Marin County
Bridge at Harbor Cove Way
3' narrow bridge needs widening
City of Mill Valley map
Bike/Ped
Marin County
E Strawberry
Sharrows
City of Mill Valley Map
Bike
Marin County
Harbor Cove Way
Harbor Cove Way says not a thru
street but it is the bike route
City of Mill Valley Map
Bike
Marin County
Harbor Cove Way and E Strawberry
Dr
Need better directional sign
City of Mill Valley map
Bike
Marin County
Knoll and Reed Blvd
Improve peds behind new Porsche
dealership. Need sidewalks, lighting
City of Mill Valley map
Ped
Mill Valley
N-S segment from De Silva Island
Drive to Belvedere Drive along
Redwood Highway Frontage
Dedicated bike/ped lanes; safer
separation between the freeway and
Frontage Road
City of Mill Valley map
Bike/Ped
Marin County
Improve ped path to connect
Strawberry to the MV multi use path
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
15 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
N-S segment from De Silva Island
Drive to Belvedere Drive along
Redwood Highway Frontage
Need to lengthen the time to cross the
Frontage Road from DeSilva Island to City of Mill Valley map
the overpass
Ped
Marin County
N-S segment from De Silva Island
Drive to Belvedere Drive along
Redwood Highway Frontage
Perhaps consider directing bikes/peds
behind the gas stations using the
City of Mill Valley map
Strawberry Rec path that exists but
needs widening
Bike/Ped
Marin County
Redwood Highway Frontage and Del
Silva Island Drive
Hook ramp
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Redwood Highway Frontage and Del
Silva Island Drive
Crossing Frontage Rd dangeous
especially crossing on ramp. Can we
install flashing lights on crasswalk
while pedestrians
City of Mill Valley map
Ped
Marin County
Redwood Highway Frontage parking
lot driveway
Crosswalk flashlight
City of Mill Valley map
Ped
Marin County
Redwood Highway Frontage parking
lot driveway
New crosswalk with flashes
City of Mill Valley map
Ped
Marin County
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Redwood Highway Frontage southern
This is Caltrains and never maintained City of Mill Valley map
loop
Train
Marin County
Seminary Drive between Chapel Dr
and Seminary Cove Dr
Bike
Marin County
Redwood Highway Frontage southern
Cars cut corner
loop
Need to enforce no parking in the bike
City of Mill Valley map
lane
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
16 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
Strawberry
Complete sidewalk on Belevedere
Drive
City of Mill Valley Map
Ped
Marin County
Tiburon and S Knoll Road
Dangerous on-ramp
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Tiburon Blvd and E Strawberry Drive
Terribly unsafe. Need improvement of
dedicated right turn lane from Tiburon
Blvd onto E. Strawberry Drive. Need
City of Mill Valley map
safe crosswalk from Belvedere Drive
across east Strawberry.
Multimodal
Marin County
Tiburon Blvd and E Strawberry Drive
Need safer crosing from Belvedere
across E Strawberry Drive
Ped
Marin County
25 Loring
Keep foliage cut back along roads.
between homstead and 5 corners. This
property is an s-curve and has allowed City of Mill Valley map
foliage to grow up so corner is totally
blind.
Vegetation
Marin County
Alta Ave and Pacheco Fire Road
Provide a pedestrian trail on the ridge
above and parallel to Alta Fire Road
City of Mill Valley map
with a spur down to Tennessee Valley
Road
Ped
Marin County
Bell Lane and Marin Ave
Crossing guard needed at Marin Ave
and Bell Lane
City of Mill Valley map
Ped
Marin County
Bell Lane south of Marin Ave
Bollards need to help students get into
school. Also need school speed limit City of Mill Valley map
sign.
Ped
Marin County
Curve from Loring Ave to California
Ave
(Striked out: blind curves tight for bikes
City of Mill Valley map
and auto.) Alt. route?
Traffic
Marin County
City of Mill Valley map
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
17 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
Flamingo Rd and Tennessee Valley
Road
Left turn from Shoreline to Flamingo
bike recognition turn signal does not
work
City of Mill Valley map
Bike
Marin County
Flamingo Rd south of Cardinal Ct
Sharrows
City of Mill Valley map
Bike
Marin County
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Jean Street just west Browning Street Street humps
Loring and Shoreline
Hairline curve with lots of traffic
creates conflict with bikes
City of Mill Valley Map
Traffic
Marin County
Loring and Shoreline
Sight distance issues - vegetation bushes/trees
City of Mill Valley Map
Vegetation
Marin County
Loring and Shorline
Where Loring meetings Shoreline Hwy
especially for cars on Loring wishing to
turn left onto Hwy 1 - can't see
vehicles and bicyclists coming down
City of Mill Valley map
highway 1 hill from Stinson because
trees/bushes in the yard of houses
across the street - worse in summer
Vegetation
Marin County
Marin Avenue at Laurel Way, Poplar
Street, Pine Street, Spruce Street
Stop signs
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Marin Avenue at Spruce Street and
Poplar Street
Roundabout or speed humps
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Marin Avenue between Maple Street
and Laurel Way
Sharrows
City of Mill Valley map
Bike
Marin County
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
18 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Montford Ave on the northeastern
border between unincorporated county
Paving is a disgrace
and Mill Valley (between Ethel Ave
and Pixie Trail)
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
City of Mill Valley Map
Traffic
Marin County/ City of Mill Valley
City of Mill Valley Map
Bike
Marin County
Sequoia Valley Road
Bike lanes would improve safety on
uphill side
Shoreline Hwy and Flamingo Road
Proposed good earth here says they
want to build a park/green space that
will prevent cars from cutting through
City of Mill Valley map
(Walgreens to Flamingo). This will just
spill more traffic to adjoining streets
and create vehicle/bike conflicts.
General
Marin County
Tiburon Blvd and Blackfield Drive
Need connector to fill gap
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Tiburson Blvd and E Strawberry Dr
Free right turn lane off Tiburon Blvd
City of Mill Valley map
Traffic
Marin County
Vernal and Greenhill
Major remodel done on corner house
so that house intrudes into roadway
and the landscaping has created a
blind corner as landscaping matures
visibility getting worse
City of Mill Valley map
Vegetation
Marin County
0 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
7 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
0 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
22
23 down Blithedale Ave
24
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
19 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
25
1 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
26
0 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
4 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
C
3 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
D
2 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
E
0 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
F
0 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
G
0 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
A
B
1 noted "park"
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
20 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
I
0 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
101 Interchange Currently under
studay
3 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
Marin County/ City of Mill Valley
Ashford Ave near Meadow Rd
1 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
South of Tamlpias High School
2 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
Blithedale Ave
9 City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (1)
City of Mill Valley
H
E Blithedale Ave
2 stars noted "over the freeway or
under!"
