sustainability path design guidelines

Transcript

1 First Last Mile Strategic Plan & PLANNING GUIDELINES Sounds good, I haven’t been to LACMA in a while...the Pathway? Hmm...I’ll check it out. See you soon! The Meet-Up! The Meet-Up! In sunny downtown LA, we join Jeff In sunny downtown LA, we join Jeff in the middle of making plans to in the middle of making plans to catch up with his long-time friend Bret... catch up with his long-time friend Bret... M M 10 min 5 min Jeff sets off on the pathway, following the signs to get to his nearest Metro station. A short and speedy Metro ride later... Ready to spend Ready to spend And with a quick look at the Jeff is off biking! a great day a great day Metro pylon to find the with his friend! with his friend! nearest bike share program... bike share metro station RL Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 2014 MARCH -

2

3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS fir M i LE ST r ATEG i C p LAN ST LAST ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Los Angeles County f irst Last Mile Metropolitan Transportation Authority Technical Advisory Committee (Metro) p roject TAC) ( Diego Cardoso, Metro Rye Baerg, Safe Routes to School Shahrzad Amiri, Metro Ellen Blackman, Accessibility Advisory Committee Neha Chawla, Metro Robert Boardman, City of Redondo Beach Steven Mateer, Metro Maddie Brozen, UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs Alexandra Oster, Metro Eric Bruins, Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition Connie Chung, County of Los Angeles Allan Crawford, City of Long Beach Southern California Association Troy Evangelho, County of Los Angeles of Governments Michelle Glickert, City of Santa Monica (SCAG) Jay Kim, City of Los Angeles Sarah Jepson, SCAG Alexis Lantz, LA County Department of Public Health Alan Thompson, SCAG Brian Ludicke, City of Lancaster Matt Gleason, SCAG Ryan Lehman, Living Streets LA Jessica Meaney, Safe Routes to School Consultants Deborah Murphy, LA Walks Group Team) i B i ( Mark Nitti, Metrolink Dylan Jones, IBI Group Hilary Norton, Fixing Angelenos Stuck in Traffic (FAST) Bill Delo, IBI Group Ghloria Ohland, Move LA Christina de Frietes, IBI Group Simon Pastucha, Los Angeles Department of City Planning Matt Redmond, IBI Group Katherine Sims, SCRRA Avery Carrig, IBI Group Walker Wells, Global Green Lissette Valenzuela, IBI Group Cory Wilkerson, City of Burbank Nadim Kurani, IBI Group Mark Yamerone, City of Pasadena Melani Smith, Meléndrez Lori Abrishami, Metro Amber Hawkes, Meléndrez Stewart Chesler, Metro Shannon Davis, Meléndrez Maggie Derk, Metro David Koo, Meléndrez Adela Felix, Metro Brian Gaze, Alta Planning Lynne Goldsmith, Metro Ryan Johnson, Alta Planning Diana Gonzalez, Metro Rufina Juarez, Metro Todd Mitsuhata, Metro Tham Nguyen, Metro Desiree Portillo-Rabinov, Metro Yvonne Price, Metro Janna Smith, Metro Cory Zelmer, Metro

4 Notes: This page intentionally left blank.

5 first last mile strategic plan TABLE O f CONTENTS f irst Last Mile Strategic p lan i NES & p LANN i NG GU i DEL ONTENTS T ABLE O f C NTRODUCTION I 1 3 2 FIRST LAST MILE PLANNING 5 3 T HE PATHWAY 12 4 ESIGN , AND IMPLEMENTATION I DENTIFICATION , D N ETWORK 17 5 TOOLBO x PATHWAY 27 6 ILLUSTRATIONS 59 7 STRATEGIES PLAN APPLICATION FOR 76 A x APPENDI APPENDI x MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 1

6 las m IC eg N T f IR s T a T INTRODUCTION I le s TR pla 1 Notes: This page intentionally left blank. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 2

7 INTRODUCTION first last mile strategic plan 1 1 NT i 1 r ON i ODUCT Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is developing a world-class rail system with stations that will be a short distance (three miles or less) from the homes of 7.8 million Los Angeles County residents. Over time, this number will continue to grow as cities modify their land-use plans to provide more housing and jobs near stations, consistent with market demand and regional goals for more sustainable communities. These planning guidelines outline a specific infrastructure improvement strategy designed to facilitate easy, safe, and efficient access to the Metro system. They introduce a concept herein referred to as ‘the Pathway’, and provide direction on the layout of transit access networks and components within Metro Rail and fixed route Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) station areas. They serve as a resource for Metro and the many public and private organizations throughout the region working to update programs, land-use plans, planning guidelines, business models, entitlement processes, and other tools that take advantage of LA County’s significant investment in the public transportation network. f irst Last Mile Strategic p lan Goals Metro 1 Expand the reach of transit through infrastructure improvements. 2 Maximize multi-modal benefits and efficiencies. 3 Build on the RTP/SCS and Countywide Sustainable Planning Policy (multi-modal, green, equitable and smart). lanning Guidelines f The p urpose of the p irst Last Mile Strategic p lan Goals In 2012, the Metro Board adopted the Countywide The purpose of these Planning Guidelines is to: Sustainability Planning Policy and Implementation Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities 1. Provide a coordination tool and resource for Metro, Strategy (RTP/SCS) Joint Work Program, both of which direct LA County, municipal organizations, community the development of a First Last Mile Strategic Plan. The goal groups, and private institutions. of this plan is to better coordinate infrastructure investments in station areas to extend the reach of transit, with the Serve as a key source of direction for LA Metro when 2. ultimate goal of increasing ridership. undertaking planning and design efforts aimed at improving first and last mile connections to transit. These guidelines help facilitate the integration of mobility solutions in a complex, multi-modal environment. Strategies Clearly articulate the Pathway concept including 3. will need to be flexibly deployed to contend with widely objectives, characteristics, and the role the Pathway varying environments throughout the county; yet will aim plays in supporting transit access and regional to improve the user experience by supporting intuitive, planning goals. safe and recognizable routes to and from transit stations. This effort will require coordination among the many cities and authorities who have jurisdiction over the public realm throughout the county. 3 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I

8 f le s s T las T m I IR TR a T eg IC pla N INTRODUCTION 1 How to use these Guidelines The guidelines are structured around the following sections: ntroduction i The introduction provides an overview of these guidelines, 1 strategic goals and project purpose. lanning p Chapter 2 defines the first and last mile access f irst Last Mile 2 challenge in transportation planning, provides guiding policy context, and reviews challenges specific to transit access in Los Angeles County. p The The Pathway is introduced in Chapter 3 as a strategic response to athway 3 the first and last mile challenge. Pathway goals, policy context and guiding principles are reviewed. Pathway users, both today and in the future, are discussed. Network This chapter provides a methodology and approach for dentification i 4 Bu rbank Blvd L Vineland Ave a n the layout of Pathway networks within station areas. Site area definition, existing conditions k ersh im Bl C handler Blvd analysis, network component and layout are all covered. v d M ! SR 170 Fwy Tujunga Ave Magnolia Blvd p athway Toolbox This chapter outlines possible improvements that may occur 5 along identified Pathway network routes. Each individual improvement includes a visual example, discussion of goals, and guidance on how to integrate the specific improvement with the overall Pathway system. i llustrations Pathway networks and component design scenarios are developed 6 utilizing the strategies and tools set forth in these guidelines at three selected stations areas around Metro Rail and BRT stops. This has been done for illustrative purposes only, and is intended to demonstrate key ideas of the Pathway concept. The Team Trip! The Team Trip! An Implementation Table and ridership targets Strategies for p lan Application 7 are dispresented to guide next step efforts. After being named the new junior soccer After being named the new junior soccer 08 04 22 league champions,the team decides to celebrate league champions,the team decides to celebrate 80 10 with a treat - ice cream ! with a treat - ice cream ! Even though the game ended a bit late, the . safe route pedestrian lights provide a pathway’s Appendix A Push to Walk Meanwhile, Coach makes Meanwhile, Coach makes car share reservations. car share reservations. I hope they have rocky road! Did you see that goal?! Metro The goalie didn’t stand a chance! Home > Transit Transfers Car Share Bus Bike Share Locating nearest car share ...or thinking about On the train, the boys which flavor ice cream still can’t stop talking they want. great game... about their Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 4 I e h T Ice cream sandwich Brownie ice cream sandwich Strawberry sundae Car e r m y a e Chocolate sundae r Sprinkles Turtle sundae C Share Vanilla sundae Marshmallows Cookie monster sundae Chocolate shake Banana split Cherries Strawberry banana sundae Caramel Sauce 08 The Creamery The Creamery 10 80 80 10 22 They pick up their car... ...and get their sweet treats!

9 First last mile planning first last mile strategic plan 2 p LANN i NG fir ST LAST M i LE 2 f irst Last Mile Definition Though the streets and infrastructure that comprise the first An individual’s trip is understood as the entire journey from last mile fall outside the boundaries of Metro’s jurisdiction and origin to destination. Individuals may use a number of modes control, they remain critical components of an effective public of transport to complete the journey; they may walk, drive, ride transportation system. Simply put, all Metro riders must a bicycle, take a train, or in many cases combine a number of contend with the first last mile challenge, and the easier it is modes. Public transportation agencies typically provide bus to access the system, the more likely people are to use it. and rail services that may frame the core of such trips, but users must complete the first and last portion on their own; they must first walk, drive or roll themselves to the nearest station. This is referred to the first and last mile of the user’s trip, or first last mile for short, even though actual distances vary by users. Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 5 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I MARCH 2014

10 FIRST LAST MILE PLANNING F irst last mil e strategic plan 2 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 6 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014

11 First last mile planning first last mile strategic plan 2 olicy Context p Federal, state, regional and local policies support increased use of public transportation as a means to ease roadway congestion, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and support economic and physical health in communities. The 2012-2035 Southern California Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) reflects significant progress within Los Angeles County to achieve this policy vision both through transit investment and local land-use planning. By 2035, Metro’s fixed guideway system will have nearly doubled in size. More than half the new housing provided in the region over the next twenty years will be in areas served by high- quality transit (with service every 15 minutes or less). In 2012, Metro adopted a Countywide Sustainability Planning Policy (CSPP) as a complement to regional planning efforts and to provide the foundation for achieving further greenhouse gas reductions in the 2016 RTP/SCS. The CSPP is particularly notable in the context of first last mile planning, because it highlights the need to focus on integrated planning and partnerships to optimize the benefits of Metro’s investments. Key concepts include “bundling strategies for greatest impact” which encourages Metro to think beyond a single mode or project in its planning efforts, and “act regionally and locally” which recognizes that local connectivity is paramount to securing the social, economic and environmental benefits associated with the expansion of transit. These guidelines were created in accordance with the principles and priorities outlined in the CSPP. These guidelines were also developed in consideration of California’s Complete Street law, which requires cities and counties to consider the needs of all users in the circulation element of municipal general plans. In addition to accommodating the efficient flow of vehicles, streets must Southern California Association of Governments accommodate safe and efficient multi-modal transfer activity ADOPTED APRIL 2012 and support a wide range of mobility options. Federal transit law explicitly recognizes the need to ensure that active transportation networks connect with public transit. Under Federal Transit Law, pedestrian improvements located within The 2012 RTP/SCS outlines a broad and ambitious strategy for sustainably one-half mile and all bicycle improvements located within three managing regional growth. Mobility, land-use and health inform an miles of a public transportation stop have a de facto physical integrated approach to achieving regional policy goals related to clean air relationship to public transportation. and economic vitality. Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 7 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I MARCH 2014

12 FIRST LAST MILE PLANNING F e strategic plan irst last mil 2 The fact that the vast majority of transit users are already walking or rolling themselves to stations or to complete multi-modal connections demands a careful consideration of the inherent relationship between active transportation and the regional transportation system. A number of questions must be asked: What are the conditions of the active transportation networks in Los Angeles County? Is the network designed to support modern modes of active mobility? Do existing networks seamlessly integrate transit users with transit stations? What part of active transportation networks are integral components of the county-wide transportation system? The First Last Mile Strategic Plan responds to these questions, and proposes a transit access strategy built on rationally developed active transportation networks located around Metro Rail and BRT stations. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 8

13 First last mile planning first last mile strategic plan 2 Challenges Transit dependency increases as age increases, • There are a number of challenges associated with improving and/or as income decreases. first last mile connections throughout the County. In many situations, especially along higher traveled corridors, right- of-way (ROW) is limited and already overburdened. Providing • Active transportation modes (walking/biking/ more robust access facilities could potentially put strain on wheelchair/etc.) are the dominant access and other complementary travel modes. For example, providing egress modes for all riders; representing 85% of protected bike lanes on a heavily used transit access route system access/egress at Rail/BRT stations and over may affect vehicular throughput and bus operations in some 95% total system access. situations. Nearly 64% of riders make at least one transfer to • Coordination is a challenge; there are many custodians of complete their one-way trip. the public realm throughout the County. Metro is committed to the “continuous improvement of an efficient and effective One of the more surprising findings from the Metro survey transportation system for Los Angeles County” but Metro data is the small number of transit riders parking at stations. does not own or have jurisdictional control over transit access Though highly visible in communities, parking facilities routes beyond the immediate confines of station facilities. support only 6.2% of Metro Rail users, and only 3.8% of Metro BRT users. Of this relatively small user group half live Funding is limited; there are numerous competing demands close enough to walk or bike to stations. on public funds throughout the county. From a user perspective cost is a challenge; pay-for-service access Transfer Activity solutions can be promising, but do not help those already struggling to pay for basic transit services. The Metro system is witness to a significant amount of transfer activity; nearly 64% of riders make at least one There are a range of site specific physical challenges faced transfer to complete their one-way trip. Transfer activity, by individual transit users. For some, stations remain too far when not happening within a station is reliant on active to access in a reasonable amount of time. Others don’t move transportation networks in the immediate vicinity of the fast or nimbly enough to comfortably contend with broken subject stations. Active transportation networks are sidewalks and hazardous street crossings, most notably the comprised of sidewalks, bike lanes (where existing), street elderly and access impaired. Some are afraid to make the crossings, signals, signs, curb returns, lighting, furnishings short walk from stations in the dark. All of these challenges and landscaped elements. These networks support muti- can be addressed through thoughtful consideration, strategic modal access and transfer activity. planning, engineering, design and, most importantly, active coordination. Metro Users Metro goes to great lengths to better understand county transit riders in order to improve operations and service. Metro conducts on-board passenger surveys as part of this effort. A review of the Metro 2011 System Wide On-Board Origin-Destination Study provides insights into transit users at a demographic level, some key findings include: • 75% of transit riders belong to households earning less than $25,000. • Half of all transit riders are transit-dependent, i.e., they belong to households that do not own any vehicles. 9 MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

14 FIRST LAST MILE PLANNING F irst last mil e strategic plan 2 r outes User Safety along Access Transit users need safe and efficient routes when accessing stations and while making multi-modal transfers. They rely on existing active transportation networks. A review of recent collision statistics for both pedestrians and bicyclists in LA County suggests there are significant challenges in terms of safety. The provision of a safe transportation system is a cornerstone of Metro’s Vision, and given the fact that most transit users are pedestrians during the first, last and transfer components of their trips, pedestrian safety is a major concern. Pedestrians are at risk within environments surrounding transit stations, primarily from automobile traffic. LA County has an alarming incidence of fatality rates, especially among some of the more transit dependent populations (the very young and very old). Risks can be significantly mitigated through design and vehicular speed control measures, and should be done so along prioritized access routes within station catchment areas. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 10

15 First last mile planning first last mile strategic plan 2 Existing Conditions Knowing that active transportation networks play such a significant role in enabling transit access and transfer activity, a deeper understanding of existing active transportation networks is required to better address challenges currently faced by users. As part of the First Last Mile Strategic Plan study, project team members selected 12 station sites throughout the County and reviewed the existing transit access conditions within these sites. It was observed that current active transportation networks serving access routes to Metro stations present a number of access challenges to transit riders. In some cases sidewalks were physically constrained or literally broken and heaved, or even more surprisingly, discontinuous. Long blocks and large parking lots create circuitous access routes for pedestrians. Lack of adequate lighting, dark freeway underpasses and general neglect all challenge users’ sense of personal security. In some areas of the county, the existing right- of-way is severely constrained. Transit rider wayfinding is often impeded just a few blocks from transit stations due to the lack of, or in other areas the confusing overabundance of, street signage. All of these noted existing conditions represent challenges to transit system access, system efficiency, user experience and safety. A strategy that addresses these issues directly will increase transit ridership, improve user experience, and contribute to meeting Metro, regional and state policy goals relating to sustainability, clean air, and health. Top 6 L.A. County Transit Access Barriers 2 – Freeways carve our region into a Freeways 1 number of ‘pedestrian islands’. Links between these Long Blocks – Transit riders prefer direct routes islands are effectively broken by dark and unpleasant to their destination. Long blocks often equate to underpasses or equally challenging overpasses. unnecessarily long routes, or unsafe crossing activity. 4 Safety and Security – Pedestrians in LA County are 3 victim to some of the highest pedestrian fatality rates in Maintenance – Many of our basic walking and the country. The neglect of infrastructure also adds to rolling surfaces are buckled, broken and generally concerns over personal security. impassable to all but the nimble footed. 6 ROW Allocation and Design – Traffic congestion along some streets crowd out all but the most 5 fearless bike riders – on other streets wide roads are Legibility – It is too easy to get lost in LA County. underutilized, and all active modes are relegated to a 4 Effective transit systems utilize sophisticated yet foot wide broken strip of concrete. A more holistic and simple signage and wayfinding strategies. These integrated approach is needed to provide equitable strategies do not currently extend much beyond mobility along access routes. station boundaries 11 MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

16 THE PATHWAY first last mile strategic plan 3 athway p The 3 Access sheds are defined by the distance people travel Metro irst Last Mile Strategy f in a set duration of time. For example, if pedestrians are willing to walk up to fifteen minutes to a given station, and Metro survey data tells us that the vast majority of transit they walk at four miles per hour, the access shed can be users in the county are utilizing active transportation defined by a half mile radial circle centered on the station. In networks to access the overall system, and field observation reality this access shed is compromised by the street grid, confirms that there are a number of obvious challenges breaks in the access network, location and number of street being faced by current users of existing networks. These crossings, and fluctuations in average speed of pedestrians challenges reduce overall system ridership in two important due to crossing characteristics and sidewalk conditions. An ways; they artificially decrease the size of transit access effective strategy will work to increase the size of access sheds around stations, and they reduce discretionary use sheds around transit stations while improving access within current access sheds. conditions within those sheds. r p olicy: eality: Goal: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I MARCH 2014 12

17 the pathway first last mile strategic plan 3 There are a wide range of approaches to addressing the The Pathway is a bold concept that takes into consideration first last mile challenge, ranging from high level policies the pressing need for mobility solutions against a backdrop (for example supporting mixed-use density in station of population growth, demographic shifts, increased areas) to specific infrastructure investments (for example concern and awareness of human health and safety, providing additional bike racks at stations). Metro’s plan environmental concerns and a rapidly expanding public can allow for the ‘coordinated bundling’ of first last mile transportation system. strategies by identifying access networks that partner agencies and alternative transportation providers can build from and/or plug into. athway The p The Pathway is a proposed county-wide, transit access network designed to reduce the distance and time it takes people to travel from their origins to stations and from stations to destinations, while simultaneously improving the user experience. At its core, the Pathway is a series of active transportation improvements that extend to and from Metro Rail and BRT stations. The Pathway is proposed along specific access routes selected to shorten trip length and seamlessly connect transit riders with intermodal facilities. Intermodal facilities may include bus stops, bike hubs, bike share, car share, parking lots, or regional bikeways, depending upon the location and context of the station. The Pathway is envisioned to include standard elements that support an association with the overall transit experience, and more flexible elements that respond to the context and character of varying communities and site specific challenges. The Pathway aims to broaden the reach of transit and improve the transit experience by increasing the size of transit access sheds and by improving access conditions within station areas. The Pathway extends the positive experience of the transit user. It is intuitive, safe, efficient, universally accessible and fun. The athway and r egional p olicy p The Pathway helps integrate the various modes provided by Metro (i.e. Bus and Rail) and also allows the integration of non-Metro provided solutions into a more seamless user experience. In so doing, the Pathway aims to support broader policy directives related to clean air, health, and economic sustainability. By improving transit access and effectiveness, more people will likely opt into public transportation which in turn will reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) and green house gas emissions (GHGs), integrate physical activity into daily commute patterns, and improve economic vitality by connecting people to regional markets. 13 MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

18 THE PATHWAY first last mile strategic plan 3 This is achieved 2. Decreasing point to point distances – The p athway – Expanding User Access through the utilization of strategic short-cuts and increased Sheds crossing opportunities. Diagonal routes through large parking lots or parks and mid block crossings can be used The Pathway expands transit user access sheds by: to significantly reduce point to point distances. 1. Increasing the average speed of active transportation The 3. Supporting multi-modal transfer activity – users – This is achieved by decreasing wait times at Pathway strengthens links between modal access points intersections and by increasing speed and capacity along (i.e. bus stops and stations, or bike share kiosks and walking/rolling routes. Pedestrian prioritized Signal timing stations) by providing easily identifiable safe and efficient improvements decrease waiting times for pedestrians; access routes between modes. Furthermore, the Pathway reduced crossing distances reduce average street crossing allows for strategic integration of mobility solutions (i.e. car time; and the provision of improved walking and rolling share) into an existing network. facilities that cater to a growing range of mobility devices increases the average speed of users. The proliferation of personal mobility devices by all age groups, from skateboards to bicycles to electric mobility scooters, presents a tremendous opportunity to extend the reach of public transit investments. It is well known that the time it takes to walk to a station is the metric by which access sheds are realized. Supporting personal mobility devices that allow an aggregate increase in average personal mobility speeds can dramatically increase regional access sheds. Better policies, new infrastructure and a careful look at mode integration is needed when assessing how best to realize the potential offered by the growing range of mobility devices. A Taxonomy of Mobility Devices is provided in the Appendix. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 14

19 the pathway first last mile strategic plan 3 have an opportunity to do so within dense mixed-use station athway – mproving the User The i p areas where amenities and services are easily accessible. Experience This is a good sustainable model and relies on the existence of universally accessible mobility options. In the future there In addition to expanding access sheds for transit users, the will be many more senior aged Pathway users, thus planning Pathway supports overall ridership by improving the quality for senior aged mobility and access is critical. of access conditions access sheds. Personal sense of within safety, security, and comfort along access routes all play a Another trend witnessed over the last ten years is the role in an individual’s choice to utilize public transportation. A reduction in automobile use and ownership by the Millennial dark, unlit sidewalk is a deterrent to many when considering Generation (those born between 1982 and 2004). There are a short walk to or from a station after dark, and can be many hypotheses presented to explain this trend, including improved utilizing a number of design strategies. The lack the recent recession which has reduced the number of of pedestrian facilities at street crossings poses undue risks commuter trips. to transit users, and can be mitigated by improved signaling strategies and painted crossings. For transit riders wanting Others argue that there is a structural shift occurring with to use, or requiring the use of, any form of wheeled access regards to lifestyle, and the allure of suburban living is not device something as simple as a broken sidewalk or missing as strong for a young demographic that shows preference curb ramp is a significant barrier; maintenance and provision for more compact, amenity-rich urban environments offered of well designed sidewalks and curb ramps improves the by city and town centers. The costs of vehicle ownership experience for these users. may also be affecting consumer behavior, especially in regions with viable mobility options. Whatever the cause of p athway Users – Today and Tomorrow these trends, mobility solutions are required for those who cannot afford, cannot operate, or choose to forego vehicular Pathway users are understood as being broadly ownership. The Pathway, by expanding the reach of transit representative of county transit users, who in turn are and by improving the user experience, helps discretionary broadly representative of county residents. Various transit users opt into multi-modal transit solutions. demographic and social trends give good insight into future pathway users. Demographic trends suggest the population is aging, and as average age increases, transit dependency increases. Many people are choosing to age-in-place and Transit users moving under their own power throughout the county have very different use characteristics and functional needs from one another, based both on the physical requirements of chosen mode and personal characteristics including age, ability and personal attitude towards risk and comfort. A healthy 17 year old skateboarder has very different mobility characteristics and needs from a 91 year old utilizing a wheeled push-walker. Pathway efforts aim to understand these differences, improve on the planning and design of existing facility options, consider how to better support a broader range of personal mobility and maximize transit integration all within a complete streets context. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014 15 I

20 THE PATHWAY first last mile strategic plan 3 p athway – Guiding rinciples p These guidelines outline an approach for planning Pathway Safe networks at Metro Rail and BRT stations and present a toolbox of strategies that can be considered when implementing Pathway networks. Intuitive Efficient Universally Fun Accessible The following values define the Pathway and provide a basis for design: 1 The Pathway is Safe – Safety is a key concern, and is supported by protected facilities, improved street crossings, strategic lighting and vehicular speed mitigation. 2 The Pathway is – Traveling along the Pathway is an extension of the transit user’s experience, Intuitive and their ability to navigate to and from destinations is assisted by wayfinding strategies that support seamless multi-modal journeys. 3 The Pathway is Universally Accessible – The Pathway supports all modes of active transportation and remains accessible to individuals dependent on mobility support devices – from white-canes to wheeled push walkers and electric mobility scooters. 4 Efficient – Greater distances are traveled in a given amount of time along the Pathway. The Pathway is Rolling and walking surfaces are smooth and free of obstacles, routes are direct, and signals reduce wait times at street crossings. 5 – People opt out of cars, and hop on scooters, skateboards and bikes to get to Fun The Pathway is where they want to go, save money, burn calories and along the way, have fun. Sounds good, I haven’t been to LACMA in a while...the Pathway? Hmm...I’ll check it out. See you soon! The Meet-Up! The Meet-Up! In sunny downtown LA, we join Jeff In sunny downtown LA, we join Jeff in the middle of making plans to in the middle of making plans to catch up with his long-time friend Bret... catch up with his long-time friend Bret... To see how Jeff and three others use the Pathway to complete their trips, refer to the appendix... M M 10 min 5 min Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 16 MARCH 2014 Jeff sets off on the pathway, following the signs to get to his nearest Metro station. A short and speedy Metro ride later... Ready to spend Ready to spend And with a quick look at the Jeff is off biking! a great day a great day Metro pylon to find the with his friend! with his friend! nearest bike share program... bike share metro station RL

21 network identification, design, and implementation first last mile strategic plan 4 p i LEMENT M i GN & NETWO r ON i DENT ifi CAT i ON, DES i K 4 This chapter outlines a methodology for planning Pathway networks at transit stations. The three steps include: 3 2 1 Layout p athway Network Site Area Definition Analyze Existing Conditions As stated in the introduction, the Pathway aims to extend the reach of transit in a number of ways. The Pathway consists of physical active transportation network improvements that allow the bundling of a broad range of first last mile strategic efforts. At its core, the Pathway aims to address the challenge of the vast majority of transit users accessing the station, namely their ability to physically do so in an efficient and safe manner. The vast majority of transit users are either rolling or walking themselves to stations, and they are limited by the distance they can realistically walk or roll. Furthermore, many make discretionary choices based on qualitative decisions, such as comfort and safety. The Pathway aims to expand the transit access shed, and to improve the quality of access within the shed. Site Area Definition (Step 1) The first step in planning for the Pathway in any given station potential thresholds of the Pathway. The first threshold area is to determine the location and limits of the network. occurs at the half mile mark, measured as the crow flies, There are current active transportation networks throughout and corresponds to how far a person will walk to access the county, comprised of sidewalks, roadways, street lights, transit. The second three mile threshold corresponds to how signage, stripping, signals and a number of other elements. far an individual will bike to access transit. The three mile The Pathway can build upon these existing conditions within shed, gives a good limit for all other active transportation pre-determined zones and along specifc routes, which users (i.e. skateboarders, mobility scooter riders) as bicycles emanate from Metro Rail and BRT stations. operate at the upper range of observed speeds among active transportation devices. These thresholds correspond to a The focus of the site area where the Pathway network will number of funding mechanisms given FTA’s stated policy. be located is the transit station itself, Metro Rail or BRT. Maintaining consistency with FTA policy, one-half-mile and To see how Jeff and three others use the Pathway to complete their trips, refer to the appendix... three-mile (pedestrian and bicycle) circles can be drawn around the station which will correspond to important MARCH 2014 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I 17 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG

22 first last mile strategic plan NETWORK IDENTIFICATION, DESIGN, AND IMPLEMENTATION 4 *Final Policy Statement on the Eligibility of Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Under Federal Transit Law MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 18 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

23 network identification, design, and implementation first last mile strategic plan 4 Analyze Existing Conditions (Step 2) specific data that together highlight conditions within half To better understand the unique challenges of an individual mile of the station portal, along with regional planning context station area chosen for Pathway network development, the and adjacent station area improvements to three miles of the subject site should be reviewed at both a macro and micro station portal. The analysis steps include: level. The intent of the analysis is to evaluate the existing condition and characteristics of the station area, and inform the layout of Pathway network routes. The analysis includes mapping, compiling, and overlaying various layers of station- Station Analysis A Overlay Maps B oute r Walking C Foothill Blvd. 210 Site Visit E Colorado Blvd. D (Station Survey) . ve Sierra Madre St. nnetoa A Ri S Rossmore Blvd. PROJECT PROC ESS MARCH 2014 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 19

24 first last mile strategic plan NETWORK IDENTIFICATION, DESIGN, AND IMPLEMENTATION 4 A. p reliminary Station Analysis The following access-related station area characteristics can be analyzed utilizing data available to Metro: Points of Interest The Points of Interest map highlights key sites located within the one-half mile radius of the station and infers logical routes between the station area and these interest points. Analyzing these routes better defines potential transit users. Key points of interest included schools, event centers, public institutions, parks, L a Vineland Ave n and any other local attractions to the transit catchment area. k Burbank Blvd ersh im These maps should also include a review of the three mile access Bl v d M shed. ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Magnolia Blvd Street Grid S R 170 The Street Grid map presents the street and block network F w y surrounding station areas. This grid shows areas that lack connectivity, logical pathways, and/or create obstacles for site navigation. The map also doubles as a base map for the station L a Vineland Ave n k Burbank Blvd ersh analysis that follows. im Bl v d M ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Pedestrian Shed The Pedestrian Shed map graphically displays the level of Magnolia Blvd S pedestrian accessibility for each station area. With the transit R 170 F w station as a starting point, all one-half mile routes based on the y street grid were mapped and then consolidated into a larger Vineland Ave catchment shape. The pedestrian shed begins to reveal limitations to access as a result of each station’s unique street grid. Burbank Blvd Lankershim Blvd High Vehicular Speeds M ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave S R 170 Fw The High Vehicular Speeds map shows potential areas that would y Magnolia Blvd cause safety concerns for pedestrians and bicyclists. Posted speeds greater than 35 mph are shown. Key Transit Access Corridors Key Transit Access Corridors are graphic depictions of Metro’s Burbank Blvd La Vineland Ave n Origin/Destination study. These maps graphically represent the kersh im Bl most frequently used transit access routes. Chandler Blvd v d M ! SR 170 Fwy Tujunga Ave Bike or Pedestrian Collisions with Automobiles Magnolia Blvd This map begins to show key intersections and locations where high rates of pedestrian and bicycle collisions with automobiles ( ! ( ! exist. ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! Lankershim Blvd Burbank Blvd ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! Vineland Ave ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( M ! ( ! ! ( ! ( Chandler Blvd SR 170 Fwy ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! Tujunga Ave Magnolia Blvd ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 20 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

25 network identification, design, and implementation first last mile strategic plan 4 Land Use Map The Land Use Map depicts concentrations of land use within each one-half mile radius. The land use map highlights the types Vineland Ave Lankershim Blvd and characteristics of users that are able to comfortably access Burbank Blvd the locations surrounding the station. Existing maps should M ! be reviewed in conjunction with planned changes captured in Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave S R 170 Fw associated specific/general plans or other policies guiding future y Magnolia Blvd land use changes. Bicycle Connections All infrastructure dedicated to bicycles in the roadway are shown in the Bicycle Connections map. This generally includes: existing L Vineland Ave an k Burbank Blvd ershim bike lanes, sharrows, separated bike facilities, bike ‘friendly streets Blvd (in some areas where cities have defined this as a category), M ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave future bike routes, etc. These maps should also include a review S R 170 Fw of the three mile access shed map. y Magnolia Blvd Transit Connections Using Metro and other transit agency data, routes of all transit modes are mapped within the one-half mile radius. This includes: all bus lines, light and heavy rail, and any other transit lines serving L Vineland Ave a n k Burbank Blvd ersh the station area. These maps should also include a review of the im Bl v three mile access shed. d M ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave S R 170 Fw Statistics y Magnolia Blvd The following statistics can be extracted from each station area to provide an overview of the site: average block length, intersection density, walk score, overlay zones, density, employment, and journey to work. B. Access Barriers Overlay Map After compiling the information collected during the macro-level station area analysis, the maps described above can be overlaid to show potential areas of intervention. The overlays described North Hollywood Station below provide substantial information that inform on-the-ground analysis. Long Blocks The freeway signicantly cuts Overlay of land use map with pedestrian shed map o access to neighborhoods to the west To begin, the station land use map can be overlaid with the L an Vineland Ave k Burbank Blvd pedestrian shed map. Here, any holes that exist within the one- ershim half mile radius that would provide a logical origin/destination Blvd East Valley High School’s Orange Line right-of-way property breaks up the route for potential users can be highlighted. For example, where M limits crossings ! street grid Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave heavy residential land uses on an area of the map do not connect Commercial center to the ½ mile pedestrian shed, a note can be made, and the area disrupts the street grid Magnolia Blvd highlighted. Recreational elds SR 170 Fwy occupy large area and prevent pedestrian cut-through Extremely long stretch Overlay land use map with bike connections map (b/t Magnolia and Lankershim) without The second step is to overlay the station land use map with the pedestrian crossings bicycle connections map. The holes shown in these maps are for North areas that are missing connections for bike riders. MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I 21

26 first last mile strategic plan NETWORK IDENTIFICATION, DESIGN, AND IMPLEMENTATION 4 station/stop area. These questions can be written as a survey Additional Overlays checklist form. Mainly qualitative, these checklists measure A number of other overlays should be reviewed using the performance of each station/stop area. With the end goal of approach described above to gain a better perspective of increasing transit ridership and user comfort, urban design access volumes relative to safety and traffic speed, access elements that are most important for rider comfort and routes relative to feeder bus services and stop locations, and system function were added to the survey tool. access shed relative to street grids, to name a few examples. The sample checklist (see Station Area Checklist in the All highlighted areas can then be synthesized. These maps Appendix) was prepared as a guide for on-the-ground inform the basis for routing site visits for on-the-ground analysis at each station area. While initially prepared for the evaluation and Pathway network layout. case sites selected for the First Last Mile Strategic Plan as an evaluation tool, the format of the checklist is broad, and touches upon a range of issues faced by most station areas C. Determine walking route in the study region. As such, this checklist can be used to evaluate a wide range of stations in the county. Pulling from all highlighted areas from the overlay maps described above, walking routes can be drawn that address The checklist is designed to broadly assess:1) safety potential improvement areas. As such, the walking route elements, 2) aesthetics, and 3) accessibility within a station directly responds to potential problems or opportunity areas area. Each of these categories account for multi-modal seen in the macro-level analysis and allows for a more experiences for all types of transit users. The results are detailed on-the-ground analysis. keyed to a scoring tool that allows for comparison between stations. The scoring matrix below outlines the ranking system for each station area. D. Site Visit – Station Survey In addition to assessing the physical conditions of the The site visit offers the opportunity to begin micro-level environment, overall observations can also be made analysis, and to begin to assess areas of intervention. that record how people move to and from the stations themselves. This analysis is supplemented by photo For station specific analysis, a set of evaluation criteria and documentation, and an open-answer area for additional questions can be written to consider current and future information gathered during the site visit. access needs and opportunities at each representative Scoring Matrix Checklist (see Appendix) Poor 1-1.99 2-2.99 Fair 3-3.99 Good 4-5 Excellent ESS PROJECT PROC MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 22 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

27 network identification, design, and implementation first last mile strategic plan 4 athway Network (Step 3) Layout p Network Components The Pathway includes a hierarchy of routes that extend out from the transit station. These routes take into consideration the existing street network, key destinations, feeder transit services, the existing and planned bike network, pedestrian/ athway Collectors – Pathway collectors include streets p bike access volumes and surrounding land uses. These items and routes within the station zone that both feed into are augmented by additional findings in the field such as arterials, and support crossing movements and general opportunities to provide active transportation shortcuts, or station area permeability. Collectors also consider the three to fill breaks in the network (physical or qualitative) not made primary active transportation groups noted above, but ar e apparent in maps. The network is defined by main branches more focused on supporting station area permeability on (Pathway Arterials) and feeder routes (Pathway Collectors), feeder routes, that will allow people access to the main each having the following characteristics; arterials. Pathway Collectors work to reduce travel distances for non-motorized users by focusing on crossing movements – Pathway arterials are the main branch athway Arterials p and support Pathway Arterial function by providing efficient lines that extend from stations and support maximized access to Arterial routes. Collectors frame the lesser traveled throughput and efficiency for active transportation users. routes along the network, and help bridge gaps caused by Pathway arterials accommodate the highest use active high traveled and/or high speed vehicular roadways within transportation corridors that lead to station portals, and are station areas. Improved street crossing opportunities are designed to accommodate a broad range of users. It is useful essential to Collectors, including improved intersection to organize Pathway users by their functional speed; function and the provision of mid-block crossings. mph) – moving, predominantly (0-5 Slow • Slow pedestrian based modes, including slower moving wheelchair and cart/stroller push/pull users. Universal access is a critical concern, and accommodation of small wheeled access assist devices (i.e. wheeled push walkers) must be considered. users that (5-15 mph) – Broad range of • Medium move faster than pedestrians but still require physical separation from vehicles. Children on push-scooters, senior citizens using mobility scooters, skateboarders, casual bike riders and joggers all fall into this group. Pathway Arterial aggressive bicyclists (15-35 mph) – Fast moving, • Fast and drivers of neighbourhood electric vehicles (NEVs) form this user group. Bikes and NEVs can mix with vehicular traffic when supported by specific design elements and vehicular speed controls. Pathway Arterials aim to provide improved facilities for all three of these primary groups. Phased approached may be ed to realize this goal due to constrained right-of-way requir (ROW). Separated active transportation lanes, signal and crossing improvements, wayfinding and plug-in component (i.e. bike share) integration are important considerations in the Pathway Collectors design of Pathway Arterials. MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 23

28 first last mile strategic plan NETWORK IDENTIFICATION, DESIGN, AND IMPLEMENTATION 4 Network Layout To plan a Pathway Network around a Metro Rail or BRT Station, the following steps should be taken; 1 1. Locate p athway Arterials – Arterials should radiate out from the station portal in at least four directions, and should correspond to the highest volume of pedestrian and rolling access to the station. Arterials must extend out at a minimum one-half mile from the station, to an upper limit of three miles from the station. Pathway 2 arterials should integrate into the r egional bike network at opportune points beyond the one-half mile access shed. Coordination with other station Pathway networks within three-mile shed is required. Key Mapping i nputs Access Volumes, Key Destinations, Land Use, Bike Routes athway Collectors Locate p – Pathway collectors 2. include streets within the one-half mile access shed that 3 run perpendicular to station access desire lines, or feed into the main branch lines of Arterials. i nputs Key Mapping Feeder transit lines, access sheds i 3. dentify Site Specific Opportunities and Constraints – Identify opportunities to provide ‘cut- throughs’ (i.e. across parking lots or through parks, where such cut-throughs shorten access routes). Also 4 equire special identify specific constraints that will r attention (i.e. freeway underpasses). Focus on area within 1 mile of transit station. i nputs Key Mapping Aerial imagery + Site Evaluation (Aesthetics, Safety, Accessibility) Evaluate Network – Review Pathway network relative 4. to qualitative and quantitative inputs. 5 Key Mapping i nputs Collision data, Access Sheds, High Speed Roads + Site Evaluation (Aesthetics, Safety, Accessibility) r r efine p athway Network – Review 5. eview and network with key agency stakeholders and local representatives. This process will help inform design team of ongoing local efforts, strengthen knowledge of key local destinations and concerns, and inform the public of access improvement ef forts. Stakeholder and public outreach MARCH 2014 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 24 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

29 network identification, design, and implementation first last mile strategic plan 4 rototype p athway Network Map... p A This map illustrates a potential Pathway network at the North Hollywood Metro Station, developed utilizing the process outlined in this chapter. The fifteen minute walk equates to a one-half mile radius around the station portal. The map is depicted in the style of a transit map, to suggest that for the user, the Pathway would be understood as an extension of the transit experience. Certain access components, such as bike share, car share, parking, and location of wayfinding stations are presented to illustrate the concept that a range of access and mobility solutions could be strategically bundled around Pathway networks. MARCH 2014 25 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

30 OOLBOX T PATHWAY l egic AT n r A firs T s A P T mile s T l 5 Notes: This page intentionally left blank. Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 26