Source
0 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
3 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
14 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
21 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
4 stars (noted "Look at Sr2S study
middle school")
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
Camino Alto & Matilda
1 star
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
Fairway Dr
Golf Course --> Dirt Path
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
Camino Alto & Sycamore Ave
Pdes in way realign ADA ramps w new
City of Mill Valley Map
SUP
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
Azaelia and Lomita Dr
bikes busy intersection/ needs repair
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
Kipling Dr to Plaza Dr
Really Steep
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (1)
City of Mill Valley
Grove Ave
12 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
De Silva Island Drive
2 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
Marin County
Montford Ave
1 star
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
22 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
Blithedale Ave
2 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
Sycamore Ave
2 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
Overhill Rd
2 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
0 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
3 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
0 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
Tam High
Safe bike route needed through Tam
High (former bikeway is now blocked,
Understudy $ look grant
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
City of Mill Valley
At Shasta Way and Browning Street
this is a Tam Valley Loop
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
Marin County
Shoreline Highway and Tennessee
Valley Road
This signal is really interfering with
areteral flow - flashing pedestrian/bike City of Mill Valley Map
crossing?
Recommended Bikeway Network (2)
Marin County
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
23 of 62
Location
Comment / Question
Source
Category
(Bike/Ped/Traffic,
etc)
Jurisdiction
23 1 star
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (2)
City of Mill Valley
27 1 star
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (2)
City of Mill Valley
28 4 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (2)
City of Mill Valley
25 2 stars
City of Mill Valley Map
Recommended Pedestrian
Improvements (2)
City of Mill Valley
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
24 of 62
Attachment 4 - 7/22/2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
25 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
26 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
27 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
28 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
29 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
30 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
31 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
32 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
33 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
34 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
35 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
36 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
37 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
38 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
39 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
40 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
41 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
42 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
43 of 62
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
44 of 62
Cecilia Zamora
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
seela lewis <seelalewis@yahoo.com>
Thursday, March 12, 2015 2:59 PM
Cecilia Zamora
Re: M.V. paths
Thank you, Cecilia
On Mar 12, 2015, at 1:08 PM, Cecilia Zamora <czamora@cityofmillvalley.org> wrote:
Thank you Ms. Lewis for your comments. They have been forwarded to the BPAC members and
the SLP subcommittee, which are also evaluating evacuation routes. The comments have also
been forwarded to Alta Planning, the consultant working with the City to update the Bicycle and
Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Your comments will be considered as we work on this important
project. We welcome all comments and ideas.
Please consider attending future BPAC meetings to provide input. You may find the BPAC
meeting dates, agendas, and staff reports
athttp://www.cityofmillvalley.org/Index.aspx?page=1139. You may also sign up for enotification athttp://www.cityofmillvalley.org/Index.aspx?page=38 to receive BPAC materials
right when they are posted. Furthermore, please consider attending the next BPAC workshop
which is scheduled for April 30th at 7 pm at the Community Center.
Best regards,
Cecilia C. Zamora, P.E.
Associate Engineer
415-384-4807
From: seela lewis [mailto:seelalewis@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 11:20 AM
To: Jill McNeal
Cc: Betsy Bikle
Subject: M.V. paths
Dear Jill McNeal,
Betsy Bikle, President of the Mill Valley Heights Homeowners Association,
suggested I write you on behalf of our Association since we were not able to
attend the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee meeting last night.
We are very concerned about the unsafe condition of the Earnscliff Canyon Trail
between Monte Vista and Marion. In case of a fire emergency, that is the nearest
evacuation route for many households in this area, and the trail is in such a poor
and dangerous condition that it is virtually unusable. The trail is at present very
steep, narrow and slippery in several places, with loose soil and pebbles and roots
where it borders a vertical drop off into the canyon. At dusk or at night, it would
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
not be an option for evacuation at all, and even in the best of conditions, it is not 45 of 62
safe.
We are asking the city to improve the trail to make it safe and usable for
emergency evacuation, as well as for a viable alternative to driving our cars to
town. The traffic on Monte Vista and Hazel, both very narrow and winding
roads, now far exceeds any reasonable safety standards—there is a constant flow
of cars (the majority large SUVs), trucks, bicycles, motorcycles, pedestrians
(including kids), dog walkers and skateboarders—and anything that can be done
to invite off-road walking would help to improve the unsafe situation on these
roads.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Seela Lewis
351 Hazel Avenue
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
46 of 62
Cecilia Zamora
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dr. Jim Taylor <jim@drjimtaylor.com>
Thursday, March 12, 2015 11:26 AM
BPAC
dangerous crosswalk at intersection of Sycamore & La Goma
Last year, I met with Robert Z. and shared my concern for the oddly shaped intersection of Sycamore and La Goma.
Because it isn’t symmetrical, the crosswalk on the west side of La Goma is not at the stop sign. Cars coming in both
directions neither expect to see a cross walk before the stop sign nor can easily see pedestrians at the crosswalk or who
are crossing. I and my children have almost been hit multiple times when trying to cross.
MV did paint one-care length of the curb red immediately to the left of the cross walk on the SW side of the street, but
parked cars still block visibility of both cars and peds.
I don’t believe that any attempts to make that specific location for the crosswalk safe will work because it is not at the
stop sign.
When I suggested to Robert that the safest solution was to move the crosswalk to the stop sign, he said that, because
the intersection is at an oblique angle, it would require too much time to cross the street and create traffic congestion
on that street. I don’t find that argument very compelling because those streets are not major thoroughfares and that
intersection does not generate much traffic.
For the safety of our children and other peds, I urge MV to simply move the crosswalk to where it belongs, namely,
directly at stop signs of the intersection of Sycamore and La Goma.
I and all the children and peds in the neighborhood thank you for your consideration and action.
Feel free to contact me if you have questions or comments.
I expect to attend the April 8 meeting to reiterate my concerns.
Regards,
Jim
Jim Taylor, Ph.D.
O & M | +1.415.322.8425
www.drjimtaylor.com
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
47 of 62
Cecilia Zamora
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Michael Mooney <michaelmooney@yahoo.com>
Thursday, March 12, 2015 10:32 AM
BPAC; BPAC@cityofmillvaley.org
Bike Ped Plan
Hi,
Please include these ideas in the Bike/Ped Plan update.
-The City of Mill Valley should allocate more money to maintaining and improving street markings,
especially crosswalks. Currently, many crosswalks are barely visible. One example is at the south
east part of the La Goma/Sycamore Ave intersection. It's the one that crosses Sycamore and is very
close to Locust Avenue.
-Add a crosswalk to the Sycamore/Park Avenue intersection between the curb cuts that are not
currently connected by a crosswalk.
-The City should perform a yearly audit of the safety and clarity of crosswalks in Mill Valley.
-The City should experiment with improving crosswalks by increasing the distance between parked
cars and crosswalks where visibility is a safety issue, such as at the crosswalk at the north east part
of the Sycamore/Park Avenue intersection. An 8' section of curb on the north west part of Sycamore
Avenue was recently painted red. This has improved visibility but the red curb painting should be
extended another 8-10' on Sycamore towards E Blithedale to make it safer.
-As the City considers and possibly implements enforcing of bike traffic violations, the City should
also begin enforcing car parking violations of cars parked on sidewalks. Perhaps a warning notice
period should be used initially, followed by the citation of fines.
-Sharrows should be added to the upper/western section of Sycamore Avenue. Students biking and
walking to and from school heavily use this part of the road. Sharrows would announce to drivers to
share the road with non-car users of the road.
-Sharrows should be added to other roads or sections of roads where student-bikers or other bikers
heavily use the road.
Thank you,
Mike Mooney
30 Sycamore, MV
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
48 of 62
From: triciasatake@comcast.net [mailto:triciasatake@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 4:08 PM
To: Cecilia Zamora
Subject: Re: SLP Subcommittee - SLP Survey
Will do.
I also have a few BPAC update suggestions to pass on to you from the community:
1) crosswalk in front of Tony's shoe repair for kids coming from Corte Madera.
2) crosswalk in front of Scout Hall
3) coordination with MVSD and TUSD to reduce traffic.
Thanks!
Tricia
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
49 of 62
Recommended Class I Facilities – Shared-Use Paths (Off-Street)
ID
Segment Name
Begin
End
Class
Length
Cost
1
Camino Alto shared-use path completion
Community Center E. Blithedale Ave
I
0.10
$100,000
2
Freeman Park Pathway improvements
Nelson Ave
I
0.12
$120,000
Camino Alto
Total Class I Shared-Use Paths
0.22
$220,000
Recommended Class II Facilities - Striped Bicycle Lanes (On-Street)
ID
Segment Name
Begin
3
Camino Alto bicycle route
E. Blithedale Ave
4
Camino Alto bicycle lanes
Miller Ave
End
Corte Madera Ave
(City Limit)
Class
Length
Cost
II
1.37
TBD
E. Blithedale Ave
II
0.50
TBD
Total Class II Bicycle Lanes
1.87
Recommended Class III Facilities - Signed Bicycle Routes (On-Street)
ID
Segment Name
Begin
End
Class
Length
Cost
5
Cascade Dr-Marion Ave bicycle route
Cascade Dr
Edgewood Ave
III
1.34
26,800
6
Molino Ave-Birch St bicycle route
Cascade Dr
Edgewood Ave
III
0.65
13,000
7
Park Ave bicycle route
Sycamore Ave
Miller Ave
III
0.08
1,600
8
Buena Vista Ave bicycle boulevard
W Blithedale Ave
Del Casa Dr
III+
0.56
100,800
9
Sycamore Ave bicycle route
E Blithedale Ave
Hilarita Ave
III
0.44
8,800
10 Roque Moraes Dr bicycle route
E Blithedale Ave
Hamilton Dr
III
0.28
5,600
11 Hamilton Dr-Kipling Dr bicycle route
Hauke Park path
E Blithedale Ave
III
0.58
11,600
12 Edgewood Ave-Molino Ave bicycle route
Edgewood Ave
(County)
Janes St
III
0.94
18,800
13 Millwood St bicycle route
Miller Ave
E Blithedale Ave
III
0.10
2,000
14 Valley Circle bicycle route
Miller Ave
Sycamore Ave
III
0.10
2,000
15 Glen Dr-Buena Vista Ave bicycle route
Manor Dr
Heather Way
III
0.67
13,400
16 Hilarita Ave bicycle boulevard
Sycamore Ave
E Blithedale Ave
III+
0.28
50,400
Hilarita Ave
Manor Dr
III+
0.61
109,800
Fern Ave
Nelson Ave
III+
0.34
61,200
17
Locust Ave-Elm Ave-Del Casa Dr bicycle
boulevard
18 Elm Ave-Matilda Ave bicycle boulevard
Total Class III Bicycle Routes
6.97
$425,800
Total Recommended Bikeway Network
9.06
$645,800
Attachment 6 - 7/22/2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
50 of 62
Recommended Citywide Bicycle Projects
Description
Install Bicycle Detection at five (5) intersection locations
(costs may be lower depending on existing conditions) Miller/Camino Alto, Sycamore/Camino Alto, E.
Blithedale/Camino Alto, Kipling/E. Blithedale
Project Status as of July 2015
Major intersections have bicycle detection systems. The City has received
HSIP funding to install optical bike detectors on all 3 intersections along
Camino Alto between Miller Avenue and E Blithedale Avenue. The City is
actively searching for ways to improve existing systems.
Rehabilitate pavement along Sycamore Ave. between the
Pavement will be rehabilitated in 2015 as part of the City’s annual street and
County Multi-Use Path and Camino Alto to provide class
sewer rehab project.
III bicycle facility
Improve bicycle parking in downtown Mill Valley and at
schools and parks locations, including bicycle lockers at
City Hall
BPAC has identified locations for bike corrals. Working on installation and
maintenance agreement and cost estimate.
Install information/map kiosks at five (5) locations
One kiosk wil be installed at the intersection of the Mill Valley – Sausalito
Pathway and Sycamore Ave. Other locations being evaluated.
Cost
$21,000.00
$250,000.00
$16,000.00
$7,200.00
Specific locations identified for resurfacing:
· Miller Ave bike lanes (Almonte Blvd to Downtown)
Monitor pavement quality on bicycle routes and perform
spot maintenance and surfacing as necessary.
· Camino Alto shoulders (E. Blithedale to Corte Madera)
· Corte Madera Ave (W. Blithedale to Downtown)
· Mill Valley – Sausalito Path (County Facility)
· Montford Ave (Molino Ave to Jane St)
Upgrade and restore Mill Valley's existing steps, lanes, and
An SLP subcommittee is working on an updated list of SLP projects for
trails to improve pedestrian safety for a variety of users
inclusion into the transportation plan. The proposed list will be presented to
including students to school and commuters to Golden
the BPAC in June 2015.
Gate Transit and Marin Transit.
Increase the frequency and visibility of shared-lane
markings on existing Class III routes
Consider the use of green-backed shared-lane markings around conflict areas
(e.g. driveways, intersections, parking lanes) and where roadway width is
constrained.
Identify additional road segments to install shared-lane
markings, specially areas heavily used by cyclists, including
students and recreational riders.
Construct uncompleted capital improvement program
(CIP) school safety improvements.
Improvements are listed in Appendix A of the 1998 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan. City is seeking funding for these projects.