31 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 5 p ATHWAY TOOLBOX This Chapter presents a set of components that directly relate to the development of the Pathway concept. This is not an exhaustive list of what makes for a great public realm, and more components may be added on to this list as this concept is developed. The components chosen respond to our specific challenges here and now, and how we can make a more dignified transit-to-destination link, one that is safer and better maintained, more intuitive, efficient, and inviting, effectively expanding the transit station outward. ntroduction eal laces p i r Applying the Toolbox to Components presented in this chapter aim to: The planning components presented in this chapter focus Expand the station’s sphere of influence and improve the • on improving access to and from Metro stations, in particular transit rider experience Metro Rail and fixed route BRT stations throughout Los Angeles County along identified Pathway networks and within Contribute to a hierarchy of improvements that are more • the confines of defined station areas. The Pathway aims to concentrated, visible, and frequent as transit users approach transit stations overcome critical access barriers through flexible deployment of a number of design components, while following the Metro • Be flexible in order to fit into diverse settings around Pathway Guiding Principles noted in the first chapter. stations The components focus on five categories of improvements as Components presented in this chapter were developed with part of the Pathway: the recognition that Pathway Networks need to be responsive 1. Crossing Enhancements and Connections to local context and variations that exist both across and within station areas. The following are key considerations 2. Signage and Wayfinding intended to support local jurisdictions in selecting treatments 3. Safety and Comfort along Pathway networks: 4. Allocation of Streetspace Sphere of The types and intensity of components nfluence: i 5. Plug-in Components deployed along Pathway Networks will differ depending on proximity to station. The “Extended Station Zone” is Components do not all directly relate to one another, but they defined as roughly one-quarter mile radius from the station work in concert to support the overall goals and guidelines portal. The larger “Transit-Friendly Zone” extends out to an of the Pathway. For example, traffic calming and curb- approximate one-half mile radius; this area would include extensions are very different tools with respect to planning, active transportation infrastructure, but to a lesser extent design and implementation, but utilized together they than in the Extended Station Zone. Pathway Arterials may , comfort and access ability. enhance transit user safety extend out farther still and link up with regional bike and pedestrian networks. The goals for these different spheres are noted in the graphic and provide guidance for prioritizing improvements. MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 27

32 T PATHWAY OOLBOX l n firs T l A s T A T r AT egic P mile s 5 nfluence Expanding the Sphere of i 1 / 2 m i l e A Hierarchy of i mprovements: Paramount to a clear and navigable transit environment is a system of cues that help the transit rider intuit which direction the station is, how 1 / 4 m best to get there, and how long it will take. The frequency of i l e access improvements should increase and be made more prominent as the transit rider approaches a station. For example, farther from the station within the Transit-Friendly Zone, crosswalks may be designed with a simpler and more traditional double stripe. In the Extended Station Zone, closer to the transit station, crosswalks should become more visible, prominent, and frequent, with continental or zebra stripes, colored paint, and increased width. The contextual diversity of Los Angeles f lexibility in Design: warrants a place-specific approach that does not stifle the individual identity of each location, allows for a flexible approach in design of the Pathway, and simultaneously Metro Station provides a legible and intuitive system-wide strategy. Each Pathway Collector component can be applied where appropriate depending on the urban condition. Illustrative examples of how Pathway Pathway Arterial components may be realized in different locations are presented in the Illustrations chapter. EXTENDED STAT i ON ZONE r (A EA 1) Branding and dentity Building: The Pathway, whether i 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike named or not, will be most effective if it is recognizable and visually consistent, both within station areas and across Pathways are more visible • communities served by Metro. For example, some Pathway • Enhanced safety features elements could use standard/consistent messages, font, Larger, more prominent Pathway • style, placement, material and colors while others may be signage informed by the identity of community in which they are • Directional markers with time-to- located. The intent is to support seamless system navigation station signage for the user, while allowing for the expression of local identity. • Frequent crossings These considerations should be made as part of further • Train time arrival/departure digital design development. Development of standard components displays would rely both on inter-jurisdictional coordination throughout the Metro region and coordination with state and federal T fri T- i ENDLY ZONE r ANS standards. (A EA 2) r 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike Less overt, more passive • wayfinding and Pathway markers Address the most pressing safety • and access improvements, such as: - New crossings - Curb ramps - Maintenance - Lighting and landscaping Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 28

33 PATHWAY oolbox T first last mile strategic plan 5 How to Use this Guide PLANNING GUIDELINES PLANNING & IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES METRO PATH 4 Category Labels each Component with one of the CROSSINGS AND CONNECTIONS Expand access shed Curb Extensions six categories: Crossing Enhancements and Connections; Cut Throughs and Enhance access shed at Intersections Shortcuts Cut-Throughs and Signage and Wayfinding, Safety and Comfort, Allocation of Shortcuts the Streetspace, and Integrated Transit Access Solutions. Component Name of Component. Goals Goals Provide more direct routes to and from the station » Improve safety by shortening crossing distances, » increasing pedestrian visibility, slowing turning vehicles, and visibly narrowing roadway for high-speed traffic Guidelines & Resources Goals Goal Describes what the Component should aim to Provide more room for walking and active » do and who it should serve. transportation, along with seating areas, expanded » Use directional signage at entrances to the shortcut » Provide more direct routes to and from the station access for transit waiting areas, and opportunities so that it is clear that it leads to the station for bio-swales, stormwater management, and othyer » Design shortcut paths with special paving, lighting, esources Guidelines and r planted areas seating, trash cans, and shade so that they are r Defines the Component. Guidelines and esources inviting to pedestrians of varying ages and abilities Guidelines presented focus on those aspects of design » Design shortcut paths to accomodate bicyclists and Guidelines & Resources Design shortcuts with special paving, lighting, » other active transportation users with a sufficiently furnishings, and shade so that they are inviting to and planning that are particularly transit-supportive, wide pathway and smooth surface Place curb extensions on streets with high pedestrian » pedestrians of varying ages and abilities If located in the middle of the block, design shortcut » volumes or pedestrian emphasis, or wide streets that rather than describing the full universe of good design » Design shortcuts to accommodate bicyclists and paths that lead to a mid-block crossing for easier are difficult to cross standards or common best practices. References are access across streets other active transportation users with a sufficiently Incorporate bioswales, bollards, planters, or other » » Make sure that pathways are well-maintained, well-lit, objects along street edge to protect pedestrians wide pathway and smooth surface included for other design and planning guidance. See the and located in “people-friendly” places, i.e. places Resource: Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, » Use directional signage to the stations at entrances » that are well-traveled, highly-visible, and pedestrian- Best Practices Design Guide ences. end of this chapter for a full list of refer to shortcuts oriented » If located in the middle of the block, design shortcut Metro Path Integration paths that lead to a mid-block crossing for easier Metro Path Integration access across streets Couple curb extensions with established Metro Path » » Use Metro Path signage at entrances and decision signage » Make sure that pathways are well-maintained, well-lit, points » Add curb edge banding alnog the edge of the curb and located in “people-friendly” places, i.e. places » Regularly place branded Metro medallion signage for extension that are well-traveled, highly-visible, and pedestrian- the length of the pathway, spaced approximately 30 oriented feet apart Identifies elements that can be ntegration i Transit » Maintain existing cut-throughs and add safety Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers enhancements used to identify or brand the Component as part of the Addressed For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Metro System, recognizable to the transit rider. Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks ntegration Transit i Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Use Metro signage at entrances and decision points » Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security » Regularly place branded Metro medallion signage for Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility Identifies relevance p athway Network Compatibility the length of the pathway, every 60-100 ft approx ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design of Tool by pathway type (Collector, Arterial, or Cut- Through), and by sphere of influence (Area 1, the Extended Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro J U LY 2013 12 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Addressed: f or Use On: ransit Friendly Zone.). Station Zone or Area 2, the T Arterial 1 Long Blocks Collector 1 Freeways Arterial 2 Maintenance Collector 2 Safety and Security Shows how the Component ssues Addressed i Cut-Through Legibility responds to the six critical Station Access Barriers, that ROW Allocation and Design identify which problem(s) it helps solve. 29 I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG

34 PATHWAY T OOLBOX n A l P egic AT r T mile s T s A l T firs 5 i NGS AND CONNECT i ONS r C OSS Mid-Block and Additional Enhance Existing Crosswalks i ntersection Crossings Goals Goals Break up long blocks by allowing pedestrians to safely » » Protect pedestrians and active transportation users cross, thereby traveling shorter distances when crossing vehicular traffic » Provide visual cues to allow approaching motorists to Enhance the visual presence of crosswalks to slow » anticipate pedestrian activity and stopped vehicles approaching vehicles r Guidelines and esources r Guidelines and esources » At mid-block crossings, or currently unsignalized Paint stripes on existing crosswalk (or use special » intersections, introduce new crosswalks and vehicular paving or paint). Stripes may be perpendicularly- or control, such as pedestrian-oriented flashing beacons, diagonally-placed in-road flashers, or HAWK (High-intensity activated » Incorporate advance stop bar or yield lines for on- which are activated by a pedestrian crosswalk) signals, coming vehicular traffic to give pedestrians more room push button to cross Provide a crossing at least every 300 ft on average, as » » Where feasible, incorporate special paving at intersections to call further attention to the crosswalk a good rule of thumb » Where feasible, install in-road warning lights or Add crossings around and adjacent to freeway » rectangular rapid-flashing beacons overpasses/underpasses, so that pedestrians can » Use leading pedestrian intervals on transit-adjacent navigate these areas more easily crossings, which give pedestrians a head start across Resource: Safety Effectiveness of the HAWK » the intersection Pedestrian Crossing Treatment » Improve crosswalk lighting » Resource: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Best Practices Transit ntegration i Where feasible and applicable, paint stripe or edges of » ntegration Transit i crosswalks to identify with Pathway network access route. Where feasible and applicable, paint stripe or edges of » Couple crosswalks with directional signage » crosswalks to identify with Pathway network access Incorporate medallion signage or related branding on » route » Couple crosswalks with directional signage new crossing signal posts Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Addressed Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 30 MARCH 2014

35 PATHWAY oolbox T first last mile strategic plan 5 i r OSS ONS C NGS AND CONNECT i aised [Case Study] r r aised Crossings Crosswalks in Boulder and Cambridge r aised Crossings Aid in edestrian p Safety 1 Boulder, Colorado In response to “poor driver compliance with crosswalk yield laws”, designers in Boulder embarked on a mission to increase comprehensive crosswalk compliance. Raised crosswalks were implemented throughout the city to test driver compliance. The raised pedestrian crossings were Goals installed at right-turn islands, and were found to “increase compliance from 69% to 91%.” » Calm traffic at intersections along high-speed streets Accompanied by a number of other additional » Visibly prioritize the pedestrian at key crossing crossing enhancements, Boulder saw an overall locations increase of motorist crosswalk compliance by 43%. 2 r esources Guidelines and Cambridge, Massachusetts Similar results were seen in Cambridge, where » Raise crossings to be flush with the sidewalk and use “raised crossings tripled the number of drivers special paving material to differentiate them from the yielding to pedestrians.” Community surveys roadway revealed that 69% of nearby residents felt that Place raised crosswalks in areas with significant » raised crossing enhancements were a better amounts of pedestrian traffic solution than the introduction of a traffic signal. » Entire intersections may also be raised » Raised crosswalks may not be appropriate on streets with bus routes as they can slow and impede bus flow ntegration Transit i » Where feasible and applicable, paint stripe or edges of crosswalks to identify with Pathway network access route Key signage to intersection » Cambridge, MA On one street in Cambridge, MA, motorists yielding to Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers pedestrians crossing at the Addressed or Use On: f raised devices went from Arterial 1 Long Blocks Collector 1 Freeways approximately 10% before Arterial 2 Maintenance installation to 55% after. Collector 2 Safety and Security Cut-Through Legibility ROW Allocation and Design Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 31 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014

36 OOLBOX T PATHWAY T n A s T mile s T r AT egic P l A l firs 5 r ONS i NGS AND CONNECT i OSS C Curb Extensions Cut-Throughs and Shortcuts ntersections i at Goals Goals » Improve safety by shortening crossing distances, Provide more direct routes to and from the station » increasing pedestrian visibility, slowing turning vehicles, and visibly narrowing roadway for high-speed traffic esources Guidelines and r Provide more room for walking/active transportation, » along with seating areas, expanded access for » Design shortcuts with special paving, lighting, transit waiting areas, and opportunities for bioswales, furnishings, and shade so that they are inviting to stormwater management, and other planted areas pedestrians of varying ages and abilities Design shortcuts to accommodate bicyclists and other » Guidelines and r esources active transportation users with a sufficiently wide pathway and smooth surface Place curb extensions on streets with high pedestrian » » Use directional signage to the stations at entrances to volumes or pedestrian emphasis, or wide streets that shortcuts are difficult to cross If located in the middle of the block, design shortcuts » » Incorporate bioswales, bollards, planters, or other that lead to a mid-block crossing for easier access objects along street edge to protect pedestrians across streets » Resource: Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, » Make sure that pathways are well-maintained, well- Best Practices Design Guide lit, and located in people-friendly places, i.e. places » Design curb extensions at bus stops so that bus that are well-traveled, highly-visible, and pedestrian- waiting areas are made larger and the bus does oriented not have to pull out of the travel lane to pick up » Maintain existing cut-throughs and add safety passengers enhancements ntegration i Transit Transit i ntegration Couple curb extensions with established signage » Use signage at entrances and decision points » » Regularly place medallion signage for the length of the pathway, every 60-100 ft approx Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers Addressed Addressed or Use On: f f or Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG J U LY 2013 32 MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I 32

37 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 ONS r C OSS NGS AND CONNECT i i [Case Study] Scramble Scramble Crossings 3 Crossings in Beverly Hills In Beverly Hills’ Business Triangle where daytime pedestrian activity is very high, there had been a high number of pedestrian/vehicle collisions. In the late 1980s the City modified traffic signals at eight locations to include scramble crossings. As Bijan Vaziri of the City of Beverly Hills Engineering Department notes, “after implementation, it seemed that people quickly became accustomed to the new operation. Public opinion has been very favorable...” Safety was improved after installation of the Goals scramble crossings as a study of collision data showed. Collision data from 10 years prior and » Prioritize the pedestrian at the intersection 10 years after was compared and pedestrian/ » Increase safety and visibility for pedestrians vehicle collisions decreased significantly, by up to » Shorten crossing times for pedestrians 63%. Furthermore, overall collisions in the Business Triangle were also reduced by 20%. Guidelines and r esources » Place scramble crossings in dense areas with a lot of commercial and pedestrian activity Paint continental striping or highly-visible pattern/ » color fully across all four legs and both diagonal paths of the crosswalks » Install informational signage that instructs pedestrians of appropriate crossing movements at scramble crossings Resource: Oakland Chinatown Pedestrian Scramble: » An Evaluation » Resource: Exclusive Pedestrian Phasing for the Business District Signals in Beverly Hills i ntegration Transit » Where feasible and applicable, paint stripe or edges of crosswalks to identify with Pathway network access routes » Key signage to intersection Scramble Crossings in Shabuya Crossings Tokyo, Japan Beverly Hills saw an overall Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers decrease in pedestrian/ Addressed f or Use On: vehicle collisions by as Arterial 1 Long Blocks much as 63% after a series Collector 1 Freeways of scramble crossings were Arterial 2 Maintenance Collector 2 Safety and Security installed. Cut-Through Legibility ROW Allocation and Design MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 33 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

38 PATHWAY T OOLBOX P egic AT r T mile s A s A l T firs n l T 5 i S NG i ND fi GNAGE AND WAY 4 Medallion Signage Metro Signage and Maps Goals Goals » Increase legibility of the urban landscape Increase visibility and awareness of proximity to transit » Increase visibility and awareness of proximity to » station transit station » Display paths of travel to station and to local Display paths of travel to station and to local » destinations; pulls people along the Pathway destinations Increase legibility of the urban landscape » » Help identify the Pathway with repetitive elements that r esources Guidelines and are recognizable Place signs on/near corners and decision points, » Guidelines and r esources regularly-spaced along a route approximately 200- 300 ft. apart » Place medallion signs on existing and new » Use signs that relate to Metro’s established family of infrastructure such as light poles at heights that are visible to both pedestrians and active transportation signage users Ensure that signs are pedestrian-scaled and oriented » Place signs with a consistent rhythm down the » Use arrows and maps on these signs to highlight » Pathway, approximately every two or three blocks station location, common destination areas, and routes Transit i ntegration Consider the potential to stamp or stencil the Metro » ‘M’ at corners on the sidewalk » Coordinate with Metro signage and branding efforts. » Resource: Legible London; A Wayfinding Study » Carry the color of the medallion sign to the ground plane where feasible ntegration i Transit Coordinate with Metro signage and branding efforts » Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Addressed Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 34 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014 I

39 PATHWAY oolbox T first last mile strategic plan 5 ND fi NG S i i GNAGE AND WAY [Case Study] Legible London Legible London is a city-wide, comprehensive, and intuitive wayfinding strategy in the city of London. Along with clear pylon signage, the program is coupled with simple navigational maps that depict average distances to and from key destinations and streets. The success of Legible London has made it an international model for wayfinding design. After an initial roll-out of the system in strategic locations in the heart of the city, a complete survey of the program has shown that it has had positive and impactful results. Select statistical findings confirm that: • 83% of users acknowledge that the wayfinding system has helped them navigate the city The reported number of pedestrians getting lost • on a journey fell by 65% • 87% of users support a full roll-out of Legible London throughout the city Legible London has also introduced new wayfinding tools that increase user legibility. Large key maps are complemented by in-road placard signage, traditional finger-posts, and taller, narrow posts that are placed in heavily congested areas. Simple and intuitive, the Legible London mapping and wayfinding program has reduced peak hour congestion on the tube by helping pedetrians navigate the street network. Rather than orienting north to the top, Legible London uses heads-up mapping, a system that orients maps to face the same way the user is facing. Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 35 MARCH 2014

40 OOLBOX T PATHWAY r firs T l mile s T A AT s l T egic n A P 5 NG i ND fi GNAGE AND WAY i S Time-to-Station eal-Time Signage Adjacent to r Signage Station Goals Goals » » Facilitate a bus to rail transfer and allow active Increase awareness of active transportation, transit, and transit-proximity transportation users to pick the best transit option in » Encourage people to use active transportation modes real-time » Provide helpful navigation and information on » Warn user of expected delays Encourage use for first-time transit users distance and time to get to the station via alternative » transportation Guidelines and esources r r Guidelines and esources » Introduce dynamic signage that shows expected arrival times for buses, trains, etc. Include pedestrian and bicycle times with directional » Place signs at or immediately adjacent to bus stops » arrows and subway portals (above ground) » Consider the travel times for other active Maintain and update real-time signage as technological » transportation users capabilities improve Transit i ntegration ntegration Transit i » Place notation on or adjacent to Pathway medallion signage » Place real-time signage on or adjacent to Pathway medallion signage or other Pathway components, using consistent Pathway logo and design Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers Addressed For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 I 36 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG

41 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 ND S i i NG GNAGE AND WAY fi Smart Technologies [Case Studies] Non-Signage Wayfinding p i n- avement Trails and Markings Wayfinding and signage are not always synonymous. Wayfinding can take the shape of any sort of consistent clue that helps someone understand where they are going. These clues can be more or less literal and are usually accommodated through a change in materials such as pavement or ground plane differentiation, lines and graphics imbedded in Goals the pavement, raised symbols, changes in lighting, or a coordinated family of streetscape amenities. » Increase the ease of use of alternative transportation modes The Freedom Trail in Boston, MA Encourage first-time users » Boston’s Freedom Trail is a red path through » Integrate with Metro Nextrip service downtown that leads pedestrians to key sites. The Integrate with on-demand ride-share and carpool » design of the path material changes as it passes services (i.e. Uber, Lyft and Sidecar) through different areas, but the family of materials used remain consistent. r Guidelines and esources Melbourne » Provide real-time information and expected transit Decades ago, Melbourne installed pavement arrival times on mobile devices markers along various pedestrian walks around Provide detailed service advisories for delayed transit, » the City. The trail includes red granite and brass and safety issues pavement inlays to demarcate it. » Assist new users in finding stations using geospacial software » Run marketing campaign for initial launch Design smart technologies to be used on all » platforms Resource: Smart Cities Applications and » Requirements White Paper Transit i ntegration Integrate transit access into existing and planned » Freedom Trail, Boston, MA smart technologies Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Addressed f or Use On: Arterial 1 Long Blocks Collector 1 Freeways Arterial 2 Maintenance Collector 2 Safety and Security Cut-Through Legibility Melbourne’s Pedestrian Trail System ROW Allocation and Design N/A MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 37

42 OOLBOX T PATHWAY T l T firs mile s r AT T s A egic P l n A 5 SA f ETY AND COM T f O r Landscaping and Shade urniture f Street Goals Goals » Provide amenities to make active transportation users » Provide refuge from the sun comfortable while travelling » Provide pleasant and safe pathways and resting » Increase number of eyes-on-the-street by providing spaces for transit users places for people to sit comfortably r esources Guidelines and r esources Guidelines and Plant shrubs, trees, etc. along sidewalks edges of » » Along streets with heavy pedestrian traffic, place pathways with heavy vehicular traffic, to buffer active street furniture and pedestrian amenities, such as transportation users and filter the air benches, bike parking, skateboard parking, charging Maintain and enhance existing landscaping » stations, etc. » Provide shade structures in areas where pedestrians Place street furniture regularly and rhythmically » gather and along pathways » Maintain clear paths of travel around furniture with enough clearance to accommodate active ntegration Transit i transportation users along the sidewalk » Maintain and clean existing street furniture along Landscaping along Pathway networks may respond » Pathway networks to the landscape identity already in place at that Install parking areas for bikes, scooters, and » particular location. other active transportation mobility devices along Pathways, near destinations and front doors » Where feasible, use environmentally sustainable materials ntegration Transit i » Street furniture may respond to the street furniture family already in place at that particular location Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Addressed Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 38 MARCH 2014

43 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 O r f T ETY AND COM f SA 10 [Case Study] Active Lights Lighting Motion Activated, Solar p edestrian Lighting Quality pedestrian lighting ensures a safe environment for pedestrians and active transportation users alike. With regularly spaced pedestrian lighting comes increased visibility, perception of safety, and eyes-on-the-street. New pedestrian lighting strategies involve creative ways to light up active transportation networks. For example, a number of cities in Sweden have Goals been using Active Lights. The design incorporates an LED lighting system that is motion activated to Increase safety and aid in night navigation for active » provide security and lighting for those who pass by. transportation users along Pathway routes Using solar energy, this system is self-powered and extremely cost effective. Guidelines and r esources » Provide pedestrian-oriented light fixtures along sidewalks, spaced as needed, approximately every 30 feet on center » Install lighting rhythmically and consistently, in coordination with existing street light pattern » Assure that lights are not located within tree canopies, which may block the light Maintain existing light fixtures on street » » Consider installing lights that are efficient and/ Active Lights in Sweden or motion activated/self powered in areas where constant light is not needed » Provide uniform light levels along the sidewalk and assure that other paths of travel for active transportation users are also well-lit » Install lighting around bus stops and bus to rail transfer routes Active Lights Illustration i ntegration Transit » Closer to the station, wrap pedestrian light poles with Studies of the Active Lights stripes and/or Metro color palette so that visually the show a 65% reduction in poles guide the active transportation user to or from stations nighttime fatal accidents, a 30% reduction in nighttime Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Addressed or Use On: f injury accidents, and a Arterial 1 Long Blocks 15% reduction in nighttime Collector 1 Freeways property-damage-only Arterial 2 Maintenance accidents. Collector 2 Safety and Security Cut-Through Legibility ROW Allocation and Design Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 39 MARCH 2014

44 OOLBOX T PATHWAY A l P egic AT r T mile s T s A l T firs n 5 f T r O SA ETY AND COM f reeway Underpass & Overpass f Enhanced Bus Waiting Areas Enhancements Goals Goals » Increase pedestrian, bicycle and personal mobility Enhance transit riders’ level of comfort » » Improve safety for users at night by improving facility safety and comfort visibility Incorporate visually-enagaging elements at freeway » crossings that make for a more friendly street and pull active transportation users along the Pathway, by r Guidelines and esources giving them compelling things to look at » Increase seating options and provide bus shelters at bus stops where space permits esources r Guidelines and Provide shading, lighting, and public art where space » Provide lighting that illuminates the overpass/ » permits underpass at all hours of the day and night Couple street furniture (e.g. lighting, trash cans, and » » Where feasible incorporate public art in the tunnel or parking for varying mobility devices) with enhanced on the overpass bus stops » Maintain existing overpasses/underpasses » Add real-time transit signage that displays next bus Improve the experience and perception of safety along » and train estimated arrival/departure time the sidewalk with special paving and bollards along » Incorporate informational wayfinding signage, route the curb edge. On overpasses, introduce trees in maps, and a push-to-talk assistance button planters where space permits along curb edges or » Maintain existing bus waiting area facilities growing vines along edge fences » Introduce a transit boarding island or bulb-outs to » Take advantage of underutilized space in the roadway allocate more space for bus boarding, where feasible to expand the sidewalk where feasible i Transit ntegration ntegration i Transit Use signage at bus waiting areas » » Incorporate Metro elements such as lighting, signage, and paving treatments along the sidewalk to direct pedestrians and active transportation users across the freeway Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers Addressed Addressed For Use On: For Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 40 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I MARCH 2014

45 A PATHw y TOO l BO x first last mile strategic plan 5 f ETY AND COM T SA r O f Sidewalk p aving & Surface Traffic Calming Enhancements Goals Goals » Make it easier and smoother to walk and roll along the sidewalk » Decrease speeds along heavily trafficked streets to » Make areas for different modes on the sidewalk, protect multi-modal users on Pathway networks apparent and obvious, for improved safety » Reduce collisions and conflicts between modes Increase awareness of transit stations » r esources Guidelines and » Begin to establish safe transit-zones around Metro In areas were multiple modes are converging, » transit areas consider using paving, pavers, and other ground » Allow for NEV integration within Transit Friendly Zone plane treatment differentiation in linear zones along the sidewalk to help people understand where they should Guidelines and r esources be walking or rolling, so that conflicts are avoided » Use enhanced paving to highlight pedestrian facilities, Paint reduced speed MPH signs in and along roadway » edges, and sidewalk amenities, for example along for vehicular travellers curb edges, around tree wells, in seating areas, or » Use narrow travel lanes that naturally cause motorists at corners or crossings. These treatments make the to slow. Use 11feet as a good maximum width for sidewalk a nicer place to be and an easier place to outside lanes and 10 feet as a good average width for navigate. inside lanes » Use appropriate, slip resistent paving and surfaces. If Use physical measures such as curb extensions to » people are expected to roll or bike across the surface, narrow the roadway make sure that it is smooth, without bumps. » Promote police enforcement of new ‘transit-zone’ friendly speeds ntegration i Transit When calming traffic, consider impact on bus » Consider coordinating the color and style of the » service; while the goal is to increase safety for active surface treatment with bundled improvements transportation users, the usability and convenience of Use color, pattern, or texture to provide cues to transit » the Metro bus service should not be comprimised riders that they are approaching a station or stop Transit i ntegration N/A » Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers Addressed For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design MARCH 2014 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 41

46 OOLBOX PATHWAY T A firs T l A s n mile s T r AT egic P l T 5 ACE ON O ALLOCAT i p f ST r EETS Enhanced Bike f r educed Lane Width acilities Goals Goals » Provide bike facilities that are separated and/or protected from vehicular traffic Narrow vehicular lane widths, were possible, to help » promote slower driving speeds, reduce the severity of vehicular crashes, and reduce crossing distances Guidelines and r esources Gain under utilized space that can be used for more » Convert existing standard bike lanes or sharrows into » transit-friendly uses, such as bus access, extended protected facilities where feasible sidewalks, buffer-zones, protected bicycle lanes, and On streets that have heavy traffic, multiple lanes, lots of » bulb-outs parking turnover, and existing or potential high bicycle ridership, consider installing separated cycle tracks to protect cyclists and make cycling more comfortable and esources r Guidelines and inviting to all users » On streets with high speeds, few driveways or cross » In urban areas where traffic volumes and bus usage streets, and high demand for bicycle access, consider permits, do not use lanes that are wider than 11 feet, installing raised cycle tracks ideally 10 feet On streets where cyclists are already riding the wrong » Use striping to channelize traffic, and create buffer » way, where direct access is very difficult for cyclists, zones or delineate parking from travel lanes (pictured) e two way connections are needed, and where wher traffic is low-speed and low volume, consider installing Transit i ntegration contraflow bike lanes or bike routes that cut-through blocks » Confirm Lane width requirements for efficient bus » Other protected facilities and bike enhancements operations recommended for transit zones include: buffered bike lanes, bike boxes, bike signal heads, and bike signal detection i ntegration Transit » For separated facilities use paint on the street surface to conform with bundled improvements » Consider signage, both directional and wayfinding Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Addressed f or Use On: Addressed f or Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 42

47 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 ALLOCAT i ON O f ST p EETS r ACE Bus Enhancements The Green Zone 100 FT APPROX. Green Zone Metro Station Goals Goals Prioritize green vehicles and active transportation uses » Provide dedicated space and more direct access » at or very near the station area for buses, which facilitates travel by bus and makes transfers easier for bus riders. r esources Guidelines and esources r Guidelines and Dedicate a Green Zone within the parking lane, parking » area, or outside travel lane adjacent to station areas, » Use bus-only lanes and design lights for buses, along which is marked with paint and identity/safety signage long transit corridors and which allows area for green transportation such as » Consider the application of contra-flow bus lanes pick up/drop off for shared rides, parking for electric where streets are one-way, but short, efficient vehicles, bus stops, car share parking, etc. connections could be made for buses » Configure the Green Zone as space allows in each Consider the use of dedicated bus lanes and bus » particular condition; sometimes the Zone may best stops bulbs that make it easier for bus operators to serve as a bus waiting area or a kiss-and-ride location, pick up passengers and re-enter traffic while in others, car share or electric vehicle parking Consider the application of far-side bus stops - stops » might be most appropriate that are past the intersection rather than before it, which are safer in terms of pedestrian crossing and ntegration Transit i easier in terms of bus traffic flow » See Enhanced Bus Waiting Area Tool Use eye-catching paint and graphics on the street » pavement and on signage to help brand the Green ntegration Transit i Zone as part of the Metro system » Integrate these improvements into the Metro brand, in terms of signage, wayfinding, and any special treatments to the ground plane Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Addressed or Use On: f or Use On: Addressed f Arterial 1 Long Blocks Arterial 1 Long Blocks Collector 1 Freeways Collector 1 Freeways Arterial 2 Maintenance Arterial 2 Maintenance Collector 2 Safety and Security Collector 2 Safety and Security Cut-Through Legibility Cut-Through Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 43 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

48 OOLBOX PATHWAY T AT T A s T mile s firs r l egic P l A n T 5 r i ACE p EETS ON O f ST ALLOCAT olling Lanes r [Case Study] 12 The idea of Rolling Lanes is to reorganize the The Netherlands streetspace to accommodate a wide spectrum of Similarly, in the Netherlands, the Dutch Ministry for active transportation users, giving both more and Infrastructure and the Environment allocated €21million better space and safer facilities. Internationally, cities to build wide, high-capacity cycle routes to reduce are introducing their own versions of Rolling Lanes. overall cycling trip time. Named Fiets Filevrig (Queue- Read below for precedents. Free Cycling), the program is aimed to attract cyclists that experience congestion on cycle routes. 11 Copenhagen In 2010, the City of Copenhagen introduced the Conversation Lane, a throughway that aims to solve conflicts that arise as a result of varying mobility speeds. Citing the increase in electric bicycle sales and the ever-expanding range of mobility rolling options, designers have called the Conversation Lane a social cycle path, which will allocate more space for alternative transit modes. Given the natural, self-organizing tendency of bicycle movements (faster traffic moves to the left while slower traffic shifts to the right), designers chose to allow “unusually wide social cycle paths” to accommodate a wider range of users. Additionally, the proposed program utilizes advancements in information technology by incorporating speed detecting signs that direct users to shift lanes depending on their independent speeds. Conversation lanes are designed to give cyclists room to travel comfortably beside each other and will be designed alongside a fast lane; a separated bicycle facility for cyclists wishing to pass or move faster than ‘normal’ speed cyclists. Queue-Free Cycling in the Netherlands Copenhagen has committed to the goal of providing conversation lanes alongside 80% of their already established cycle routes, ultimately encouraging riders of all speeds and levels to embrace the city’s Conversation Lanes, Copenhagen cycling culture. Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los 44 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I MARCH 2014

49 PATHWAY oolbox T first last mile strategic plan 5 EETS p ALLOCAT r ACE f ON O i ST Signal Modifications 13,14 United States In the United States, a number of cities are implementing their own versions of a Rolling Lane. Portland and Chicago have both introduced passing lanes for cyclists at key conflict points. In Portland the new markings expand the bike lane to 10 feet, and include side-by-side bike lane symbols that separate slow and fast lanes. New striping was completed to allow easier and safer passing on an uphill segment of one of Portland’s heavily congested bikeways. Goals The Park Slope neighborhood of Brooklyn is also gearing » Slow vehicular speeds within transit zones up for some proposed changes in response to an Give crossing priorities to pedestrians and active » increase in collisions between pedestrians and bicyclists. transportation users The plan introduces a new Ped/Child Cyclist lane, a Time signals to ease traffic and minimize conflicts » widened slow bike lane, and a sharrow lane for faster between pedestrians and vehicles cyclists. Vehicular traffic is shifted into one lane. Begin to establish safe transit-zones around Metro » transit areas In March 2010, San Diego State University opened a dual skateboard/bike lane. r esources Guidelines and » Set vehicular signal timing for moderate progressive speeds, rather than aggressive speeds along Pathway routes » Time signals to provide pedestrians and other active transportation users lead time for crossing before vehicular travel Use bus and bike detection at traffic signals for » prioritization of active transportation devices Add pedestrian-actuated signals for crossings » ntegration i Transit Portland, Oregon’s Passing Lanes N/A » Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Addressed f or Use On: Arterial 1 Long Blocks Collector 1 Freeways Arterial 2 Maintenance Collector 2 Safety and Security Cut-Through Legibility Proposed Configuration of Prospect Park Loop, Park Slope, ROW Allocation and Design Brooklyn 45 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014

50 PATHWAY OOLBOX T r T mile s T s A egic T firs l A n P AT l 5 ST EETS r f ACE p ON O i ALLOCAT Sidewalk Widening olling Lane r Goals Goals Shift the balance of the roadway so that it caters more » » Shift the balance of the roadway so that it caters more to active transportation users of all types within station to active transportation users of all types within station areas and transit zones areas and transit zones Increase safety and comfort in the roadway for active » Increase safety and comfort on the sidewalk for active » transportation users transportation users Provide a passing lane for faster riders » Provide enough room on the sidewalk for active » transportation users of varying speeds, ages, abilities, r esources Guidelines and using varying mobility device types » Convert existing bike lanes into Rolling Lanes and add new Rolling Lanes within a 1/4 or 1/2 mile Guidelines and r esources radius of the station, where feasible. Rolling lanes are dedicated lanes, wider than standard bike lanes, Couple sidewalk widening with the provision of » which welcome users of varying speeds beyond amenities such as street furniture, lighting, and bicyclists such as scooter riders, electric bicycles, landscaping skateboarders, etc. » Maintain existing sidewalks, fix buckling sidewalks, » Paint fast/slow indicators in the Lane, giving ample pick up trash, etc. room for passing at conflict points such as crosswalks » Assure that utility boxes and other auxiliary and hills. infrastructure is placed secondarily to through Ideally provide buffer (painted or raised, e.g. planter, » movement and does not impede access of parking, or bollards) to separate active transportation pedestrians and other active transportation users users comfortably from vehicular traffic. Where space permits, introduce parklets in » Couple with informational signage, traffic markings, » underutilized right of way and dedicated signalization through intersections If more permanent solutions are untenable, consider » Allow cyclists to also travel outside of the Rolling Lane, » using temporary installations to test sidewalk contrary to current regulation regarding bike lanes. improvements. Examples of these may include Coordinate Rolling Lane design/placement with bus » temporary extensions of the pedestrian realm into the operations needs and stop locations; the bus/bike right-of-way, through parklets and temporary plazas. interface should be coordinated for maximum impact » Resource: Urban Bikeway Design Guide ntegration Transit i ntegration Transit i » Consider identifiable paving treatments At conflict zones, apply paint on street » Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Addressed Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 46 MARCH 2014

51 PATHw x BO l TOO y A first last mile strategic plan 5 p ONENTS i N COM LUG- p Car Share Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) Goals Goals Increase connectivity to Metro stations » » Increase connectivity to Metro stations Encourage the use of electric and alternative mobility » Encourage multi-modal options and modal transfers » Increase transportation flexibility devices that are zero emissions » Expand modal opportunities for those that are transit » » Increase transportation flexibility » Integrate multi-modal serviece offerings dependent Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) and Greenhouse » Gas (GHG) emissions Guidelines and r esources Provide direct connections to major destinations (i.e. » x LA , Union Station, Regional Universities) » Introduce NEV charging stations within designated Green Zone Provide NEVs (and other low-speed, electric vehicles) » esources r Guidelines and priority parking stalls in micro park-and-ride facilities, which are closer to the entrances/exits Locate pick-up/drop-off spaces for car share in the » Allow compact NEVs to travel in Rolling Lanes, when » Green Zone or in another highly-visible and convenient traveling at reduced speeds location Incorporate signage near station areas that informs » the transit rider of car share options Transit i ntegration » Contract with private company to begin car share program » Use signage at NEV parking locations and to and from » Resource: See Zip Car, LA Car Share, City Carshare, x these areas as directional indicators to the stations Philly Carshare, Lyft, Uber and Sidecar Transit i ntegration Use signage at car share stations and as directional » indicators to the stations Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers Addressed Addressed For Use On: For Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014 47

52 OOLBOX T PATHWAY P T s A l T firs r T mile s n AT egic A l 5 ONENTS p N COM i p LUG- [ recedents] Bike Share p Bike Share and Bike Station Paris, France Paris, France, is home to Velib – one of the largest bike share programs in the world. Boasting 20,000 bicycles and more than 1,800 bike-stations, Velib is available 24/7, with stations located every 1000 feet, allowing for convenient pick-up and drop- off. Station density typically increases around transit hubs, and stations vary in size depending on demand. Interactive maps and competitive rates have made the program one of the most accessible bike share programs in the world. Velib was one piece of Paris’ city-wide strategy Goals to dramatically increase active transportation specific infrastructure, prioritizing the expansion of Increase connectivity to Metro stations » alternative modes over vehicular modes. » Increase low-cost public transportation options Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) and Greenhouse » United States Gas (GHG) emissions Bike share programs are becoming increasingly » Reduce traffic by decreasing the number of cars on popular in the United States. In 2013, New York the road City introduced CitiBikes, adding to the growing list » Encourage physical activity of U.S. cities that are implementing comprehensive Increase retail exposure and enhance nearby » bike share programs. Other bike share programs commercial areas include Washington D.C.’s Capital Bike Share, Boston’s Hubway, Denver’s B-cycle, Miami Beach’s r esources Guidelines and Deco Bike and Minneapolis’ Nice Ride. Locate bike share/bike stations in highly-visible areas » near or at Metro transit stations » Strategically locate bike share/bike stations along transit corridors, existing or proposed bikeways, popular destinations, and retail/job centers, to ensure that users can pick-up/drop-off bikes conveniently » Couple bike share with smart technologies that help active transportation users navigate the system Transit i ntegration » Use signage at bike share stations and as directional indicators to the stations Paris Velib Bike Share Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers For Use On: Addressed Addressed For Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility New York City Citibike Share ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 48 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG

53 A TOO y l PATHw BO x first last mile strategic plan 5 p N COM i LUG- ONENTS p ntegrated [ p recedents] i p ool and eeder Bus Van f Access Solutions Goals » Increase connectivity to Metro stations » Increase low-cost public transportation options, especially for commuters Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) and Greenhouse » Gas (GHG) emissions » Reduce traffic by decreasing the number of cars on the road r esources Guidelines and Philly CarShare, Philadelphia, PA Locate pick-up/drop-off areas for van pool and feeder » bus in the Green Zone or in another highly-visible and convenient location Retrofit existing feeder bus stops and van pools with » Pathway signage Resource: See Emery Go-Round or LA DASH » Transit i ntegration Use signage at van pool/feeder bus pick up/drop off » locations and to and from these ares as directional Curbside electric Vehicle charging station, Portland, OR indicators to the station Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Addressed Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Feeder Bus: Emery Go-Round, Emeryville, CA Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design 49 MARCH 2014 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

54 OOLBOX T PATHWAY P n A l firs T l A s T mile s T r AT egic 5 p ONENTS LUG- N COM i p edestrian Electronic Bicycle & p arking High-Visibility Bicycle p Counters Goals Goals Provide easy-to-access and easy-to-see bicycle » » Gather information on bicycle and pedestrian usage, parking (may be located on-street), adjacent to pre- and post-improvement to understand usage building front doors, sidewalks, and crossings. patterns, help justify investments, assess impacts, rank sites, and plan maintenance Guidelines and r esources esources r Guidelines and Locate bike parking within easy walking distance » to main building entrances, and in highly visible » Use electronic counters to sense both pedestrians locations that are well-lit and secure and bicyclists at critical locations along transit routes Where sidewalk space is limited and where cycling » » Show counts and locations online to raise awareness demand is high, consider installing bike corrals and so that people can participate in the data (pictured above) on the street gathering » Bike corrals need not remove existing parking stalls Coordinate with local groups to publicize counters and » if placed creatively, for example immediately adjacent strategically use the data that is collected to crosswalks where the curb is already painted red Protect bike corrals from vehicular traffic at edges » ntegration i Transit Regularly maintain existing bike corrals and bike » parking areas » Use signage on counters and in related publicity Typical bike corrals that replace a parking space » materials accommodate parking for 16 bicycles Transit i ntegration Include signage at bike parking locations and at » decision making points, which points riders to the parking areas Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers Addressed Addressed or Use On: f f or Use On: Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 50

55 PATHWAY oolbox T first last mile strategic plan 5 i LUG- ONENTS p p N COM [Case Studies] Electronic Bicycle eaders r eward System – Zap r and p edestrian Counters The Minneapolis and St. Paul Transportation Management Organizations promote sustainable transit and transportation systems and work directly Make the Need Visible with with employers to encourage the use of active Electronic Bicycle Counters transportation. Popularized in Copenhagen and brought to the US The Organizations installed a Zap system that detects first in Portland, OR, electronic bicycle counters bikes as they pass and then reports the data received help to gather data and improve measurements of at each station. The system uses RFID tags on the progress toward increasing bike ridership. front wheel of registered bikes and 20 meters on major bicycle routes in a ring around downtown Minneapolis Seattle, WA and St. Paul. Any commuter can participate in the In 2013, Seattle’s City Council voted to install seven program and putting an RFID tag on their bike and the additional bike counters (added to the two they program is free to use. People who participate receive already have). rewards and information tailored to them. San Francisco, CA In 2013, San Francisco started using California’s p edestrian Counting in Melbourne first bike traffic counter on Market Street. The City of Melbourne has a website that depicts the information gathered from 18 pedestrian counting Arlington, VA sensors located around the central business district. Arlington County has set up a system of permanent The system is giving the City a better understanding of automatic counters that monitor both bicycle and how people use the streets and how they can be better pedestrian numbers, 24 hours a day at selected managed to cater to pedestrian needs. locations. Pedestrians in downtown Melbourne are monitored by Findings from the bike counter in San Francisco are the pedestrian counter (upper right corner of image) shared online Installing the RFID tag in the bike wheel, for tracking and One of Seattle’s bike counters counting purposes; Zap Minneapolis and St. Paul. MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 51

56 OOLBOX T PATHWAY A A s T mile s T firs l T r AT egic P n l 5 p i N COM p ONENTS LUG- r ide ide Micro p ark-and- Kiss and r Goals Goals » Provide parking areas for transit users that are » Increase connectivity to Metro stations uncoupled from the station area, thereby freeing Provide drop off areas that are safe and convenient to » up valuable land immediately at the station for the station in order to encourage shared rides development potential and joint-use. Concept requires Reduce Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) and Greenhouse » Gas (GHG) emissions furhter study. Reduce traffic by decreasing the number of cars on » the road Guidelines and r esources r Guidelines and esources » Design micro park-and-ride areas within three blocks (or 1/4 mile) from the transit station, linked by wayfinding and possibly bike-share access solutions » Designate pick-up/drop-off areas within the Green Choose compact parking typologies, from parking » Zone or in another highly-visible and convenient structures with retail integrated into the ground floor, to location smaller surface lots and automated parking facilities » Coordinate design and placement of drop off faciltiies » Include waiting and parking areas for green vehicles with bus operations and bus stop locations such as shared ride vans, car shares, etc. » Generate revenue from existing park-and-ride facilities Transit i ntegration by charging for parking Further review this concept relative to Metro parking » Use signage at pick-up/drop-off locations and as » utilization studies directional indicators between this area and the station Transit i ntegration » Use wayfinding signage and colors throughout parking area Component Appropriate Component Appropriate Station Access Barriers Station Access Barriers For Use On: Addressed For Use On: Addressed Arterial 1 Arterial 1 Long Blocks Long Blocks Collector 1 Collector 1 Freeways Freeways Arterial 2 Arterial 2 Maintenance Maintenance Collector 2 Collector 2 Safety and Security Safety and Security Cut-Through Cut-Through Legibility Legibility ROW Allocation and Design ROW Allocation and Design Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 52 MARCH 2014

57 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 i i - AT r T TOGETHE i r NG i UTT LLUST p ON Extended Station Zone » Typical application in regional centers, with the region’s largest concentration of housing and jobs. Refer to CSPP Place-types D. - http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/ 1 Metro Station p ortal and laza p countywide_sustainability_planning_policy.pdf Signage with r eal-Time Transit 2 nformation i 3 Medallion Signage and Curb-Edge Banding 4 Colored Scramble Crossings 5 r olling Lane) Advisory Bike Lane (see 1 / 4 m i l e 6 Green Zone and Kiss-and- r ide 7 Bike Share/Bike Station 8 i Bulb-Outs at ntersections 9 Traffic Calming 10 Enhanced Bus acilities f 11 Sidewalk Widening 5 3 11 4 9 10 8 7 2 6 1 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 53 MARCH 2014

58 T PATHWAY OOLBOX n A l P egic firs T l A s T mile s T r AT 5 i ON i AT r r T TOGETHE i NG - UTT p i LLUST Mid-Block Crossing Typical application in urban neighborhoods, with large concentrations of housing and mostly neighborhood » serving retail. Refer to CSPP Place-types C. - http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/ images/countywide_sustainability_planning_policy.pdf 1 Added Mid-Block Crossing 2 Cut-Through/Shortcut 3 Signage with Directional Arrows 1 / 4 m i l e 4 p aved Treatments Medallion Signage and 5 f urniture Street 6 Landscaping 7 Lighting 8 p olling Lane/ rotected Bike Lane r 9 Signal Modifications 10 Bike Share 2 7 5 3 10 1 4 9 6 8 Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los I 54 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014

59 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 r i UTT p i NG i ON T TOGETHE AT r LLUST i - Transit- f riendly Zone Typical application in sub-regional centers that act as activity and transit hubs for surrounding suburban » neighborhoods or lower density employment/industrial parks. Refer to CSPP Place-types A & B - http:// media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/countywide_sustainability_planning_policy.pdf Added Mid-Block Crossing 1 Medallion Signage Cut-Through/Shortcut 2 Continental Crosswalks Signage with Directional Arrows 3 r olling Lane e l i m 4 / Medallion Signage and paved Treatments 4 1 Car Share Street furniture 5 Micro ide r ark-and- p Landscaping 6 p Van ool Lighting 7 amps r Dual Curb rolling Lane/protected Bike Lane 8 Signal Modifications 9 Signal Modifications p edestrian Lighting 10 Bike Share Landscaping 10 8 1 9 2 7 3 4 5 6 MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 55

60 PATHWAY OOLBOX T r firs l A s T n T T AT egic P l A mile s 5 r ESOU r CES General and Best ractices p Design Better Streets, Commission for Architecture » Active Design Guidelines: Promoting Physical Activity and the Built Environment, 2007: http://webarchive. and Health in Design, City of New York, 2010: http:// nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe. www.nyc.gov/html/ddc/html/design/active_design.shtml org.uk/publications/paved-with-gold » Are We There Yet? Creating Complete Communities » Paving the Way: How we achieve clean, safe and for 21st Century America, Reconnecting America, attractive streets, Commission for Architecture 2012: http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/resource-center/ and the Built Environment, 2002: http://webarchive. books-and-reports/2012/reconnecting-america-releases- nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110118095356/http:/www.cabe. are-we-there-yet-creating-complete-communities-for-21st- org.uk/files/paving-the-way.pdf century-america/ » San Francisco Better Streets Plan, City of San » Beautiful Places: The Role of Perceived Aesthetic Francisco, 2011: http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/ Beauty in Community Satisfaction, Working Paper BetterStreets/index.htm Series, Martin Prosperity Research, Richard Florida, » Street Design Manual, New York City Department of University of Toronto; Charlotta Mellander, Jönköping Transportation, 2009: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/ International Business School; Kevin Stolarick, pedestrians/streetdesignmanual.shtml University of T oronto, 2009: http://www.creativeclass. » Smart Growth America, Complete Streets Resources, com/rfcgdb/articles/Beautiful%20places.pdf http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets/ http://bostoncompletestreets. Boston Complete Streets: » complete-streets-fundamentals/resources org The Value of Urban Design, Commission for » » Case Study Compendium, Pedestrian and Bicycle Architecture and the Built Environment, Department Information Center, 2009: http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/ of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, 2001: case_studies/ http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/Documents/Documents/ » Complete Street Design Guidelines, Tennessee Publications/CABE/the-value-of-urban-design.pdf Department of Transportation, 2009: http://www.tdot. » Urban Street Design Guide, National Association of state.tn.us/bikeped/CompleteStreets.pdf City Transportation Officials (NACTO), forthcoming » Complete Streets Chicago, Department of in summer 2013: http://nacto.org/wp-content/ Transportation, 2013: http://www.cityofchicago.org/ uploads/2012/10/NACTOUrbanStreetDesignGuide_Highrez. content/dam/city/depts/cdot/Complete%20Streets/ pdf CompleteStreetsGuidelines.pdf » Walking the Walk: How Walkability Raises Home » Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Values in U.S. Cities, CEO for Cities, 2009: http://www. Thoroughfares for Walkable Communities, Institute ceosforcities.org/research/walking-the-walk/ of Transportation Engineers, 2006: http://www.ite.org/ bookstore/RP036.pdf p ractices irst Last Mile Best f » Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, » Mobility Hub Guidelines: For the Greater Toronto Best Practices Design Guide, Federal Highway and Hamilton Area, Metrolinx, Ontario, 2011: http:// Administration, Part II of II, 2001: http://www.fhwa.dot. www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/mobilityhubs/ gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/sidewalk2/ mobility_hub_guidelines.aspx contents.cfm Good Design: The Fundamentals, Commission for » esources r Los Angeles-Specific Architecture and the Built Environment, 2008: http:// » Downtown Design Guide, City of Los Angeles, 2009: www.rudi.net/files/paper/optional_file/good-design.pdf http://urbandesignla.com/downtown_guidelines.htm » Inclusion by Design: Equality, diversity, and the » Final Report: Recommended TDM Strategies and built environment, Commission for Architecture Actions for the City of Los Angeles, Transportation and the Built Environment, 2008: http://www. Demand Strategies, Southern California Association humancentereddesign.org/sites/default/files/AB x 2012/ of Governments and Los Angeles Department CABE_inclusion_by_design.pdf Manual for Streets, of Transportation, 2011: http://www.scag.ca.gov/ Department for Transport, London, 2007 publications/pdf/2011/cityofla_tdmstrategies_finalreport.pdf » Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Best » Maximizing Mobility in Los Angeles- First and Last Practices, 2012 Mile Strategies Final Report, City of Los Angeles and Measuring the Street: New Metrics for 21st Century » Southern California Association of Governments, Streets, New York Department of Transportation, 2009: http://www.scag.ca.gov/nonmotorized/pdfs/LA- 2012: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/2012- Maximizing-Mobility-Final-Vol1.pdf 10-measuring-the-street.pdf Paved with Gold: The real value of good street design, » Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 56

61 PATHWAY T oolbox first last mile strategic plan 5 » Model Design Manual for Living Streets, University of » Safety Effectiveness of the HAWK Pedestrian Crossing Treatment, Federal Highway Administration, HRT-10- California Los Angeles, Luskin Center for Innovation, 2011: 042, 2010 http://www.modelstreetdesignmanual.com/ » Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Short Range Transportation Plan for Los Angeles » Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations, Final Report County, Los Angeles County Metropolitan and, Recommended Guidelines, Federal Highway Transportation Authority, 2003: http://ebb.metro.net/ Administration, HRT-04-100, 2005: http://www.fhwa.dot. projects_studies/images/2003_SRTP.pdf System-Wide On-Board Origin-Destination Study, » gov/publications/research/safety/10042/10042.pdf Final Report, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2011 Universal Design » Walkability Checklist, City of Los Angeles Department » Universal Design and Visitability from Accessibility of City Planning, 2008: to Zoning, the John Glenn School of Public Affairs, http://urbandesignla.com/ National Endowment for the Arts, 2007: https://kb.osu. walkability.htm edu/dspace/bitstream/1811/24833/2/ Branding, Signage, and Wayfinding Legible London Wayfinding Study Report - Transport » End Notes for London, AIG, Central London Partnership, Tuttle, Steve. City of Boulder Crosswalk Compliance 1. 2006: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/ Studies & Treatment Implementation. PBIC, n.d. Web. 25 businessandpartners/Legible_London_report.pdf July 2013 » See New York City Wayfinding Program designed by Watkins, Katherine. Cambridge’s Traffic Calming Program 2. Pentragram Pedestrians are the Focus: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2006. Web. 25 July 2013 Smart Technologies in the City Vaziri, Bijan. “Exclusive Pedestrian Phase for the Business 3. » Smart Cities Applications and Requirements White District Signals in Beverly Hills, 10 Years Later: City of Paper, Net!Works European Technology Platform, Beverly Hills, California”, 1996 2011: http://www.networks-etp.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/ Central London Partnership. Legible London: A Wayfinding 4. Publications/Position_White_Papers/White_Paper_Smart_ Study. London N.p., 2006. Web. 25 July 2013 Net!Works European Technology Platform. “Smart Cities 5. Cities_Applications.pdf Applications and Requirements White Paper”, 2011. Web. See TextMyBus App from Detroit, SF Live Bus, » 25 July 2013 Chicago Transit Authority App Center, LA Metro Home SF Live Bus. Live map of SF MUNI. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 July 6. Nextrip Service 2013 Chicago Transit Authority. “App Center.” Chicago Transit 7. Bike Share p rograms Authority. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 July 2013 » The Case for Bike Share in NYC, 2009: http://www.nyc. City of Detroit. City of Detroit | Official City of Detroit Web 8. gov/html/dcp/pdf/transportation/bike_share_part2.pdf site | www.detroitmi.gov. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 July 2013 “LA Metro Home | Nextrip Service.” LA Metro Home | 9. Bikeways Getting Started. N.p. Web. 25 July 2013 Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning » Active Lights - Leading the way. N.p., Web. 25 July 2013 10. e Degros, Marie Goyens, and é Bendiks, Stefan, Agla 11. and Design, Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Nick Lakides. Fietsinfrastructuur: Cycle Infrastructure. Innovation, 2009: http://ashlandtsp.com/system/datas/51/ Rotterdam: nai010 uitgevers/publishers, 2013. Print original/BicycleBoulevardGuidebook.pdf Shahan, Zachary. “Dutch Improving Cycle Networks, 12. » Urban Bikeway Design Guide, National Association Building Fast Cycle Lanes.” EcoLocalizer. N.p., 31 Jan. of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), 2011: http:// 2011. Web. 25 July 2013 nacto.org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide/ 13. Masoner, Richard. “Cyclelicious » Bike lane passing lane.” Cyclelicious. N.p., 6 Sept. 2000. Web. 25 July 2013 Crossings Goodman, David. “Changes Planned for Prospect Park 14. Analyzing Raised Crosswalks Dimensions Influence » Loop - NYTimes.com.” The New York Times - Breaking on Speed Reduction in Urban Streets, 3rd Urban News, World News & Multimedia. N.p., 27 Feb. 2012. Web. Street Symposium, June 2007: http://trid.trb.org/view. 25 July 2013 15. NYC Dept. of City Planning. “Bike Share Opportunities in aspx?id=850990 New York City.” New York N.p., 2009. Web. 25 July 2013 » Oakland Chinatown Pedestrian Scramble: An Evaluation, Safe Transportation Research & Education Center, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley, 2003: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/ item/3fh5q4dk 57 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

62 OOLBOX T PATHWAY l egic AT n r A firs T s A P T mile s T l 5 Notes: This page intentionally left blank. Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Los MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 58

63 iLLUSTRAT ONS i first last mile strategic plan 6 AT r i LLUST ONS i 6 This section applies the Pathway concept to three case study sites, Wilshire/Normandie (Metro Purple Line), North Hollywood (Metro Red Line/Orange Line), and 103rd/Watts (Metro Blue Line). The intent of this section is to explain from a planning perspective, how Pathway networks can be developed and how components can be selected and applied in different urban settings. Final route maps and images are meant for illustrative purposes only. The Case Study Sites The North Hollywood station The Wilshire/Normandie The 103rd/Watts station area is is the closest of the is a dense urbanized and mixed- area station area characterized by low to mid-residential three to downtown Los Angeles use transit node, adjacent to the NoHo density, wide arterials, and long blocks, Arts District, an active commercial area and is characterized by high density with minimal pedestrian or multi-modal residential, mixed-use, commercial, to the south of the station, and mid-to amenities. The Watts Towers is located high-density residential areas closer and civic land uses. Taller mixed- within walking distance from the station. use and commercial buildings along to the station with residential density There is a substantial number of modal- decreasing away from the station. Wilshire Boulevard step down to shorter transfers in the station area, along with structures, mainly residential, on the Long blocks without crossings, an at- a transit-dependent population, and an grade bus transit way, and an adjacent streets behind it. There is a significant underutilized park-and-ride lot. freeway pose challenges for active amount of multi-modal and transfer transportation users’ station access. activity in the area. There is a significant amount of multi- modal and transfer activity in the area. 3rd St Normandie Av La Vineland Ave n Vermont Ave kersh Burbank Blvd Catalina St Century Blvd Wilmington Ave e im 6th St Western Ave B lv d 103rd St Compton Ave Wilshire Blvd M M M ! ! ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Irolo St S ant a Ana Blvd Magnolia Blvd 8th St 1 0 8t h St S R 170 Fwy I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 59

64 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station The Watts/103rd Station is surrounded by a large residential population. The station, which directly connects residents in South L.A. to the Downtown 7th/ Metro terminus station, creates potential for first last mile commuters originating in Watts. The 103rd/Watts station is located adjacent to the Watts Towers, which attract approximately 300,000 visitors annually, and are designated as a U.S. National Historic Landmark and a Los Angeles Historic-Cultural monument. Station Access Barriers Safety • Buckling sidewalks and minimally maintained pathways Wide arterials prioritize the vehicle • Unsafe traffic speeds, wide arterials • Lack of pedestrian lighting • Lack of pedestrian buffers along sidewalk edge Limited safety signage • Aesthetics Lack of pedestrian amenities like shade and • landscaping • Lack of maintenance–trash is abundant Accessibility Unclear transit mode transfer • • Lack of bicycle facilities • Shortcuts are not maintained, unmarked, and feel Park and Ride Station is underutilized unsafe athway Network Overview of p p roposed The case study location, 103rd Place and Wilmington Avenue, is located mid-block on a wide arterial. The Pathway design proposal for this area would entail: signage and curb-edge banding to direct transit users through the shortcut and along the street. A new mid- block crossing splits up the long block and is signalized for safety. The wide street right-of-way is divided into a Rolling Lane, which caters to active transportation users. Two alternate studies are shown: the first uses a painted buffer to differentiate between the travel lanes and the Rolling Lane, while the second takes it a step further with a vertical separation between the two, showing how the Narrow sidewalks with few pedestrian amenities Pathway network can grow and change over time. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 60

65 iLLUSTRAT i ONS first last mile strategic plan 6 103rd/Watts Station Network Design Century Blvd Century Blvd Wilmington Ave Wilmington Ave 103rd St 103rd St Compton Ave Utilizing the approach outlined in Chapter Compton Ave M M ! 3 of these guidelines, a Pathway network S S ant a nta Ana Blvd a Ana Blvd design was developed for the 103rd/ 1 0 8t h St 10 8 t h St Watts station area. The Metro Blue Line runs north–south along this corridor at Points of Interest Pedestrian Shed Street Grid grade, thus running one Pathway Arterial ! ( north–south is not effective, as it would ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( only service half the corridor catchment. ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( Century Blvd Century Blvd Century Blvd In this case two north–south arterials are ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( Wilmington Ave ( ! ( ! ( ! Wilmington Ave Wilmington Ave ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! 103rd St 103rd St rd St 103 required, and have been proposed along Compton Ave ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( Compton Ave ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( Compton Ave ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! M ( ! M ! M ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( Compton Ave and Wilmington Ave. An ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( S S ( ! ! ( a S a nta a n n ( ! ta ta A A ( ! ! ( ! ( A na B ! ( na Blvd additional Arterial is proposed connecting na Blvd ! ( 1 0 8 t h S t 10 8 th St l v d 10 8 th St ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! the station to Watts Towers, a major ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( regional destination within the station ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! Key Transit Access Collision Severity and High Vehicular area. An east–west Arterial is proposed Location Corridors Speeds along 103rd. Two existing cut-throughs are enhanced and provide a short-cut for Century Blvd Century Blvd C entury Blvd pedestrians accessing the station from Wilmington Ave Wilmington Ave Wilmington Ave 103rd St 103rd St Wilmington Ave. 103rd St Compton Ave Compton Ave Compton Ave M M M ! ! ! S S a a 1 0 7 th S t Santa n n ta ta A A na Blvd A na Blvd na B 10 8 th St 10 8 t h S t l vd Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Land-Use Map Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 61 MARCH 2014 I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG

66 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 103rd/Watts Station, Location 1 103rd Place and Wilmington Avenue – Less intensive variation, non-seperated Rolling Lane 9 Before 8 7 5 4 3 6 11 10 2 1 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings Enhancements and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks 2 Mid-block and additional crossings Cut-throughs (multi-modal pathway through 3 pedestrian paseo) Signage and Wayfinding 4 Signage 5 Medallion signage Curb-edge banding 6 Safety and Comfort 7 Landscaping/Shade 8 Lighting Metro Station Location Allocation of the Streetspace Visualization Location 9 Signal modification ON ZONE (Area 1) EXTENDED STAT i 10 Traffic calming 5-Minute Walk / 2-Minute Bike 11 Rolling Lane (Buffered) i fri ANS r T ENDLY ZONE (Area 2) T- 10-Minute Walk / 5-Minute Bike Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 62

67 ONS iLLUSTRAT i first last mile strategic plan 6 103rd/Watts Station, Location 1 (enhanced) 103rd Place and Wilmington Avenue – More intensive variation, vertical seperation along Rolling Lane 9 Before 8 7 5 4 3 6 11 10 2 1 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings Enhancements and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks 2 Mid-block and additional crossings Cut-throughs (multi-modal pathway through 3 pedestrian paseo) Signage and Wayfinding 4 Signage 5 Medallion signage Curb-edge banding 6 Safety and Comfort 7 Landscaping/Shade 8 Lighting Metro Station Location Allocation of the Streetspace Visualization Location 9 Signal modification 10 Traffic calming EXTENDED STAT i ON ZONE (Area 1) *Note: Components dipicted are the 11 Rolling Lane same as previous visualization with 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike the exception of the added vertical (vertical seperation) r T T- i (Area 2) ENDLY ZONE fri ANS seperation between the Rolling Lane 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike and vehicular path of travel. Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 63 MARCH 2014

68 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 Overview of p roposed p athway Network Wilshire/Normandie Station Two case study sites are presented at Wilshire/ Located along the Wilshire Corridor (a key connector Normandie. Location 1 is immediately adjacent to the throughout Los Angeles County) the Wilshire/ station on the southeast corner of Wilshire Boulevard Normandie Station is situated in the midst of an active and Normandie Avenue. Location 2 is farther from the commercial zone and a regular street grid. Additionally, station at 8th Street and Fedora Street. adjacent to the site are a number of educational facilities, including Robert F. Kennedy Community shows how transit infrastructure can be Location 1 Schools, a 26-acre facility that hosts six independent retrofitted to include Pathway elements, including static public schools. Serving over 4,200 students at this identification signage and real-time signage with next- campus alone, the site hosts students of all ages bus/next-train information on the existing Metro Rapid within a 9-block radius. bus shelter. Bike share facilities are added along the Pathway along with seating and amenities for transit Wilshire’s commercial corridor is surrounded by a riders. The intersection is painted with an all-way, dense residential population. Bicycle-friendly streets scramble crossing for enhanced access. All of these parallel Wilshire Boulevard and allow ample room for more intensive Pathway components are appropriate non-vehicular traffic to the north of the station, but for the Extended Station Zone, Area 1. Wilshire itself is less friendly to active transportation users. Metro has proposed a regional Bus Rapid includes prominent Pathway signage Location 2 Transit that will run along Wilshire Boulevard, showing time-to-station, along with sidewalk connecting regional and local users to the Wilshire/ enhancements for transit-user comfort, including new Normandie Station. street trees and lighting. A Rolling Lane is added to the street with room for multiple speeds of active Station Access Barriers transportation users. Crossings are enhanced with Continental stripes. Safety • Located along a high-speed traffic corridor • Lack of pedestrian lighting within one-half mile radius • Unmarked crossings Aesthetics • Sparse landscaping along residential connector streets • Trash strewn along streets/lack of overall maintenance Lack of bicycle facilities Accessibility • Crowded sidewalks • Long crossing wait time and long distances between crossings Unclear transit transfer/directional signage • • Lack of bicycle lanes—bicyclists riding on crowded sidewalks Lack of secure bike parking • Narrow sidewalks Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 64

69 iLLUSTRAT ONS i first last mile strategic plan 6 3rd St 3rd St Wilshire/Normandie Station Normandie Ave N o r ma Western Ave n Network Design di Vermont Ave Vermont Ave e Ave Catalina St Catalina St 6th St 6th St Western Ave Utilizing the approach outlined in Chapter Wilshire Blvd M M Wilshire Blvd ! Irolo St 3 of these guidelines, a Pathway network Irolo St 8th St 8th St design was developed for the Wilshire/ Normandie Station Area. The Metro Red Line runs east–west along this corridor Street Grid Points of Interest Pedestrian Shed underground, thus it is beneficial to run ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! 3rd St a Pathway Arterial north–south along ( ! 3rd St ! ( 3rd St ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! < < ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ( ! ! ! ( ! ( ! < < ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! Normandie Ave ! ( ( ! N Western Ave o N r Catalina St ! ( ! ( ma Normandie. To the south, the Arterial jogs ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( o ! ( Vermont Ave Western Ave Vermont Ave Catalina St ! ( r ma ! ( n ! ( ( ! di Vermont Ave n e Ave ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( di over to Harvard Blvd, to coordinate with ( ! ( ! ( ! e Ave 6th St 6th St ! ( 6th St ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( the current bikeway planned along that Wilshire Blvd ! ( Wilshire Blvd Wilshire Blvd ! ( M ! ( M ! ( ! Western Ave M ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! < ( ( ! ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! Catalina St ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( Irolo St ! ( ! ( Irolo St street. The major east–west Arterial runs Irolo St ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( 8th St ! ( ( ! 8th St 8th St ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( along Wilshire, given the high level of bike ! ( ! ( ( ! ! < ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! < ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! and pedestrian access volume along this ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! < ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! major street. Vehicular volumes are also ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( < ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! < ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! Collision Severity and High Vehicular Key Transit Access very high along this corridor, requiring Speeds Corridors Location careful consideration of how best to utilize 3rd St 3rd St 3rd St Normandie Ave Western Ave available ROW. Western Ave N N Catalina St Vermont Ave Catalina St o o Western Ave r r ma ma Vermont Ave n n di di e Ave e Ave 6th St 6th St 6th St A dense network of Collectors is provided Wilshire Blvd Wilshire Blvd Wilshire Blvd M M M ! ! ! Catalina St Vermont Ave within the station area as extensive Irolo St Irolo St Irolo St mitigation is required given the high 8th St 8th St 8th St incidence of pedestrian collisions and overall access volumes. Transit Connections Land-Use Map Bicycle Connections I 65 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG

70 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 , Location 1 Wilshire Normandie Station Wilshire Blvd. and S. Normandie Ave. 3 4 Before 1 2 7 5 6 8 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings Enhancements and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks 2 Scramble crossings Signage and Wayfinding 3 Medallion signage 4 Real-time signage, next train/bus 5 Curb-edge banding 6 Smart technologies Safety and Comfort 7 Street furniture ntegrated Transit Access Solutions i Metro Station Location 8 Bike Share Visualization Location i ON ZONE (Area 1) EXTENDED STAT 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike ANS T r i T- fri ENDLY ZONE (Area 2) 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014 I 66

71 iLLUSTRAT ONS i first last mile strategic plan 6 Wilshire Normandie Station, Location 2 8th St. and Fedora St. 5 4 Before 2 3 1 6 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings Enhancements and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks Signage and Wayfinding 2 Medallion signage 3 Time-to-station notation Safety and Comfort 4 Landscaping/Shade 5 Lighting Allocation of the Streetspace Rolling Lane 6 Metro Station Location Visualization Location i ON ZONE (Area 1) EXTENDED STAT 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike ANS T r i T- fri ENDLY ZONE (Area 2) 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 67 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I MARCH 2014

72 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 North Hollywood Station The North Hollywood Station serves as a critical connector for the Metro Red Line and the Orange Line Bus. The Red Line directly connects to the Downtown Los Angeles terminus, while the Orange Line Bus Terminal connects directly east to Ventura. The station lies in the center of the North Hollywood (NoHo) Arts District. Additionally, the station is adjacent to the Hollywood Art Institute campus and a lively retail and housing district. The North Hollywood Station serves a vast demographic and has significant catchment potential within the surrounding region. Also located within the one-half mile pedestrian shed is NoHo Park, which draws daily visitors. Currently, the park does not offer enough seating and does not have a welcoming street-edge nor clear pathways through it. No cut through/direct access to station from adjacent neighborhoods Station Access Barriers Safety • Lack of separated bicycle infrastructure along main roads Superblocks with minimal pedestrian crossings • Aesthetics Sometimes unpleasant pedestrian environment • Accessibility Orange and Red Lines stops face different directions • and connections between the two are unclear Lack of crossings along superblocks and bike • There is potential for alternative mode enhancement: facility without special markings or enhancements bicycle racks and Park-and-Rides are often full • Limited station signage or directional signage • Large park and ride facility is hard to get through on foot, bike, or via other active transportation mode • Lack of secure bike parking Overview of p roposed p athway Network Four case study locations are depicted for the North Hollywood station. Location 1 depicts enhancements to the park-and-ride lot at the station. Location 2 depicts the intersection of Klump Avenue and Burbank Boulevard, which is located in the Transit Friendly Zone, along the No station signage or directional cues intersection of a Pathway Collector and a Pathway Arterial. Location 3 depicts the Pathway in an underpass condition at Magnolia Avenue and Location 4 includes a Pathway shortcut at NoHo Park, also along Magnolia. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 68

73 iLLUSTRAT i ONS first last mile strategic plan 6 North Hollywood Station L L a Network Design Vineland Ave an n Vineland Ave k Burbank Blvd k Burbank Blvd ersh ershim im Bl Blvd v d Utilizing the approach outlined in Chapter M M ! Chandler Blvd Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Tujunga Ave 3 of these guidelines, a Pathway network Magnolia Blvd Magnolia Blvd design was developed for the North SR 170 Fwy S R 170 F Hollywood Station Area. The Metro w y Red Line comes in from the east and Points of Interest Pedestrian Shed Street Grid terminates at this station underground; ! ( ( ! ! ( the Orange line also terminates here, Vineland Ave ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! arriving at grade from the west. Pathway ! ( La Burbank Blvd ( ! Burbank Blvd n Burbank Blvd ! ( L kersh Vineland Ave La an ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( arterials run east – west along Chandler, n k kersh ershim ! ( Vineland Ave im ! ( ( ! B im lv ( ! ! ( Blvd ! ( d north through the Metro parking lot Chandler Blvd B ( ! ! ( ! ( lv ! ( ! ( ! ( M ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! M ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( M ! ( d ! ! ! ! ( Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave ! ( Chandler Blvd SR 17 Tujunga Ave SR 170 Fwy ! ( ( ! ( ! SR 170 Fwy ( ! linking to Elmer, south along Tujunga, and ! ( ! ( 0 Fwy ( ! ( ! Tujunga Ave Magnolia Blvd Magnolia Blvd Magnolia Blvd ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( cutting through North Hollywood Park ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ( to the southwest and the Metro Parking ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( lot to the northeast. Cut-throughs (refer ( ! ! ( High Vehicular Collision Severity and Key Transit Access to p. 32) provide critical time saving Corridors Location Speeds improvements for these heavily utilized stations. La Vineland Ave La Vineland Ave Vineland Ave La n n n kersh Burbank Blvd kersh Burbank Blvd kersh Burbank Blvd im im im B B B lv lv lv d d d M M M ! ! ! Chandler Blvd Chandler Blvd Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Tujunga Ave Tujunga Ave S SR 170 Fwy SR 170 Fwy R 170 Fw y Magnolia Blvd Magnolia Blvd Magnolia Blvd Land-Use Map Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 69 MARCH 2014

74 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 At Location 3 , the freeway underpass is fairly Location 1 is the closest to the station itself and illustrates how an existing Park-and-Ride lot can be typical of current conditions around Los Angeles; made more friendly to active transportation users, with narrow sidewalks and a wide street are dimly-lit and no the addition of pedestrian and active transportation pedestrian amenities are provided. The Pathway would improve this situation, providing a widened sidewalk cut-throughs that allow people to come in to the facility at multiple entrances, whereas currently access and bollards along the curb edge for an enhanced perception of safety. Public art, new lighting, and is limited to the vehicular entrance on the north and special paving are also added, along with Pathway east sides only. The cut-throughs are designed with signage with time-to-station notation. trees and lighting for safety and comfort, and special paving to demarcate the active transportation space. A new crossing at Klump Avenue facilitates pedestrian depicts an area of NoHo Park that has Location 4 movement into the station from the neighborhood. a short-cut to the Metro station, which is currently un-signed. The Pathway enhancements chosen for this area include easily-visible signage directing people Location 2 along Burbank Boulevard illustrates an through the park toward the station, new lighting for enhanced intersection with bulb-outs at corners and nighttime safety, and repairs to the sidewalk. new signalized crossing. Currently the space between crossings along this stretch of Burbank Boulevard is over 1,700 feet while a comfortable distance between crossings is around 300 feet. Adding crossings in this area will help to expand the reach of transit for the neighborhoods immediately to the north. Pathway signage directs transit riders down Klump Avenue, which connects directly to the station. 2 1 34 Visualization Locations: 1 Park-and-Ride Lot 2 Burbank Blvd and Klump Ave 3 NoHo Park 4 Magnolia Ave Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 70

75 iLLUSTRAT ONS i first last mile strategic plan 6 , Location 1 North Hollywood Station Park-and-Ride Lot Before 3 6 4 5 1 2 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks 2 Mid-block and additional crossings 3 Cut-throughs (multi-modal pathways through existing parking lot) Safety and Comfort 4 Landscaping/Shade 5 Lighting Allocation of the Streetspace 6 Sidewalk widening (through parking lot) Metro Station Location Visualization Location EXTENDED STAT (Area 1) i ON ZONE 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike fri T r ANS i T- ENDLY ZONE (Area 2) 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike MARCH 2014 71 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG

76 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 North Hollywood Station, Location 2 Burbank Blvd. and Klump Ave. 7 3 Before 4 6 5 2 1 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks 2 Bulb-Outs Signage and Wayfinding 3 Medallion signage Safety and Comfort 4 Landscaping/Shade 5 Dual curb ramps ntegrated Transit Access Solutions i 6 Car share 7 Signal modification Metro Station Location Visualization Location EXTENDED STAT i ON ZONE (Area 1) 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike r T (Area 2) ANS i T- fri ENDLY ZONE 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014 72

77 iLLUSTRAT i ONS first last mile strategic plan 6 North Hollywood Station, Location 3 Magnolia Ave. Underpass Before 7 3 6 4 2 1 8 5 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks Signage and Wayfinding 2 Signage 3 Medallion signage 4 Time to station notation 5 Curb-edge banding Safety and Comfort 6 Lighting 7 Enhanced freeway underpass Allocation of the Streetscape 8 Sidewalk widening Metro Station Location Visualization Location (Area 1) i EXTENDED STAT ON ZONE 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike (Area 2) T- ENDLY ZONE fri i ANS r T 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro 73 MARCH 2014

78 ILLUSTRATIONS first last mile strategic plan 6 Notes: North Hollywood Station, Location 4 NoHo Park at Magnolia Avenue Before 8 10 11 4 5 3 6 2 1 7 9 After Components Used at Case Study Site Crossings and Connections 1 Continental crosswalks 2 Cut-through and shortcuts Signage and Wayfinding 3 Signage 4 Medallion signage 5 Time-to-station notation Safety and comfort 6 Street furniture 7 Landscaping 8 Lighting Allocation of the Streetspace 9 Sidewalk widening Metro Station Location ntegrated Transit Access Solutions i Visualization Location 10 Car share EXTENDED STAT i ON ZONE (Area 1) 11 Park-and-Ride 5-Minute Walk/2-Minute Bike T- (Area 2) i ENDLY ZONE r T fri ANS This page intentionally left blank. 10-Minute Walk/5-Minute Bike Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 74

79 iLLUSTRAT ONS i first last mile strategic plan 6 Notes: This page intentionally left blank. I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 75

80 STRATEGIES FOR PLAN APPLICATION first last mile strategic plan 7 O CAT ON i ST r ATEG i ES f L r i p LAN A pp 7 Sustainability is a core business value of Metro and touches all transportation efforts undertaken by the agency. Metro’s sustainability policy has been formally articulated and adopted as part of the Metro Countywide Sustainability Policy & Implementation Plan (CSPP). This First Last Mile Strategy has been developed in conformance with that policy, and furthers implementation efforts outlined as part of that document. This chapter includes an Implementation Table that outlines next-step efforts that will foster collaboration among Metro and partner agencies in furthering stated plan goals and objectives. Also included are Pathway targets that can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies as they are considered, designed and implemented. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 76

81 strategies for plan application first last mile strategic plan 7 i mplementation Table: 77 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG MARCH 2014

82 STRATEGIES FOR PLAN APPLICATION first last mile strategic plan 7 Evaluating Goals idership Metro r The setting of evaluation targets helps guide resource The Pathway aims to increase ridership by improving allocation with respect to meeting strategic goals, access conditions, and uses strategies that also and provides a rationalized benchmark against which support the development of transit supportive improvements can be evaluated. This Strategic Plan land uses (through the place making attributes of states a set of specific goals which include: improvements), quality of service (through better multi-modal integration), human health and wellness 1. Expand the reach of transit through (by focusing on active transportation improvements infrastructure improvements. strategies) and equitable investment (by focusing on improvements that support the transit dependant 2. Maximize multi-modal benefits and efficiencies. population). As noted in Chapter 3, the Pathway does so by expanding access user sheds, and by 3. Build on the RTP/SCS and Countywide improving the transit user experience. Implementation Sustainable Planning Policy (multi-modal, green, of Pathway networks in Metro Rail and BRT station equitable and smart). areas will directly and indirectly increase ridership both at individual stations and system-wide. Realization of the first goal noted above can be evaluated based on changes to metrics related to Setting targets for ridership can be based in part on ridership. This data is tracked by Metro on a monthly predictive modeling; however, travel behavior affected basis, is readily available, and easy to comprehend, by qualitative environmental changes are much more making it an ideal data-set for measuring improvement difficult to predict using quantitative tools. For example, performance. though it logically follows that pedestrians may be more willing to walk along a sidewalk that feels safe at night, The second strategic goal reinforces the use of there are no tools available to transportation planners ridership as a key metric. Trips in the county are that allow for the accurate prediction of just how many inherently multi-modal in nature, focusing too carefully more potential transit riders in a given neighborhood on singular modes (i.e. bike/pedestrian/bus mode will walk to stations past dark if pedestrian lights are splits) discounts the fact that most Metro riders are installed along primary access routes. Pilot project using multiple modes to complete their journeys. programming should include a process for pre and post project evaluation of such improvements to The third goal helps focus strategies relative to provide planners better predictive modeling tools for broader policy efforts. Implementation strategies have qualitative improvements. third party affects, referred to as externalities. These externalities may be positive or negative in nature relative to regional and state policy goals, of which Metro is a custodian. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 78

83 strategies for plan application first last mile strategic plan 7 Targets A detailed mapping and modeling exercise was • Finally, long term resultant ridership to increases undertaken for the three case study sites presented from additional development that would naturally in this report. The process included the modeling of occur around Pathway networks. Pathway networks existing active transportation network routes in the suggested in these planning guidelines are by their station areas, including sidewalks and street crossings. nature place-making, and would improve conditions for The limits of existing access sheds based on how development wherever implemented. These marginal far people could walk in a given time frame were place-making improvements would build on regional mapped. Proposed Pathway improvements including efforts that aim to support development within station new sidewalks, cut-through routes, mid-block or eas. Target 4% (20 Year) ar new crossings and pedestrian prioritized signals were modeled providing a larger revised access shed. A A preliminary Metro Rail and BRT ridership increase multiplier was factored with the population falling target resultant from Pathway improvements for the within the added shed areas thus providing a rational short term (3-5 years) and the long term (20 year) time prediction of ridership changes. Predictive ridership horizons can be developed by adding together the increases associated with these improvements ranged above noted targets: from 1.5 to 4% at the stations reviewed. Target 3% Metro lan Goals p irst Last Mile Strategic f Predictive modeling is not sufficient on its own to 3- to 5-year target – 8% increase in Rail and BRT analyze critical factors that would each play an ridership important role in increasing ridership. These additional considerations include: 20-year target – 12% increase in Rail and BRT ridership estimation of transit use by discretionary The riders • within transit access sheds resultant from qualitative For perspective, the Expo Line which cost environmental access improvements. This could approximately $800 million has increased system Rail potentially equal or even surpass those ridership and BRT ridership by approximately 2.5%. A high level increases suggested by the quantitative modeling. review of potential costs of Pathway improvements at Target 3% the case study sites indicated costs of implementation ranging from $5 to $12 million per station. From a increases resultant from • The capture of ridership dollar/rider perspective, implementation of this plan the support of much more geographically significant represents a cost effective means to increase the non-pedestrian active transportation users (i.e. reach of transit as measured by ridership. Of further bicyclists, skateboarders, scooter riders, electric note, these increases would largely come from active assisted devices). Currently the mode share of such transportation modes that by their nature support users remains small, but the concerted effort to provide human health and wellness, clean air, place-making facilities that support the use of these devices could dramatically extend the access shed’s geographic and equitable access. reach due to the r elative high speeds of these mobility Target 1% devices. • made improvements the to due ridership in Increases to multi-modal transfer operations and efficiencies. The provision of Pathway routes that would allow for plug-in mobility solutions (i.e. mobility hubs) and increased efficiencies of bus to rail transfers, would contribute to measurable ridership increases. Target 1% 79 MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro

84 APPENDIX I P c I AN f I rst l A st m g l E str A t E l A Notes: This page intentionally left blank. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro MARCH 2014 Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG I 80

85 APPENDIX A A st mile str A tegic pl first l n A APPENDI x FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN CONTENTS : S A REA CHECKLIST(S) TATION GRAPHIC NOVEL P EVIEW C ONTE x T R LANNING ITES S TUDY ASE S C OST E STIMATE T ECHNICAL M EMORANDUM C M CCESS ODAL A T ARGETS T ECHNICAL M EMORANDUM EVICES D OBILITY OF M T A x ONOMY MARCH 2014 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority - Metro I Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG 81

86

87

88

89

90

91 Sounds good, I haven’t been to LACMA in a while...the Pathway? Hmm...I’ll check it out. See you soon! The Meet-Up! The Meet-Up! In sunny downtown LA, we join Jeff In sunny downtown LA, we join Jeff in the middle of making plans to in the middle of making plans to catch up with his long-time friend Bret... catch up with his long-time friend Bret... M M 5 min 10 min Jeff sets off on the pathway, following the signs to get to his nearest Metro station. A short and speedy Metro ride later... Ready to spend Ready to spend And with a quick look at the Jeff is off biking! a great day a great day Metro pylon to find the with his friend! with his friend! nearest bike share program... bike share metro station RL

92 The Team Trip! The Team Trip! After being named the new junior soccer After being named the new junior soccer 08 04 22 league champions,the team decides to celebrate league champions,the team decides to celebrate 80 10 with a treat - ice cream ! with a treat - ice cream ! ended a bit late, Even though the game safe route pedestrian lights provide a pathway’s the . Push to Walk Meanwhile, Coach makes Meanwhile, Coach makes car share reservations. car share reservations. I hope they have rocky road! Did you see that goal?! Metro The goalie didn’t stand a chance! Home > Transit Transfers Car Share Bus Bike Share Locating nearest car share ...or thinking about On the train, the boys ice cream which flavor still can’t stop talking they want. great game... about their e h T Ice cream sandwich Brownie ice cream sandwich Strawberry sundae Car e r m y a e Chocolate sundae r Sprinkles Turtle sundae C Share Vanilla sundae Marshmallows Cookie monster sundae Chocolate shake Banana split Cherries Strawberry banana sundae Caramel Sauce 08 The Creamery The Creamery 10 80 80 10 22 They pick up their car... ...and get their sweet treats!