Total Citywide Projects
$294,200.00
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
51 of 62
Recommended Sidewalk (On-Street) Improvements
ID
Segment Name
22 Elm Ave (west side)
23 Elm Ave (north side)
Begin
End
Length (ft)
215 Elm Ave (@ Matilda
191 Elm Ave
Ave)
South of E. Blithedale
133 Elm Ave
Ave
200
180
24 Elm Ave (one side)
Manor Dr
Sidney St
1,200
25 Roque Moraes Dr (south side)
E Blithedale Ave
Enchanted Knolls Park
parking lot
1,200
26 Lomita Dr (west side)
Mill Valley Post Office
Ashford Ave
520
27 Hilarita Ave (east side)
Lock Ln
E Blithedale Ave
820
Almonte
Sunnyside Ave
28
Miller Ave Streetscape Master Plan
implementation
--
Total Sidewalks
4120
Recommended Intersection/Crossing Improvements
ID
Notes
Segment
Buena Vista Ave at Boyle Park stairs crossing
A
improvements (SLP 254)
Study the potential to implement crossing treatments that improve pedestrian visibility, such
as HAWKs or RRFBs. Consider treatments to slow motor vehicle traffic in concert with
recommendation #11 (Buena Vista Ave bicycle boulevard), such as a raised crosswalk, speed
bumps and/or other traffic calming measures.
B
Sycamore Ave at Park Ave intersection
improvements
Improve sightlines and complete crosswalks.
C
Sycamore Ave at La Goma St intersection
improvements
Improve sightlines and complete crosswalks. Consider adjusting intersection geometry to
clarify right-of-way and improve pedestrian safety.
D
Camino Alto at Miller Ave intersection
improvements
Construct crosswalk on east side of Camino Alto to improve pedestrian access through this
vital junction adjacent to commercial and recreational destinations.
US 101 pedestrian overcrossing access
E improvements (Redwood highway / Frontage
Road)
Improve pedestrian access on west side of existing pedestrian overcrossing (enhanced
crosswalks, ramps and wayfinding signage). Coordinate with Caltrans/County for east side
improvements.
F
This facility would link together several ped-bike routes at a key convergence point. An
Mill Valley–Sausalito shared-use path at Ashford
additional connection of approx. two hundred feet could provide a link to the proposed
Ave access improvement
Camino Alto Class III via Azalea Dr.
G
Camino Alto at Freeman Park shared-use path
access improvement
Construct a bike-ped crosswalk across Camino Alto and improve transition to pathway. This
mid-block crossing would improve pedestrian safety and comfort along Camino Alto and
serve as a trailhead for the proposed Elm-Matilda bicycle boulevard.
H
US 101 shared-use path overcrossing - consider
special study
This crossing would provide the most direct link between Mill Valley and Strawberry, but at
significant cost (compared to 101 underpass sidepath, proposed above). Note that Mill Valley
jurisdiction ends at the 101 – coordinate with Caltrans/County.
I
E Blithedale Ave at US 101 interchange
Interchange currently under study.
J
129 Miller Ave crosswalk (old lumber mill)
Construct a mid-block pedestrian crossing across Miller Ave/Presidio Ave between Hill St
and Grove St.
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
52 of 62
Warner Canyon to Boyle Park
Evaluate the possibiltity to develop a pedestrian facility near or at the MV Golf Course to
connect residents including school children from Warner Canyon to Boyle Park
Other Recommended Pedestrian Improvements
Description
Project Status as of July 2015
Improve pedestrian routes and route signage from the
Golden Gate Transit bus stops at Highway 101 to
downtown Mill Valley.
Need further study to define project scope before pursuing project funding
Upgrade and restore Mill Valley's existing steps, lanes
and trails to improve pedestrian safety for a variety of
users including students to school and commuters to
Golden Gate Transit.
Constructed with 2012 NTPD: SLPs 51, 39, 33, 11, 54, 23 and 23 A. Constructed by
volunteer or City funds: SLPs 53, 18,184, 48, 47, 254, 46, 248, and 249. Scheduled for
construction 2015: SLPs 230 (Gardner Steps), 221 (Raynold's donation - Greenwood to
Woodbine), 166 (Tamalpais to Summit), 318 (Lomita/Ashford to MUP)
Improve crosswalks at the following intersections along
Miller Avenue, including high visibility crosswalks,
signage, street lighting and minor curb extensions, as
appropriate.
Pursuing project funding.
a. Almonte
b. Reed
c. Valley Circle
d. Locust
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
53 of 62
ID
Segment Name
1 Mill Valley to Strawberry Connection
2
ID
Alto Tunnel - Under Study (extension to MVSausalito MUP)
Segment Name
Regional Connectivity - Bicycle Improvements
Begin
End
Class
Length
Hamilton Dr
East of US101
TBD
TBD
Vasco Ct
Corte Madera
I
TBD
Potential Special Studies - Bicycle Improvements
Begin
End
Class
Length
Cost
Jurisdiction
Mill Valley/ County of Marin/
TBD
Caltrans
Mill Valley / Corte Madera / County
TBD
of Marin
Cost
Jurisdiction
3 E&W Blithedale Avenue
King Street
Kipling Drive
TBD
2.36
TBD
Mill Valley
4 Throckmorton Ave
Miller Ave
E Blithedale Ave
TBD
0.1
TBD
Mill Valley
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
54 of 62
Mill Valley Safe Routes to Schools Action Plan for Schools within the City
Strategy
Traffic flow and parking/drop off
evaluation
School
All Schools
Details
Meet with school and SR2S reps to assess
current traffic flow, parking, and drop off
situation to determine if changes are
neede to increase safety and improve flow
around the school
Stakeholder
Responsible
Funding
DPW and School
Principal (or site
council) and SR2S
reps
Priority 1: Fund and construct
improvements along the 4 high-priorty
pathways
Old Mill
Eugene Way Extension: Linking Summit to
Tamalpais
DPW
Priority 1: Fund and construct
improvements along the 4 high-priorty
pathways
Old Mill
Marion Lane Extension: Linking Rose to
Hazel to Monte Vista
DPW
Priority 1: Fund and construct
improvements along the 4 high-priorty
pathways
Old Mill
Ethel/Millside Lane Extension: Linking
Edgewood/Marion to Florence/Helens
DPW
Priority 1: Fund and construct
improvements along the 4 high-priorty
pathways
Old Mill
Oak Lane Extension: Linking Summit to
Tamalpais
DPW
Priority 2: Safety improvements
around the perimeter of Old Mill
School
Old Mill St / Olive St one-way traffic
pattern. City of Mill Valley Circulation
Element to conduct a specialized study in
the Old Mill neighborhood. If the study
recommends this proposed one-way
traffic pattern a public hearing will take
place.
MV Planning/DPW
Old Mill
Status
Circulation
Element to
recommend
study of
neighborhood
traffic flow in
Old Mill
neighborhood
UNK
Priority 3: Improvement of all 16
pedestrian routes to school identified
in 15 Minutes to School
Old Mill
See appendix C of School Travel Plan
DPW
Annual maintenance and repair
around school sites
All Schools
Conduct annual assessment and, if
needed:
Marin County or
DPW
City or County
DPW
All Schools
Paint crosswalks around school
Marin County or
DPW
City or County
DPW
All Schools
Provide up-to-date signage
Marin County or
DPW
City or County
DPW
All Schools
Maintain sidewalks; repair cracked
sidewalks and curbs
Marin County or
DPW
City or County
DPW
All Schools
Stripe bike lanes near schools where
possible
Marin County or
DPW
City or County
DPW
All Schools
Clean bike lanes with street sweeper
Marin County or
DPW
City or County
DPW
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
55 of 62
PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
Once a bikeway or pedestrian project has been identified, the next challenge is to classify the priority
projects that will offer the greatest benefit to bicyclists and pedestrians once they are implemented. The
project prioritization list in section (insert section number) was developed through a qualitative analysis
based on stated priorities of the BPAC and City staff, priorities communicated by the public at the City of
Mill Valley Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update public workshops held on May 5 and
November 13, 2014, priorities from the 2008 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and the criteria
detailed below.

Potential Liability – Is the City at risk without implementing the project, due to a hazard or
failure to comply with a mandate?

Continuity and Gap Closure – Does the project provide new or significantly improved
connectivity on established corridors or between major activity areas that does not currently
exist or is not currently usable by the general public? Does the project provide a new
connection between major activity centers or on a major corridor that currently either does not
exist or has convenience/safety issues?

Demand Patterns – Does the project serve a significant existing or potential demand, as
evidenced by (a) counts or observed activity, (b) comments from the public, (c) connectivity and
proximity to major generators, and/or (d) projections from an acceptable demand model?
Would the project reduce vehicular traffic?

Safety – Does the project address a significant safety concern in a community as evidenced by
collision data, field observations, and/or public perception and comments? Does the project
connect to evacuation routes identified by the Mill Valley Fire Department?

Project Readiness - Are the key feasibility issues of the project (right-of-way, environmental
impacts, engineering issues, cost issues, neighborhood support) understood and not expected
to negatively affect or delay the project? Has any formal feasibility study, engineering or design
been conducted?

Multi-Modal Integration – Does the project provide enhanced connectivity to existing transit
services?

Cost/Benefit Analysis – Will the project provide the greatest benefit to cyclists and/or
pedestrians for the amount of investment required to build it?

Separate Facilities – Does the project provide separate facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians?
Does it incorporate innovative engineering solutions to accommodate the facilities and still stay
within the parameters of the cost/benefit analysis?
Attachment 7 - 7/22/2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
56 of 62
It is important to remember that the lists of bikeway and pedestrian projects and programs are flexible
concepts that serve as guidelines to those responsible for implementation. The priority projects list, and
perhaps even the overall system and segments themselves, may change over time as a result of
changing bicycling patterns and implementation constraints and opportunities. Project prioritization is
not meant as an absolute value, rather as an indication of project’s relative importance only. These
priorities should be considered a “living document”. The BPAC and City staff should review the priority
projects list on an annual basis to ensure that it reflects the most current priorities, needs, and
opportunities for implementing the bikeway or pedestrian networks in a logical and efficient manner. In
particular, the list should be adjusted to take advantage of all available funding opportunities and grant
cycles. As projects are implemented and taken off the list, new projects should be moved up into
priority projects status.
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
57 of 62
Policy for Uncontrolled Crosswalks
Purpose of Uncontrolled Crosswalk Policy
Uncontrolled crosswalk locations may exist at an intersection with no stop signs or signals,
at intersections with a minor stop sign but no control on the major through street, and at
mid-block locations between intersections. Marked crosswalks are a tool to designate
where pedestrians should cross a street, but in most cases are best when used in
combination with other treatments to clearly designate the crossing. Per the California
Manual on Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), uncontrolled marked crosswalks should be
considered at:

Locations “to help alert road users of a designated pedestrian crossing point across
roadways at locations that are no controlled by traffic control signals or STOP or
YIELD signs” when installed “in conjunction with signs and other measures.”
(§3B.18)

“Non-intersection locations [to] legally establish the crosswalk.” (§3B.18)

“All intersections on established routes to a school where there is substantial
conflict between motorists, bicyclists, and student movements; where students are
encouraged to cross between intersection; where students would not otherwise
recognize the proper place to cross; or where motorists or bicyclists might not
expect students to cross.” Moreover, “whenever a marked pedestrian crosswalk has
been established in a roadway contiguous to a school building or school grounds, it
shall be yellow.” (§7C.02)
Note however, that the California MUTCD does not necessarily consider marked crosswalks
alone as a sufficient treatment. The California MUTCD dictates that an engineering study
should be performed prior to installing a crosswalk at an uncontrolled location, and should
consider the number of lanes, the pedestrian volumes and delays, the average daily traffic
(ADT), speed limit, and other appropriate factors.
A comprehensive study by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) definitively
showed that at an uncontrolled location marked crosswalks alone were not associated with
a significantly lower pedestrian crash rate than an unmarked crosswalk.i Furthermore, on
multilane roads (i.e., roads with two or more lanes in each direction) with more than
12,000 vehicles per day, having only a marked crosswalk was associated with a higher
pedestrian crash rate, after controlling for other site factors. As such, careful consideration
must be paid when proposing an unmarked crosswalk and oftentimes more substantial
improvements are needed, like additional traffic signs and pavement markings, raised
medians/refuge islands, speed-reducing measures, and/or other practices.
Attachment 8 - 7/22/2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
58 of 62
Conditions Precluding Marked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations
Per California MUTCD §3B.18, marked crosswalks alone are not recommended at locations
with the following conditions due to the degree of pedestrian exposure to traffic, driver
stopping distance at high speeds, and pedestrian crash severity.

Where the speed limit exceeds 40 mph and either:
o On a roadway with four or more lanes without a raised median or crossing
island than has an ADT of 12,000 or greater
o On a roadway with four or more lanes with a raised median or crossing
island than has an ADT of 15,000 or greater
Enhanced crossing treatments (e.g., traffic calming treatments, traffic and pedestrian
signals or beacons, and other substantial improvements) are recommended instead.
Standard Treatments at Uncontrolled Crosswalks for Single Lane Roads
At uncontrolled locations marked crosswalks indicate preferred locations for pedestrians
to cross and help designate right-of-way for motorists to yield to pedestrians. Marked
crosswalks should not be installed in close proximity to traffic signals, since pedestrians
should be encouraged to cross at the signal. The minimum distance from a signal for
installing a marked crosswalk should be determined per the City’s discretion. FHWA
guidance is for higher priority to be placed on locations having a minimum of 20 pedestrian
crossings per peak hour or 15 or more elderly and/or child pedestrians. However, in all
cases good engineering judgment must be applied.
The following presents standard treatments at uncontrolled crosswalks in order of
scalating priority and cost. The City should consider these treatments as a progression until
the crossing is adequately mitigated.