93 Grandma to the Rescue! I’m on my way! Grandma to the Rescue! has just been recieved at LA Weekly, hard-hitting story A hard-hitting story has just been recieved at LA Weekly, A and Julia won’t be able to pick up her kids on time. and Julia won’t be able to pick up her kids on time. Mom! Can you pick up the kids? who to call... But she knows who to call... But she knows Grandma sets off on her scooter! Scooter! Grandma RL Push to Walk RL elevated crosswalks Ramps Ramps and elevated crosswalks moving safe keep her safe and moving And the metro station, An elevator gets her to the platform Once inside the metro, she can recharge her scooter during the ride. Race you home Grandma!

94 I need to be in the office Pop Meeting! Pop Meeting! in 20 minutes. Can you drop me off at the Metro station? It’s breakfast at the Lim’s, It’s breakfast at the Lim’s, urgent and Kate recieved an and Kate recieved an urgent call office... from the office... call from the Planning Context Review In perfect time to make her meeting. Green Zone Green Zone prepare for her meeting. Kate has extra time to prepare for her meeting. Kate, you made it! Task 3.1 – Review RTP/SCS Task 4.2 - Best Practices Compilation & Review IBI Group January 2013

95 Planning Context Review Task 3.1 – Review RTP/SCS Task 4.2 - Best Practices Compilation & Review IBI Group January 2013

96 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Contents 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 2012-2040 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY STRATEGY 10 THE LAND USE PATTERN 12 THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK 14 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT 15 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT 17 COUNTYWIDE SUSTAINABILITY PLANNING POLICY 19 METRO’S LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 20 SHORT RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 21 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN 22 CREATING SUCCESSFUL TRANSIT-ORIENTED DISTRICTS IN LOS ANGELES 23 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES REPORT 24 METRO EASTSIDE ACCESS PROJECT 25 MAIN STREETS FOR TRAVELERS AND COMMUNITIES 26 METRO STATION DESIGN REVIEW 27 COMPASS BLUEPRINT 28 LOS ANGELES COUNTY MODEL DESIGN MANUAL FOR LIVING STREETS 29 ACTIVE DESIGN GUIDELINES: PROMOTING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND HEALTH IN DESIGN 31 WALKABLE AND LIVABLE COMMUNITITES INSTITUTE: WALKABILITY WORKBOOK 32 ACTIVE LIVING BY DESIGN Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 2 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

97 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Planning Context Review Executive Summary State-Wide Policy Context California’s Assembly Bill 32, The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, was the first statewide plan enacted to mandate reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. The legislation requires the State to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by or before 2020. It also directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which establishes targets for 2020 and 2035 for each region covered by one of the State’s 18 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), to develop discrete early actions to reduce greenhouse gases and to prepare a scoping plan to identify how best to reach the 2020 target. Senate Bill 375, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, was enacted in 2008 in response to AB 32 as the legal mechanism to achieve greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. SB 75 is a state law that requires the metropolitan regions of the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through their planning process and enhances California’s ability to reach its AB 32 goals by promoting sustainable community planning, most notably by making explicit the link between land use and transportation planning policies. Regional Policy Context- 2012 RTP/SCS The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the planning authority for six counties: Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura; and is the lead agency in facilitating the development of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). SCAG’s RTP is a comprehensive long-range transportation plan that identifies transportation strategies to address the mobility needs of Southern California. The RTP must be updated every four years in order to qualify the region’s transportation projects for federal and state funding. In 2012 SCAG updated the RTP and included a Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) to facilitate the requirements of SB 375. Combined with the RTP, the SCS is a vision for growth based on mobility, economy, and sustainability. The 2012 RTP/SCS provides the foundation for an effective First Last Mile Strategy. Chapter 01 outlines a vision for the region and includes a clear definition of mobility: A successful transportation plan allows the residents of the region to access daily needs, including work, school, shopping, and recreation, without undue burdens of cost, time, or physical danger. This includes the pressing need to preserve and maintain our infrastructure at adequate levels. Residents should be able to rely on their ability to get from one place in the region to another in a safe and timely manner. They should be able to choose from a variety of transportation modes that suit their preferences and needs, including active, non-motorized modes such as biking and walking that allow for physical activity and greater health. 2012 Regional Transportation Plan, p.12 Future Context The regions daily access needs will become even more pressing, as Los Angeles County expands over the next 30 years. As Southern California pulls out of the recession, and the economy is on the mend, we are reminded how critical a functional transit system is to allow residents access to a wide range of job markets. The region is expected to grow by 4 million people in the next 30 years, and with it will bring a growing demand to move both people and goods. There are a number of factors that will contribute to Los Angeles County’s ability to address the new demand, as it relates to demographic changes, economy, mobility, and a sustainable future. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 3 I IBI Group June 2013 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

98 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Not only will the region see a significant increase in the population in the next 30 years, but the aging Baby Boomer generation will increase the share of the 65+ population from 11% to 18% by 2035, and the working-age population will decrease. These shifts will increase the labor forces’ dependency on transit, and increase the demand for development types such as multifamily and infill housing in centralized locations. The region plans to add over 1.5 million households, of which over 50% will be within High-Quality Transit Zones (HQTAs); this development pattern will rely on the addition of jobs near transit to balance the job-housing ratio, and provide complete communities with access to transit to all segments of the population. Transportation Investments and Measure R Investing in transportation infrastructure throughout Southern California in the coming years is a strategy to improve the regions mobility while re-invigorating its economic vitality. According to the 2012 RTP/SCS, over 174,500 new jobs will be generated by construction and operations, and an additional 354,000 jobs will be created annually in the broad cross-section of industries that will result from increased competitiveness throughout the region. This expansion, utilizing Measure R funding, will include dozens of critical transit and highway projects, Metro Link and Metro Rail Line extensions, and larger intercity rail service increases to support the region’s growing transportation demand while infusing an estimated $32 billion back into the local economy. Metro Expansion and Sustainabilitly Los Angeles County Transportation Authority (Metro) is taking an active role in responding the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets with the approval of the Health and Active Transportation Motion (April 2011) and the development of the Active Transportation Agenda (November 2011). These efforts represent first steps in creating a standard of excellence for design across the agency that will ensure that all types of transportation investments contribute to a future urban form that encourages walking, biking, and transit use. The Agenda includes eight objectives to advance active transportation which are addressed by the advancement of new short and longer-term strategies. The Health and Active Transportation Motion recognizes the goals of the Sustainable Communities Strategy, a component of SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan, as opportunities to establish transit-supportive land-use patterns and improve regional accessibility with low-cost, non-polluting alternatives. Metro, through this motion, supports creating healthier and more sustainable communities with alternatives to driving that incorporate physical activity into daily life. The First Last Mile Strategic Plan advances the objectives established by Metro’s Board to promote active transportation, and implements Metro’s Active Transportation Agenda by providing technical analysis to support the development of an Active Transportation and Design Policy by May 2013. The Plan will provide a framework for strategically investing Metro resources and the basis for seeking additional funds to extend the station area and expand the reach of transit in communities. The underlying land use, socioeconomic, and transportation data provided in existing documents are key components to the technical analysis that support the expansion of the transportation network and design policies that improve first mile/last mile connectivity. Developed by regional players, such as institutions, government agencies, and metropolitan planning organizations, the reviewed documents include policy, process, implementation, funding, and reference design guidelines. Following this introduction are summaries of a number of important planning documents starting with a more detailed look at the 2012 RTP/SCS. The First Last Mile Strategy exists in a context of on-going planning efforts; the ability to build on the ideas and efforts of regional and national planners and designers will only strengthen the work. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 4 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

99 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Southern California Association of Governments ADOPTED APRIL 2012 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) April 2012 The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is a long-range transportation plan that is developed and updated by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) every four years. The RTP provides a vision for transportation investments throughout the region. The Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) is a newly required element of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The SCS will integrate land use and transportation strategies that will achieve CARB emissions reduction targets. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 5 IBI Group June 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

100 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review The region wastes over [3 million] hours each year sitting in traffic [21%] of all traffic-related fatalities involve pedestrians State and federal gas taxes have not change in nearly [20] years Yet, highway construction costs have grown by [82%] Rail operating costs have increased by over [40%] in the past decade Intercity transit operators have been forced to cut service by up to [20%] The Regional Transportation Plan provides the framework for land use, socioeconomic data, and transportation analysis that are key components to the technical analysis of the existing and future transportation network. The success of land-use and transportation changes, outlined in the RTP/SCS, will be largely driven by respective actions of local governments and transportation commission’s such as Metro. Engagement with a larger scope of strategies will be critical in order for the region to experience long-term benefits. SCAG performed a careful analysis of the transportation network, including outreach with stakeholder agencies and planning sessions with residents, which culminated into a shared vision for the region’s sustainable future. The vision has been shaped by many entities, and is addressed Southern California’s mobility, economy, and sustainability. Southern California is currently home to 18 million people, and is considered by some to be crowded, congested, and expensive. Over the next 25 years Southern California is expected to accommodate an additional 4 million people, putting additional pressure on the already congested transportation system, communities and neighborhoods, and the environment. The economic downturn (with the loss of 800,000 jobs in the region) will continue to impact housing options for Southern California residents, effecting their commute choices and frequency. Exacerbating this increase in commuter trips, projected population growth for the region will occur primarily in suburban counties, furthering the imbalance of the jobs to housing ratio in those areas. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 I IBI Group J u n e 2013 6 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

101 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has prepared Regional Transportation Plans (RTPS) for the past three decades, increasing mobility for the region has always been the primary goal; however, the regions current challenges require the accommodation of additional growth, while providing improved quality of life, a resilient economy, and a healthy environment. The challenges facing the region are expansive; the region’s roadways are the most congested in the nation, multi-modal fatality rates are high, the air quality is poor, and the costs provide major obstacles. To address these challenges, SCAG has worked with the key regional players to create a vision of growth based on mobility, livability, prosperity, and sustainability. This vision is included in the RTP as the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS); the SCS considers the transportation needs of the growing region and the planned transportation network to set forth a future land use pattern that will help meet GHG emission reduction targets in compliance with federal law for developing an RTP. The RTP/SCS builds on the backbone of the region’s economic well-being, the multimodal transportation system that the region has invested in over the past few decades. THE SYSTEM AT A GLANCE [21,690] miles of highways and arterials [470] miles of passenger rail [6] air carrier airports THE REGION IN MOTION [446 million] miles driven each day [81 million] air passengers each year more urban rail riders between 2000-2006 [45%] [34%] of our jobs depend on the goods movement industry Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group J u n e 2013 I 7 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

102 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review The SCS takes an integrated approach to addressing the regions challenges, with strategies that respond to projected growth, housing needs, changing demographics, and transportation demands. The goals of the SCS reach beyond the reduction of GHG emissions by building on and refining the regional blueprint that SCAG began in 2000, addressing ongoing issues such as placemaking, the cost of living, the environment, health, responsiveness to the marketplace, and mobility. The proposed transportation network expansion is supported by the land use development pattern, which focuses new housing and job growth in high-quality transit areas, and the transportation demand management measures in the SCS. The SCS addresses the needs of the region, by utilizing broader definitions of mobility, economy, and sustainability; where the integration of land use planning and transportation provide improved access, create jobs, and reduces GHG emissions through not only the expansion of the transportation network, but the redistribution of residencies, commercial corridors, and industry clusters and the efficiency of movement of goods and people throughout the region. Offering a variety of transportation modes to suit all preferences and needs, the plan proposes over $524 billion of investment in the next 25 years, constituting the largest infrastructure jobs program in Southern California’s history. To guide these investments through projects, programs, and strategies, the SCS has specific goals that carry out the vision that reflect the wide range of challenges identified. The following goals have been approved by the RTP Subcommittee, and will adopted by the Regional Council as part of the 2012-2035 RTP/SCS: We will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by [9%] by 2020, and by by 2035 [16%] jobs per year [500,000] We will generate Over [twice] as many households will live near high-quality transit We will get [$2.90] back for evey $1 spent Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 I IBI Group J u n e 2013 8 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

103 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review The RTP/SCS is a performance-based plan that allows the regional goals to be quantified and investment impacts to be estimated, and re-evaluated over time. The performance measurements are based on previous successes and will be refined and expanded upon to meet policy objectives, as needed. Utilizing local general plans, recent planning assumptions, and the two sub-regional Sustainable Communities Strategies prepared by the Gateway Cities Council of Governments (GCCOG) and Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG), the SCS was developed around four key building blocks: land use, transportation networks, transportation demand management, and transportation system management programs and policies. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group J u n e 2013 I 9 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

104 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review The Land Use Pattern accommodates the region’s future employment and housing needs and protects sensitive habitat and resource areas while planning for additional housing and jobs near transit. The land use pattern was developed using five community types and Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) to identify localized effects of the interaction of land use and transportation. The resulting policies consider density of residential areas, centrality of employment districts, convergence of transit facilities, capacity of non-auto infrastructure, and multi-modal connectivity such as active transportation. These components are used to develop land use patterns with additional High-Quality Transit Areas (HQTA) where jobs and housing are within a walkable distance to a transit village, within a half-mile of a well-serviced transit stop, and which include transit corridors with frequent service during peak commute hours. HQTAs provide the framework for new land use zones such as “Pedestrian-Oriented Transit Zones” (POTs). The SCS outlines requirements that lay a regional policy foundation for local governments to build upon, which integrate transportation and land use strategies to meet GHG-reduction targets. Local governments should: Identify existing land use, • accommodate long-term housing needs, • Identify areas to • Identify areas to accommodate an eight-year projection of regional housing needs, Identify transportation needs and the planned transportation network, • • Consider resource areas and farmland, • Consider state housing goals and objectives, • Set forth a forecasted growth and development pattern, and The review of local plans and subregional strategies identified recent trends that support the goals of the SCS with an overall land use pattern. Along with planning for additional housing and jobs near transit, the land use plan allows for changing demands in types of housing, ensures adequate access to open space, and continues to incorporate local input for future growth. The land use pattern accommodates approximately 644,000 additional households by 2020, and an additional 1.5 million households by 2035, while encouraging a more balances job to housing ration by adding 676,000 jobs by 2020 and 1.7 million by 2035. The integrated land use and transportation planning strategy outlined in the SCS allows for better place making, lower costs to taxpayers, public health and environmental improvements, and a responsiveness to the economic climate, reaching a broader scope of goals than improvement to access and mobility alone. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group J u n e 2013 I 10 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

105 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 11 IBI Group J u n e 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 © Southern California Association of Governments

106 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN The transportation network consists of public transit, highways, local streets, bikeways, and walkways. Creation of HQTAs, called for by the land use pattern, requires an expansion of the public transportation and transit service on new and existing routes to create greater accessibility and connectivity throughout the region. Measures to ensure the expansion of the transportation network supportive of the land use plan include adding new corridors and lengthening existing ones in Los Angeles County through Measure R, providing additional travel options for long distance travel within the region and neighboring regions, improving technology along existing highways and local streets, and increasing the active transportation network. The expansion of the transportation network will include highways, local arterials, bus transit, active transportation, light rail transit, high-speed and passenger rail, and transit facilities. Even with the focus of transportation currently on the reduction of single-occupancy vehicle trips, the addition of highways and arterials will still need improvements. There are critical gaps which hinder access to isolated parts of the region and cause congestion chokepoints elsewhere in the network. Transit facilities and services will also be expanded over the next 25 years. The envisioned rail network will add entirely new corridors and lengthen existing corridors, as well as supplement and host new bus rapid transit (BRT) routes and Metro link lines. The expansion includes frequency, encouraging targeted corridors and larger spans of service in TOD and HQTA areas. Active transportation networks are an essential part of the regional transportation system and will see some of the largest expansion of a transportation network in the region over the next 25 years. They are low cost, reduce roadway congestion, and increase health and quality of life. The RTP/SCS calls for an expansion of the public transportation network and transit services (i.e., public transit, highways, local streets, bikeways, and walkways) on new and existing routes to create greater accessibility and connectivity throughout the Los Angeles region. Active transportation will receive a total of $6.7 billion in available revenues - an increase of more than 200% over the 2008 RTP. Increasing the use of active modes of transportation will require bicycle and pedestrian facility maintenance, easy access to transit facilities, and safety improvements. Dedicated bicycle facilities require expansion in the region (7,154 miles planned), and established sidewalks will undergo streetscape improvements to improve pedestrian environments. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group J u n e 2013 I 12 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

107 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 13 IBI Group J u n e 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 © Southern California Association of Governments

108 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategies are key to any transportation network and provide the approach and policies necessary to reduce and redistribute travel demand, specifically of single- occupancy vehicles, spatially and temporally. Extensive TDM strategies that support the expected land use development patterns will increase the usability and effectiveness of the active transportation system. TDM strategies will receive a total of $4.5 billion in available revenues - an increase of more than 200% over the 2008 RTP - in order to close gaps in the regional bikeway network, bring the majority of the sidewalks and intersections in the region into American with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance, expand parking cash-out programs in urban areas, and promote Guaranteed Ride Home programs. Employment of strategies, such as incentives to reduce solo driving, which increase the usability and effectiveness of the active transportation systemand first-last mile amenities will allow travelers to easily connect to transit service at their origins and destinations.TDM funding can be used to develop mobility hubs around major transit stations, integrate bicycle and transit by providing bicycle racks on buses, and provide dedicated bicycle racks on light and heavy rail vehicles. Safety is a main priority for transportation demand management in active transportation networks with cyclists; cyclists range from “vehicular cyclists” that are fully confident on most surfaces and in traffic flows to “no way, no how” cyclists that are not interested in bicycling for transportation and may not ride at all. This broad range of rider types makes filling in the bikeway network gaps very important to ensure all levels of cyclists can safely and comfortably navigate to and from their destinations. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 I IBI Group J u n e 2013 14 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 © Southern California Association of Governments

109 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Transportation System Management (TSM) measures maximize the efficiency of the transportation network and support the land use patterns of the RTP/SCS by increasing capacity and improving operation efficiency of the transit network with strategies such as universal transit fare cards, traffic signal synchronization, transit automatic vehicle locations (AVL), and advanced traveler information. System accessibility and safety are addressed by TSM measures as are traffic flow and air quality. The primary measures for TSM in the SCS are enhancing incident management, advanced ramp metering, corridor system management plans, traffic signal synchronization, and improved data collection. Making these improvements will contribute to improved traffic flow, better air quality, and system accessibility and safety. Maximizing the existing transportation system reduces the need for costly system expansions while alleviateing congestion and reducing accidents. TSM will be key in the economic vitality of the region, as it plays an increasing larger role in the movement of goods throughout the region. System efficiency at the ports and intermodal operations will reduce delays and wait times, assisting in meeting the larger goals of emission reduction. TSM measures also serve the public, providing real-time traffic conditions and alternative routes or transportation options. The measures are not only focused on auto-centric technology, but improvement of efficiency at transit user interfaces, such as purchasing transit tickets. Comprehensive user statistics, demographics, bicycle travel patterns, accident mapping, and project funding needs are types of ongoing data collection that will be needed to help plan for increases in active transportation investments. All transportation planning projects will need to consider an increase in bicycle and pedestrian accommodations, multi- modal planning, programming, and design. The accommodation by all transportation planning efforts should, in effect, increase active transportation use and safety while accomplishing the environmental and congestion reduction goals that concern the entire region. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 15 I IBI Group J u n e 2013 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 © Southern California Association of Governments

110 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review For the first time, SCAG has integrated land use, housing and environmental strategies with transportation planning to help meet emissions reduction targets by the California Air Resources Board. This Sustainable Communities Strategy provides an alternative to “business as usual” development. It encourages community revitalization and neighborhoods that are bike and pedestrian friendly, with convenient access to transit. SCAG (09/20/2012) The dominant factors that will continue to affect travel behavior, contribute to transit demand, and determine access patterns over the next 30 years, are demographic changes and population growth. The SCS objectives and strategies are a framework for reducing travel distances and providing additional travel choices while addressing these regional challenges and their impact on air pollution and human health. The four building blocks of SCS; land use, transportation networks, transportation demand management strategies, and transportation system management, identify an explicit link between land use policy and transportation investments. Many see the link between land use and transportation planning as the largest breakthrough of the 2012 RTP/SCS; it is very possible that making the link between transportation and health is an even more significant breakthrough. The ongoing partnership between SCAG and Metro covers a range of initiatives that address these linkages. While the land use pattern provides the region with housing options near transit, the expansion of the network consists of many investments in alternative infrastructure to further the reach of transit. These investments provide the framework for alternatives such as green technology (car charging stations), telecommuting, interconnected active transportation networks, adequate parking, and improvements to roads in poor condition and non ADA compliant sidewalks. The 2012 RTP/SCS’s focus on connectivity at all scales is paramount in reaching the goals for sustainability and public health, by decreasing GHG emissions, shortening commute times (associated with poor health) and promoting physical activity as a commute mode by providing safer streets in and around transit zones and communities. Active transportation, while only one piece of the multi-modal network, will play a key role in the expanded transportation network, particularly the land use pattern. A First Last Mile Strategy should consider expanding the definition of POTs beyond “pedestrians” to include all forms of non-motorized mobility devices that support active living as well as clean energy (i.e., electric) mobility devices. It is worth noting that First Last Mile planning is concerned primarily with mobility in the public realm, most importantly the linkages between origins and destinations that rely on public transportation network infrastructure (rails, roads, walkways, etc.), and as such, is concerned with the connections to and from various land uses, not the visioning of land uses themselves. SCAG’s 2012-2035 RTP/SCS is a policy document that outlines strategies for reaching the region’s GHG emission reduction and healthy sustainable community goals. It is a driving document that provides background demographic data for the region along with future growth analysis and vision. Metro’s Joint-Work Program with SCAG is a collaboration that includes the RTP/SCS and ensures its progress into the 2016 RTP/SCS, advancing sustainable transportation options through its countrywide planning capacity and programming transportation funds in the region. The RTP/SCS acts as a key component to the technical analysis supporting the First Last Mile Strategic Plan and provides a framework for active transportation recommendations and first last mile solutions. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group J u n e 2013 I 16 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

111 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Countywide Los Angeles County Metropolitan Sustainability Planning Transportation Authority Metro Countywide Sustainability Policy (CSPP) Planning Policy Technical Document Final | June 19, 2012 June 2012 This document was prepared by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) for the citizens of Los Angeles County. The Countywide Sustainable Planning Policy (CSPP) uses SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/ Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) 2012 as its foundation to create a more sustainable and active transportation system. Compliance with state climate change law is also promoted to implement the regionally adopted land use and transportation vision. The Countywide Sustainable Planning This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. approach integrates land use and transportation Job number 217351-00 design such as pedestrian-oriented transit zones (POTs), transit-oriented developments (TODs), and Arup North America Ltd 560 Mission Street Suite 700 complete-streets that incorporates local modes of San Francisco 94105 United States of America www.arup.com access and promotes “green mode” (walking, biking, rideshare, transit, and clean-fueled vehicles) trips. Complete streets and transit-oriented development policies are consistent with the RTP/SCS and should be promoted at the local level through policy incentive programs. The CSPP applies place-based policies to activity clusters in order to delineate appropriate active transportation strategies based on existing densities, activity levels, and zoning typologies: • Cluster A includes areas with moderate to high residential density, but limited access to major job centers and long commutes to work. Cluster A should have access to alternative commuting options such as rail and buses active transportation options are limited due to nearby auto-oriented corridors and suburban block patterns. Policies applicable to Cluster A support the growing use of active transportation through facilities development and promotion of safety. Transit-oriented development should be planned at select locations with a focus on mixed-use centers, and transit services to employment centers, corridors, and feeder services should be provided. Projects that utilize existing capacity of streets by all modes should be prioritized. • Cluster B includes two sub-types, both with low housing densities, of suburban/rural communities and special-use areas such as large industrial zones. Cluster B requires diverse transportation strategies for residents, workers, and goods. Because auto-oriented travel is typically the most efficient in suburban and rural communities the advancement and development of new policies that promote efficiency in alternative transportation modes and trip reduction is needed to improve health and mobility in these community types. In special-use areas the addition of transportation alternatives for commuters is important for job access as well as the efficient operation of major freeway Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 17 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

112 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review and freight corridors. Cluster B policies encourage active transportation networks, but the local government planning policies are focused on improving the efficiency and safety of goods movement along with passenger travel. Cluster B place types’ transit services focus on creating sub-regional transit hubs and feeder services. Special-use areas support sustainable transportation through the promotion of clean-fuel vehicles and other green transit modes. Where greater development is desired strategies that limit congestion should be considered. • Cluster C defines sub-regional centers, neighborhoods, and districts where housing is dense enough to support local employment centers. Short trip lengths allow for active modes and transit to serve as the primary commute methods. covers areas with significant urban office centers, major destinations, and cultural activity. These Cluster D • areas are mixed-use horizontally and vertically and have high capacity transit stops and corridors throughout. They allow for multimodal connectivity at the local, regional, and statewide scale. Clusters C and D are the place types that best suit mobility options that support car-free and one-car living through extensive pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. Mixed use corridors with local transit coverage and prioritization of active modes of transportation are encouraged. The four place-based topics - sustainable transportation, local government planning, transit services, and street operations - are used as general guides for policy making, but each activity cluster has a set of specific policies within these guides that best addresses their transportation needs. Accessibility is analyzed through the Policy’s Accessibility Index which includes nine place types that are combined into the four place type clusters. The Index is a secondary characterization that assigns context to current planning and investment projects where they correspond with existing Measure R project implementation. The Index clusters, categorized as capacity enhancements, interchanges, ramps and grade separations, provide a method for understanding Measure R projects. The Countywide Sustainability Planning Policy is a policy document that lays out specific objectives and strategies to expand the transportation system and focuses on accessibility throughout the region. The identification of place types, and typically which new infrastructure is applied to each place type to improve accessibility, is a jumping off point for defining transit zones and expanding station areas in the First Last Mile Strategic Plan. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 18 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

113 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Metro’s Long Range metro.net/longrangeplan Transportation Plan (LRTP) August 2009 This document was prepared by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) for the citizens of Los Angeles County. Metro’s Long Range Transportation Plan aims to I want a mobile future. improve mobility over the next thirty years by enhancing public transit and reducing greenhouse 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan gas emissions by funding expansion to public transit throughout the region. The LRTP will play a key role in implementing the 2006 Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan (BTSP), and is focused on improving bicycle and pedestrian access to encourage ridership of new and existing transit. It acknowledges that coordination between transit and users’ final destinations, including linkages to bus centers and rail stations, is vital to sustainability of the regional transportation system. Along with the BTSP, this plan will improve bicycling as a viable transportation mode by shifting the focus from long arterial bikeways to routes under three miles and improving access to bike-transit hubs. Filling gaps in the bikeway system and improving parking at transit stations are essential to encourage the use of bicycles with transit. In addition to bicycling, pedestrian improvements are a priority in the non-motorized component of the transportation network. All motorized and non-motorized modes of transportation should connect to an efficient and safe pedestrian system at the beginning and end of trips, as well as secondary destinations and links into the public transit systems. Improvements to wayfinding, signage, sidewalks, and street crossings should be made alongside installation of physically attractive features and amenities. Metro’s approach to improving the pedestrian environment focuses on the development of public policy, adoptions of regulatory standards, and targeted funding. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 19 IBI Group June 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

114 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Short Range Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority ANGETRANSPORTATIONPLANFOR SHORTR LOS ANGELES COUNTY Transportation Plan 2003 (SRTP) 2003 This document was prepared by Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) with Mobility 21 Coalition for the citizens of Los Angeles County. The Short Range Transportation Plan is a master plan to protect funding sources for Los Angeles County’s transportation needs and assess options for additional and future funding. Metro will work with subregional organizations to fund and implement priority projects that improve local bus services, expand the Metro Rapid Bus program, expand the light rail system, and introduce Metro Rapid Transitways to create better connectivity throughout the County. The Mobility 21 Coalition, a contributor to this document, incentivizes better land use and transportation planning interaction and the Short Range Transportation Plan’s land use initiative to grow more efficiently. Enhancing non- motorized forms of transportation that provide compliments to transit use supports the land use initiative, as well as the Congestion Management Program (CMP). The land use initiative encourages infill development near transit stations and along major transit corridors, and promotes land use programs that create self-sustaining urban centers. Minimizing the need for intraregional car travel and increasing the use of active transportation, the plan explores opportunities to construct transit-oriented developments. Initiatives such as creating smart growth enterprise zones, market-based incentives, and traffic impact fees will ensure the impact of growth on the regional transportation network is better addressed. The Land Use Initiative Action Plan calls for coordination between the partnership programs with SCAG’s growth visioning process. The bicycle and pedestrian programs are expected to be implemented in the short-term to enhance non-motorized forms of transportation. Creating environments that are comfortable and safe will encourage pedestrians to walk longer distances or take public transportation in exchange for short auto-trips. The SRTP Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Action Plan calls for implementation of programs that complete gaps in countywide networks, encourage access to transit services, and improve mobility and safety. The Action Plan also promotes programs that enhance pedestrian travel, such as expansion of the transit system and redevelopment of urban centers around transit. (Insert SRTP Table of Improvements) Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 20 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

115 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan (BTS) June 2006 Prepared by: L o . c o s A n g e l e s C u n t y A l t a P l a n n i n g + D e s i g n , I n This document was th M i t a t o Street, Suite 212 2560 9 y t i r o h t u A n r o e t r o p o l i t a n T r a n s p One Gateway Plaza Berkeley, CA 94710 prepared by the Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952 ph: 510.540.5008 ph: 213.922.6000 County Metropolitan metro.net T n s r a d i g h t L i m i t e Transportation Authority l t i n g l c S e t t C i o n s u s u n e , 2 0 0 6 L e o J with Alta Planning + Design, Inc., Transight Limited, and Leslie Scott Consulting for use by the Cities of Los Angeles County. The Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan is collaborative document utilizing the Metro Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan and the Bicycle Transportation Account Compliance Document, both prepared to improve mobility in the region through the use of bicycles. The BTS establishes regional planning policy and tools for local agencies promoting bicycling as a viable transportation mode. The purpose of the BTS is to identify strategies that increase the use of bicycles in place of automobiles for trips to work, errands, recreational destination, and transit. The BTS includes a policy objective to encourage high quality end-of-trip facilities at transit locations and destinations. The countywide incorporation of bicycle parking will help create a network of bike-transit centers, and more seamless linkages for users from their origin to their destination. The bikes-to-transit policy objective encourages transit hub access plans to ensure that bicycle access is addressed in the design of new and existing transit stations. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 I IBI Group June 2013 21 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

116 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Creating Creating Successful Successful Transit- Oriented Districts Transit-Oriented in Los Angeles: A Districts in Los Angeles: Citywide Toolkit A Citywide Toolkit for for Achieving Achieving Regional Goals Regional Goals Executive Summary February 2010 February 2010 This document was prepared by The Center for Transit-Oriented Development (CTOD) for Caltrans and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). The Center for Transit-Oriented Sponsored by: Development identifies strategies that could help station areas achieve high transit ridership, lower VMT, provide housing, create healthy neighborhoods, and provide a multitude of travel options. This TOD study explores the opportunities and challenges of achieving TODs in Los Angeles County. One of the study’s strategies for expanding TOD in Los Angeles is supporting the SCS and its implementation of SB 375, which will require a significant change in density and development where transit station areas will be designated as regional priority areas for growth. The study breaks down benefits of TOD into four categories: public health, economic development, affordable housing, and climate change; and assesses each strategy’s impact on those benefits. While many strategies address individual benefits offering high quality transit options, increasing housing near transit, improving walkabililty, and enhancing access between transit and job centers all positively impact at least three of the four strategies. The CTOD’s report supports the sentiment that coordination and linkages between transit hubs and destinations are vital to a sustainable transit network throughout the region. The CTOD studied 71 existing and under-construction transit stations in Los Angeles and categorized them into nine station area place types based on existing intensity of each station area and the proportion of residents to employees. The “station area typologies” are categorized as residential, balanced, and employment; and are ranked from lowest to highest VMT to determine appropriate strategies that create high-performing TOD projects. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 22 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

117 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Transportation Demand F : EPORT R INAL Management R ECOMMENDED TDM CTIONS A & TRATEGIES S C NGELES A OS L ITY OF FOR THE Strategies Report P REPARED F OR : (TDMS) C A OS L ITY OF D RANSPORTATION T EPARTMENT OF , NGELES 100 TREET LOOR F TH 10 , S AIN M OUTH S L OS CA , 90012 NGELES A S C ALIFORNIA A OUTHERN G OVERNMENTS SSOCIATION OF July 2011 W , S EVENTH S TREET 12 TH F LOOR EST 818 L , OS A NGELES CA 90017 This document was prepared by Transportation Management Y B : REPARED P Services (TMS) with Eric RANSPORTATION M ANAGEMENT S ERVICES T S UITE 200 N ORTH C HESTER A VENUE , 236 Schreffler Transportation P 91106 CA , ASADENA Consultants, LDA Consulting, N I : ITH W SSOCIATION A and The Rifkin Transportation RANSPORTATION ONSULTANT C RIC S CHREFFLER T E 13580 S AMANTHA A VENUE Planning Group for the City of S CA , IEGO D AN 92129 Los Angeles Department of LDA C ONSULTING Transportation and the Southern 3241 IVINGSTON L , NW S TREET ASHINGTON , DC 20015 W California Association of T ROUP IFKIN G LANNING P T HE R RANSPORTATION Governments (SCAG). 4455 OS L , UITE 1403 S B ELIZ F OULEVARD L 90027 CA OS , ELIZ F The Transportation Demand Management Strategies report summarizes a study to 2011 29, J ULY identify actions the City should consider maintaining, enhancing, and/or adopting to reduce the demand for automobile traffic. This TDMS report recognizes how strategies can balance demand for travel by supplying transportation facilities and re-configure an auto-dominated physical environment to promote connectivity. The report ranks existing strategies/actions used to promote transit ridership, giving high rankings to strategies that promote access and ease of transition at transit facilities. Giving higher priority to TDM in LADOT Traffic Study Policies and multi-modal measurements is ranked in the high category as well. Along with positive reinforcement for non-vehicular modes of transportation, such as filling gaps in bicycle networks and creating safer pedestrian walkways, the TDMS has recommendations for decreasing the ease of access for automobiles in transit- oriented developments, such as increased density with decreased parking requirements. While TDM initiatives are pursued by City departments independently, this report offers tools for coordination with multiple departments which will be beneficial for funding larger projects and providing greater improvements. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 I IBI Group June 2013 23 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

118 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Metro Eastside Access 0 0 0HWUR*ROG/LQH (DVWVLGH$FFHVV3URMHFW VW6W 0 &XPPLQJV6W Project VW &XPPLQJV3OD]DV 0 %HIRUH June 2011 This document was prepared $IWHU by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) with the Community Advisory Committee for residents on the Eastside of Los Angeles County. In 2009, the Metro Eastside Access Project identified ways to improve access and &RQQHFWWZRNH\%R\OH *RDO +HLJKWVVWDWLRQVDQGWKHVW safety while reflecting local communities 6WUHHWFRPPHUFLDOGLVWULFW surrounding stations on the Gold Line FXUUHQWO\VHSDUDWHGE\WKH ,,IUHHZD\XQGHUSDVV Eastside expansion. The priorities focused on DQGWUDQVIRUPLQWRDQ DPHQLW\DQGDVVHWIRU%R\OH VW6WUHHW creative landscape solutions, public art, and +HLJKWV lighting and signage on City-owned streets +RZWR$FFRPSOLVK ‡ ([WHQGFXUEVDQGVLGHZDONWRPDNHSHGHVWULDQ   FURVVLQJGLVWDQFHVVKRUWHU and sidewalks. The street improvements in ‡ 'XDOFXUEUDPSVDQGHQKDQFHGFURVVZDONV ‡ (QFURDFKRQ&DOWUDQV52:WRFUHDWHVPDOOSOD]DV ‡ $GGKHDUW\ODQGVFDSHWRLQFUHDVHJUHHQHU\ the Metro Eastside Access Project provide ‡ 3URYLGHVHDWLQJDQGVKDGHHOHPHQWV ‡ ,QWHJUDWHFRPPXQLW\GHVLJQHOHPHQWVEDVHGRQ  FXOWXUHRI%R\OH+HLJKWV additional benefits to pedestrians’ and bikers’ ‡ 0DLQWDLQDFFHVVIRU&DOWUDQV &XPPLQJV6WUHHW experiences. Land use and transportation integration planning is not a component of the project; however, the recommendations identify existing urban centers and work to create linkages between them and transit. These linkages include enhanced wayfinding, pedestrian connections through public plazas, and bicycle improvements such as bike lanes and sharrows. (Insert Eastside Access Project Boards or just the tables from the boards) Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 24 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

119 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Main Streets for DRAFT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT Travelers and Communities Main Streets for Travelers and Communities 2012 Comments due July 11 This document was Please email completed comment forms to prepared by Caltrans for [email protected] the public. Main Streets for Travelers and Dear Reviewers: Communities addresses the Thank you for your valued review. To submit comments, please use the Comment Form overlap of main streets’ roles as found here: transportation facilities and public http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/download/ places, and how planning and 1 Draft for Public Comment Main Streets - design of main streets impacts travelers, communities, and the environment. Multimodal travel, livability, and sustainability are key components to main street strategic planning. Design flexibility is a standard principle outlined by Caltrans allowing for design exceptions that take the context into consideration; however, Caltrans still calls for the evaluation of multi-mobility, livability, and sustainability before deviation from the design standards outlined in the Highway Design Manual when highways are functioning as main streets. Maximizing multimodal transportation networks is a main principle of Main Streets for Travelers and Communities. Emphasis on mobility, access, options, and connections (such as providing pedestrian access to transit stops) is a strategy for maintaining main streets that respond to the needs of local communities. Multimodal networks must address the users that participate in several modes of travel within a single trip (such as from a bus stop to a parked car) to fill the gaps in the transportation network. Caltrans recommends implementation of “complete streets” to incorporate multimodal principles into the physical configuration of roadways and facilities and best address the needs of travelers. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 25 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

120 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Metro Station Design Review April 2012 This document was prepared by the design team ofJohnson Fain, Sussman Prejza, Melendrez, Final Report and Lea+Elliot, for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). The Metro Station Design Review was commissioned to review the diversity of existing station designs and make recommendations to correct deficiencies and inconsistencies. The review contains recommendations for a “kit of parts” that can be applied to a variety of station area types and provide connectivity through visual identity. The main concerns for cohesive station design are legibility, maintainability, and flexibility. Cost effective strategies were given priority, but not where they hinder security, functionality, and accessibility of transit stations. Connectivity is a priority in station area design; the Metro Station Design Review promotes neighborhood linkages by establishing a minimum sphere of influence of improvements and station area branding; encouraging pedestrian circulation over vehicular traffic in transit zones by emphasizing physical pedestrian and bike connections; and utilizing signage to assure local destinations, bicycle infrastructure, and street names are clearly identified. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 I IBI Group June 2013 26 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