Treatment
Notes
Curb ramps
Curb ramps must be installed at all ntersections and
midblock locations where pedestrian crossings exist,
as mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990.
High-visibility crosswalk markings
Marking materials like thermoplastic are highly
reflective, long-lasting, and slip-resistant. Dense
marking patterns like zebra patterns provide
improved visibility over standard crosswalk
markings.
2
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
59 of 62
Warning signs and pavement
stencils
Pedestrian and school warning signs shall conform to
California MUTCD standards by using a fluorescent
yellow-green background with a black legend. Signs
with arrows shall be placed at the crosswalk location.
Signs with AHEAD shall be placed in advance of the
crosswalk. Pavement stencils such as PED XING and
SLOW SCHOOL XING shall be installed on the street
surface.
Roadway lighting
Pedestrian scale lighting is necessary to alert
motorists to stop in low-light conditions.
Supplemental Treatments at Uncontrolled Crosswalks for Multi-lane Roads
Uncontrolled crosswalks on multi-lane roadways represent a greater design challenge
because of potential multiple threat conditions. A multiple threat crash involves a vehicle
stopped in one lane to yield to a pedestrian with an oncoming vehicle in the adjacent samedirection lane striking the pedestrian crossing in front of the stopped vehicle. This crash
type can involve both the pedestrian crossing and the driver failing to see each other in
time.
The following presents supplemental treatments to mitigate the multiple threat condition
at multi-lane roadway crossings. These treatments should be used in conjunction with the
countermeasures presented in the prior table.
Treatment
Notes
Advance yield lines with
supplemental signs (e.g., “Yield
Here for Crosswalk”)
Advance yield lines located 20 to 50 feet in advance of
the crosswalk can improve the visibility of
pedestrians to drivers in both lanes of approaching
traffic. Signs can be located adjacent to the yield line.
Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacons (RRFB)
Actuated crossing beacons can provide advance notice
to drivers in conditions where a full traffic signal is
not warranted per California MUTCD standards.
RRFBs should be considered only for roadways with a
speed limit over 30 mph and/or multi-lane roads
when peak pedestrian volumes are greater than 20
pedestrians per hour and peak conflicting traffic
volumes are greater than 800 per hour, or when
based on engineering judgment by the Public Works
Department.
3
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
60 of 62
Additional Treatments to Consider
The following presents a discussion of additional crosswalk countermeasures that the City
may choose to supplement the treatments presented in the prior two sections.
Implementation of one or more of these measures should only be considered after
installation of the above treatments and based on monitoring and/or engineering judgment
by the Public Works Department.
Treatment
Notes
In-Street “Yield to Pedestrians”
signs
Reminds drivers the laws regarding right-of-way at an
unsignalized pedestrian crosswalk. Per California
MUTCD guidelines, the in-street sign is placed at the
crosswalk location at the center line, and therefore
should be used in conjunction with a standard
advance warning sign. Does not mitigate the multiple
threat condition and therefore should not be used on
a multi-lane road or on roadways with a speed limit of
> 30 mph.
Parking prohibitions
Used to improve pedestrian visibility at crossings. Per
California MUTCD §3B.19, all intersections should
have one stall length on each side measured from the
crosswalk or end of curb return should have parking
prohibited.
Additional parking prohibitions can be used as
necessary to improve pedestrian visibility.
Refuge islands
Raised curb provides a safe waiting area for
pedestrians to await gaps in traffic for a single
direction at a time.
Traffic calming measures, such
as curb extensions and lane
reductions
More costly and longer time to implement compared
to standard treatments. Refer to Mill Valley
Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program for further
guidance.
4
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
61 of 62
STAFF REPORT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
TO:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC)
FROM:
David Parisi, Traffic Engineer
Cecilia Zamora, Associate Engineer
DATE:
February 12, 2014
SUBJECT:
Draft Policy for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crosswalks
ISSUE: Development of a City Policy to enhance uncontrolled crosswalks across Mill Valley
RECOMMENDATION: Provide feedback
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City of Mill Valley receives many requests from residents and visitors to improve existing
uncontrolled crosswalks or to install new ones. In an effort to address these requests and to make
Mill Valley a safer place for pedestrians, the City is developing a draft policy for uncontrolled
pedestrian crosswalks. Traffic engineer David Parisi presented the draft policy at the January 15
BPAC meeting. The presentation focused on treatments and measures that can be applicable to
various uncontrolled crosswalks across the City. Parisi and Staff directed the Committee to
review the draft policy and provide feedback at the next BPAC meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City of Mill Valley Uncontrolled Crosswalk Policy - Draft
Attachment 9 - 7/22/2015
Item E1 - Attachment 1
BPAC Meeting 08/26/2015
62 of 62
Policy for Uncontrolled Crosswalks
2014 Minutes Excerpt
Committee Members:
David Griffis (Chair), Bob Gordon (Vice Chair),
Elisabeth Thomas-Matej, Tricia Satake and Carter Zinn
January 15, 2014
Draft Policy for Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crosswalks – (David Parisi) – An uncontrolled crosswalk is
one that is not at a traffic signal or stop controlled intersection. Parisi noted that there have been
intensive studies done on crosswalks. Parisi summarized the draft policy he prepared to the
Committee. Core need recommendations are: Zebra type markings are highly recommended for
Mill Valley as this type is the most visible to drivers; curb ramps that are ADA compliant; florescent
yellow/green signs with down arrow; extra signs near schools; signs leading up to crosswalks; and
pavement markings prior to crosswalk locations and roadway lighting if it is warranted. For multilane roads such as Miller Ave, it is also recommended to install teeth marking 20-50 ft in advance
of crosswalk. Parisi discussed rectangular rapid flashing beacons/lights which are imbedded into
signs with a burst of LED light, recommended at Miller Ave and Almonte because of 40 mph speed
limit, and at Miller Ave and Evergreen because of the volume of pedestrians in relation to vehicles;
$25K/light; 2 lights needed at each location. Regarding in-street lights, Parisi doesn’t recommend
them because: sunlight can impair light’s effectiveness, maintenance is high, gives a blocked view
for second car, and false sense of security for pedestrians. He advised schools and arterials should
be a priority. Any questions about draft will be addressed at a later meeting after Committee
reviews it. Committee shall review the draft policy and provide comments at the February BPAC
meeting.
February 22, 2014
Member Thomas-Matej asked if the actual speed, in addition to the posted speed limit is taken
into account when crosswalk treatments are considered. Engineer Parisi affirmed, yes.
Director Barnes explained that the Draft Policy would need to go before Council.