121 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Compass Blueprint: Framework of Sustainable Transit Communities March 2011 This document FRAMEWORK OF SUSTAINABLE was prepared by a TRANSIT COMMUNITIES team of consultants: OFFICE OF THE MAYOR, CITY OF LOS ANGELES MARCH 2011 Design, Community & Environment (DC&E), Bay Area Economics (BAE), Arellano Associates, and Christopher B. Leinberger, for the City of Los Angeles, with funding from the Southern California Association of Governments’ (SCAG) Compass Blueprint Program and grants from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). This Compass Blueprint project provides a framework within which the City of Los Angeles and private developers can work for new construction and rehabilitation projects to create balanced Sustainable Transit Communities (STCs). STCs include a mix of housing and employment-generating uses such as offices and cleantech enterprises. This document identifies strategies for sustainable TOD near Metro rail and BRT stations and prioritizes investments. Using a scorecard developed for rating individual station areas, the study selected station areas with the highest potential to become STCs. The station areas were rated based on their existing qualities and availability of opportunity sites, as well as market conditions for creating job centers. When an STC has all of the qualities outlined in this framework it becomes a vibrant place with a strong local economy that encourages further investment in the station area. A major component of the framework is multimodal transportation systems; pedestrian friendly streets, walkability, connectivity, complete streets, and bicycle facilities are highly weighted qualities that impact other components of STCs as well. The framework uses station place types (defined by the Center for Transit Oriented Development, CTOD), each with a distinct architectural character, mix of businesses and potential for economic success, and shared qualities that are used to inform efforts to transform them into Sustainable Transit Communities. For each of the nine place types defined by the CTOD - suburban neighborhood, neighborhood center, office/industrial district, transit neighborhood, mixed-use center, business district, urban neighborhood, urban center, and central business district/special district - components of the framework are given priority to best balance the given place types’ intensity. This framework expands upon the CTOD’s work by describing specific built character, mix of uses, and pedestrian and bicycle network improvements needed for each place type to move towards an STC standard. The Compass Blueprint is a model for integrating land use and transportation planning that has been incorporated in the 2012-2035 RTP/SCS and local partners. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 27 IBI Group June 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

122 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Los Angeles County Model Design Manual for Living Streets for October 2011 This document was prepared by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. This document serves a manual for creating walkable and bicycle neighborhoods, 2011 Los Angeles County cities that are conducive to transit use, and livable communities. Experts from traffic engineering, transportation planning, land use planning, architecture, landscape architecture, and public health teamed to produce this set of guidelines that create opportunities for active transportation networks and living streets. Living streets are designed for people of all ages and physical abilities whether they walk, bicycle, ride transit, or drive; and integrate connectivity and traffic calming with pedestrian-oriented site and building design to create safe environments. To assist in meeting the goals of living streets, this manual outlines benchmarks and performance measures for communities to adopt. The benchmarks ensure that every street and neighborhood is comfortable to walk and bicycle in, it is safe for children to use active transportation modes to get to school, all streets provide safe and comfortable crossings, active lifestyles are available to all, and traffic fatalities are reduced or eliminated. Performance measures are put in place to decrease fatalities and injuries in streets, increase active transportation trips and decrease motorized transportation trips, slow vehicle speeds on local streets, increase retail sales and tourism, and improve resident satisfaction in communities. Sustainable street networks increase the number of people walking and bicycling and reduce vehicle miles traveled. To create a well designed street network the manual identifies seven zone types - natural, rural, sub-urban, general urban, urban center, urban core, and special district - and their associated street networks to assign design standards that will increase connectivity and improve street function. Within each zone type, improvements to intersections, pedestrian access and crossings, bikeway design, transit accommodations, traffic calming measures, streetscape design, and land use policy are identified to promote the engagement of communities along streets and in an active transportation network. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 28 IBI Group June 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

123 Planning Context Review FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Active Design Guidelines: ACTIVE Promoting Physical Activity and Health in Design DESIGN GUIDELINES October 2011 PROMOTING PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND HEALTH IN DESIGN This document was prepared by New York City’s Departments of Design and Construction (DDC), Health and Mental Hygiene, Transportation (DOT), and City Planning with the Mayor’s Office of Management and Budget for designers, architects, and local agencies that play a role in the design and construction of the built environment. The goal of the Active Design Guidelines is to create an environment that enables all city residents to incorporate healthy activity into their daily lives throughout New York City. The guidelines address neighborhoods, streets, and outdoor spaces that encourage active modes of transportation, including walking and bicycling. To create an active city access to transit and transit facilities, plazas, parks, open spaces, recreational facilities, and services needs to be improved through designing pedestrian friendly streets and bicycle facilities and expanding the active transportation network. The document outlines specific planning and design strategies that promote physical activity through recreation and active transportation. The “three Ds” that define the relationship between urban design and travel patterns: density, diversity, and design are supplemented by The Active Design Guidelines with destination accessibility and distance to transit to fill important gaps in the urban design process for active transportation networks. The strategies related to land use mix and transit address the design of the city’s streets and public spaces in addition to strategies for enhancing the walkability and bicycle facilities on city streets. The strategies outlined in the Active Design Guidelines are based on current best practices and emerging ideas that will be tested and refined in the coming years. This document makes recommendations for land use, transit and parking, parks, open space and recreational facilities, public plazas, access to services, street connectivity, traffic calming, pedestrian pathways, programming streetscapes, bicycle networks and connectivity, bikeways, and bicycle infrastructure based on research that correlates the population’s behavior with the built environment. Strategies that increase physical activity by improving access to destinations such as parks and services from places of residence and work include: locating transit stops along well-connected streets and building entrances, providing a mix of land uses in walkable areas; designing facilities that make pedestrian and bicycle access to transit convenient; adding open spaces to large-scale developments; and encouraging the use of pathways, tracks, and open spaces through signage. Maintaining well connected streets with sidewalks that provide direct routes between destinations to increase pedestrianism should be combined with traffic calming strategies that promote walking by improving the pedestrian experience. Equally as important as providing pedestrian routes is creating attractive street environments that encourage walking with destinations such as art installations, outdoor cafes, and street closures for special programming. Bicycle networks and connectivity should be encouraged alongside pedestrian improvements by creating continuous networks Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 29 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

124 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review of bikeways, signage, and links between bicycling and transit. Addition of bicycle infrastructure such as parking, specific crossings, rails along outdoor stairways, and bike share programs can enhance the bikeway networks and provide more organized movements of pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 30 IBI Group June 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

125 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Walkable and Livable Communities Institute: Walkability Workbook April 2012 This document was prepared by the Walkable and Livable Communities Institute for community walkability workshops by local agencies. Walkability in communities promotes physical health, lowers traffic injury and death rates, and provides better access for people while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This workbook provides principles of walkability that must be addressed to ensure accessible, welcoming, convenient, and safe pedestrian environments. Sidewalks, bike lanes, vehicle travel lanes, driveways, and parking can all be incorporated on streets with buffers of plantings, medians, striping, and sidewalks that make drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians more comfortable traveling. Complete streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders. To accommodate a diversity of uses, sidewalks require space for street furniture, bike racks, trees, and room for building access that does not disrupt pedestrian flow. Proper bicycle facilities not only promote active transportation through bicycling, but improve pedestrian environments as well. When bicyclists are forced onto sidewalks due to lack of bike lanes, or lack of bike racks cause locking to signage and trees, they impede walkability. Through implementation of phased improvements over time, streets that are void of pedestrian safety and access can begin to promote walkability with sidewalks, crosswalks, parks, seating, signage, and orientation of new developments. Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group June 2013 I 31 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

126 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Planning Context Review Active Living by Design (ALBD) 2010 Active Living by Design is a founding program in the Active Living initiative of the Robert Wood Johnson Case Study Sites Foundation. It creates community-led change by working with local and national partners to build a culture of active living. http://www. activelivingbydesign.org/ events-resources/essentials/transportation Active Living by Design promotes physical activity by increasing transportation choices and expanding opportunities for active transportation. The organization looks at land use patterns and transportation infrastructure that can promote active transportation and increase health while reducing safety risks. A balance of transportation and land use goals can support walking, biking, transit, and alternative forms of travel to help make healthy lifestyles more attainable for communities. The Active Living by Design organization provides links to existing resources, guidelines, enhancement projects, and events that facilitate work on active living projects. In Santa Ana, Sacramento, Oakland, and California, Active Living by Design has contributed to recreation opportunities by implementing physical improvement projects, establishing advisory groups and partnerships, and securing grants and funding for local projects. ALBD has identified five strategies as an approach to increasing physical activity in a community. Preparation, promotions, programs, policies, and physical projects each comprise specific tactics to create more active communities. They develop and maintain partnerships to conduct neighborhood assessments of barriers and opportunities, and evaluate master plans and ordinances that affect active living. After creating initiatives and programs for active living in community events and outreach, they establish policies that are consistent with land use and transportation plans that promote active living; update road policies, standards, and parking requirements; and secure funding for pedestrian and cycling-oriented capital improvements. ABLD works to successfully integrate physical infrastructure such as sidewalks, bike lanes, and trails with traffic calming measures to ensure safer and more comfortable walking and bicycling environments. Task 3.4 – Case Studies Task 3.4.1 - Select Case Studies Task 3.4.2 Develop Research/Evaluation Task 3.4.3 - Case Study Analysis Contrac t PS - 4010 -2178 - 01- 08 IBI Group January 2013 IBI Group June 2013 I 32 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

127 Case Study Sites Task 3.4 – Case Studies Task 3.4.1 - Select Case Studies Task 3.4.2 Develop Research/Evaluation Task 3.4.3 - Case Study Analysis IBI Group January 2013

128 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Contents D EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 SELECTION METHODOLOGY AND IDENTIFICATION 1 SITE SELECTION METHODOLOGY (EXHIBIT I) 2 STATION CLASSIFICATION (EXHIBIT II) 3 CASE STUDY SITES PROPOSED FOR DISCUSSION (EXHIBIT III) 4 CASE STUDY SITES (EXHIBIT IV) 5 CASE STUDY SITES MAP (EXHIBIT V) 6 CASE STUDY SITES 6 1.NEWHALL METROLINK STATION 7 2.AGOURA RD./LIBERTY CANYON RD. BUST STOP 8 3. RESEDA ORANGE LINE STATION 9 4. NORTH HOLLYWOOD RED LINE/ORANGE LINE STATION 10 5. OLIVE STREET/SAN FERNANDO BUS LINE STOP 11 6. SIERRA MADRE VILLA GOLD LINE STATION 12 7. WILSHIR/NORMANDIE PURPLE LINE STATION 13 8. HIGHLAND PARK GOLD LINE STATION 14 9. DOUGLAS GREEN LINE STATION 15 10. HARBOR GATEWAY TRANSIT CENTER SILVER LINE STATION 16 11. COMPTON BLUE LINE STATION 17 12. WILSHIRE/WESTWOOD WILSHIRE BRT 18 13. 103RD/WATTS BLUE LINE STATION 19 RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS 20 PRELIMINARY STATION ANALYSIS 21 ACCESS BARRIERS OVERLAY MAP 21 DETERMINE WALKING ROUTE 21 SITE VISIT-STATION SURVEY 22 IDENTIFY ISSUES 23 1.NEWHALL METROLINK STATION 28 2.AGOURA RD./LIBERTY CANYON RD. BUST STOP 33 3. RESEDA ORANGE LINE STATION 38 4. NORTH HOLLYWOOD RED LINE/ORANGE LINE STATION 43 5. OLIVE STREET/SAN FERNANDO BUS LINE STOP 48 6. SIERRA MADRE VILLA GOLD LINE STATION 53 7. WILSHIR/NORMANDIE PURPLE LINE STATION 58 8. HIGHLAND PARK GOLD LINE STATION 63 9. DOUGLAS GREEN LINE STATION 68 10. HARBOR GATEWAY TRANSIT CENTER SILVER LINE STATION IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 B I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

129 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Contents 11. WILSHIRE/WESTWOOD WILSHIRE BRT 73 12. 103RD/WATTS BLUE LINE STATION 78 APPENDIX 83 STATION AREA CHECKLIST-SAFETY 84 STATION AREA CHECKLIST-AESTHETICS 85 STATION AREA CHECKLIST-ACCESSIBILITY 86 STATION AREA CHECKLIST-ROUTE TAKEN 87 PHOTO DOCUMENTATION 88 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel C June 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

130 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Executive Summary Case study locations have been selected for 12 sites, covering a range of SCPF identified typologies, as well as a range of geographic, demographic and physical challenges that give a full view of the potential opportunities and constraints in need of addressing throughout the region. IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 D I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

131 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites Case Study Sites Selection Methodology and Identification In order to analyze questions germane to first last mile strategic planning, a number of case study locations have been selected; covering the range of Metro Countywide Sustainability Planning Policy identified typologies, as well as a range of geographic, demographic and physical attributes. The intent is to use these case study sites as “testing grounds” and as such the stops are intended to represent as best as possible an accurate sample of the entire Los Angeles County transit network. Opportunities and constraints found within the geographic regions of the selected sites, should be representative of conditions found throughout the system. The process of site selection began with the development of a methodology to classify the numerous transit stops within Los Angeles County. There are about 15,000 transit stops in Los Angeles County, the vast majority being local bus stops. For the purposes of this analysis, priority was given to stops that are defined by dedicated infrastructure (stations), complemented with local bus stops if necessary. A brief description of the methodology utilized to propose the initial list of Case Study Sites is outlined in the paragraphs below. The work initiated with a compilation of all Metrolink and Metro heavy rail, Metro light rail, Metro BRT and Metro rapid stops in Los Angeles County. Regional diversity was considered by dividing the full list by Metro Subregion, with the intent to assure representation from each geographic area. The Metro Countywide Sustainability Planning Policy (CSPP) place types were added to each station to ensure the consideration of a variety of areas with respect to residential density and employment centrality. Characteristics regarding these stations were added to allow further station classification, and these special considerations include: • Adjacent or within Freeway ROW • High transit density node/multi-modal hub or within a regional destination • Next to or No) • Terminus Station (Yes • Existing or Future station • Type (Street level, elevated, underground) • Adjacent to • Presence of Park-and-Ride or on the border or multiple jurisdictions These incremental filters allowed the design and planning team to prepare a list of proposed sites that offer a broad and representative picture of the interface between Metro’s mass transit system and its associated urban/sub-urban contextual fabric. Exhibit 1 illustrates the general structure of the site selection methodology. Exhibit 1 – Site Selection Methodology Spatial List of Rail Place Initial List - Discussion Final List - Special Analysis Stations, Rail/BRT Case Study Types with Metro, Case Study Considerations complemented Lines - Metro Sites SCAG & TAC Sites (CSPP) Subregions with bus stops 150+ 9 9 9 8 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 1 June 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

132 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites The station classification regarding Subregion and place type is illustrated in Exhibit 2. The background color is relative to the place type, the font color denotes the Metro Subregion and the line is identified after the station name. Exhibit 2 – Station Classification HIGH CENTRALITY LOW CENTRALITY MEDIUM CENTRALITY Santa Clarita (ML) Via Princessa (ML) Civic Center (R/P) V. Gr. / Acton (ML) Sun Valley (ML) Expo Park/USC (E) LOW Palmdale (ML) Sierra Madre Villa (GL) Spring/1st (Silver) Roscoe (O) South Pasadena (GL) Filmore (GL) RESIDENTIAL Nordhoff (O) Covina (ML) Douglas (G) DENSITY Sylmar/ Baldwin Park (ML) El Segundo (G) S.Fernando (ML) Industry (ML) Mariposa (G) Sun Valley (ML) Industry (ML) Aviation/LAX (G) Maravilla (GL) Lancaster (ML) Harbor Fwy/I-105 (Silver) Sepulveda (O) Redondo Beach (G) Expo/Crenshaw (E) Palmdale (ML) Avalon (G) Woodley (O) Rosecrans/I-110 (Silver) Expo/Western (E) Roscoe (O) Crenshaw (G) Balboa (O) Harbor GGTC (Silver) Farmdale (E) Nordhoff (O) Harbor Fwy (G) Sun Valley (ML) Artesia (B) La Cienega/ Jefferson (E) Sylmar/ Vermont/Athens (G) Valley College (O) Commerce (ML) Glendale (ML) S.Fernando (ML) 103rd /Watts (B) El Monte Station (Silver/ML) MEDIUM Lakewood (G) Downtown Burbank (ML) Northridge (ML) Compton (B) Cal State LA (Silver/ML) Montebello/Commerce (ML) Burbank/ B.Hope Airport (ML) Reseda (O) RESIDENTIAL Firestone (B) Allen (GL) Norwalk/ Santa Fe Springs Tampa (O) Long Beach (G) Industry (ML) DENSITY (ML) Chatsworth (O/ML) Norwalk (G) Southwest Mus. (GL) Slauson (B) Sun Valley (ML) Willowbrook (B/G) Willow (B) Industry (ML) Woodman (O) Atlantic (GL) East LA/C. Center (GL) Indiana (GL) Newhall (ML) N.Hollywood (R/O) Hawthorne / Lennox (G) 7th Street / Metro Ctr Silver Line Stations Van Nuys (O/ML) LA Co. & USC Med. Ctr 1st Street (B) (B/R/P/E) Laurel Canyon (O) El Monte Busway & Alameda/ 5th Street (B) 23rd Street (E) Sherman Way (O) U. Station Chinatown (GL) Manchester/I-110 (Silver) 1st St. & Hill St. Anaheim (B Expo / La Brea (E) Del Amo (B) Grand Av. & 3rd St. (SB) Florence (B) Expo / Vermont (E) P. Coast Hwy (B) Olive St. & Kosciuszko Way (NB) Pacific (B) Grand (B) Wardlow (B) Flower St. & 5th St. (SB) Transit Mall (B) Heritage Square (GL) Highland Park (GL) Olive St. & 5th St. Culver City (E) Hollywood / Highland (R) Flower St. & 7th St. (SB) 4th St/ Colorado (E)* Hollywood / Vine (R) HIGH Figueroa St. & 7th St. (NB) Del Mar (GL) Hollywood / Western (R) Flower St. & Olympic Blvd. (SB) Lake (GL) Jefferson / USC (E) RESIDENTIAL Figueroa St. & Olympic Blvd. (NB) Memorial Park (GL) Lincoln / Cypress (GL) Figueroa St. & Pico Blvd. De Soto (O) L. Tokyo/ A. District (GL) DENSITY Figueroa St./ Washington Blvd. Canoga (O) Mariachi Plaza (GL) 23rd St. & Flower St. (SB) Warner Center (O) Pershing Sq. (R/P) HOV Roadway & Adams Blvd (NB) Pierce College (O) Pico (B/E/SC) Flower St. & Adams Blvd. (SB) Universal City (R) Pico / Aliso (GL) 37th Street/USC Downtown Burbank (ML) San Pedro (B) Slauson/I-110 Burbank/ B.Hope Airport Soto (GL) (ML) Union Station (R/P/GL/ML) Vermont / Beverly (R) Vermont / S. Monica (R) Vermont / Sunset (R) Vernon (B) Washington (B) Westlake / MacArthur Pk Transit Line Subregion (R/P) (ML) Arroyo Verdugo Cities (3) Metrolink Wilshire / Normandie (P) (B) Central Los Angeles (56) Blue Line Wilshire / Vermont (R/P) Gateway Cities (22) (E) Expo Line Wilshire / Western (P) North Los Angeles County (6) Green Line (G) Gold Line (GL) Las Virgenes / Malibu (0) (O) Orange Line San Fernando Valley (22) (P) San Gabriel Valley (16) Purple Line (R) Red Line South Bay (15) (Silver) Silver Line Westside Cities (2) Northbound (NB) Southbound (SB) IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 2 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

133 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE The proposed methodology yielded fourteen sites for further discussion, summarized in Exhibit 3. Exhibit 3 – Case Study Sites Proposed for Discussion LOW CENTRALITY MEDIUM CENTRALITY HIGH CENTRALITY Las Virgenes/Malibu San Gabriel Valley South Bay • Agoura Rd/ Liberty • Sierra Madre Villa Station (GL) • Douglas (G) LOW Canyon Rd (Bus 161) - MM - PnR - SL - T - EL RESIDENTIAL - FWY - PnR DENSITY - FWY - J San Fernando Valley San Gabriel Valley Gateway Cities • Reseda (O) • El Monte Station (S) • Slauson (B) MEDIUM - SL - MM - EL - MM - T RESIDENTIAL - PnR DENSITY - SL North Los Angeles County San Fernando Valley Central Los Angeles Central Los Angeles • Newhall (ML) • N. Hollywood (R/O) • Hollywood/Highland • Wilshire / Normandie (P) - SL - MM (R) - UG OR - T - UG Westside Cities - PnR - RD / Colorado Ave(E*) • 4th St - UG&SL - MM - FS - RD HIGH Central Los Angeles - T • Highland Park (GL) RESIDENTIAL - SL - SL DENSITY Arroyo Verdugo Cities Arroyo Verdugo Cities • Broadway/ • Olive/S. Fernando (Line Brand (Line 780 - 794 - Burbank) OR Glendale) - MM - SL - FWY Special Considerations Transit Line Subregion Metrolink Arroyo Verdugo Cities (ML) (PnR) Park and Ride (B) Blue Line Central Los Angeles (T) Terminal (E) Gateway Cities Expo Line Type of Station: Green Line (G) North Los Angeles County (GL) Las Virgenes / Malibu Gold Line (EL) Elevated Orange Line (O) San Fernando Valley (UG) Underground San Gabriel Valley (P) Purple Line (SL) Street Level South Bay Red Line (R) Westside Cities (Silver) Silver Line (MM) Serves more than one transit line/high number of stops in the immediate vicinity Northbound (NB) (FS) Future Station (SB) Southbound (RD) Regional Destination Adjacent to, or on the border, or multiple jurisdictions (J) IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 3 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

134 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites The sites proposed ensure representation of all lines and subregions, and include a mix of special considerations. The list was presented at the October 25th Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting for discussion. Feedback received from TAC members altered the proposed list. For example, the El Monte Transit Center was replaced with the Harbor Gateway Center, as the prior selected site is less representative of general conditions. The final site selection is illustrated in Exhibit 4, the sites are presented on an overall map illustrated in Exhibit 5, and a summary of key data is provided for each site selected in the following pages. Exhibit 4 – Case Study Sites HIGH CENTRALITY LOW CENTRALITY MEDIUM CENTRALITY Las Virgenes/Malibu San Gabriel Valley South Bay (Bus 161) • Agoura Rd/ Liberty Canyon Rd • Sierra Madre Villa Station (GL) • Douglas (G) LOW - SL - MM - PnR - FWY - T - EL RESIDENTIAL - PnR DENSITY - FWY - J San Fernando Valley Gateway Cities South Bay • Reseda (O) • Compton (B) • Harbor GTC (Silver) MEDIUM - SL - PnR - T - MM - SL - SL RESIDENTIAL - MM South Bay/Gateway Cities DENSITY - PnR Watts (B) • 103rd/ - FWY - PnR - SL North Los Angeles County San Fernando Valley Central Los Angeles • Newhall (ML) • N. Hollywood (R/O) • Wilshire / Normandie (P) - SL - MM - UG - PnR - T Westside Cities - PnR • Wilshire/Westwood (Wilshire BRT/P) - UG&SL HIGH - FS RESIDENTIAL - RD Central Los Angeles - SL DENSITY • Highland Park (GL) - MM - SL Arroyo Verdugo Cities • Olive/S. Fernando (Line 794 - Burbank) - MM - FWY Special Considerations Transit Line Subregion (ML) Arroyo Verdugo Cities Metrolink (PnR) Park and Ride Central Los Angeles Blue Line (B) (T) Terminal (E) Expo Line Gateway Cities Type of Station: Green Line (G) North Los Angeles County (GL) Las Virgenes / Malibu Gold Line (EL) Elevated Orange Line (O) San Fernando Valley (UG) Underground (P) Purple Line San Gabriel Valley (SL) Street Level (R) Red Line South Bay (Silver) Silver Line Westside Cities (MM) Serves more than one transit line/high number of stops in the immediate vicinity (NB) Northbound (FS) Future Station Southbound (SB) (RD) Regional Destination Adjacent to, or on the border, or multiple jurisdictions (J) IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 4 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

135 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Exhibit 5 – Case Study Sites - Map Subregion Arroyo Verdugo Cities Central Los Angeles Gateway Cities North Los Angeles County Las Virgenes / Malibu San Fernando Valley San Gabriel Valley South Bay Westside Cities IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 5 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

136 FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN SITE 1: Newhall Metrolink Station CSPP Place Type: High Residential/Low Centrality Metro Subregion: North Los Angeles County City: Santa Clarita SL Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • Metrolink - Heavy Rail • Street level, low ridership corridor • Connection to Local Santa Clarita Transit, Commuter Express Lines and Amtrak California Thruway Bus • 3 parking lots, over 300 spaces (150 park and ride spaces – Metrolink riders only) • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 14,290 - From 1 to 2 miles: 26,150 - From 2 to 3 miles: 21,820 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 6 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

137 FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN SITE 2: Agoura Rd/Liberty Canyon Rd Bus Stop - Line 161 CSPP Place Type: Low Residential/Low Centrality Las Virgenes/Malibu Metro Subregion: Agoura Hills City: SL/FWY Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • Metro Local Bus • Connection to Commuter Express ridership • Street level, low freeway • Adjacent to • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 15,780 - From 1 to 2 miles: 7,070 - From 2 to 3 miles: 3,620 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 7 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

138 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 3: Reseda Orange Line Station CSPP Place Type: Medium Residential/Low Centrality San Fernando Valley Metro Subregion: Los Angeles City: SL/MM Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • BRT • Street level station, high corridor ridership • Proximity to freeway and block sizes are barriers • Connection to Metro Local and Metro Rapid • 522 park and ride spaces adjacent to • Orange Line Bike Path station • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 34,990 - From 1 to 2 miles: 69,300 - From 2 to 3 miles: 87,860 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 8 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

139 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 4: North Hollywood Red Line/Orange Line Station CSPP Place Type: High Residential/Medium Centrality San Fernando Valley Metro Subregion: Los Angeles City: Special Considerations: MM/T/PnR/UG&SL CHARACTERISTICS • BRT/Heavy Rail, connection of two major transit lines • Underground and street level station, high corridor ridership • Terminus station for Metro Orange Line (surface) and Metro Red Line (underground) freeway is a barrier • Proximity to Metro Local, Santa Clarita Transit, Burbank Bus, LADOT Commuter Express • Connection to • 1904 park and ride spaces • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 44,810 - From 1 to 2 miles: 98,600 - From 2 to 3 miles: 109,800 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 9 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

140 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 5: Olive Street/San Fernando Bus Line Stop - Line 794 CSPP Place Type: High Residential/High Centrality Arroyo Verdugo Cities Metro Subregion: Burbank City: Special Considerations: MM/FWY/SL CHARACTERISTICS • Rapid Bus • Street level • Proximity to I-5 is a barrier Metro Local bus lines • Connection to Downtown • Close proximity to Burbank Metrolink Station • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 37,700 - From 1 to 2 miles: 58,200 - From 2 to 3 miles: 54,300 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 10 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

141 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 6: Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station CSPP Place Type: Low Residential/Medium Centrality San Gabriel Valley Metro Subregion: Pasadena City: Special Considerations: MM/T/PnR/FWY/J CHARACTERISTICS • LRT • Freeway-median station (210 Freeway) • Elevated above Sierra Madre Villa Avenue, high corridor ridership • Current terminus station for the Gold Line Metro Local, Metro Express, Foothill Transit, Pasadena ARTS and other city shuttle service • Connection to • 1026 parking spaces • Adjacent to unincorporated LA County (East Pasadena) • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 13,720 - From 1 to 2 miles: 57,000 - From 2 to 3 miles: 80,000 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 11 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

142 FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN SITE 7: Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station CSPP Place Type: High Residential/High Centrality Central Los Angeles Metro Subregion: Los Angeles City: UG Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • Heavy rail • Underground and street level station, low corridor ridership Metro Local, Metro Rapid and Foothill Transit • Connection to • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 125,220 - From 1 to 2 miles: 227,290 - From 2 to 3 miles: 266,070 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 12 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

143 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 8: Highland Park Gold Line Station CSPP Place Type: High Residential/Medium Centrality Central Los Angeles Metro Subregion: Los Angeles City: Special Considerations: SL CHARACTERISTICS • LRT • Street level, high corridor ridership • Proximity to freeway and block sizes are barriers Metro Local, LA DOT DASH • Connection to • 145 park and ride spaces • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 45,540 - From 1 to 2 miles: 80,400 - From 2 to 3 miles: 129,800 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 13 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

144 FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN SITE 9: Douglas Green Line Station CSPP Place Type: Low Residential/High Centrality Central Los Angeles Metro Subregion: El Segundo City: EL/PnR Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • LRT • Elevated Metro Local, Beach Cities Transit and Amtrak Thruway • Connection to • 30 park and ride spaces • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 8,150 - From 1 to 2 miles: 72,750 - From 2 to 3 miles: 152,540 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 14 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

145 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 10: Harbor Gateway Transit Center (Artesia Transit Center) Silver Line Station CSPP Place Type: Medium Residential/High Centrality South Bay Metro Subregion: Los Angeles City: SL/T/MM/PnR/FWY Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • Street level • Terminus line • Connection to Metro Express, Metro Local, Torrance, Carson and Gardena local lines • 980 park and ride spaces freeway • Adjacent to • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 14,980 - From 1 to 2 miles: 49,860 - From 2 to 3 miles: 110,160 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 15 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

146 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 11: Compton Blue Line Station CSPP Place Type: Medium Residential/Medium Centrality Gateway Cities Metro Subregion: Compton City: Special Considerations: SL/PnR CHARACTERISTICS • LRT • Street level, moderate corridor ridership • Proximity to MLK Transit Center Metro Local, Compton Renaissance, and Gardena Transit Service • Connections to • 196 park and ride spaces • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 43,529 - From 1 to 2 miles: 104,431 - From 2 to 3 miles: 132,333 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 16 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

147 FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN SITE 12: Wilshire/Westwood Wilshire BRT CSPP Place Type: Medium Residential/Medium Centrality Westside Cities Metro Subregion: Los Angeles City: MM/FS/RD/UG&SL Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • BRT/Heavy Rail • Street level and underground station, moderate corridor ridership (projection) • 405 Freeway within 0.5 mile UCLA • Proximity to • Future • Connectivity to Local and Rapid lines • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 45,880 - From 1 to 2 miles: 82,460 - From 2 to 3 miles: 90,330 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 17 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

148 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 13: 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station CSPP Place Type: Medium Residential/Medium Centrality South Bay/ Gateway Cities Metro Subregion: Los Angeles City: SL/PnR Special Considerations: CHARACTERISTICS • LRT • Street level, moderate corridor ridership • Next to/within railroad ROW • Proximity to railroad and block sizes are barriers Community Hospital • Nearby destinations: Watts Health Center, Greater El Monte Metro Local and LADOT DASH service • Connections to • 62 park and ride spaces • Population in the vicinity of the station (2010 Census) - Within 1 mile: 52,560 - From 1 to 2 miles: 146,380 - From 2 to 3 miles: 258,290 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 18 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

149 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites S AST M TRATEGIC tudy S PLAN FIRST L Case S ILE ites Case Study Sites Research and Analysis To better understand the unique challenges of selected station areas. This analysis involved each station area chosen during the Site Selection mapping, compiling, and overlaying various layers Phase, each case study site selected was evaluated of station-specific data that illuminated existing at both a “macro” and “micro” level. The intent of conditions within a ½-mile radius of the station area. the preliminary station analysis was to perform a The ½-mile radius has been defined as an average overall survey of conditions and characteristics 10-minute walk for pedestrians, and serves as the of neighborhoods immediately surrounding the primary catchment area for first/last mile transit Station Analysis 1 Overlay Maps 2 Route Walking 3 Foothill Blvd. 210 E Colorado Blvd. . ve Sierra Madre St. Identify nnetoa A Site Visit Ri 4 S (Station Survey) Issues Rossmore Blvd. 5 Design Guidelines 6 Toolbox ESS PROJECT PROC IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I 19 March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 19 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

150 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST L ILE AST M S TRATEGIC PLAN Case S tudy S ites 1. Preliminary Station Analysis The following access-related station area characteristics were analyzed at the ½-mile radius: Points of Interest The Points of Interest map highlights key sites located within the ½-mile radius of the station and infers logical routes between the station area and these interest points. Analyzing these routes better defined potential transit users. Key points of interest included schools, event centers, public institutions, parks, and any other local attractions to the transit catchment area. L Street Grid an Vineland Ave k Burbank Blvd ershim Blvd The Street Grid map illuminates the street and block network surrounding M ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave station areas. This grid shows areas that lack connectivity, logical pathways, Magnolia Blvd SR 170 Fwy and/or create obstacles for site navigation. The map also doubles as a base map for the station analysis that follows. Pedestrian Shed L an Vineland Ave The Pedestrian Shed map graphically displays the level of pedestrian k Burbank Blvd ershim Blvd accessibility for each station area. With the transit station as a starting point, M ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave all ½-mile routes based on the street grid were mapped and then consolidated Magnolia Blvd SR 170 Fwy into a larger catchment shape. The pedestrian shed begins to call out limitations to access as a result of each station’s unique street grid. A diamond shaped pedestrian shed is ideal (as it provides the most extensive connections for non-vehicular travelers). Vineland Ave Burbank Blvd La n kersh im High Vehicular Speeds Bl v M d ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave SR 170 Fwy The High Vehicular Speeds map shows potential areas that would cause safety Magnolia Blvd concerns for pedestrians and bicylicts. Speeds that average higher that 35 mph are shown. Burbank Blvd Lankershim Blvd Vineland Ave Key Transit Access Corridors Chandler Blvd M ! Key Transit Access Corridors are graphic depictions of Metro’s Origin/ SR 17 Tujunga Ave 0 Fwy Magnolia Blvd Destination study. These maps graphically represent the logical pedestrian routes frequently utilized by transit users. ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( La Burbank Blvd ! ( n ( ! kersh ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( Collision Severity and Location ( ! Vineland Ave im ! ( ( ! Bl ! ( ( ! v ( ! d ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( M ! ( ! ( ! The Collision Severity and Location map begins to show key intersections ( ! Chandler Blvd S ( ! ( ! ( ! R ! ( 170 Fw ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! Tujunga Ave y Magnolia Blvd ( ! ! ( where high rates of pedestrian and bicycle collisions exist. ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! Vineland Ave La Land Use Map n kersh Burbank Blvd im B lv The Land Use Map depicts concentrations of land use within each ½-mile d M ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave SR 170 Fwy radius. The land use map highlights the types and characteristics of users that Magnolia Blvd are able to comfortably access the locations surrounding the station. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 20 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 20 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

151 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites tudy S AST M ILE ites S Case S PLAN TRATEGIC FIRST L Lankershim Blvd Vineland Ave Burbank Blvd Bicycle Connections M ! Chandler Blvd All infrastructure dedicated to bicycles in the roadway are shown in the Bicycle Tujunga Ave S R 170 Fw y Magnolia Blvd Connections map. This generally includes: existing bike lanes, sharrows, separated bike facilities, bike ‘friendly streets (in some areas where cities have defined this as a category), future bike routes, etc. La Vineland Ave n kersh Burbank Blvd Transit Connections im B lv d M ! Using Metro data, routes of all transit modes are mapped within the ½-mile Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave SR 17 0 Fwy Magnolia Blvd radius. This includes: all bus lines, light and heavy rail, and any other transit lines serving the station area. Statistics The following statistics were extracted from each station area to provide an overview of the site: average block length, intersection density, walk score, overlay zones, density, employment, and journey to work. 2. Access Barriers Overlay Map After compiling the information collected during the macro-level station area analysis, the maps described above were overlayed to show potential areas of intervention. The overlays described below provided substantial information North Hollywood Station that informed on-the-ground analysis. Long Blocks The freeway signicantly cuts Overlay land use and pedestrian shed map o access to neighborhoods to the west To begin, the station land use map was overlayed with the pedestrian shed L an Vineland Ave k Burbank Blvd ershim map. Here, any holes that existed within the ½-mile radius that would provide a Blvd East Valley High School’s Orange Line right-of-way property breaks up the M limits crossings ! street grid logical origin/destination user was highlighted. For example, where there were Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Commercial center heavy residential land uses on an area of the map that did not connect to the ½ disrupts the street grid Magnolia Blvd Recreational elds SR 170 Fwy mile pedestrian shed, a note was made, and the area was highlighted. occupy large area and prevent pedestrian cut-through Extremely long stretch (b/t Magnolia and Lankershim) without pedestrian crossings Overlay land use and bike connections map North The second step was to overlay the station land use map with the bicycle connections map. Here, any holes that existed within the ½-mile radius that would provide a logical origin/destination user was highlighted. The holes shown in these maps accounted for any areas that were missing connections to potentially heavy usage by bike riders. All highlighted areas were then synthesized. These maps informed the basis for routing the site visit. 3. Determine walking route Pulling from all highlighted areas from the overlay maps described above, walking routes were drawn that addressed potential improvement areas. As such, the walking route directly responded to potential problems or opportunity areas seen in the macro-level analysis and allowed for a more detailed on-the-ground analysis. 4. Site Visit - Station Survey The site visit offered the opportunity to begin micro-level analysis, and to begin to assess areas of intervention. For station specific analysis, a set of evaluation criteria and questions were written to consider current and future access needs and opportunities at each representative station/stop area. These questions were written as a survey checklist form. Mainly qualitative, these checklists measured performance of each station/stop area. With the end goal of increasing transit ridership, urban design elements that are most important for rider comfort and system function were added to the survey tool. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I 21 March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 21 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

152 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites tudy S S TRATEGIC FIRST L AST M ILE PLAN ites Case S The sample checklist (see Appendix) was prepared as a guide for on-the-ground analysis of each station area. While initially prepared for the case sites selected for the First/Last Mile, the format of the checklist is broad, and touches upon a range of issues faced by most station areas in the study region. As such, this checklist can be used to evaluate a wide range of stations in the area. The checklist is designed to broadly assess:1) safety elements, 2) aesthetics, and 3) accessibility within a station area. Each of these categories account for multi-modal experiences for all types of transit users. The results are keyed to a scoring tool that allows for comparison between stations. The scoring matrix below outlines the ranking system for each station area. In addition to assessing the physical conditions of the environment, overall observations were also made that record how people move to and from the stations themselves. This analysis is supplemented by photo documentation, and an open-answer area for additional information gathered during the site visit. Using this checklist, each station area has been visited, evaluated, and summarized in the pages that follow. Checklist (see Appendix) Scoring Matrix Poor 1-1.99 2-2.99 Fair 3-3.99 Good 4-5 Excellent 5. Identify Issues ESS PROJECT PROC From each surveyed station area, key issues are then identified. The synthesized data for each station area is documented in the pages that follow. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 22 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 22 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

153 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites TRATEGIC S PLAN ites tudy S ILE AST M FIRST L Case S SITE 1: Newhall Metrolink Station Newhall Metrolink Station Cluster A; High Residential/Low Centrality CSPP Place Type: City: Santa Clarita Special Considerations: SL R ailroad W alnut A ve St M ! t R Safety Rating: 3.33/5 (Good*) t S ac rke e a Few crossings M S Aesthetics Rating: 3.4/5 (Good*) t along creek Few crossings along creek Accessibility Rating: 2.43/5 (Fair*) N *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix e w h a ll A ve Few crossings along right-of-way Few crossings along rail right-of-way Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers North Opportunities Observed at Newhall Metrolink Issues Observed at Newhall Station Station Safety Main Street is the heart of Old Town Newhall and is one Pedestrian safety concerns with regard to: traffic • block west of the Metrolink station. Main Street has volumes, speeds and crossing times / distances been beautifully re-constructed per the vision outlined along Railroad Ave., Lyons Ave,, and Newhall Ave. in the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan. A wide range of pedestrian oriented treatments along Main Street Aesthetics have been built, including brick paving, wood decked • No issues to report boardwalks at corners, mid-block crossing, traffic calming, intersection bulb-outs, appropriately scaled Accessibility landscaping and street furnishings. The improvements • Crossings across Railroad Avenue are limited could extend one block east along Market Street to • Crossing at Market and Main Street has very long strengthen the pedestrian link to the Metrolink Station. signal cycle time, and no pedestrian prioritization • No accessible path for residents who live east The station area is composed of three distinct of the tracks, or for pedestrians crossing to the ‘neighborhood islands’. There is a tranquil community south side of the street of single family dwellings to the southeast of the tracks • Long pedestrian crossing and short traffic signal bounded by the tracks to the north and west, Newhall cycle at Lyons Ave and Newhall intersection Creek to the east, and Newhall Avenue to the south. No pedestrian signage for Metrolink beyond the • Main Street itself is flanked by small apartment buildings station site itself and anchored by a new library. The third neighborhood • Bike facilities not observed island in the station area is to the north of Lyon Ave. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 23 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 23 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

154 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 1: Newhall Metrolink Station nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 24 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 24 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

155 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites T M FIRS T L AS PLAN ILE Case Study Sites S TRATEGIC Transit Lines Freeway SITE 1: Newhall Metrolink Station SITE 1: Newhall Metrolink Station W W alnut alnut Rail Rail road road St St A A e v ve ve Lyons A s Ave n yo L R R M M ace S ace S ! t ! t t S t S rke rke a a t t M M N N e e w w h h a a l l l l Av Av e e Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Transit Connections Bicycle Connections Metrolink W W alnut alnut Rail Rail road road St St A A e e v v ve ve Lyons A Lyons A R R M M ace S ace S ! t ! t t S t S rke rke a a t t M M Ped & Bike Volumes N N e e w w h h a a l 1-5 l l l Av Av e e 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ High Vehicular Speeds Key Transit Access Corridors W ! ( alnut Rail Rail W alnut ! ( road road St St A A ve ve ( ! ! ( s Ave n yo L ! ( ! ( ! ( s Ave n yo L ( ! R R M ace S M ! ace S t ! t t S ( ! t S rke a rke t t a M M ( ! Low Res High Res N N e e Commerical w w h Ped & Bike h a a l l l Av l Av Office Collisions e e Industrial Crash Site Education Fatality Open Space Land Use Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other / Journey to Work: 23.2% take transit/bike/walk to work / Employment: 3.65 jobs per acre Walk Score: 78 / Density: 4,331 total population / Overlay Zones: N/A IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 25 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 25 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

156 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 1: Newhall Metrolink Station Newhall Metrolink Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metrolink Proposed Existing Bike Path Bike Lane G o Westeld Bike Route lden Santa Clarita Town Center Metrolink Cycletrack V al l ey College of the Canyons Santa Clarita M c B e a n Pk w y 14 · Newhall Metrolink Hart High ve A s n yo L School N e w h a l l Av e d v l B ve o r Calg 3-Mile Buffer 5 Major Destination * IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 26 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

157 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN AST M PLAN tudy S FIRST L TRATEGIC ILE S ites Case S Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 1: Newhall Metrolink Station 3.1 Pedestrian crossing at Railroad & 2.3 Vehicular-oriented residential neighborhood with limited Newhall Ave is not friendly pedestrian amenities 3.2 Non-accessible pedestrian path across tracks 3.1 Discontinuous sidewalk along Newhall Ave. approaching Lyon Ave. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I march 2013 26 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 27 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

158 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites S tudy S Case S TRATEGIC ites PLAN FIRST L ILE AST M Agoura-Liberty Canyon Bus Stop SITE 2: Agoura Rd/Liberty Canyon Rd Bus Stop - Line 161 CSPP Place Type: Cluster B; Low Residential/Low Centrality City: Agoura Hills SL/FWY Special Considerations: Freeway (US 101) Freeway (US 101) A g o u r a R d No access No access to large residential M to large ! neighborhood on north and residential west sides neighborhood No pedestrian/bicycle Safety Rating: 3.86/5 (Good*) No pedestrian/bicycle access access between between Agoura Rd. and Aesthetics Rating: 3.6/5 (Good*) residential neighborhood L residential neighborhood i be Accessibility Rating: 3.67/5 (Fair*) r t y C a *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix n yo n R d Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers North Opportunities Observed at Agora Rd/Liberty Issues Observed at Agora Rd/Liberty Canyon Rd Canyon Rd Bus Stop Bus Stop Metro Line 161 connects Thousand Oaks to Warner Safety Center traveling primarily along the 101 corridor. The Traffic speeds along Agoura Road are high, but • Agoura Rd/Liberty Canyon stop services a small pocket in-line with the type of development in the area of residential development located to the south of the stop. The streets and walks are well-maintained and Aesthetics free of obstruction. Traffic speeds tend to be higher • Station itself is lacking shade amenities due to the open nature of the roads. There are some • Station area is pleasant though uneventful painted bike facilities and the streets are wide enough • Auto-oriented to provide plenty of safe manoeuvring space for bikes and pedestrians. The bus stop is provided with a bench Accessibility and a sign post. • No issues to report IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 I 27 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 28 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

159 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 2: Agoura Rd/Liberty Canyon Rd Bus Stop - Line 161 nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 28 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 29 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

160 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN FIRS Case Study Sites T L T M ILE PLAN TRATEGIC S AS SITE 2: Agoura Rd/Liberty Canyon Rd Bus Stop - Line 161 US 101 US 101 d R ra gou A d R ra gou A M ! M ! L L i b i b erty erty C C a a ny ny o o n n Rd Rd Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Metrolink US 101 US 101 d R ra gou A d R ra gou A M ! M ! L L i b i b erty erty C C a Ped & Bike a ny ny o Volumes o n n Rd 1-5 Rd 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds d R US 101 ra gou A US 101 d R ra gou A ( ! ! < M ! M ! L L i b i b erty erty C Low Res C a a ny ny High Res o o n Commerical n Ped & Bike Rd Rd Office Collisions Industrial Crash Site Education Fatality Open Space Vacant/Other Collision Severity & Location Land Use / Journey to Work: N/A / / Density: N/A / Walk Score: 26 Overlay Zones: N/A Employment: N/A IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 29 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 30 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

161 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 2: Agoura Road/Liberty Canyon Road Bus Stop Agoura Road/Liberty Canyon Road Bus Stop LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan 0 3 1.5 Miles Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metro Route 161 Proposed Existing Bike Path Bike Lane Bike Route K a nan Rd Cycletrack Agoura Hills Thousand Oaks Blvd d R u a e r u M Agoura High School 101 A g o u ra R d M ! ( ! Agoura/Liberty Canyon L i Calabasas b d er v l B r le t d y n a Ch C d any R s e on n e Rd g r i V s 3-Mile Buffer La Mulholland Hwy Major Destination * IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 31 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

162 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites Case S ites tudy S AST M FIRST L ILE S TRATEGIC PLAN Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 2: Agoura Rd/Liberty Canyon Rd Bus Stop - Line 161 1.5/1.6 Lack of bus shelter, pedestrian amenities, large car-oriented superblocks with opportunity for speeding 1.6/2.3 Narrow pedestrian sidewalks, high traffic speed and lack of pedestrian amenities IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel march 2013 30 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 32 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

163 STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites S TRATEGIC ILE AST M FIRST L tudy S PLAN ites Case S Reseda Station SITE 3: Reseda Orange Line Station Cluster A; Medium Residential/Low Centrality CSPP Place Type: Sherman Oaks Los Angeles City: Elementary School SL/MM Special Considerations: Sherman Oaks Elementary School Etiwanda Ave Yolanda Ave Erwin St Limited crossings along Orange Line right-of-way Orange Line right-of-way M limits crossings ! Oxnard St Safety Rating: 2.14/5 (Fair*) Aesthetics Rating: 2.2/5 (Fair*) Large commercial and housing Large commercial and Reseda Blvd developments limit housing developments Accessibility Rating: 2.88/5 (Fair*) pedestrian/bicycle routes limit pedestrian and bicycle routes *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix US 101 Fwy Freeway Freeway may serve Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed as a psychological Barriers barrier North Opportunities Observed at Reseda Orange Line Issues Observed at Reseda Orange Line Station Station Safety Oxnard Street, to the south of the station, is • Traffic volumes and speeds along Reseda Blvd characterized by small industrial uses, complete with a contribute to safety concerns for pedestrians small strip mall, gas station, small industry-related uses, Lack of crossings along Oxnard • two larger institutional uses and a local landmark all Vacant industrial parcels along Oxnard / lack of • within 1/4 mile of the Orange Line. The lots on the south ‘eyes-on-the-street’ side are very deep and bisected by service alleys. Some sites are actively used, others vacant. Aesthetics • Lack of visual interest, non-transparency, minimal There is steady pedestrian traffic to and from the entries Orange Line mostly north and south along Reseda • Existing uses internal-facing, minimal street primarily due to transfers to and from the local busses presence adjacent to Oxnard Street that service Reseda Blvd. Accessibility The Orange Line stop itself is serviced by large surface • Lack of pedestrian crossings along Reseda parking lots directly to the east and west of the Oxnard/ Traffic calming required along Reseda and Oxnard • Reseda intersection, and a dedicated bike path that in vicinity of station runs along the tracks. Densely-populated residential • Large block lengths areas exist to the north and south of the station, beyond • Lack of shade trees along sidewalks the light industrial areas. Very wide streets, difficult to cross, especially for • slower pedestrian and universal access modes IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 31 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 33 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

164 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 3: Reseda Orange Line Station nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 32 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 34 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

165 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites TRATEGIC T M T L FIRS AS ILE S PLAN Case Study Sites SITE 3: Reseda Orange Line Station Victory Blvd Victory Blvd Wilbur Ave Wilbur Ave Etiwanda Ave Etiwanda Ave Erwin St Erwin St Lindley Ave Lindley Ave M M ! ! Oxnard St Oxnard St Yolanda Ave Yolanda Ave Reseda Blvd Reseda Blvd US 101 Fwy US 101 Fwy Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Orange Line Victory Blvd Victory Blvd Wilbur Ave Wilbur Ave Etiwanda Ave Etiwanda Ave Erwin St Erwin St Lindley Ave Lindley Ave M M ! ! Oxnard St Oxnard St Yolanda Ave Yolanda Ave Reseda Blvd Reseda Blvd Ped & Bike Volumes 1-5 6-10 11-25 US 101 Fwy US 101 Fwy > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds ! ( ( ! Victory Blvd ! ( < ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! Etiwanda Ave Etiwanda Ave ! ( Erwin St ! ( Erwin St Lindley Ave Wilbur Ave ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( M M Oxnard St ! ! Oxnard St ( ! ( ! Yolanda Ave Yolanda Ave ! ( Reseda Blvd Reseda Blvd Low Res ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! High Res Commerical Ped & Bike Office Collisions ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! Industrial Crash Site US 101 Fwy US 101 Fwy ! ( Education Fatality Open Space ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! Land Use / / / Density: 13,038 total population Journey to Work: 12.2% take transit/bike/walk to work Walk Score: 74 / Employment: 4.59 jobs per acre Overlay Zones: N/A IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 33 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 35 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

166 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 3: Reseda Orange Line Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Reseda Orange Line Station Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metro Orange Line Proposed Existing Metro Rapid or BRT Routes Bike Path Northridge Bike Lane Hospital Re Bike Route s eda Cycletrack B l vd t S icoy t a S W W i h n i t n e e O tk a a Reseda High k Ave A v School e vd l B y ctor i V Pierce College M Reseda Orange Line ! ( ! Lake Balboa / Sepulveda Basin 101 V e n tur a B l vd 3-Mile Buffer vd l Major Destination * Santa Monica eseda B R Mountains IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 36 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

167 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN AST M PLAN FIRST L Case S S ILE tudy S ites TRATEGIC Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 3: Reseda Orange Line Station 1.7 Visual clutter, unclear signage 2.4 Alley and empty parking lot in center of large station area block 3.8 Looking across Oxnard to fenced and 3.7 Orange Line multi-use trail without accessible ramp underutilized Metro park-and-ride lot IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I march 2013 34 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 37 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

168 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites TRATEGIC S tudy S Case S PLAN ILE AST M FIRST L ites SITE 4: North Hollywood Red Line/Orange Line Station Cluster C; High Residential/Medium Centrality CSPP Place Type: North Hollywood Station City: Los Angeles T /PnR/UG&SL Special Considerations: MM/ Long Blocks The freeway signicantly cuts o access to neighborhoods to the west La Vineland Ave n kersh Burbank Blvd im B l v East Valley High School’s d Orange Line right-of-way property breaks up the M limits crossings ! street grid Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Safety Rating: 3.38/5 (Good*) Aesthetics Rating: 3/5 (Good*) Commercial center disrupts the street grid Accessibility Rating: 2.75/5 (Fair*) Magnolia Blvd Recreational elds S R 170 Fwy *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix occupy large area and prevent pedestrian cut-through Extremely long stretch (b/t Magnolia and Lankershim) without pedestrian crossings Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers North Issues Observed at Olive St/San Fernando Station Opportunities Observed at Olive St/San Fernando Station Safety Lack of separated bicycle infrastructure along • The North Hollywood Station serves as a critical main roads connector for the Metro Red Line and the Orange Line Bus. The Red Line connects directly to a Downtown Aesthetics Los Angeles terminus, while the Orange Line Bus Along secondary streets that connect residential • Terminal directly connects to easterly to Ventura. The neighborhoods to station, land uses and the site’s station lies in the center of the North Hollywood (NoHo) block network create an unpleasant pedestrian Arts District. environment (e.g. superblocks with minimal pedestrian crossings, and unfriendly/noisy land Additionally, the site is adjacent to the Hollywood uses flanking the street) Art Institute campus, and a lively retail and housing district. With recent streetscape enhancements and Accessibility the subject of a number of CRA/LA redevelopment Orange and Red Lines stops face different • projects, the North Hollywood Station serves a vast directions and connections between the two are demographic and has significant catchment potential unclear within the surrounding region. Also located within the • Bicycle racks are completely full 1/2 mile pedestrian shed is the NoHo Park, which has the potential to draw daily visitors. Currently, the park • Park-and-ride is often full does not offer enough seating, and does not have a welcoming street-edge. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 35 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 38 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

169 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 4: North Hollywood Red Line/Orange Line Station nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 36 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 39 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

170 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites AS FIRS ILE PLAN TRATEGIC S T L T M Case Study Sites SITE 4: North Hollywood Red Line/Orange Line Station L Vineland Ave L Vineland Ave a a n n k Burbank Blvd k Burbank Blvd ersh ersh im im Bl B l v v d d M M ! ! Chandler Blvd Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave Tujunga Ave S S R R 17 17 0 0 Fw Fw y y Magnolia Blvd Magnolia Blvd Local Rapid/Express Existing Metrolink Proposed Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Vineland Ave Burbank Blvd L Burbank Blvd Vineland Ave a L n an k ersh k ershim im B Chandler Blvd l v Blvd d M ! M ! Chandler Blvd SR 17 Tujunga Ave Tujunga Ave S R 170 Fw 0 Fwy Ped & Bike Magnolia Blvd y Magnolia Blvd Volumes 1-5 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! Vineland Ave L L a an Burbank Blvd n ( ! ( ! k Burbank Blvd k ersh ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ershim ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! im Vineland Ave ( ! B ! ( l Blvd v ( ! ( ! d ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( M ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! M ! ( ! ( ! Chandler Blvd Tujunga Ave S ! ( Chandler Blvd S ! ( ( ! ( ! R R ( ! 170 Fw 170 Fw ! ( ! ( Low Res ! ( ! ( y Tujunga Ave y Magnolia Blvd Magnolia Blvd High Res ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( Commerical ! ( Ped & Bike ( ! ( ! Office Collisions ! ! ( ( Industrial ! ( ( ! Crash Site ! ( Education ( ! ( ! Fatality Open Space ! ( ! ( Land Use Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other ( ! ( ! / Employment: 8.47 jobs per acre / Overlay Zones: “NoHo” Commerical Arts District Walk Score: 95 / Journey to Work: 14.7 / Density: 11,870 total population take tansit/bike/walk to work IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 37 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 40 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

171 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites SITE 4: North Hollywood Orang/Red Line Station ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! North Hollywood Orange/Red Line Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Transit and Bicycle Network ! ! KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Vi ! ! n Metrolink Proposed Existing e ! ! la n Metro Orange Line Bike Path ! d ! ! ! A Metro Red Line ve Bike Lane ! ! ay W n rma e Sh Bike Route ! ! ! ! ! Bob Hope ! ! Cycletrack La 5 Airport T uj ur ! ! ! ! un el ! C g ! Metrolink a a 170 n L · A ! ! y ! a M ! ! ! v o n e a k n p e ! ! Olive San Fernando rs le hi ! ! ! Burbank ! S ! ( ! m ! t d v B l B r lv ! e LA Valley College l ! nd d a h C d v l B k n a rb u B ! ! ! ! North Hollywood ! ! ! M ! ! ! ( C Ave olf ! ! go ! ! du Art Institute r e a V ! x Ave Providence r D side r e v i R Hospital ! ! ! 101 ! ! ! ! 134 · Warner Brothers 3-Mile Buffer d lv B a r u t n e V ! ( Universal City Major Destination * 101 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 41 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

172 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN S ILE AST M FIRST L TRATEGIC Case S tudy S ites PLAN Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 4: North Hollywood Red Line/Orange Line Station 1.3 Lack of maintenance of public realm 3.2 Lack of crossings along superblocks 3.1 Inadequate sidewalks 3.5 Graffiti on signage 3.1 Utilities in sidewalks 3.7 Lack of curb cuts 3.8 Fenced parking is a barrier for community access IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I march 2013 38 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 42 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

173 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST L Case S PLAN tudy S ites TRATEGIC S ILE AST M SITE 5: Olive Street/San Fernando Bus Line Stop - Line 794 Olive-San Fernando Bus Stop CSPP Place Type: Cluster D; High Residential/High Centrality City: Burbank Large shopping mall here severs San Fernando Blvd and breaks MM/FWY/SL Special Considerations: up the grid Ave e iv l O nolia Blvd g a M Fir s t St M ! S a n Fe r na n do B Safety Rating: 3.25/5 (Good*) l F v r d o n t St Aesthetics Rating: 3.6/5 (Good*) Accessibility Rating: 2.7/5 (Fair*) *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix Few crossing points over the rail tracks Freeway North Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers Issues Observed at Olive St/San Fernando Station Opportunities Observed at Olive St/San Fernando Station Safety Bikes are not separated from vehicles or provided a • Olive St/San Fernando is a unique station that serves buffer more than one transit line. In addition to the Metro Lack of clear safety signage • Bus Line 794 at the intersection of Olive St. and San Fernando Blvd., a regional Metrolink station lies Aesthetics just within the 1/2 mile accessible pedestrian shed. • Vacant industrial parcels along Oxnard / lack of Connecting the bus line with the wider, Metrolink eyes-on-the-street regional transit line provides a critical link to regional travelers, offering the opportunity to extend the first/last Accessibility mile shed. Unclear transit mode transfer between Metrolink • station and Bus Stop 794 Streetscaping surrounding Metro Bus Line 794 • Limited and hard to read transit signage incorporates a number of pedestrian amenities and • Pathways to Metrolink line the freeway, and are services. Ample bike racks are provided, along with uninviting to pedestrians significant shade tree planting along heavily trafficked Lack of street lights along roads that connect transit • corridors. Highly visible crossings and wide sidewalks modes provide ample room for 794 riders when entering • Lack of bicycle infrastructure, special paving and/or Downtown Burbank. street level amenities outside of downtown node IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I 39 March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 43 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

174 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 5: Olive Street/San Fernando Bus Line Stop - Line 794 nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 40 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 44 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

175 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN TRATEGIC AS Case Study Sites PLAN T L T M ILE S FIRS SITE 5: Olive Street/San Fernando Bus Line Stop - Line 794 nolia Blvd nolia Blvd g g a a ve e e M M A v v Ave A e A e iv o iv o l l g g O O u u d rd Fir r Fir s Ve s Ve t t St St M M ! ! G G S S l a l a e en n n n Fe Fe o o aks Blvd aks Blvd r rna na n n do B do Blvd I I - - 5 Fwy 5 Fwy l v d Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Transit Connections Bicycle Connections Metrolink nolia Blvd nolia Blvd g g a a ve e e M M A v v Ave A A e e iv o iv o l l g g O O u u d rd r Fir Fir s Ve s Ve t t St St M M ! ! G G S S l l a a e en n n n Fe Fe o o aks Blvd aks Blvd r rna na n n do B do Blvd I I - - 5 Fwy 5 Fwy Ped & Bike l v d Volumes 1-5 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! nolia Blvd nolia Blvd ( ! g g a a ve ( ! e ! ( ( ! M M A v Ave ! ( A e e iv o iv ( ! l g e O Ol ( ! u v ! ( ! ( A Fir rd Fir ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( o s s Ve ! ( ( ! ( ! t g t St u ! ( St ! ( ( ! d ! ( ! ( ( ! M M r ! ! G S S l Ve a a e ( ! n n n Fe Fe ! ( o ! ( aks Blvd ( ! r r na na ( ! ( ! ! ( n n ( ! do B do B I Low Res I - - ( ! 5 Fwy 5 Fwy ! ( ! ( l l v v High Res ( ! d d ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( Commerical Ped & Bike Office Collisions ( ! ! ( Industrial ( ! Crash Site ! ( Education ( ! ( ! Fatality ! ( Open Space ( ! ! ( Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( Land Use Density: 4,845 total population Journey to Work: 14.4% take transit/bike/walk to work / Overlay Zones: N/A / Employment: 69.29 jobs per acre / / Walk Score: 94 IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 41 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 45 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

176 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 5: Olive Street/San Fernando Blvd Bus Stop LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Olive Street/San Fernando Blvd Bus Stop Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metrolink Proposed Existing Los Angeles Metro Rapid or BRT Routes Bike Path Bike Lane Bike Route Cycletrack d R h t ne en K 5 r D t s er h Burbank K m en A ne ia th nc e R Burbank Town d d i v e Av c  i c a P o Center r P St ve Olive/San Fernando e A l M ! ( ! K w e e i ys Myriad Pro 13.6 Map G le d t dv v l n o Metrolink B r n oaks n le d a n e a Glendale S Ch Gr Bl t v d ! ( ! ( e v A North go e du r v e V Hollywood A e v r D li e d i O rs e v i Disney/Dreamworks R 3-Mile Buffer Providence Hospital 134 · Major Destination Grith Park * ! ( IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 46 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

177 STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites TRATEGIC FIRST L S ILE tudy S Case S PLAN AST M ites Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 5: Olive Street/San Fernando Bus Line Stop - Line 794 1.7 Unclear Safety Signage 1.1/1.6 No pedestrian lighting adjacent to Metrolink/cut through traffic at unsafe speeds. 3.4/3.6 Limited signage 2.3 Need for landscaping/maintenance 1.2/2.1 Vacant lots and unclear transit transfer 3.1 No connection to downtown Burbank 2.5 Unfriendly street conditions for pedestrians IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel march 2013 42 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 47 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

178 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites PLAN Case S ites tudy S TRATEGIC S ILE AST M FIRST L SITE 6: Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station CSPP Place Type: Cluster B; Low Residential/Medium Centrality abriel Valley Sierra Madre Villa Station City: Pasadena /PnR/FWY/J T Special Considerations: MM/ Residential neighborhood has few access points Ave Water channel a Madre Vill Large commercial/oce centers a limit pedestrian/bicycle movements Sierr d v l Bl il oth o F This frontage road actually y Fw 0 I-21 connects to Madre St., so Station can only be accessed this is an accessible area M ! through parking garage on Safety Rating: 2.88/5 (Fair*) Colorado Blvd north side of freeway R Aesthetics Rating: 2.6/5 (Fair*) os St emead Accessibility Rating: 2.88/5 (Fair*) re d Kinneloa Ave a M B lvd Del Mar Blvd *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix Long blocks restrict east-west movements Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed North Barriers Opportunities Observed at Sierra Madre Villa Issues Observed at Sierra Madre Villa Station Station Safety The Sierra Madre Villa Station is in the freeway median Limited lighting along residential neighborhoods • of the I-210 freeway. Opportunities for residents working adjacent to the station in concentrated commercial nodes (e.g. Downtown • Lack of transparent ground floors or entries Los Angeles) exist as a visual and logical alternative to Limited safety signage (when crossing residential • vehicular congestion. The station offers a robust park- neighborhood to the station) and-ride structure (958 stalls), and connects to a retail center to the north. Aesthetics • Limited number of shade trees and/or The station currently allows access to and from the landscaping within the public realm northern, commercially dominated landscape, but does • Overall lack of pedestrian amenities not provide connection for residents living to the south No bus shelters in waiting areas • of the station. Opportunities to enhance first/last mile • Loud freeway noise ridership include the following: provide a pedestrian bridge that allows access to the station for the adjacent Accessibility residential community, increase high quality signage • Access is only located through 4th floor of parking to the south of the freeway to highlight the Gold Line structure, and is not connected to residential station, and enhance active transportation infrastructure community to the south to the surrounding residential neighborhood. • Narrow sidewalks, where provided Lack of signage for transit mode transfer • • Pathways are unmarked/not intuitive IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 43 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 48 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

179 M L F ites S tudy S AST IRST I Case LAN P TRATEGIC S E L SITE 6: Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station nterest I Points of Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN TRATEGIC PLAN Case S tudy S ites FIRST L AST M ILE S IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 44 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 SITE 6: Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station I nterest Points of IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I 44 March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 49 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

180 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN T M Case Study Sites S FIRS ILE PLAN TRATEGIC T L AS SITE 6: Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station Ave Ave a a Madre Vill Madre Vill a a d v Bl l il oth o d F v Bl l il oth o F Sierr Sierr I-210 I-210 M M ! ! Colorado Blvd Colorado Blvd lvd lvd B B St St re re Kinneloa Ave d d a a emead emead M M os os Kinneloa Ave R R Del Mar Blvd Del Mar Blvd Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Gold Line Ave Ave a a Madre Vill Madre Vill a a d v Bl l il oth o F Sierr d v Bl l il oth o F Sierr I-210 I-210 M ! M ! Colorado Blvd Colorado Blvd lvd lvd B B St St re Ped & Bike re d Kinneloa Ave d a Volumes emead a M emead M os Kinneloa Ave os R Del Mar Blvd 1-5 R Del Mar Blvd 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds Ave a Ave ! ( a ! ( Madre Vill ! ( a Madre Vill a Sierr d v Bl l il oth o F d Sierr v Bl l il oth o F ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( I-210 I-210 ( ! M ! ! M ! Colorado Blvd Colorado Blvd ( ! ( ! lvd ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ( lvd B B St ( ! St Low Res re Kinneloa Ave re Kinneloa Ave d High Res d a a emead emead M M Commerical os Ped & Bike os R Del Mar Blvd R Del Mar Blvd Office Collisions ! ( ! ( ! ( Industrial Crash Site Education Fatality Open Space Land Use Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other Walk Score: 75 Overlay Zones: N/A / Journey to Work: 7.2 take transit/bike/walk to work / Density: 3,351 total population / / Employment: 12.61 jobs per acre IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 45 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 50 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

181 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 6: Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan La Canada Flintridge Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metro Gold Line Existing Proposed Metro Rapid or BRT Routes Bike Path Bike Lane Bike Route Cycletrack Eaton Canyon Ma Park d Sierra Madre r e St Victory Park Blvd erra Madre i S Pasadena Monrovia d Blv e ov r ge G n ra O d R ill h n e re G St a l il V ! ( ! ( Sierra Madre Gold Line 210 Pasadena ! ( ! ( M ! R City College os Westeld d Blv r a M l e D em ! ( Santa Anita ead B t l S a u asq P an S CalTech Arcadia l v ! ( gton Dr d n ti n u H Huntington Gardens d v l B r e l d 3-Mile Buffer n San Marino a h C Major Destination ! ( South Pasadena * Temple City Alhambra Los Angeles IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 51 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

182 STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites AST M FIRST L TRATEGIC tudy S S ILE Case S ites PLAN Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 6: Sierra Madre Villa Gold Line Station 2.4 Lack of bus shelter / pedestrian amenities 2.3 Need for increased landscaping and/or shade trees 2.5 Visual Clutter - not obscured by landscape 3.2 Narrow sidewalks along highly trafficked path 3.5 Need for safe, separated bicycle facilities IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I march 2013 46 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 52 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

183 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE PLAN S ites TRATEGIC tudy S Case S AST M FIRST L Wilshire-Normandie Station SITE 7: Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station Cluster D; High Residential/High Centrality CSPP Place Type: City: Los Angeles Special Considerations: UG 3rd St N o r ma n Western Ave di e Ave Vermont Ave Catalina St 6th St Wilshire Blvd M ! Robert F. Kennedy Safety Rating: 2.25/5 (Fair*) Community Aesthetics Rating: 2.4/5 (Fair*) Irolo St Schools Robert F. Kennedy Accessibility Rating: 2.57/5 (Fair*) Community Schools 8th St *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers North Issues Observed at Wilshire/Normandie Station Opportunities Observed at Wilshire/Normandie Station Safety • Lack of pedestrian lighting within 1/2 mile Located along the Wilshire Corridor (a key connector throughout Los Angeles County) the Wilshire Normandie radius Station is situated in the midst of an active commercial Located along a high-speed corridor • zone and along a regular street grid. Additionally, adjacent to the site are a number of educational Aesthetics facilities, including Robert F. Kennedy Community No identifying sense of place • • Schools, a 26-acre facility that hosts six independent Sparse landscaping along residential connector streets public schools. Serving over 4,200 students at this campus alone, the site hosts students of all ages within Trash strewn along streets/lack of overall • maintenance a 9-block radius. Wilshire’s commercial corridor is surrounded by a dense Accessibility residential population. Bicycle-friendly streets parallel • Crowded sidewalks Wilshire Boulevard, and allow ample room for non- • Long crossing wait time • vehicular traffic to the north of the station. Additionally, Unclear transit transfer / directional signage Metro has proposed a regional Bus Rapid Transit that Lack of bicycle lanes - bicyclists riding on • will run along Wilshire Boulevard, connecting regional crowded streets and local users to the Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 I 47 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 53 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

184 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 7: Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 48 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 54 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

185 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites EGI AS FIRS Case Study Sites LAN C P T L TR AT S ILE T M SITE 7: Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station 3rd St 3rd St Western Ave N Vermont Ave Western Ave Catalina St o r Normandie Av Catalina St ma n di e Ave 6th St 6th St e Wilshire Blvd M ! Wilshire Blvd M ! Vermont Ave Irolo St Irolo St 8th St 8th St Local Rapid/Express Existing Red Line Proposed Purple Line Transit Connections Bicycle Connections 3rd St 3rd St N o Western Ave r ma Normandie Av Vermont Ave Catalina St Catalina St n Vermont Ave di e Ave 6th St 6th St e Wilshire Blvd Wilshire Blvd M Western Ave M ! ! Irolo St Irolo St Ped & Bike 8th St 8th St Volumes 1-5 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( 3rd St ! ( ! ( ! ( 3rd St ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! < ! < ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! < < ( ! ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! N Normandie Av ( ! ( ! o r ma ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( Western Ave n ! ( Western Ave ( ! di ! ( ( ! e Ave Vermont Ave Vermont Ave ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! e ! ( ( ! 6th St ( ! ! ( ( ! 6th St ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( Wilshire Blvd ( ! ! ( ( ! M Wilshire Blvd ( ! ( ! M ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! < ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( Catalina St Catalina St ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! Irolo St ( ! Irolo St ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( Low Res ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! 8th St ! ( ! ( High Res ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! < ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( 8th St ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! < ! ! ( ( ! Commerical ! ( Ped & Bike ( ! ! ( ! ( Office ! ( ! ( Collisions ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! Industrial ! ( ! ( Crash Site Education ( ! ( ! Fatality ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! < ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( Open Space ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! < ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ! < ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! Land Use / Journey to Work: 36.3% take transit/bike/walk to work Employment: 47.36 jobs per acre Walk Score: 95 Density: 39,309 total population / / / Overlay Zones: N/A IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 49 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 55 June 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

186 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites SITE 7: Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metro Red/Purple Lines Proposed Existing ! ( ! Metro Expo Line ( ! ( Bike Path Metro Blue Line Bike Lane ! ( Ave n ai t un o F Metro Rapid or BRT Bike Route West Hollywood Routes Cycletrack ! ( 101 ! ( LA City College Western Ave Arden Blvd ! ( ! ( 4th St Beverly Hills LA County Wilshire/Normandie ! ( ! ( ! ( M Museum of Art ! ( ! MacArthur Park Wilsh ire B lvd Vermont Blvd 110 ! ( ! ( ! ( · ! ( O l y mp i c B l v d ! ( ! ( ! ! ! ( ( ( LA Live/ ! ( ! ( Pico Blvd Convention Center ! ( ! ! ( ( 3-Mile Buffer 10 Arlington Ave ! ( Major Destination ! ( ! ( * ! ( ! ( Culver City ! ( ! ( USC ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( Vernon Unincorporated ! ( IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 56 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

187 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites AST M FIRST L PLAN Case S S TRATEGIC ILE ites tudy S Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 7: Wilshire/Normandie Purple Line Station 1.4 Lack of bicycle facilities (off-street( 1.4 Lack of bicycle facilities (on 2.2 Empty tree wells street) 2.4 Trash strewn along sidewalk 3.5 Unclear signage / grafitti 3.8 Fenced wall disconnects linkages to school IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I march 2013 50 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 57 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

188 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites PLAN AST M tudy S S ILE FIRST L ites Case S TRATEGIC SITE 8: Highland Park Gold Line Station CSPP Place Type: Cluster C; High Residential/Medium Centrality Highland Park Station City: Los Angeles Special Considerations: SL Franklin High School occupies Odd street conguration a large piece of land and results in gaps in street grid breaks up the street grid St ldama A t t S Vista S a e o ont er M u ig F M ! Safety Rating: 3.13/5 (good*) A ve A Aesthetics Rating: 3.6/5 (good*) 5 v 7 e Av 6 0 Accessibility Rating: 3.38/5 (good*) e 5 4 Steep topography 0 Fwy *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix interrupts the street grid 1 R 1 S Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers North Issues Observed at Highland Park Gold Line Opportunities Observed at Highland Park Gold Station Line Station Safety The Highland Park station serves a largely residential • Lack of bicycle infrastructure community just 7 miles outside of the Downtown • High traffic speeds along Figueroa Los Angeles, and is connected by the gold Line to Pasadena. The Highland Park gold Line Station is Aesthetics neighborhood-scaled, and located off of a heavily No special signage • trafficked arterial street. With such a large residential population with potential for traffic in both directions, Accessibility (southwest to Downtown Los Angeles and northeast to • Lack of bicycle infrastructure (same as in safety Pasadena) first/last mile users would likely travel to both category) the east and west from the Highland Park station. Limited sidewalk width • Just off of the main arterial, the Highland Park Station is located parallel to a bustling retail corridor, offering visitors with a diverse array of eateries, and local shops to visit. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 51 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 58 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

189 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 8: Highland Park Gold Line Station nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 52 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 59 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

190 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites EGI FIRS T M ILE S TR AT AS C P LAN Case Study Sites T L SITE 8: Highland Park Gold Line Station Y or Y k or B k lv B d lv d St St ldama ldama A A ta St s ta St s nte Vi nte Vi o o M M A a St ve A a St o o M er ve ! M er u 5 ! u g i g 7 F i 5 F A 7 A Av v Av v e e e 6 e 6 0 5 0 5 4 4 0 Fwy 0 Fwy 1 1 R 1 R 1 S S Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Gold Line Y or k B lv d St St ldama ldama A A St ta St ta St s s a ro e nte Vi nte Vi u o o A M M ig ve F 5 A 7 ve a St o M M er ! ! u 5 g i Av 7 F A A e Av v v e 5 e 4 e 6 6 0 5 0 4 Ped & Bike Volumes 1-5 0 Fwy 0 Fwy 1 1 6-10 R 1 R 1 S S 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( Y or k B lv ( ! d ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! St St ( ! ( ! ! ( ldama ldama A ! ( ! ( A ( ! ( ! ! ! ( ( ! ( ( ! St ta St t ta St s s S a a ro o ! ( nte Vi e ! ( nte Vi o o u er ! ( A M M ig ve gu F ! ( i ( ! F 5 A ! ( ! ( 7 ve M ! M ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! < ! ( ! ( 5 7 ( ! Av ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( A ! ( ! ( Av v ! ( ! ( e e A ! ( 5 e v 6 4 e 0 ( ! 5 ! ( ( ! Low Res 6 ! ( 4 ( ! 0 ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ( ! High Res ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ! ( ( ( ! ( ! Commerical ! ( Ped & Bike ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! Office 0 Fwy 0 Fwy Collisions 1 1 ! ( ! ( ! < ( ! ! ( Industrial R 1 R 1 S S Crash Site ! ( Education ( ! Fatality ( ! ( ! ( ! Open Space Land Use Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other ! ( ( ! ( ! / Employment: 2.84 jobs per acre Overlay Zones: Highland Park-Garvanza Historic Preservation Overlay Zone Walk Score: 83 / / Density: 16,311 total population / Journey to Work: 19.5% take transit/bike/walk to work IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 53 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 60 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

191 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 8: Highland Park Gold Line Station Highland Park Gold Line Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metro Gold Line Existing Proposed ! ( ! ( Metro Rapid or BRT Routes Bike Path Glendale Pasadena ! ( 134 Bike Lane · Bike Route ! ( d v Bl do a r o l o C Cycletrack Unincorporated Eagle Rock Business District ! F ( i g ue 2 ro · Occidental a St College San Pascual Park Blvd San Marino k c Y o r o k B R l vd le Eag ! ( Ave Highland Park ! M ( 5 ! ! ( South Pasadena 0 San Gabriel 110 Los Angeles · ! ( Debs Park r D on t g Alhambra n i nt 3-Mile Buffer u ! ( H 5 G ri  ! ( Major Destination t h Av * e ! ( Monterey Park ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 61 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

192 STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites ILE S ites tudy S Case S FIRST L TRATEGIC AST M PLAN Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 8: Highland Park Gold Line Station 1.2/2.4 Vacant lots / grafitti / no special signage 3.1Buckling sidwalks / inadequate sidewalk width IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel march 2013 54 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 62 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

193 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites Case S PLAN TRATEGIC ites tudy S AST M S ILE FIRST L SITE 9: Douglas Green Line Station Douglas Green Line Station CSPP Place Type: Low Residential/High Centrality Few crossing points along the Green Line and freight l Segundo E City: right-of-way E L/PnR Special Considerations: Wall around dense residential neighborhood, No crossing points along the with no ped/bike access freight right-of-way, separating Aviation Blvd the station from major shopping destingation on northwest side Alaska Ave H a wa No crosswalk to Hawaii St M i i ! S t from eastside of Aviation Blvd Douglas St Safety Rating: 1.38/5 (Poor*) Aesthetics Rating: 1.2/5 (Poor*) Accessibility Rating: 1.63/5 (Poor*) Rosecrans Ave *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix Access Barriers Overlay North 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Issues Observed at Douglas Green Line Station Opportunities Observed at Douglas Green Line Station Safety • No pedestrian lighting Located in an industrial zone, the Douglas green Line is located in a large employment center. The station itself No eyes-on-the-street or transparent walls • No bicycle infrastructure • prominently elevated above vehicular traffic. Narrow sidewalks • The station’s physical proximity to Los Angeles • Speeding traffic Lack of safety signage international Airport provides a strong potential to • connect air travellers Los Angeles County Light Rail network. Future Metro expansions will extend the green Aesthetics Line directly to the airport. in the meantime, the Douglas No sense of place • station has the opportunity to highlight vistor’s initial Lack of pedestrian amenities • experience of Los Angeles transit options. With strong Vacant lots • connections to the airport and surrounding industrial job centers, the Douglas Station is encapsulated by trip Accessibility generating activity, and has high potential to increase • Narrow sidewalks first/last mile ridership. • Unclear crossings Lack of transit transfer signage • Limited bicycle parking • Unclear navigation of public realm • IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 55 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 63 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

194 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 9: Douglas Green Line Station nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 56 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 64 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

195 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites EGI FIRS LAN C P Case Study Sites TR AT S ILE T M AS T L SITE 9: Douglas Green Line Station y y es Wa es Wa gh gh u u Utah Ave H H Alaska Ave Alaska Ave H H a a wai wai Aviation Blvd Aviation Blvd i M M i M M ! ! ! ! S S t t Douglas St Douglas St Rosecrans Ave Rosecrans Ave Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Transit Connections Bicycle Connections Green Line y y es Wa es Wa gh u gh Utah Ave H u Utah Ave H Alaska Ave Alaska Ave H a H wai a Aviation Blvd wai i M M Aviation Blvd ! ! S i M M t ! ! Douglas St S t Douglas St Ped & Bike Rosecrans Ave Rosecrans Ave Volumes 1-5 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ High Vehicular Speeds Key Transit Access Corridors y y es Wa es Wa gh u gh Utah Ave H u Utah Ave H ! ( Alaska Ave Alaska Ave H H a wai a wai Aviation Blvd Aviation Blvd M M i M M ! ! ! ! S i t S Douglas St Douglas St t Low Res Rosecrans Ave High Res Rosecrans Ave ! ( Commerical Ped & Bike Office Collisions Industrial Crash Site Education Fatality Open Space Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other Land Use Walk Score: 85 Journey to Work: 1.2% take transit/bike/walk to work / / Density: 732 total population / / Overlay Zones: N/A Employment: 21.11 jobs per acre IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 57 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 65 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

196 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 9: Douglas Green Line Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Douglas Green Line Station Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Los Angeles Metro Green Line Proposed Existing Inglewood Metro Rapid or BRT Routes Bike Path Bike Lane LAX Int’l Bike Route Airport Cycletrack ! ( 105 ! ( ! ( D ! ( o A u ! ( vi g a l as ti o S Hawthorne n El Segundo Blvd t El Segundo ! ( B Hawthorne Blvd l v d Douglas Green Line M ! ( ! ! ( Rosecrans Ave Beach Bike Marine Ave ! ( Path El Camino Pollywog Park College Manhattan Beach Manhattan Beach Blvd Lawndale 3-Mile Buffer 405 Major Destination Artesia Blvd * Redondo Beach Grant Ave IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez June 2013 66 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

197 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN C P EGI TR AT S ILE FIRS LAN Case Study Sites AS T M T L o Do CUM en TAT ion PHoT *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 9: Douglas Green Line Station 1.1/2.3/3.3 No pedestrian lighting, 1.6/3.5 No sidewalks / no facilities for bicyclists limited landscaping, limited crossings etc... 2.4 Pedestrian amenities in the 2.1 Unfriendly street conditions 2.3 Need for landscaping right-of way maintenance 3.2/3.3 Small sidewalks, and 2.5 Visual clutter - not obscured 3.1/3.4/3.6 Unclear navigation of unsafe, speeding traffic by landscape station, lack of transit mode transfer signage & unclear safety signage IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 58 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 67 June 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