E1. Attachment 2
BPAC 08/26/2015
Recommended Class I Facilities – Shared-Use Paths (Off-Street)
ID
Segment Name
Begin
End
Class
Length
Cost
1
Camino Alto shared-use path completion
Community Center E. Blithedale Ave
I
0.10
$100,000
2
Freeman Park Pathway improvements
Nelson Ave
I
0.12
$120,000
Camino Alto
Total Class I Shared-Use Paths
0.22
$220,000
Recommended Class II Facilities - Striped Bicycle Lanes (On-Street)
ID
Segment Name
Begin
End
Corte Madera Ave
(City Limit)
Class
Length
Cost
II
1.37
TBD
0.50
TBD
3
Camino Alto bicycle route
E. Blithedale Ave
4
Camino Alto bicycle lanes
Miller Ave
E. Blithedale Ave
II
5
Miller Avenue Streetscape - bicycle lanes
Almonte Blvd
Sunnyside Ave
II
TBD
6
Ashfor Avenue bicycle lanes
E. Blithedale Ave
Lomita Drive
II
TBD
Total Class II Bicycle Lanes
1.87
Recommended Class III Facilities - Signed Bicycle Routes (On-Street)
ID
Segment Name
Begin
End
Class
Length
Cost
7
Park Ave bicycle route
Sycamore Ave
Miller Ave
III+
0.08
1,600
8
Sycamore Ave bicycle route
E Blithedale Ave
Hilarita Ave
III+
0.44
8,800
9
Hamilton Dr-Kipling Dr bicycle route
Hauke Park path
E Blithedale Ave
III+
0.58
11,600
10 Valley Circle bicycle route
Miller Ave
Sycamore Ave
III+
0.10
2,000
11 Cascade Dr-Marion Ave bicycle route
Cascade Dr
Edgewood Ave
III
1.34
26,800
12 Molino Ave-Birch St bicycle route
Cascade Dr
Edgewood Ave
III
0.65
13,000
13 Buena Vista Ave bicycle boulevard
W Blithedale Ave
Del Casa Dr
III+
0.56
100,800
14 Roque Moraes Dr bicycle route
E Blithedale Ave
Hamilton Dr
III
0.28
5,600
15 Edgewood Ave-Molino Ave bicycle route
Edgewood Ave
(County)
Janes St
III
0.94
18,800
16 Millwood St bicycle route
Miller Ave
E Blithedale Ave
III
0.10
2,000
17 Glen Dr-Buena Vista Ave bicycle route
Manor Dr
Heather Way
III
0.67
13,400
18 Hilarita Ave bicycle boulevard
Sycamore Ave
E Blithedale Ave
III+
0.28
50,400
Hilarita Ave
Manor Dr
III+
0.61
109,800
Fern Ave
Nelson Ave
III+
0.34
61,200
19
Locust Ave-Elm Ave-Del Casa Dr bicycle
boulevard
20 Elm Ave-Matilda Ave bicycle boulevard
Total Class III Bicycle Routes
5.77
$401,800
Total Recommended Bikeway Network
7.86
$621,800
1 of 5
E1. Attachment 6
BPAC 07/22/2015
Recommended Citywide Bicycle Projects
Description
Project Status as of July 2015
Install Bicycle Detection at five (5) intersection locations
(costs may be lower depending on existing conditions) - Major intersections have bicycle detection systems. The City has received
HSIP funding to install optical bike detectors on all 3 intersections along
Miller/Camino Alto, Sycamore/Camino Alto, E.
Camino Alto between Miller Avenue and E Blithedale Avenue. The City is
Blithedale/Camino Alto, Kipling/E. Blithedale
actively searching for ways to improve existing systems.
Rehabilitate pavement along Sycamore Ave. between the
Pavement will be rehabilitated in 2015 as part of the City’s annual street and
County Multi-Use Path and Camino Alto to provide class
sewer rehab project.
III bicycle facility
Improve bicycle parking in downtown Mill Valley and at
BPAC has identified locations for bike corrals. Working on installation and
schools and parks locations, including bicycle lockers at
maintenance agreement and cost estimate.
City Hall
Install information/map kiosks at five (5) locations
Cost
$21,000.00
$250,000.00
$16,000.00
$7,200.00
One kiosk wil be installed at the intersection of the Mill Valley – Sausalito
Pathway and Sycamore Ave. Other locations being evaluated.
Specific locations identified for resurfacing:
· Miller Ave bike lanes (Almonte Blvd to Downtown)
Monitor pavement quality on bicycle routes and perform
spot maintenance and surfacing as necessary.
· Camino Alto shoulders (E. Blithedale to Corte Madera)
· Corte Madera Ave (W. Blithedale to Downtown)
· Mill Valley – Sausalito Path (County Facility)
· Montford Ave (Molino Ave to Jane St)
Upgrade and restore Mill Valley's existing steps, lanes,
and trails to improve pedestrian safety for a variety of
users including students to school and commuters to
Golden Gate Transit and Marin Transit.
An SLP subcommittee is working on an updated list of SLP projects for
inclusion into the transportation plan. The proposed list will be presented to
the BPAC in June 2015.
Increase the frequency and visibility of shared-lane
markings on existing Class III routes
Consider the use of green-backed shared-lane markings around conflict
areas (e.g. driveways, intersections, parking lanes) and where roadway width
is constrained.
Identify additional road segments to install shared-lane
markings, specially areas heavily used by cyclists,
including students and recreational riders.
Construct uncompleted capital improvement program
(CIP) school safety improvements.
Improvements are listed in Appendix A of the 1998 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan. City is seeking funding for these projects.
Total Citywide Projects
2 of 5
$294,200.00
E1. Attachment 6
BPAC 07/22/2015
Recommended Sidewalk (On-Street) Improvements
ID
Segment Name
19 Elm Ave (west side)
20 Elm Ave (north side)
21 Elm Ave (one side)
Begin
End
Length (ft)
215 Elm Ave (@ Matilda
191 Elm Ave
Ave)
South of E. Blithedale
133 Elm Ave
Ave
200
180
Manor Dr
Sidney St
1,200
22 Roque Moraes Dr (south side)
E Blithedale Ave
Enchanted Knolls Park
parking lot
1,200
23 Lomita Dr (west side)
Mill Valley Post Office
Ashford Ave
520
24 Hilarita Ave (east side)
Lock Ln
E Blithedale Ave
820
Miller Ave Streetscape Master Plan
25
implementation
Almonte
Sunnyside Ave
Cost
$25,000.00
$22,500.00
$150,000.00
$150,000.00
$65,000.00
$102,500.00
--
Total Sidewalks
4120
$515,000.00
Recommended Intersection/Crossing Improvements
ID
Notes
Segment
K Warner Canyon to Boyle Park
Evaluate and if feasible construct a pedestrian facility near or at the MV Golf Course to
connect residents including school children from Warner Canyon to Boyle Park
Buena Vista Ave at Boyle Park stairs crossing
A
improvements (SLP 254)
Study the potential to implement crossing treatments that improve pedestrian visibility,
such as HAWKs or RRFBs. Consider treatments to slow motor vehicle traffic in concert
with recommendation #11 (Buena Vista Ave bicycle boulevard), such as a raised
crosswalk, speed bumps and/or other traffic calming measures.