198 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ites TRATEGIC S ILE AST M FIRST L Case S tudy S PLAN ites tudy S Case S PLAN TRATEGIC S ILE AST M FIRST L SITE 10: Harbor Gateway Transit Center (Artesia Transit SITE 10: Harbor Gateway Transit Center (Artesia Transit Center) Silver Line Station Center) Silver Line Station Harbor Gateway Transit Center Points of Interest CSPP Place Type: Cluster C; Medium Residential/High Centrality No pedestrian/bicycle access Los Angeles City: to this neighborhood on the south and west sides T /MM/PnR/FWY SL/ Special Considerations: Freeways with limited crossings No pedestrian crosswalk 3 at Cassidy Street Figueroa St M Safety Rating: 1.29/5 (Poor*) ! Freeway o-ramp and large parking lot Aesthetics Rating: 1/5 (Poor*) t S nd 2 8 1 Accessibility Rating: 2.34/5 (Fair*) V e rmont 1 A *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix Gated cemetery v e Water channel with few crossing points 2 110 Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers North T Issues Observed at Harbor G T C C Opportunities Observed at Harbor G The Harbor gateway Transit Center is the southern Safety Unsafe traffic volumes and speeds along Vermont terminus of the Silver Line, and a transfer station for • Lack of pedestrian design amenities combined a number of other Metro bus, municipal bus and • with harsh industrial landscape and extensive miscellaneous coach line services. The hub is integrated parking lots contribute to concern for security with a 900+ car park-and-ride lot and bounded on all sides by freeways, drainage infrastructure, and parking Aesthetics lots. SCHOOLS PARKS Station is sparse and devoid of visual interest • South Golden Park 3 Gardena High School 1 Freeway noise from 110 and 405 significant • More densely-developed residential areas can be found American Institute of 2 • Blocks are long and intimidating, underpasses are at the edge of the ½ mile pedestrian shed to the east, Technology dark and foreboding and further out to the west. These ar eas are difficult Drainage infrastructur • e attracts large amount of to walk to due to the hostile design of the associated urban environment. To the west of the station there is a bird activity low and dark underpass that would prove intimidating for most pedestrians. To get to the station by foot Accessibility from the east, one must cross Vermont (heavy traffic, • Lack of pedestrian crossings along Vermont. 120’ wide crossings) and then proceed down ¼ mile • Pedestrian link to station from NW is hard to find of 182nd Street that is flanked by blank walls and • Crossing at gardena Freeway seems dangerous industrial properties, and cross a bridge over a drainage • Large block lengths culvert. • Lack of shade trees along sidewalks Unclear pathways • IBI Group IBI Group IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel édrez Mel March 2013 59 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 60 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 68 69 I June 2013 I Alta Planning Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

199 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites TRATEGIC ILE AST M FIRST L tudy S PLAN Case S S ites SITE 10: Harbor Gateway Transit Center (Artesia Transit Center) Silver Line Station nterest I Points of 3 1 2 110 SCHOOLS PARKS South Golden Park 3 Gardena High School 1 American Institute of 2 Technology IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 60 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 69 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

200 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites LAN ILE AS T M FIRS Case Study Sites S C P EGI TR AT T L SITE 10: Harbor Gateway Transit Center (Artesia Transit Center) Silver Line Station Transit Lines Artesia Blvd Ar tes i a Blvd y w F 1 R 9 S y 91 Fw SR Figueroa St M Figueroa St M ! ! I-110 Fwy I-110 Fwy t S nd 82 1 t S nd V V 82 e e 1 r rmont mon t A Ave v e Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express t t S S h h t t Transit Connections Bicycle Connections 90 Metrolink 90 1 1 Key Transit Access Corridors Artesia Blvd y w F 1 R 9 S Ar tes i a Blvd y w F 1 9 SR Figueroa St M ! Figueroa St M ! t I-110 Fwy S t S I-110 Fwy nd nd 2 82 8 1 1 V e V rmont e Ped & Bike rmont Volumes A A 1-5 v e v e 6-10 11-25 t S > 35 mph 26+ t h t S h 90 t 1 0 9 High Vehicular Speeds Key Transit Access Corridors 1 Collision Severity & Location ! ( Ar tes i a Blvd y 91 Fw SR y w F 1 9 SR Ar tes i a Blvd ( ! ! ( Figueroa St M ! ! ( Figueroa St M I-110 Fwy ! I-110 Fwy t ( ! S ( ! ( ! nd < ! ( ! 2 ( ! t 8 ! ( 1 V e 82nd S 1 V r Low Res ! ( ( ! mon e ( ! rmont High Res t Ave Commerical Ped & Bike A Office v Collisions e ( ! Industrial ! ( Crash Site t Education 0th S Fatality 19 t S Open Space h t 0 ( ! 9 Collision Severity & Location 1 Vacant/Other Land Use Overlay Zones: N/A / Walk Score: 52 / Employment: N/A / Journey to Work: N/A Density: N/A / IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 61 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 70 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

201 STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE SITE 10: Harbor Gateway/Artesia Silver Line Station ! ( ! ( ! ( LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Harďor 'ateway/rtesia Silǀer Line Station Transit and Bicycle Network Lynwood KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metro Silver Line Existing Proposed Metro Rapid or BRT Routes Bike Path Bike Lane 110 Bike Route C Compton Blue Line ent Cycletrack ! ( ! ( r al ! ( Gardena Compton A v e Vermont Ave El Camino Blvd f Greenlea College Normandie Ave ! ( Ar t e s ia B lvd 91 · Harbor Gateway TC Redondo Beach M t S ! ria ( o t c Vi ! 18 2 n d St 405 CSU-Dominguez Hills Van Ness Ave Los Angeles ! ( Del Am o Blvd Carson 3-Mile Buffer Torrance Major Destination * Long Beach IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 71 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

202 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites TRATEGIC S ILE AST M Case S tudy S PLAN ites FIRST L Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 10: Harbor Gateway Transit Center (Artesia Transit Center) Silver Line Station 1.1/1.2/1.8 Unsafe and dark path under on-ramp 1.4/3.4 Unfriendly link to regional bike network 1.8/3.8 Unfriendly pedestrian link to neighborhoods to the 2.4 Garbage strewn along sidewalk north of station 2.5 Problematic drainage infrastructure bordering station 3.5/3.8 Lack of signage and pedestrian pathways to east neighborhoods IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel march 2013 62 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 72 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

203 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites Case S tudy S ites AST M FIRST L ILE S PLAN TRATEGIC SITE 11: Wilshire/Westwood Wilshire LRT Wilshire-Westwood Station Cluster C; Medium Residential/Medium Centrality CSPP Place Type: City: Los Angeles The National Cemetery is gated MM/FS/RD/UG&SL Special Considerations: and only allows pedestrian access on the western side (at Sepulveda Blvd) Westwood Blvd Wilshire Blvd M ! e Av orth w l l e W V e t Safety Rating: 4/5 (excellent*) e ran Se Ave Aesthetics Rating: 4.4/5 (excellent*) p u lv e Accessibility Rating: 3.86/5 (good*) da Blvd Ohio Ave *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix The large Federal Building North campus blocks access to Access Barriers Overlay Sepulveda Blvd 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers Issues Observed at Wilshire/Westwood Opportunities Observed at Wilshire/Westwood Safety Located at the Southern tip of the UCLA campus, Unsafe traffic speeds • the future LRT stop at the Wilshire Westwood station Potential to add more safety signage • provides a critical connection for students and employees of the University. The Wilshire/Westwood Aesthetics intersection is also located at the center of a highly No issues to report • trafficked retail and commercial zone. Also adjacent to • Billboards and auto-oriented signage the site is a well-maintained residential community to the east and to the south. As such, there is a strong Accessibility opportunity to serve this robust population and pull a Potential to increase transit transfer signage • high number of both incoming and departing users. • Wide streets that are unfriendly to cross Lack of directional signage • Additionally, the Wilshire/Westwood intersection benefits from an active and bustling street life. With numerous multi-modal users, eyes-on-the-street and safety is improved for potential users withinin the 1/2-mile pedestrian shed. IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 63 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 73 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

204 STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites Case S TRATEGIC PLAN ites tudy S S ILE AST M FIRST L SITE 11: Wilshire/Westwood Wilshire LRT Points of I nterest 2 1 3 5 4 INSTITUTIONS SCHOOLS PARKS 4 Veteran Park Geffen Playhouse 2 UCLA 1 Westwood Chicago School of 3 5 Memorial Park Professional Psycology IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 64 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 74 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

205 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites Case Study Sites S C P EGI TR AT ILE T M AS T L FIRS LAN SITE 11: Wilshire/Westwood Wilshire LRT Transit Lines V V eteran eteran Ave Ave Wilshire Blvd Wilshire Blvd e e Av M Av h M t ! W h t ! W I wor l I wor - l e el - 40 el W 4 e stwood Blvd W 0 stwood Blvd 5 5 Fwy Fwy Sepulveda Blvd Ohio Ave Ohio Ave Sepulveda Blvd Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Bicycle Connections Transit Connections Metrolink V V e eteran t e ran Ave Ave Wilshire Blvd Wilshire Blvd e e Av M Av th ! M W h t ! W I wor l - I wor e el l - 4 e el W 40 stwood Blvd W 0 stwood Blvd 5 5 Fwy Fwy Se Sepulveda Blvd p Ped & Bike u Ohio Ave lv Ohio Ave e Volumes da Blvd 1-5 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds ! ( ( ! Westwood Blvd ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( V ( ! e ! ( t V e eteran ! ( ran ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! Ave ( ! ! ( Wilshire Blvd ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( Ave ! ( e ! ( Wilshire Blvd ! ( ( ! Av W M ! ( I h ! ( ! ! ( ( t - 40 M ( ! ! ( I wor e l ! e - el 4 stwood Blvd Av W 5 ( ! h t ! ( 0 ! ( Fwy ( ! 5 wor l ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( el Fwy W ! ( ( ! ( ! Low Res Se p ( ! ! ( Sepulveda Blvd High Res ( ! u ( ! ! ( Ohio Ave ( ! lv ! < ! ( e Commerical ( ! da Blvd ( ! < ! Ped & Bike ! ( Ohio Ave ( ! ( ! Office Collisions ( ! ( ! Industrial Crash Site ! ( ( ! ( ! Education ( ! ( ! Fatality ! ( ( ! ( ! Open Space ( ! Land Use Collision Severity & Location ( ! Vacant/Other ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! < ! ( ! Density: 11,972 total population / Overlay Zones: N/A / Walk Score: 95 Journey to Work: 28.5% take transit/bike/walk to Employment: 94.42 jobs per acre / / work IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 65 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 75 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

206 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 11: Wilshire/Westwood Wilshire LRT future) Wilshire/Westwood Purple Line Station ( LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES Metro Rapid or BRT Routes Proposed Existing Bike Path Bike Lane West Hollywood Bike Route Cycletrack 405 Beverly Hills d v l B et ns u S Unincorporated d e Blv Av We a na UCLA a c ont ni M st h Mo a o t l n m a S e Los Angeles Wilshire Westwood d M lv ! ( ! B Century City e r i lsh i W n Vicente Blvd a S VA Healthcare W lvd es Center B S o e two c pulv Pi B a o rring d eda Blvd B t lv on d Av 3-Mile Buffer e Santa Monica Major Destination ! ( 10 ! ( ! ( * Santa Monica College Culver City d R h ennet K IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 76 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

207 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites FIRST L TRATEGIC PLAN Case S ILE S AST M tudy S ites Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 11: Wilshire/Westwood Wilshire LRT 3.2 Broken sidewalks 1.6 Speeding traffic 3.5 Need for bike facilities 3.3 Long blocks/limited crossings 3.3 No pedestrian refuge at large crossings IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I march 2013 66 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 77 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

208 STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE Case Study Sites PLAN TRATEGIC tudy S ites Case S S ILE AST M FIRST L SITE 12: 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station 103rd St/Watts Towers Station CSPP Place Type: Cluster C; Medium Residential/Medium Centrality City: Los Angeles SL/PnR Special Considerations: Century Blvd Wilmington Ave 103rd St Compton Ave M ! Large undeveloped lot with no sidewalk along edge Safety Rating: 1.38/5 (Poor*) S a nta An Aesthetics Rating: 1.2/5 (Poor*) a B l v d 1 08th S Accessibility Rating: 1.38/5 (Poor*) t *Based on Checklist Rating Matrix Large residential neighbor- hood has very few access points Blue Line tracks and old rail ROW along Santa Ana Blvd limit crossings for long North Access Barriers Overlay 1/2 mile pedestrian shed Barriers Issues Observed at 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station Opportunities Observed at 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station Safety Lack of pedestrian lighting • The 103rd/Watts station is conveniently located Lack of eyes-on-the-street and transparent walls • adjacent to a the Watts Towers. The Watts Towers • Buckling sidewalks attract approximately 300,000 visitors annually, and Lack of bicycle infrastructure • are designated as a U.S. National Historic Landmark Lack of pedestrian buffer • and a Los Angeles Historic-Cultural monument. The Unsafe traffic speeds • Watts/103rd Station is also surrounded by a large Limited safety signage • residential population. The station, which directly • Unsafe station area connects residents in South L.A. to the Downtown 7th/ Metro terminous station, creates potential for first/last Aesthetics commuters originating in Watts. • No sense of place • Lack of pedestrian amenities • Lack of maintenance - trash abundant Unpleasant walking experience • Accessibility • Unclear transit mode transfer Lack of bicycle facilities • • Limited signage • Unclear navigation of the public realm IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 67 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 78 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

209 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites ILE ites tudy S Case S PLAN S FIRST L AST M TRATEGIC SITE 12: 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station nterest Points of I IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez 68 I March 2013 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 79 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

210 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites TR AT T L C P Case Study Sites LAN EGI S ILE T M AS FIRS SITE 12: 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station Century Blvd Century Blvd Wilmington Ave Wilmington Ave 103rd St 103rd St Compton Ave Compton Ave M ! M ! S a S n a ta n ta A A na B na B l vd l vd 1 0 8 t h S t 1 0 8 t h S t Existing Local Proposed Rapid/Express Transit Connections Bicycle Connections Blue Line Century Blvd Century Blvd Wilmington Ave Wilmington Ave 103rd St 103rd St Compton Ave Compton Ave M ! M ! S a Ped & Bike n ta S a A n na B ta Volumes A na B l vd l vd 1 0 8 t h S t 1-5 1 0 8 t h S t 6-10 11-25 > 35 mph 26+ Key Transit Access Corridors High Vehicular Speeds ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( Century Blvd Century Blvd ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( Wilmington Ave Wilmington Ave ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( 103rd St 103rd St ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( Compton Ave ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( Compton Ave ( ! M M ! ( ! ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( Low Res S ! ( ( ! a n ta ( ! High Res S A a ! ( ( ! ( ! na B ( ! n ta ( ! A l vd Commerical na B ( ! Ped & Bike ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( ( ! l vd 1 0 8 t h S t Office ( ! Collisions 1 0 8 t ( ! h S t ! ( ( ( ! ! ( ! Industrial Crash Site ! ( Education ! ( ( ! ! ( ! ( Fatality ( ! ! ( ( ! Open Space ! ( ! ( ( ! ! ( Collision Severity & Location Vacant/Other ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ( ! ( ! ! ( ! ( Land Use Overlay Zones: N/A / Employment: 2.18 jobs per acre / Density: 12,891 total population / / Journey to Work: 8.2% take transit/bike/walk to work Walk Score: 66 IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 69 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 80 June 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

211 Case Study Sites STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST LAST MILE SITE 12: Compton Blue Line Station Compton Blue Line Station LA Metro First-Last Mile Strategic Plan Transit and Bicycle Network KEY TRANSIT LINES BICYCLE FACILITIES ! ( Metro Blue Line Existing Proposed Los Angeles Metro Green Line Bike Path Bike Lane Bike Route 105 ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( ! ( Cycletrack t S th 120 ! ( Lynwood A l a meda St Drew Medical Willowbrook Center S a Park n ! ( t a Fe Ave 710 Ave s n a cr Rose C Ce Compton Blue Line o m 110 n ! ( p Blvd ton omp C tr M ! ( t ! on al LA River C A re ve ek Bike Path Blvd a dr on l A eaf Blvd nl e e r G El Camino Bellflower College ! ( Harbor Gateway TC 91 · 3-Mile Buffer M ! CSU-Dominguez Hills Major Destination Long Beach * Carson T Lakewood ! ( IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 81 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

212 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites Case S TRATEGIC PLAN AST M ILE FIRST L S tudy S ites Photo Documentation *Photos are keyed to checklist (see Appendix) SITE 12: 103rd/Watts Blue Line Station 1.6 Unsafe Traffic Speeds 1.8 Area surrounding station does not feel safe 1.8 Park-and-ride lot surrounding station is underutilized2.4 Large fences create safety concern 3.1 Utility obstructions in sidewalk right-of-way 2.4 Lack of maintenance IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez I march 2013 70 Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 82 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

213 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites L S Case LAN S tudy E S P I ites M AST L TRATEGIC F IRST Appendix IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel IBI Group March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel June 2013 83 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

214 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN S Case S TRATEGIC PLAN ILE AST M FIRST L tudy S ites For each of the quality criteria, rank the station area based on how adequately or poorly it provides amenities, connections, and a STATION AREA transit-supportive environment for riders. Multiple modes » Multiple constituencies (gender, » CHECKLIST age, abilities, etc.) Name of station: ____________________________ Date/Time/Weather conditions during visit: ___________________________ Station Typology: _________________________________________ Somewhat/ Disagree/ Strongly Agree/Ample Adequate Lacking 1. SAFETY 1.1 Adequate lighting. (Night survey required) 1 2 3 4 5 Regularly spaced and frequent lighting that is directed towards the sidewalk and any bikeways, which provides sufficient illumination. Potential obstacles marked with reflectors or lighting. 1.2 Eyes-on-the-street. 1 2 3 4 5 Presence of highly transparent ground-floors, windows, and entries. 1.3 Well maintained public realm. 1 2 3 4 5 Sidewalks are smooth and without cracks, vegetation is trimmed, etc. 1.4 Safety buffer for bikes. 1 2 3 4 5 Bikes are adequately set back from vehicles. Consider type and quality of buffer -- sufficient width, painted material, vertical separation, such as bollards. 1.5 Safety buffer for pedestrians. 1 2 3 4 5 Pedestrians set back from travel lanes via ample sidewalk width, landscaping, and street furniture. 1.6 People-friendly traffic speeds and manners. 1 2 3 4 5 Drivers yield to pedestrians and traffic is slowed via narrow roadways, markings, no turn on red lights, etc. 1.7 Clear safety signage. 1 2 3 4 5 Signage is clear, legible, and well maintained. Signs promote traffic safety and streamline navigation of the public realm. 1.8 Overall, the station area feels safe. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall, there is a feeling of safety as you walk through the station area. women, children, and the Consider the safety of all users -- especially . Consider both day and nighttime safety. elderly TOTAL SCORE _____ (sum of answers) ÷ ____ (# of questions answered) = ______ l Page 1 (Average score on safety) IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 84 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

215 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites TRATEGIC FIRST L S ILE AST M PLAN Case S tudy S ites For each of the quality criteria, rank the station area based on how adequately or poorly it provides amenities, connections, and a STATION AREA transit-supportive environment for riders. » Multiple modes CHECKLIST Multiple constituencies (gender, » age, abilities, etc.) Somewhat/ Disagree/ Strongly Lacking Agree/Ample Adequate 2. AESTHETICS 2.1 Sense of place. 1 2 3 4 5 Inclusion of unique street characteristic, landmarks, striping or a navigable streetscape hierarchy that sets this space apart from other areas. 2.2 Pleasant landscaping. 1 2 3 4 5 Consistent landscaping that provides ample shade. Trees are well maintained and all tree wells are planted with street trees. 2.3 Strategically placed pedestrian amenities. 1 2 3 4 5 There are a variety and sufficiently provided pedestrian amenities (seating, trash cans, water fountains) that are well maintained and inviting. Kiosks and vendors are present on pedestrian paths, are visually pleasing and are located in areas that do not interfere with foot traffic. 1 2 3 4 5 2.4 Pedestrian unfriendly elements are limited. There are a general lack of the following: unpleasant smells, blank walls, vacant lots, fences, noise pollution, unfriendly street conditions, trash. 2.5 Pleasant experience. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall, there is a pleasant ambiance as you walk, bike, or use alternative transit throughout the station area. Consider the experience of all users -- especially . Consider both day and women, children, and the elderly nighttime amenities. Care has been taken to make a nice environment for all users. TOTAL SCORE _____ (sum of answers) ÷ ____ (# of questions answered) = ______ (Average score on aesthetics) 2 l Page IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 85 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

216 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites tudy S S ites FIRST L AST M ILE TRATEGIC Case S PLAN For each of the quality criteria, rank the station area based on how adequately or poorly it provides amenities, STATION AREA connections, and a transit-supportive environment for riders. Multiple modes » Multiple constituencies (gender, » CHECKLIST age, abilities, etc.) Disagree/ Strongly Somewhat/ Agree/Ample Adequate Lacking 3. ACCESSIBILITY 3.1 High quality sidewalks 1 2 3 4 5 Sidewalks are large enough for pedestrians to walk, pass, and jog comfortably in opposing directions. There are very few disruptions to the sidewalk quality (e.g. smooth surface paving, signage and poles are set back from the pedestrian right-of-way). 3.2 Clear, safe crossings. 1 2 3 4 5 Signalized intersections allow ample time to cross, frequently allow passage, are a walkable distance (or provide a pedestrian refuge or median), are supplied with functioning push buttons, have minimal street crowns and are painted for safety. 3.3 Seamless transit mode transfer. 1 2 3 4 5 Transferring to alternate modes of transit is streamlined through the presence of well-marked, nearby, and obvious pathways. 3.4 Operating and sufficient bicycle facilities. 1 2 3 4 5 Bicycle facilities allow sufficient room, have a smooth surface, and provide riders with bike lanes, routes, pathways, adequate marking, parking, separated push buttons, bike staions and bike boxes. 1 2 3 4 5 3.5 High quality signage. Signage is located in clear view for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other transit modes. Signage provides clear directional and locational information, regulatory warnings, and station area identity. 1 2 3 4 5 3.6 Parking and drop-off is streamlined. Adequate number of parking spaces (in park-and-ride if applicable), room for drop-off (kiss-and-ride) on street parking serves as a buffer for pedestrians, parking time restrictions are in effect where necessary, and vehicles are prohibited from blocking the pedestrian right-of-way. 3.7 Curbs and curb ramps are provided. 1 2 3 4 5 Curbs and curb ramps are present at all crossings and have a gentle slope. 3.8 Navigating the public realm is intuitive and easy. 1 2 3 4 5 Overall, there are a series of passageways that are frequent and well TOTAL SCORE marked as you walk through the station area. Consider the experience of all users -- especially women, children, and the elderly . Consider both _____ (sum of answers) day and nighttime linkages. ÷ ____ (# of questions answered) = Page l 3 ______ (Average score on accessibility) IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 86 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

217 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Case Study Sites PLAN TRATEGIC S ILE ites Case S tudy S AST M FIRST L For each of the quality criteria, rank the station area based on how adequately or poorly it provides amenities, connections, and a STATION AREA transit-supportive environment for riders. » Multiple modes » Multiple constituencies (gender, CHECKLIST age, abilities, etc.) ROUTE TAKEN Additional opportunities & constraints: Include a blank map and note route taken during site visit Insert additional narrative from site findings. 4 l Page IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 87 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

218 Case Study Sites FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN FIRST L S TRATEGIC PLAN ites ILE AST M Case S tudy S PHOTO DOCUMENTATION Description of photo, keyed to issue number (e.g. 2.5) Description of photo, keyed to issue number (e.g. 2.5) in checklist in checklist etc... IBI Group IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 Mel édrez Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 June 2013 88 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

219 IBI Group 18401 Von Karma –Suite 110 n Avenue USA Irvine CA 92612 833 5588 tel 949 833 fax 5511 949 Memorandum To/Attention Date August , 2013 Metro Sarah Jepson, LA 20 From Project No IBI Group 32903 cc Steno Neha Chawla Metro Path Initial Draft Cost Estimate for Three Selected Metro Subject Rail Stations Introduction estimates The goal of this memo is to provide an overview of the high- level planning cost first Path ) at three case study sites wi thin prepared for proposed -last mile improvements (Metro Metro Rail and BRT station areas. The three stations selected for analysis include Wilshire / rd / Watts (Metro Blue Line) and North Hollywood (Metro Red Normandie (Metro Purple Line), 103 and Orange Lines). Network and design improvements follow guidelines set forth in the draft Metro Path Planning Guidelines . Development of the Metro Path concept is an ongoing process. Path components currently proposed have been largely accounted for in this cost estimate, however added components and refinements that will take place as part of concept development are unaccounted for in this cost estimate at this time. This estimate begins to frame a baseline that can be refined in concert concept development. Furthermore, when reviewed against projected ridership changes with future evaluation can be undertaken to review the resulting from Metro Path improvements, effectiveness of the strategy from a ridership/cost perspective. This Memo presents key findings from the analysis, the methodology used to develop cost a high- level cost estimate from each of the three stations (including a network map estimates, , and source cost data used to generate quantity estimates. and cost summary tables for each) to account for potential cost unknowns given the current level Contingencies have been applied of design. Key Findings Cost estimates assume that work is being done specifically to implement Path • improvements. If improvements are made during normal street re- construction as part of routine roadway maintenance, cost savings could be achieved. • Any improvement that involves curb and gutter re- configuration and re- construction is relatively expensive. Examples include bulb- outs at intersections and protected rolling that utilize permanent curbs. These improvements can be achieved as short term lanes low -cost -cost improvements utilizing temporary barriers and street paint. These low solutions have been accounted for in our low -cos t estimate for each scenario. • The low -cost variations suggest as much as 40% savings over more permanent options, but generally lack the same degree of permanence. • Three sample sites are insufficient to generate a system -wide cost estimate wi th any form of accuracy. Important variables include level of intervention at different pl ace- overlap (some facilities accounted for in one station area overlap with adjacent types, IBI Group is a group of firms providing professional services

220 IBI Group Memorandum 2 Metro , 2013 – August Sarah Jepson, LA 20 suggest station areas), and economies of scale. The second two points noted measurable reduction in costs if implementing along entire corridors or system -wide. • The range of employment and residential centrality in the three case study sites reviewed suggest that higher densities equate to a denser network of improvements, but of Path Arterials. similar extension and length Methodology High level cost estimates for the Metro Path at the three stations w ere developed by multiplying bundled groups of improvements by either linear or quantity measures. M easurements and and aggregated working off Path net work maps, and quantities were taken developed utilizing the methodology outlined in the . Metro Path Planning Guidelines Groups of improvements were structured around intersections and street segments and included; Type 1 In tersection - Intersection improvements where Path Arterials cross other Path • Arterials at or adjacent to subject station portals. Scramble intersections utilized. Type 2 Intersection • – Intersections where Path Arterials cross Path Collectors. • Type 3 Intersection – Intersections along Path Collectors (crossing other Collectors or non- Path network streets). • Mid -Block Crossings – Can occur along any long block Path Arterial or Collector. • Type 1 Arterial (250’ segment) – Occurs within 1/2 mile of the station por tal. • Type 2 Arterial – Extends beyond 1/2 mile of the station portal some (250’ segment) distance not to exceed 3 miles. • (250’ segment) – Occurs within the one half mile of stations along identified Collector routes. noted above was prepared by aggregating the The high level cost of each of the elements various component costs that together formed the subject unit. Metro Path Planning Using the as a reference, assumptions were made about what components would most likely Guidelines element . The Metro Path has been planned as a flexible structure that can be included in each be applied in varying forms to respond to local conditions, funding availability and local inputs, therefore what is proposed here may in truth be affected by inputs not known at this time. Fo r each site, a high- cost and a low -cost estimate is provided (‘Complete Path’ and ‘Path Lite’ respectively) ifferences between the two are attributed to the permanence of improvements . D (i.e. fixed bollards vs. paint buffers along Path Arterials) or the lev el of security and com fort of components (i.e. provision of in street LED flashers or street furniture) . Items are tabulated for each site. For each site, a network map is presented that visually highlights the different cost units noted above along with summary cost tables. Cost Assumptions follow these as back -up reference.

221 IBI Group Memorandum 3 Metro , 2013 – August Sarah Jepson, LA 20 Wilshire / Normandie Cost Estimate Cost Table Complete Path Station Wilshire Normandie Station Qnt. Cost Linear Feet Type I Arterial 17,817 $ 2,904,071 Type II 24,035 $ 2,631,833 Arterial Collector $ 1,315,380 28,089 5 $ 962,140 Mid Block Crossing 1 $ 218,342 Intersection Type I Intersection Type II 20 $ 4,366,850 Intersection Type III 27 $ 145,200 Complete Path Total $ 12,543,816 Station Path Lite Station Cost Table Wilshire Normandie Station Qnt. Cost Linear Feet Type I Arterial $ 2,110,680 17,817 Type II Arterial 24,035 $ 1,228,890 Collector 28,089 $ 1,315,380 Mid Block Crossing $ 743,140 5 Intersection Type I 1 $ 24,128 Intersection Type II 20 $ 386,050 Intersection Type III 27 $ 145,200 Path Lite Station Total $ 5,953,468

222 IBI Group Memorandum 4 Metro , 2013 – August Sarah Jepson, LA 20 rd / Watts Cost Estimate 103 Complete Path Station Cost Table 103rd/ Watts Station Linear Feet Qnt. Cost 17,140 $ 2,793,724 Type I Arterial 32,727 Type II Arterial $ 3,583,607 13,006 Collector $ 609,058 3 $ 577,284 Mid Block Crossing Intersection Type I $ 240,848 1 Intersection Type II 13 $ 2,838,452 Intersection Type III 13 $ 69,911 Complete Path Total $ 10,712,884 Station Path Lite Station Cost Table 103rd/ Watts Station Qnt. Cost Linear Feet Type I Arterial $ 2,030,480 17,140 Type II Arterial 32,727 $ 1,673,305 Collector 13,006 $ 609,058 Mid Block Crossing $ 297,256 2 Intersection Type I 1 $ 24,128 Intersection Type II 13 $ 250,932 Intersection Type III 13 $ 69,911 Path Lite Station Total $ 4,955,071

223 IBI Group Memorandum 5 Metro , 2013 – August Sarah Jepson, LA 20 North Hollywood Cost Estimate Complete Path Station Cost Table North Hollywood Station Qnt. Cost Linear Feet Type I Arterial 16,978 $ 2,767,319 43,338 Type II Arterial $ 4,745,511 Collector $ 826,626 17,652 5 Mid Block Crossing $ 962,140 2 $ 481,696 Intersection Type I Intersection Type II $ 3,056,795 14 Intersection Type III 12 $ 64,533 Complete Path Station Total $ 12,904,620 Path Lite Station Cost Table North Hollywood Station Qnt. Cost Linear Feet 16,978 $ 2,011,289 Type I Arterial 43,338 $ 2,215,837 Type II Arterial Collector 17,652 $ 826,626 Mid Block Crossing 5 $ 743,140 Intersection Type I $ 48,256 2 Intersection Type II 14 $ 19,302 Intersection Type III 12 $ 5,378 Path Lite Station Total $ 5,869,828

224 IBI Group Memorandum 6 Metro 20 , 2013 Sarah Jepson, LA – August Cost Assumptions based on previous public cost estimates for similar roadway These cost estimates provided are and streetscape enhancements. This estimate is high level and includes the following assumptions in total costs of all components ; • Contingency - All cost estimates include a contingency for unforeseen incurred costs. This contingency is assumed to be 15% for planning purposes. • Engineering and Design - 30% cost is included in each item for Engineering and Design of the ; this covers additional design development and final design and elements engineering services. • Public Art - A 1% cost is assumed for inclusion of art treatment s that will increase aesthetics and enhance local community identity along the Path network. As noted above in the Methodology section, improvements were bundled in the following units , source material is shown in the appendix ;

225 IBI Group Memorandum 7 Sarah Jepson, LA Metro – August 20 , 2013 Type 1 Intersection Memorandum IBI Group 7 20 , 2013 – August Metro Sarah Jepson, LA Type 1 Intersection Complete Path Type I Path Lite Type I Intersection - Intersection - Arterial&Arterial (Scramble) Legend Total Cost Arterial&Arterial (Scramble) Total Cost Source* Bulbouts (Curb reconstruction, 21 Complete Path Type I $ 860 $ 146,000 9 Paint and Landscape Bulbouts A , dual curb ramps) Path Lite Type I Intersection - - Intersection 12 B $ 3,728 Crosswalks $ 3,728 Crosswalks Arterial&Arterial (Scramble) Total Cost Legend Source* Total Cost Arterial&Arterial (Scramble) (Not Included in Path LED Flashers Bulbouts (Curb reconstruction, 13 21 860 A , 9 $ Paint and Landscape Bulbouts $ 146,000 dual curb ramps) Lite) $ 24,480 LED Flashers C $ - 12 Crosswalks $ 3,728 Crosswalks B $ 3,728 Ped Detection Padding (Not 17 (Not Included in Path LED Flashers Included in Path Lite) $ D Ped Detection padding $ 5,440 - 13 Lite) C $ 24,480 $ - LED Flashers Resignalize Signal for Resignalize Signal for Pedestrians 18 Ped Detection Padding (Not (Not Included in Path Lite) $ E $ 40,800 Pedestrians - 17 Included in Path Lite) Ped Detection padding $ 5,440 D $ - 19 Ped buttons and Audio Chirp $ 14,144 Ped buttons and Audio Chirp F $ 14,144 Resignalize Signal for Resignalize Signal for Pedestrians 18 (Not Included in Path Lite) $ - $ 40,800 Pedestrians E 15 Medallion Signage $ 2,176 $ 2,176 Medallion Signage G 19 $ 14,144 Ped buttons and Audio Chirp $ 14,144 Ped buttons and Audio Chirp F Information Kiosk (1 per Metro 20 15 Medallion Signage $ 2,176 G Medallion Signage $ 2,176 $ 4,080 Information Kiosk (1 per Metro Stop) Stop) $ 4,080 H Information Kiosk (1 per Metro Total Total $ 33,988 $ 240,848 20 Stop) $ 4,080 H $ 4,080 Information Kiosk (1 per Metro Stop) Total $ 240,848 Total $ 33,988 *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A

226 IBI Group Memorandum 8 Sarah Jepson, LA Metro – August 20 , 2013 Type 2 & 3 Intersection Memorandum IBI Group 8 20 , 2013 – August Metro Sarah Jepson, LA Type 2 & 3 Intersection Complete Path Type II Intersection - Path Lite Type II Intersection - Legend Source* Total Cost Arterial&Collector Total Cost Arterial&Collector urb reconstruction, Bulbouts ( c 16 (Not Included in Path Lite) Bulbouts $ 146,000 dual curb ramps) - $ A Complete Path Type II - Intersection Path Lite Type II Intersection - 12 B $ 2,982 Crosswalks $ 2,982 Crosswalks Total Cost Source* Total Cost Arterial&Collector Arterial&Collector Legend (Not Included in Path LED Flashers urb reconstruction, c Bulbouts ( 13 16 Lite) LED Flashers $ 12,240 - C $ Bulbouts (Not Included in Path Lite) $ 146,000 A dual curb ramps) $ - 12 Resignalize Signal for Resignalize Signal for Pedestrians B Crosswalks $ 2,982 Crosswalks $ 2,982 18 (Not Included in Path LED Flashers (Not Included in Path Lite) Pedestrians $ 40,800 D $ - 13 Lite) $ 12,240 LED Flashers C $ - $ 19 Resignalize Signal for Pedestrians Resignalize Signal for E 14,144 $ 14,144 Ped buttons and Audio Chirp Ped buttons and Audio Chirp 18 (Not Included in Path Lite) - D $ Pedestrians $ 40,800 15 F Medallion Signage Medallion Signage $ 2,176 $ 2,176 $ 19 $ E $ 14,144 Ped buttons and Audio Chirp 14,144 Ped buttons and Audio Chirp Total 19,302 $ 218,342 Total 15 Medallion Signage $ 2,176 $ 2,176 Medallion Signage F $ $ 218,342 Total Total 19,302 – Complete Path In tersection Type III Source* Total Cost Collector Legend Collector& Complete Path In – tersection Type III 12 $ 3,202 Crosswalks B Collector Legend Collector& Total Cost Source* 15 12 $ 3,202 B Crosswalks Medallion Signage F $ 2,176 15 $ 2,176 F Medallion Signage $ 5,378 Total Total $ 5,378 *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A

227 IBI Group Memorandum 9 Metro 20 , 2013 Sarah Jepson, LA – August Mid -Block Crossing Complete Path Midblock Path Lite Midblock Total Cost Legend Crossing Total Cost Crossing Source* A A WK Sig nal H H A WK Signal $ 146,000 11 $ 146,000 12 B Crosswalk Paint (50') $ 876 Crosswalk Paint (50') $ 876 LED Flashers (Not Included in Path Lite) $ C $ 43,800 - 13 LED Flashers Safety Signage $ 584 D Safety Signage $ 584 14 E Medallion Signage $ 1,168 Medallion Signage $ 1,168 15 $ 148,628 Total $ 192,428 Total *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A

228 IBI Group Memorandum 10 Sarah Jepson, LA Metro – August 20 , 2013 Type 1 & 2 Arterial Memorandum IBI Group 10 20 , 2013 – August Metro Sarah Jepson, LA Type 1 & 2 Arterial Path Lite Arterial Type I Complete Path Arterial Type I Total Cost Source* (250') (250') Legend Total Cost Protected Rolling Lane (Bollards, 2 $ 11,863 Rolling Lane (Painted Stripe) $ 20,805 Stripe) Green Paint, Painted A 4 Bike Racks (every 500') $ 876 B $ 876 Bike Racks (every 500') Sidewalk (Not Furniture 5 Included in Path Lite ) - $ 2,190 (every 500') Furniture Sidewalk C $ Complete Path Arterial Type I Path Lite Arterial Type I Total Cost Legend (250') Source* Total Cost (250') 6 $ 1,168 Signage (every 250') Signage (every 250') $ 1,168 D Protected Rolling Lane (Bollards, 2 7 $ 13,286 E Lighting (every 100') $ 13,286 Lighting (every 100') Rolling Lane (Painted Stripe) A $ 11,863 Green Paint, Painted Stripe) $ 20,805 4 Bike Racks (every 500') $ 876 $ 876 Bike Racks (every 500') B 8 Garbage Cans (every 500') $ 1,095 F Garbage Cans (every 500') $ 1,095 (Not Sidewalk Furniture 9 5 G Landscaping (every 500') $ 1,329 Landscaping (every 500') $ 1,329 (every 500') C Sidewalk Furniture $ 2,190 Included in Path Lite ) $ - $ 29,616 Total $ 40,749 Total 6 Signage (every 250') D Signage (every 250') $ 1,168 $ 1,168 7 $ 13,286 E Lighting (every 100') $ 13,286 Lighting (every 100') 8 $ 1,095 $ 1,095 Garbage Cans (every 500') F Garbage Cans (every 500') 9 Landscaping (every 500') Landscaping (every 500') $ 1,329 G $ 1,329 $ 40,749 $ 29,616 Total Total Complete Path Arterial Type II Total Cost (250') Legend Path Lite Arterial Type II (250') Total Cost Source* 3 Rolling Lane (Painted Stripe) $ 11,863 Bike Lane A $ 1,460 Complete Path Arterial Type II Bike Racks (Not Included in Path Lite) 4 $ 438 $ - Bike Racks (every 1000') B Source* Total Cost Path Lite Arterial Type II (250') Total Cost (250') Legend Bike Lane 3 $ 11,863 Rolling Lane (Painted Stripe) A $ 1,460 Benches (Not Included in Path Lite) Benches (every 1000') C $ 1,095 $ - 10 (Not Included in Path Lite) Bike Racks 4 - $ $ 438 Bike Racks (every 1000') B Signage (every 1000') $ 146 6 D $ 146 Signage (every 1000') (Not Included in Path Lite) Benches $ 10 - C Benches (every 1000') $ 1,095 Lighting (every 125') E Lighting (every 125') 7 $ 10,629 $ 10,629 D 6 $ 146 Signage (every 1000') $ 146 Signage (every 1000') E Lighting (every 125') Lighting (every 125') $ 10,629 7 $ 10,629 Garbage Cans (every 1000') F 8 $ 548 Garbage Cans (every 1000') $ 548 Garbage Cans (every 1000') F Garbage Cans (every 1000') $ 548 $ 548 8 ( Landscaping $ 2,657 Landscaping (every 1000') G $ 2,657 ) ’ 9 very 1000 e e G $ 2,657 Landscaping ( Landscaping (every 1000') very 1000 ’ ) $ 2,657 9 $ 12,782 $ 27,375 Total Total Total $ 27,375 Total $ 12,782 *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A

229 IBI Group Memorandum 11 Metro – August 20 , 2013 Sarah Jepson, LA Collector Complete Path Collector (250') Total Cost Source * Legend 3 Bike Lane $ 1,460 A 4 B Bike Racks (every 2500') $ 175 10 Benches (every 2500') $ 438 C 6 D $ 292 Signage (every 500') 7 E Lighting (every 150') $ 8,857 8 Garbage Cans (every 2500') $ 219 F 9 G Landscaping (every 2500') $ 266 Total $ 11,707 *For Source information, Refer to Appendix A

230 Appendix A - Cost Estimate Sources Reference Element # Cost Quantity Source Link Protected Rolling Lane http://ladot.lacity.org/pdf/PDF255.pdf LA DOT Case Study $ LF 57.00 1 http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/14267923 - 2 Rolling Lane 418/more-bike-lanes-planned-for-city.html Chicago Case Study LF 26.51 $ http://dpw.lacounty.gov/pdd/bike/docs/bmp/Appendix%2 3 Bike Lane 0H.pdf LA County Appendix $ 4.00 LF http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 4 Bike Rack _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf $ Each CA MTC 1,200.00 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 5 Sidewalk Furniture _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf $ CA MTC Each 3,000.00 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 6 Signage _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf CA MTC Each 400.00 $ http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikecost/docs/NCHRP_7 - 7 Lighting 14_Final_Report_5.pdf Bicycling Info Report $ 3,640.00 Each http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 8 Garbage Can _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf CA MTC $ 1,500.00 Each http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 9 Landscaping _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf $ Each CA MTC 1,820.00 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 10 Bench _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf Each $ CA MTC 3,000.00 http://www.kcrg.com/home/top-9/Traffic-Engineers-Push - Drivers-to-Pay-Attention-to-New-HAWK-Signals- 11 Hawk 188140591.html Case Study $ 100,000.00 Each http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 12 Crosswalk Paint _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf LF $ CA MTC 6.00 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 13 LED Flashers _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf $ CA MTC 120,000.00 Intersection http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikecost/docs/NCHRP_7 - 14 Safety Signage 14_Final_Report_5.pdf 200.00 $ Bicycling Info Report Each http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 15 Medallion Signage _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf Each 400.00 $ CA MTC http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 16 Bulbouts _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf 100,000.00 $ CA MTC Intersection http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 17 Ped Detection Padding _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf 8,000.00 $ CA MTC Intersection Resignalize Intersection for http://www.walkinginfo.org/pedsafe/pedsafe_curb1.cfm ? 18 Pedestrians CM_NUM=37 30,000.00 $ Intersection Walking Info http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 19 Ped buttons and audio chirp _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf Intersection $ CA MTC 10,400.00 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d 20 Information Kiosk _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf Intersection $ CA MTC 3,000.00 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d Paint _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf 400 LF 21a $ CA MTC 2,400.00 http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/bicyclespedestrians/Pe d _Districts/04-Generic-Cost-Estimating-Tool.pdf Low Height Planter Boxes 21b CA MTC 7,280.00 $ 4 Painted Bulbou t Intersection 9,680.00 $ Source in 21a,21b 21

231 IBI Group 18401 Von Karman Avenue –Suite 110 USA Irvine CA 92612 949 833 5588 tel 833 5511 fax 949 Memorandum Date To/Attention Sarah Jepson August 2 0, 2013 From Project No IBI Group 32903 Steno cc CDF Task 4.1 Modal Access Targets Summary Memo Subject This memorandum provides a summary of the evaluation of available analytical tools, models, and methodologies that could assist the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in determining or calculating modal access targets for different time horizons (for example 5 to 10 The objective of this sub- task was to identify not only years) as well as different station types. - the modal access targets, but also to identify a single tool that could be used to evaluate multi modal strategies and the magnitude of potential model access changes. This technical memorandum builds on the findings of Task 3.4 Case Study Analysis, as well as discussions conducted between the consultant team, Metro and SCAG. Our analysis incorporates the agreed upon site typologies and available data regarding first -last mile access modes. New research w as conducted by IBI to identify and assess the potential use of predictive s that could be used to assess the implementation of first tool -last mile improvement strategies. During the course of this research, it became apparent that there is limited existing information and a limited number of models and/or methodologies focused on assessing how improvements to transit station accessibility for non- motorized and active transportation modes could result in mode share changes for a particular station. Instead, many of the existing methodologies and sources focus on either quantifying ridership in total for transit systems or assessing the quality or performance of the transportation environment and infrastructure for pedestrians or bicyclists. The linkages between these two assessments are currently tenuous at best. This technical memorandum includes the following elements: • Existing Modal Access – A summary of the existing modal access information available from the Metro Origin- Destination Study • Tools Analyzed – A review and summary of each tool researched and analysis for this task Findings – A summary of the findings and conclusions of this analysis • • Application of the proposed metrics to three case study sites Summary of Key Findings • Based on our review of the most recent O- D data provided by Metro, there is significant variation in the observed existing modal access percentages from station to station and from place type to place type . This variation makes it difficult to identify or recommend a modal access targets, or more system -wide modal access target. Instead, identifying IBI Group is a group of firms providing professional services

232 IBI Group Memorandum 2 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson percentage increase in active transportation appropriately access, by place type goals would appear to be a more achievable goal. , and pedestrian • A wide range of station access models, ridership models and bicycle environment assessment tools were reviewed and evaluated as part of this memo. This evaluation revealed that there is no current single tool that provides the analysis capability sought by Metro in the original scope of work for this project . Selected tools, in particular the First Mile (FLAM) Strategic Model tool being tested in Portland, & Last nge OR could provide applicability to Los A County in the future. les • In the absence of single tool for assessing changes to modal access targets, IBI Group developed a separate interim tool that could be used by Metro to analyze station access and the potential changes to ridership based on improvements to the active transportation network. • This tool was applied at three station areas and was used to assess the potential benefits of the implementation of the Metro Path at each station. Using the tool, forecasted increases in ridership resulting from the Metro Path improvements ranged ri der from 1.5% to 3% based on existing sh ip numbers. Existing Modal Access Data Destination (O The data provided through the Metro Origin- Study co nducted in 2011 was -D) analyzed through the perspective of modal access at high capacity transit stations within Los Angeles County. The O -D data was collected from the universe defined in the Case Study Site selection Report, which corresponds to the nine different station typologies (four different CSPP Accessibility Clusters) as defined in previous tasks. It should be noted that while transit line information was available, the number of responses by line or by station was not always significant. For example, the high density residential and low centrality station typology is not represented in this analysis because the only station in this category is part of the Metrolink system, not the Metro transit network, and therefore O -D data was not available for that specific site. In reviewing the O -D data, it was observed that no direct or consistent correlations existed between station types and modal access, as illustrated in Figures 1 through 3. Figure 1 presents the modal access shares according to each of the nine station typologies, with highest auto access observed in the Low Residential and Medium Centrality station typology. The highest non motorized access with a significant number of records is observed in two of the High Centrality typologies (Low and High Residential).