B
Sycamore Ave at Park Ave intersection
improvements
Improve sightlines and complete crosswalks.
C
Sycamore Ave at La Goma St intersection
improvements
Improve sightlines and complete crosswalks. Consider adjusting intersection geometry to
clarify right-of-way and improve pedestrian safety.
D
Camino Alto at Miller Ave intersection
improvements
Construct crosswalk on east side of Camino Alto to improve pedestrian access through
this vital junction adjacent to commercial and recreational destinations.
US 101 pedestrian overcrossing access
E improvements (Redwood highway / Frontage
Road)
Improve pedestrian access on west side of existing pedestrian overcrossing (enhanced
crosswalks, ramps and wayfinding signage). Coordinate with Caltrans/County for east side
improvements.
F
This facility would link together several ped-bike routes at a key convergence point. An
Mill Valley–Sausalito shared-use path at Ashford
additional connection of approx. two hundred feet could provide a link to the proposed
Ave access improvement
Camino Alto Class III via Azalea Dr.
G
Camino Alto at Freeman Park shared-use path
access improvement
H
This crossing would provide the most direct link between Mill Valley and Strawberry, but
US 101 shared-use path overcrossing - consider
at significant cost (compared to 101 underpass sidepath, proposed above). Note that Mill
special study
Valley jurisdiction ends at the 101 – coordinate with Caltrans/County.
J
129 Miller Ave crosswalk (old lumber mill)
Construct a bike-ped crosswalk across Camino Alto and improve transition to pathway.
This mid-block crossing would improve pedestrian safety and comfort along Camino Alto
and serve as a trailhead for the proposed Elm-Matilda bicycle boulevard.
Construct a mid-block pedestrian crossing across Miller Ave/Presidio Ave between Hill St
and Grove St.
3 of 5
Cost
E1. Attachment 6
BPAC 07/22/2015
Other Recommended Pedestrian Improvements
Description
Project Status as of August 2015
Cost
Develop an annual sidewalk maintenance program to
improve the condition of existing sidewalks by
Staff will request an annual allocation for this project of $100,000.
repairing them or reconstructing them
$100,000.00
Downtown Sidewalk Rehabilitation Project: sidewalks
and curb ramps on Throckmorton Ave from E.
Pursuing project funding
blithedale to Cascade Dr., and on Miller from
Throckmorton to Sunnyside
$400,000.00
Improve pedestrian routes and route signage from the
Golden Gate Transit bus stops at Highway 101 to
Need further study to define project scope before pursuing project funding
downtown Mill Valley.
$10,000.00
Upgrade and restore Mill Valley's existing steps, lanes
and trails to improve pedestrian safety for a variety of
users including students to school and commuters to
Golden Gate Transit.
$875,000.00
Constructed with 2012 NTPD: SLPs 51, 39, 33, 11, 54, 23 and 23 A. Constructed by
volunteer or City funds: SLPs 53, 18,184, 48, 47, 254, 46, 248, and 249. Scheduled for
construction 2015: SLPs 230 (Gardner Steps), 221 (Raynold's donation - Greenwood to
Woodbine), 166 (Tamalpais to Summit), 318 (Lomita/Ashford to MUP)
Crossing Improvements around schools:
a. Locust/Catalpa: stop bar, markings, add crosswalk,
reconstruct curb curb
Pursuing project funding
b. Fern/Catalpa: add crosswalk and curb ramps
TBD
c. Blithedale/Catalpa: install yellow chanalizing lines
around in-pavement ped signs.
Buena Vista Improvements: install sidewalk and high
visibility crosswalk on Buena Vista Ave for students Under review
going to Park School and MV Middle School
TBD
MUP Access: install curb ramps and high visilbility
crosswalk on north leg of Ashford Ave and Lomita
Drive intersection
Under review
TBD
Vehicle speed feedback signs at all school locations
speed feedback signs are being installed or replaced at MV Middle School, Edna Maguire,
and Tam High. Other locations will be evaluated.
TBD
Improve pedestrian crossing at Lomita Drive:
repainting crosswalk with continental style, and
installing curb ramps. Consider installing a raised
crosswalk.
Under review
TBD
Construct Sidewalks in missing gaps along
Throckmorton Avenue
City obtained a $25 k grant to install sidewalk on Throckmorton between Josephine and
Laurel Ave. Construction scheduled for 2015. Pursuing funding for other sidewalks.
TBD
Annual Maintenance and repair around school sites:
paint crosswalks, update signs, repair craked
sidewalks and curb ramps, clean bike lanes
This elements are incorporated into various City projects on a regular basis
TBD
Improve crosswalks at the following intersections
along Miller Avenue, including high visibility
crosswalks, signage, street lighting and minor curb
extensions, as appropriate.
a. Almonte
b. Reed
c. Valley Circle
d. Locust
Pursuing project funding.
Total Other Improvements
4 of 5
$81,600.00
$1,466,600.00
E1. Attachment 6
BPAC 07/22/2015
ID
Segment Name
1 Mill Valley to Strawberry Connection
2
Alto Tunnel - Under Study (extension to MVSausalito MUP)
3 Almonte/Shoreline bike lanes
ID
Segment Name
Regional Connectivity - Bicycle Improvements
Begin
End
Class
Length
Hamilton Dr
East of US101
TBD
TBD
Vasco Ct
Corte Madera
I
TBD
Tennessee Valley
Rd
Gibson/Flamingo
II
TBD
Potential Special Studies - Bicycle Improvements
Begin
End
Class
Length
Cost
Jurisdiction
Mill Valley/ County of Marin/
TBD
Caltrans
Mill Valley / Corte Madera / County
TBD
of Marin
TBD
Marin County
Cost
Jurisdiction
4 E&W Blithedale Avenue
King Street
Kipling Drive
TBD
2.36
TBD
Mill Valley
5 Throckmorton Ave
Miller Ave
E Blithedale Ave
TBD
0.1
TBD
Mill Valley
ID
Segment Name
6 E Blithedale Ave at US 101 interchange
ID
Regional Connectivity - Intersection/Crossing Improvements
Notes
Jurisdiction
Mill Valley / Caltrans/ County of
Marin
Interchange currently under study
Segment Name
Begin
Old Mill and Olive Circulation improvement Project 7
TBD
One way street configuration study
Other Potential Special Studies
End
Class
TBD
TBD
5 of 5
Length
Cost
Jurisdiction
TBD
TBD
Mill Valley
E1 - Attachment 3
BPAC 08/26/2015
1 of 4
E1 - Attachment 3
BPAC 08/26/2015
2 of 4
E1 - Attachment 3
BPAC 08/26/2015
3 of 4
E1 - Attachment 3
BPAC 08/26/2015
4 of 4