233 Memorandum IBI Group 3 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson – Modal Access Share for Station Typologies Figure 1 120% Other 100% School Bus 80% DAR Taxi 60% Carpool and park Drive and Park 40% Dropped off 20% Bike Walk 0% MH MM ML LH LM LL HH HM HL Note s: Percentages based on number of responses Number of responses for LL not statistically significant The aggregation of the data to CSPP Accessibility Cluster types reduces the variation related to modal access, but differences are still present among the categories, as can be observed in Figure 2.

234 IBI Group Memorandum 4 Sarah Jepson – August 20, 2013 – Modal Access Share for Station Clusters Figure 2 120% Other 100% School Bus 80% DAR Taxi 60% Carpool and park Drive and Park 40% Dropped off 20% Bike Walk 0% D B A C Percentages based on number of responses Notes: Cluster A (HL, ML), Cluster B (LH, LL, LM), Cluster C (MH, MM, HM), Cluster D (HH) Further variation is observed within each station typology. For example, in the High Residential and Medium Centrality typology, the modal access share for the stations that had the most responses varies as shown in Figure 3. – Modal Access Share for Stations within the High Residential and Medium Figure 3 Centrality Typology 120% 100% Other School Bus 80% DAR 60% Taxi 40% Carpool and park 20% Drive and Park Dropped off 0% Bike Walk Notes: Percentages based on number of responses Stations with low response are not shown, but included in the average for the station typology

235 IBI Group Memorandum 5 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson The differences in access mode shares can be explained by station access, station characteristics and also differences in the mix of trip generators. For example, both Highland Park and North Hollywood are stations included as Case Study Sites, and were evaluated according to a set of categories observed during a site visit. These two stations had similar ratings regarding safety and aesthetics, but the North Hollywood Station was given a lower rate for accessibility than the Highland Park station, consistent with the modal access share obtained from the survey. Motorized access to the station is more dependent on the convenience of the station (location within a route for drop- off) and parking availability, than the network itself. These types of users also have, in general, a longer commute to reach the desired station. motorized modes, and the size of The majority of transit users access their routes through non- the active transportation shed varies according to the network around the desired station. As identified in previous documents, the size of this shed is dependent on the existence of connections, but also on the quality of these conditions, given that not all types of users have the same mobility. Due to the observed variation in modal access shares between stations and between the nine place types, a regional modal access target is not recommended as an adequate goal to be c Plan included in the First -Last Mile Strategi . Instead, a possible alternative approach to the countywide access targets would be to set improvement targets per station type, improving the non- motorized access performance of the stations, so the average shifts towards the maximum ed by station place type. shares observ Table 1 illustrates the observed pattern of modal access by station place type. This information on of the data for the Metro stations that had more than 100 was obtained through t abulati . response rate at or above 2% of the station’s daily boardings responses or a Table 1 – Modal Access Ranges per Place Type - Metro OD Survey 2011 Carpool Expected Drive and Drop ped Modal and School Access Walk off Bike Park Place Type park Taxi DAR Bus Other 2% 1% imum 99% 10% 12% 24% 2% 2% Max 1% High Residential 0% 90% 2% 4% Average 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% High Centrality Minimum 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 70% 19% Maximum 93% 7% 15% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% High Residential Medium 0% Average 0% 77% 4% 8% 11% 0% 0% 0% Centrality 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 60% Minimum 0% 0% Maximum 100% 3% 9% 0% 3% 0% 0% High Residential 0% Average 97% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Low Centrality 0% 0% 0% Minimum 91% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 1% 1% Maximum 91% 9% 18% 41% 5% Medium Residential High Average 71% 4% 0% 14% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% Centrality Minimum 45% 2% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Medium 2% 1% 3% 0% Maximum 95% 7% 15% 54% 1% Residential 3% 0% Average 74% 0% 9% 14% 0% 0% 0% Medium Centrality 0% Minimum 30% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

236 IBI Group Memorandum 6 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Expected Drive Carpool Drop ped and and School Modal Access off Walk Park Bike park Taxi DAR Bus Place Type Other 0% 0% Maximum 70% 13% 13% 19% 0% 0% 0% Medium Residential Low Average 68% 8% 11% 13% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Centrality 67% 3% 8% 7% Minimum 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Maximum 96% 4% 4% 16% 0% 0% 0% 6% Low Residential 0% 0% 89% 2% 3% 5% 0% 0% 1% Average High Centrality 80% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Minimum 13% 41% 76% 3% Maximum 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% Low Resident ial Medium Average 0% 0% 60% 2% 12% 25% 0% 0% 0% Centrality 44% 11% 9% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Minimum 1% 0% Maximum 4% 4% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% Low Residential Average 97% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% Low Centrality 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Minimum 93% 0% 0% 0% Note: Modal access ranges were estimated considering bus stop data for the Low Residential/Low Centrality and High Residential/High Centrality to improve number of responses Stations with a large park and ride infrastructure are likely to have a different behavior in regards to access shares with smaller or no park and ride infrastructure. In this case, as the than stations comprises share of station access, improvements to non- motorized motorized access a larger access to these stations may not produce substantial changes in non- motorized access . T he place types with the largest amount percentages that are as noticeable as for other stations of park and ride facilities and number of parking spaces will most likely contribute to a lower in non- motorized access shares . A n example of target could be to improve the non- average motorized average share as follows: • 5% - 10% for the place types with average shares below 7 0% • 2.5% - 5% for the place types with average shares between 70 % and 85% • Up to 2.5% for the place types with average shares over 85% -D Survey was designed to focus on the bus and rail lines as a whole, It must be noted that the O and does not always provide enough entries for each station or stop along the lines anal It yzed. is recommended that the information contained in Table 1 be refined through the conduction of a future O- D survey at the stations in order to obtain mode share statistics that are statistically representative of universe of stations analyzed. To ols Analyzed The scope calls for assessment of potential tools and methodologies for establishing modal access targets by place types. However, given the conclusion of the previous section, it has become apparent that the examination of tools that can evaluate modal access and active transportation access on a station to station basis is also warranted for this assessment. The variation in modal access by station within individual place types is a result of numerous factors, which would be difficult to harmonize across stations. Additionally, stations that currently have high pedestrian and cyclist mode splits may have greater potential for ridership gains from these modes than stations with mode splits below an arbitrary target. Given this condition, we

237 IBI Group Memorandum 7 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson think that the focus of these tools should be on measuring how overall access, and consequently ridership, can improve, more than modal access percentages. All documents analyzed as part of this research suggests or shows that transit ridership is directly affected by accessibility, as well as use/urban design variables (population density, employment density, land use mix, land use balance). Each of the five tools reviewed for this assessment is discussed below. TCRP Report 153 The Transit Cooperative Research Program Report 153: Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations provides a process and a tool to assist in planning for access to high capacity transit stations. The methodology has been developed considering data and input from several agencies throughout the country, and the eight -step process identified for station access is illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 4 – Eight -step station access planning flowchart Identify the need Establish a Collaborative Environment Develop Objectives and Principles Establish Evaluation Criteria Build a Rich Set of Appropriate Options Predict Outcome and Apply Criteria Trade -offs, Negotiation and Choice Implementation and Monitoring Source: TCRP Report 153, 2012

238 IBI Group Memorandum 8 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Station access is in general m ulti- modal, and the research has found that the predominant access travel modes are dependent on several characteristics: Type of land use • • Street spacing • Development density • Station infrastructure and connection to surroundings TCRP Report 153 developed a set of station typologies that would illustrate the general characteristics of typical transit stations, and therefore allow for the analysis of the attributes of access/egress mode characteristics. Individual typologies relate to physical factors present at the station and in a 0.5 mile area around the station. The typologies were defined considering housing density, building scale, distance from CBD, supporting transit network, pedestrian/bike access, parking facilities, and access/egress, as illustrated in Figure 5. One drawback with the potential use of this tool is that the stations are evaluated according to their access typology and not to their place type classification. Therefore, in order to use this methodology, there would need to be a realloc ation of stations based on access instead of place type. The report also provides an average station access mode share for each station type, illustrated in Figure 6.

239 9 Commuter Bus Commuter Rail Ferry Heavy Rail Commuter Rail Heavy Rail Commuter Rail Light Rail BRT Heavy Rail Light Rail BRT Ferry BRT Light Rail Commuter Rail BRT Light Rail Heavy Rail Light Rail BRT Commuter Bus Ferry Heavy Rail BRT Light Rail Heavy Rail Light Rail Rapid Transit Modes BRT Heavy Rail 14th Street (NY Waterway) - Columbia (MTA) – – Pink Line (CTA) Bellevue Transit Center (Sound Mukilteo (Sound Transit) Forest Hills (MBTA) Euclid Ave/71st St (Cleveland RTA) Othello Station (Sound Transit) West Baltimore (MARC) Western 16th Street/Mission (BART) Van Nuys (LA Metro) South Bank (PAT) Warner Center (LA Metro) Tunney’s Pasture (OC Transpo) Kingsbridge Road (NYCT) Owings Mills (MTA) Greenwich Station (Metro North) Transit) Lloyd Center (TriMet) East Liberty (Port Authority) Example Stations Anacostia (WMATA) Downtown Littleton (RTD) Maple Island (Lane Transit) McCormick Road (MTA) Pleasant Park (OC Transpo) Route 915 Great Mall Transit Center (VTA) Quincy (MBTA) Hoboken Davis Street (Metra) Bethesda (WMATA) Orenco Station (TriMet) - - - - - - ff - and and -and- -and- - - street - Park off -street ride Park prioritized ride often No/limited parking prioritized Parking Facilities parking street Park No off ride street Some off prioritized available parking street available Some off ride parking prioritized off -street Some o Park No/limited street parking Off parking available parking Some off parking street Both Both Access Egress Access Access Access Access Both Egress Egress Access/ Access Both limited office Surrounding civic uses neighborhood retail, limited office neighborhood retail Residential, Office, residential, Office, retail and Residential, limited residential Residential, retail, Residential, neighborhood retails retail, commercial neighborhood Residential, office Varies Retail, limited Varies Land Use entertainment, and institutional, retail, Residential, neighborhood retail, limited office Residential, neighborhood retail volume – Station Access Typology ctivity, -volume -volume nections nnectivity, quality quality quality -quality -quality - - - -volume -volume -volume Ped/Bike Access Limited connectivity, Limited connectivity, Poor co Isolated, difficult High High Good network within Good con High High High Poor conne Figure 5 high network; good network; good roadways connectivity connectivity roadways connectivity high roadways connections connectivity network; good network; good roadways roadways isolated network; high- roadways may limit connectivity some high station area some some high high between systems; Supporting Some local bus Subregional hub Employer Some local bus Intermodal Some local bus Intermodal Some local bus Some local bus Some local bus Subregional hub Subregional hub connections connections connections employer connections connections Transit Network bus connections connections, hub hub shuttles shuttles, limited facility/transit facility/transit . -20 -40 iles 0- 10 5- 15 5- 15 5- 10 5- 15 5- 15 5- 15 5- 15 5- 10 10 10 0- 10 miles miles miles m miles miles miles miles miles Dist miles from miles miles CBD ies) 3 3 5 3 2 8 5 3 5 – – – – - - - - - Scale 1 1 2 2 0 2 1 1 2 >5 >5 2-5 stor (# of - - - - - h Medium Medium Housing Low Medium High Low Density Low Medium Medium High Medium High Low Low Medium High Hig – August 20, 2013 Memorandum - Density - Neighborhood Intermodal Transit Center Urban Suburban (Freeway) Retail Center Commercial Suburban Neighborhood High Urban with Parking Village Center Suburban Suburban TOD Urban Neighborhood Suburban Density Urban Historic Medium Suburban Employment Center Type Station Area Transit Village Neighborhood Sarah Jepson IBI Group

240 10 Commuter Bus BRT Light Rail Commuter Rail Commuter Bus Commuter Rail BRT Light Rail Heavy Rail Commuter Rail Modes Rapid Transit Ferry Commuter Rail Eagleson (OC Transpo) Transit) Sammamish Park & Ride (Sound Golden Glades (TriRail) I- 485/South Blvd (CATS) Hamburg Street (MTA) Example Stations Airport Station (MBTA) Great America (ACE) Hoboken Transit Terminal (NY Waterway) Port Townsend (WSDOT Ferry) Elgin (Metra) St. Denis (MARC) El Monte Bus Station (LA Metro) Hartsfield Airport (MARTA) - - -and- -and- -and- ride prioritized Park ride Park ride Park prioritized Facilities available Limited parking Some off street parking off -street street Parking Some off prioritized parking Both Access Egress Access Access/ Egress Egress Both Varies Varies Varies Varies airport, and/or civic uses Surrounding Residential, retail, Entertainment, Land Use limited office -quality -volume Ped/Bike Access Isolated, difficult Limited connectivity High Isolated, difficult High Isolated, difficult connections network; good roadways, difficult with emphasis on special facility connections connections connectivity connections Supporting Employer Limited Some local bus Employer, Subregional hub Subregional hub bus connections shuttles, limited airport, special Transit connections event shuttles connections Network . –30 -40 –40 10 >30 15 15 Varies Varies miles miles miles CBD Dist miles from ies) 3 2 3 – - - Scale 1 0 1 0-2 0-2 (# of stor Varies - - Low Housing Density Medium Varies Medium Low Low Low Low – August 20, 2013 Memorandum / Highway Satellite City Freeway Legacy Event/Campus Busway Park& Ride Shuttle Station Type Station Area Special Sarah Jepson IBI Group Source: TCRP Report 153, 2012

241 IBI Group Memorandum 11 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Figure 6 – Average station access mode share by station type Average Access Mode Percentage Auto (Park - and - - off) Ride) Walk Bicycle Feeder Bus Auto (Drop Station Type (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 1 10 82 5 Urban Commercial 2 High - Density Urban 72 Neighborhood 14 4 10 2 Medium -Density Urban 80 1 4 7 Neighborhood 9 Urban Neighborhood with Parking 3 21 10 31 35 e Historic Transit Villag 1 3 17 53 25 Suburban TOD 32 2 13 14 39 Suburban Villag e Center 30 2 16 12 40 Suburban Neighborhood 1 11 13 46 29 10 12 12 65 Suburban Freeway 1 Suburban Employment 29 3 25 9 36 Center Suburban Retail Center 30 19 11 39 2 Intermodal Transit 27 1 36 6 30 Center Special Event/Campus 55 2 24 6 13 Satellite City 7 12 16 59 6 Source: TCRP Report 153, 2012 The guidelines regarding station access can be used for existing and for new stations. The TCRP Report 153 is accompanied by a spreadsheet tool that can be used to estimate station ridership and mode access share. The station typology is used to govern the arrival modes that should be encouraged or discouraged at particular types of stations. The model does not focus on active transportation access, and the tool does not estimate the benefits for non- motorized/active transportation access improvements to the station. The tool provides an estimate of new walk trips based on transit -oriented development, as well as target bicycle access boardings, but these are not linked to non- motorized access improvements. The spreadsheet is straightforward, and the data needed for the analysis includes station characteristics, demographics in 0.5 mile radius, station daily boardings, access mode split (existing or by station type – default values), and other station data related to parking and management strategies. The analysis is focused on the assessment of impacts of changing parking supply/costs and the implementation of TOD on ridership. Improvements to wal k access to a station are suggested to be effective if the mode share is a lot smaller than the mode share considered for the typology standard, and the user is referred to the Guidebook for a list of potential pedestrian improvements. A similar approach is used in the analysis of bicycle access, where improvements are considered likely to be effective only if the bicycle mode share is less than 1.5 times the bicycle commute mode share. In terms of bicycle commute mode share, it must be noted that the input data is for Census Place (American Communities Survey), which means that data would be aggregated for an area much larger than a typical station area.

242 IBI Group Memorandum 12 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Station access improvement opportunities listed for pedestrians and bicyclists include: Provide paved sidewalks at least 5 feet wide • Remove sidewalk clutter near station entrances • • Provide station entrances through the buildings • Build pedestrian overpasses and/or underpasses • Provide weather -protected connections to adjacent land use • Install traffic signals at busy junctions • Improve night visibility Install intersection safety improvements (e.g., crosswalks) • Install wayfinding on approaches to station • Install bicycle lanes • Provide bicycle paths • • Provide secure bicycle storage at stations The strengths of this tool include the representation of a variety of station types, but the application relies heavily on data collection on access mode shares, as no improvements to non- motorized modes are considered to be effective if the defaults existing in the tool are used. This tool is useful to assess changes to ridership given changes to parking configuration and -oriented development in the station area, management, as well as the implementation of transit an assess ment of the impacts of changes to the non- but does not provide motorized access to the station. Direct Ridership Model of Bus Rapid Transit in Los Angeles County The direct ridership model proposed by Cervero, Murakami and Miller (University of Berkeley Center for Future Transport, 2009) estimates boardings at a BRT stop or station as a function of three sets of variables: • Service attributes: frequency, operating speeds, feeder bus connections, dedicated lanes, vehicle brand/marketing, etc. Location and Neighborhood attributes: population and employment densities, mixed land • use measures, median household incomes, vehicle ownership, distance to nearest stop, accessibility levels, terminal station, street density, connectivity indices (number of intersections divided by number of links, where a higher number indicates in general a more walkable environment), etc. • Bus Stop/Site attributes: shelters, next bus passenger information, benches, far -side bus stops, park -and- ride lots, bus bulbs, etc. The model was proposed considering 50 Metro Rapid stops, 13 Orange Line Stops and 6 Big Blue Bus stops, and the coefficients are shown in Figure 7.

243 IBI Group Memorandum 13 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson – Direct Ridership Model for BRT in Los Angeles County Figure 7 T Statistic Sig. Beta Std. Error Coefficient Service Attributes ses (both Number of Daily Metro Rapid Bu 1.353 .176 directions) .00 0 5.103 .371 Number of perpendicular daily feeder bus lines (both directions) 73.921 36.045 .080 2.051 .0 45 Number of perpendicular daily rail feeder trains 6.722 1.934 .126 (both directions) .001 3.476 Neighborhood A ttributes - 0.017 0.004 .134 4.303 .00 0 Population Density (1/2 mile buffer) 261.705 150.751 0.060 1.736 .0 Distance to nearest BRT stop (in miles) 88 Interactive Terms - BRT & Feeder Bus: Dedicated Lane (0 1)* bus lines 124.557 62.121 Number of perpendicular daily feeder 2.005 .0 50 .123 BRT & Feeder Rail: Dedicated Lane (0-1)* Number of perpendicular daily rail feeder trains 52.891 3.831 .533 13.807 .0 00 BRT & Parking Capacity: Dedicated Lane (0- 1)* - and - Ride Lot Capacity .514 .249 .093 2.06 7 .043 Park BRT & Total Density: Dedicated Lane (0- 1)*(Population +Employment density within - mile buffer) .036 .011 .185 3.202 .00 2 1/2 - 541.164 154.71 -- - 3.50 .001 Constant Summary Statistics: R Square = 0.952 F Statistic (prob.) = 129.011 (.000) N=69 Source: Direct Ridership Model of Bus Rapid Transit in Los Angeles County , U C Cervero, R., Murakami, J, Miller, M. - Berkeley Center for Future Urban Transport: A Volvo Center of Excellence, Institute of Transportation Studies (UCB), UC Berkeley , June 2009 As can be observed in Figure 7, the proposed multiple regression model includes as variables the quality of high capacity service provided in the station area buffer, population and employment densities, presence (or not) of dedicated lane, parking supply and distance to the nearest BRT stop. Even though distance to next stop is used to capture the size of the catchment area, there are no variables related to the walkability within the station area (as connectivity indices are not present in the proposed model). The model captures changes in service , as well as changes in density and parking capacity , but is not designed to capture changes to the active transportation network, which reduces its applicability for the assessment -last mile strategies. of the impacts of first LRT First & Last Mile (FALM) Strategic Model Viacity is a GIS -based pedestrian, bicycle and transit connectivity planning service and software developed by the Transpo Group. The software uses Route Directness Index (RDI), which is a compar ison of the straight line distance between two points with the actual route between these points. The more direct a route is, the higher the RDI is, with RDI equal to 1.0 if the route is a straight line. These metrics have been packaged to serve as input to a tool, the LRT First & Last Mile (FALM) Strategic Model, which would allow for the estimation of walk connectivity to stations, as well as the increase in station boardings resulting from improvements to walk connectivity. It considers the effect of the built environment variables around the station:

244 IBI Group Memorandum 14 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson – population and employment • Density Diversity – mix of land use • quality of the urban street network • Design – LRT service frequency Destination accessibility – • • Distance to transit – walk connectivity The FA LM Strategic Model was developed through the application of multiple regression analysis to determine the “built environment” variables that have the strongest influence on downtown LRT stations within the Portland urban area. predicting daily walk boardings at 28 non- Similar to the tool proposed in the TCRP Report 153, it uses data made available through the Center for Transit Oriented Development (CTOD), but employs a set of measures of land parcel - specific connectivity to LRT stations within a 0.5 mile b uffer based on RDI. Parcel -based RDI measurements for high capacity transit station areas have been applied in recent studies to stations/stops for Sound Transit, Tri -Met and DART. This tool has great potential to assess the impacts of changes to non- mo torized access within the vicinity of the station area, but the efficiency and transferability of the model to other transit systems (other Cities/agencies as well as other modes – heavy rail, commuter rail and BRT) are not contemplated in the existing version, but are considered to be next steps of the process. This is a weakness of this tool, but this could be overcome with the appropriate data collection and calibration to local conditions. http://www.viacity.info/wp- content/uploads/2012/02/ViaCity_FALM_Model.pdf Ridership+ Ridership+ is a series of regression- based direct ridership forecasting tools developed by Fehr and Peers. This tool incorporates livability values, and has been used in the development of forecasts for the BART system in San Francisco and also utilized in Los Angeles County in the Westside Subway Extension, Westside Mobility Plan and the Downtown Los Angeles Streetcar Project. The tool has been used in streetcar, bus rapid transit, light rail and heavy rail projects, most of them in California. The model was used to estimate ridership changes on the BART system contains, along with the traditional variables of population, employment and parking supply at the stations, a walkability measure, where the design of the street network and pedestrian environment affect ridership. The focus of this model has been high capacity transit. This model has been developed as a forecast model for future stations and estimates ridership for new stations based on existing patterns and behavior rather than estimating changes to demand at existing stations, which reduces its applicability in the assessment of the anticipated impacts to ridership at existing transit stations due to the implementation of first -last mile strategies at these stations. Therefore, this model does not meet the requirements of this study. Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index/ Bicycle Environmental Quality Index (PEQI/BEQI) The Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index (PEQI) is a tool developed by the San Francisco Department of Public Health and used to prioritize improvements in pedestrian infrastructure during the planning process. The PEQI is an observational survey that quantifies street and intersection factors empirically known to affect people's travel behaviors . Thirty -one empirical indicators are organized into five categories: intersection safety, traffic, street design, land use

245 IBI Group Memorandum 15 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson and perceived safety. The data collected is entered into a customized Microsoft Access table, and a score is produced reflecting the quality of the pedestrian environment. Bicycle Environmental Quality Index (BEQI), also developed by the San Francisco Department of Public Health, is a quantitative observational survey developed to assess the bicycle environment on roadways and evaluate what streetscape improvements could be made to promote bicycling in San Francisco. Twenty -one indicators are organized into 5 categories for this tool. These two tools can be used to help assess the quality of the infrastructure along access routes to the station and further refine the access sheds for each station. It is a very time consuming process, as data has to be entered for each stop and each segment considered, but is a valuable tool to understand the anticipated perceived changes to the non- motorized environment These tools are good for assessing improvements to infrastructure, but are not applicable for assessing the how these improvements would change ridership. Combined with a quantitative tool like FALM, they could provide for the adequate assessment of accessibility and ridership.

246 IBI Group Memorandum 16 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Proposed Metrics -last mile strategies on station ridership are a The proposed metrics to analyze the impact of first combination of the tools analyzed on the previous pages. The assessment of the impact of adding or changing the parking conditions at the station as well as the implementation of transit - oriented development can be assessed through the use of the tool provided in the TCRP Report 153, and the metric analyzed should be the estimated passenger gain given the cost of ation of the strategy. implement For non- motorized access, it is suggested that the change in ridership be estimated given the is currently change in the access shed. FALM, the most elaborate tool available, not calibrated for Los Angeles County, and therefore it is proposed that initially, the shed be calculated and employment in a 15 minute timeframe, considering the population that can reach the station given the existing network, and the existing access share for the station being analyzed, and that the metric analyzed should be the estimated passenger gain given the cost of implementation of the strategy. This provides for a comparison, if need be, to the implementation or increase in parking at stations. and accessible sidewalks Changes to walking time can be implemented by providing adequate which increases the average walking speed, providing more crossing points as well as improved crossing at heavy pedestrian traffic intersections, providing bike paths and signalization, as well as improving bicycle facilities at the stations that are operating at capacity . Tool Analysis Findings Access conditions vary significantly between motorized and non- motorized modes from station to station and place type to place type. Therefore, it is recommended that Metro consider the appl ication of a hybrid approach to determine the likely impact of changes to station ridership given changes to accessibility in the station area. One tool would be focused on changes regarding parking and TOD strategies and one on active transportation strategies. The identification of modal access targets for transit stations and stops is a task that can be best accomplished after the data regarding existing mode access is compiled for the several types of -D survey provides a good set of data, but stations that exist in the County of Los Angeles. The O the sampling plan was developed according to Metro routes, and not Metro stations. The survey also only captures the users that are already in the system, and not those that could be part of the system if access conditions compatible with their needs were provided to stations. Instead of regional access targets, due to variation observed in the station access mode shares for the various station types (and also within station types) it is proposed that Metro c onsider a range of access shares as a reference point and test and implement strategies that can change the average share for the place type to reflect Metro’s active transportation policies. In regards to motorized and motorized related access improvements to stations can be assessed metrics, non- through: 1. Non- motorized access: The increase of the active transportation shed around the stations, with the goal of increasing the number of riders as the shed expands. For example, the expected increase in ridership can be defined given the change between the population/employment within a 0.5 mile buffer around the station and the population/employment that can actually reach the station given the characteristics of the active transportation network available and the network with the proposed improvements.

247 IBI Group Memorandum 17 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson 2. Motorized access: The changes to ridership given parking strategies as well as implementation of transit -oriented developments in the station area. All models identified as potential candidates rely heavily on station data. Some of the data regarding socioeconomic variables surrounding the station/stop can be obtained from the United States Census or from other sites such as the Center for Neighborhood Technology’s TOD Database (toddata.cnt.org), but the data gathering is labor intensive and time consuming, which increases as further geographic detail is needed. In the near future, the benefits of the proposed active transportation projects can be assessed through station surveys, while existing models identified in this memo are refined to reflect the access behavior within Los Angeles County and therefore be suitable to be used as predictive of the anticipated changes in station mode access. Most research has been conducted on high capacity transit stations or stops. The TCRP Report 153 provides for standard mode splits according to several station types, but it must be noted that the use of this tool regarding the assessment of changes to station area access is heavily dependent on the use station specific data. The TCRP Report 153 also is more focused on the changes to ridership given changes to parking and TOD characteristics, and does not consider non- motorized access improvements directly in the model. The model can be used for predicting changes to ridership given changes to land use (TOD development) as well as changes to parking supply and strategies, but is not effective in predicting the changes in mode access and ridership given improvements to the non- motorized network. the LRT First & Last Mile (FALM) Strategic Model captures the The methodology proposed in benefits of adding or improving non- motorized connections to the station area, but this model has to date only been tested on a small number of stations, and needs to be further enhanced to rporate a larger data set, with a greater variety of locations and access modes in order to inco provide portability. The most important feature of this model is the incorporation of the possibility of changing the built environment and the anticipated increase in non- motorized access modes. It must be noted that this methodology requires parcel -level data in order to compute the RDI. It is recommended that Metro monitor the further development of this tool, as it can provide quantitative benefits to connection improvements, but it is unlikely that this tool can be immediately applied to stations in Los Angeles County. In the meantime, the overlay of the access shed and the available socioeconomic data (Census 2010 and other) can provide for an assessment of the likely impact of changes to non- motorized station access. It must be noted that improvements should not be guided solely by the changes predicted to ridership, given that some improvements to station access area cannot be captured directly by the proposed models, and a more holistic approach is recommended to augment the information available for decision makers.

248 IBI Group Memorandum 18 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson of Interim Station Access Assessment Tool Application esents This section pr the application of the interim tool recommended to analyze station access. motor focused on the non- The application is ized access to the station, and the methodology and results are presented in the following pages. This interim tool has been developed by IBI to provide Metro with an evaluation tool in the interim timeframe while other tools (in particular to FL by others to provide better AM tool profiled above) are further developed and refined measurements of ridership changes resulting from changes to station accessibility. The methodology for the interim tool is straightforward , and relies heavily on GIS data, with the ng most time consuming task being the codi of the network for the conditions to be analyzed. The shed size and shape is cross -referenced spatially with socioeconomic data to obtain input for the calculation of access increase and expected increase in ridership. The increase in ridership relevant to the ridership for the station must be carefully analyzed, as The implementation of active transportation many stations have high percentage of transfers. improvements does increase the quality of the transfer for those already in the system, as the system becomes more efficient in terms of overall time for a trip. When assessing the impacts of the implementation of first -last mile strategies in areas where -mile bands overlap, caution should be exercised in order to station density is such that the half not double count the changes in socioeconomic data, which can lead to an overestimate of the potential new riders. The methodology is not capable of measuring the effect of the improvements on the choice of people t hat live or work within the existing shed. To capture this shift in behavior, pre- and post - implementation surveys should be conducted at the stations where the Metro Path is implemented. The proposed methodology yields numerical results that are considered conservative in terms of the potential change in modal access . Methodology The proposed methodology was applied to the three station areas that were selected as interim rd and Wilshire/Normandie. case study sites for the Path Network: North Hollywood, Watts/103 Thi s methodology is GIS- based, and the software used was TransCAD , developed by Caliper a widely used software, and the same software utilized to develop SCAG’s regional Corporation, The procedure uses the TransCAD’s GIS and network funct ions. travel demand model. Inputs to the procedure consisted of: • Census Data Census block geographic database o  Population 2010 (Source: Census)  Total employment 2010 (source: Census - LEHD Origin -Destination Employment Statistics (LODES)) Street Network • o Street network geographi c database (source: Caliper) • Metro R ail Stations (source: Metro, complemented by IBI) o Geographic database containing all Metro stations The following paragraphs outline the step- by-step procedure followed to assess the impact of the Metro Path network on the non- motorized access shed around a given rail station, as well as a high- level estimate of the potential ridership increase that can be associated with the increase of the size of the access shed.

249 IBI Group Memorandum 19 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson -mile band was generated around each stat to be analyzed, and the street and First, a ion half sidewalk network within the area was detailed to represent the existing pedestrian infrastructure. The pedestrian infrastructure includes the representation of sidewalks on each side of the street, striped locations, as well as other pedestrian connections striped crossings and crossings at non- such as overpasses. Travel t ime was allocated for each link, based on the following assumptions : Sidewalks or pedestrian paths with no interaction with traffic – • speed of 2 mph • speed of 2.4 mph, plus 27s delay Pedestrian crossings at signalized intersections – (average estimated time that pedestrians would have to wait for the walk signal) • signalized intersections or locations – 2.4 mph (no Pedestrian crossings at striped non- delay was added as it was assumed that vehicles would be more aware of pedestrians, and the lat ter would be able to cross the street shortly after arriving) • Pedestrian crossings at non- striped locations – 2.4 mph, plus 30s delay (average estimated time that pedestrians would wait for a break in traffic before crossing) Freeways and other express roadways included in the GIS database were not considered as pedestrian infrastructure and were coded to ensure that these links, even though part of the were database, not a viable option for the pedestrian to use when walking to and from the station. Once the base pedestrian infrastructure was coded, TransCAD was used to generate a transportation network, and then network bands were built around the station and overlaid with the Census layer, providing the base assessment of the non- The bands motorized access shed. were built considering 5- minute travel intervals and represent the distances that can be reached from the station within 15 minute time period. The shape of the band is an indicator of how the pedestrian infrastructure affects accessibility to the station. The street database was modified to include the changes proposed by the Metro Path concept for the station being analyzed. N ew network and associated network bands were then generated, providing the assessment of the applied Path Network shed. Changes to infrastructure included the inclusion of new connections and improvement of existing connections such as the consideration of shorter crossing distances at signalized intersections as well as the striping of crosswalks. Travel time allocated for each link was recalculated considering the input above, with the exception of the time to cross the street at signalized intersections, where the added time (del ay) was reduced from 27s to 24s to account for signal phasing improvements. The socioeconomic data for each of the infrastructure configurations was then input into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to estimate the net change in access to station and the pote ntial benefits in terms of ridership that the increase in access could provide. The following pages contain the results obtained for the three stations analyzed.

250 IBI Group Memorandum 20 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson North Hollywood Station North Hollywood is the terminus station for the Metro Red Line and for the Metro Orange Line. two station areas are separated by Lankershim Boulevard, and the station area The east to the (Metro Red Line) has a park -and- ride lot located next to it, as well as a small bus terminal. This station is among the Metro stations with the highest boardings. For purposes of analysis, the location of the Red Line station was considered as the origin for the time analysis. Socioeconomic data within a 0.5 mile (15- minute walk without any interference) from the station is as follows: Population – 11,675 • • Workers – 5,130 • Jobs – 4,535 It is important to note that the urban fabric and street layout play a strong role in the definition of access routes to the station. Considering the same average speed for walking on sidewalks (2 mph), the existing infrastructure, the number of street crossings (signalized, striped only or not marked), in a 15- minute period of time, it is anticipated that the number of residents (population), work ers and jobs reached would be about half of the amount existing in the circular 0.5 mile band around the station. The shape of the existing 15- minute access shed is shown in Figure 7.

251 IBI Group Memorandum 21 Sarah Jepson – August 20, 2013 Figure 7 – Existing 15 -minute walk access shed – North Hollywood Station The analysis of the area surrounding the station indicated that there were numerous active transportation connections that could be improved. Figure 8 illustrates the Metro Path concept for the North Hollywood station area.

252 IBI Group Memorandum 22 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Figure 8 – Metro Path Concept – North Hollywood Station The implementation of the Metro Path concept in the network surrounding the North Hollywood : station includes the following elements • Inclusion of a pedestrian cut -through in the parking lot in order to streamline the connection from the area north- east of the st ation • cut -through in the North Hollywood Park to increase the shed Inclusion of a pedestrian in the southwest direction • Time gains regarding improvements at signalized intersections • Time gains due to improvements at pedestrian crossings along the Path Arterial connections These improvements to pedestrian access and travel time in the area surrounding the station expanded the 15- minute access shed, as can be seen in Figure 9.

253 IBI Group Memorandum 23 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Figure Metro Path 15- minute walk access shed – North Hollywood Station 9 – The Metro Path enhancements increase the access shed within the half -mile boundary, but there is still a pocket northwest of the station that is out of reach of the 15- minute travel time period. This is because there is no outlet for the street to connect to Lankershim Boulevard. If a connection could be established, the observed gap would close. It was also observed that there are a number of intersections that do not have pedestrian crossing treatment s in the vicinity of the st ation, many of them located on Path Collectors. A second network including these extra connectivity enhancements was tested, and the results regarding the access shed are displayed in Figure 10.

254 IBI Group Memorandum 24 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson 10 – Enhanced Metro Path 15 -minute walk access shed – North Hollywood Station Figure additional improvements to the pedestrian network increased the overall The application of the accessibility to the station, and it is estimated that the population and employment levels within a 15 minute walk increases about 5% in the first scenario tested, and over 15% for the enhanced access scenario . Assuming a similar magnitude change in ridership, these improvements could result in a ridership increase of as high as 100 to 200 boardings per day at the station above current levels . However, the ridership survey indicates that North Hollywood is a station with a large number of transfers , with about 70% of the riders boarding the Metro Red Line at that location coming from other bus lines or from the Orange Line. Under these circumstances, the resulting forecast increase in ridership given the change in accessibility to the station would range from about 2% to 4% above current levels .

255 IBI Group Memorandum 25 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson rd 103 Street/Watts Station rd Street/Watts Station is a station located along the Metro Blue Line, in the vicinity of The 103 rd Street . Socioeconomic data within a 0.5 mile (15- minute walk without Grandee Avenue and 103 any interference) from the station is as follows: • Population – 12,672 • Workers – 3,170 • 1,529 Jobs – The pedestrian network in the area is constrained by gated communities, as well as by the rail tracks. Considering the same average speed for walking on sidewalks (2 mph), the existing infrastructure, the number of street crossings (signalized, striped only or not marked), in a 15- minute period of time, it is anticipated that the number of residents (population), workers and jobs reached would be about half of the amount existing in the circular 0.5 mile band around the station. The shape of the existing 15- minute access shed is shown in Figure 11. rd Street/Watts Station Figure 11 – Existing 15- minute walk access shed – 103

256 IBI Group Memorandum 26 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson rd Figure 12 illustrates the Path concepts proposed for the street network surrounding the 103 the access shed shape is illustrated in Street/Watts Station. The resulting forecast change in Figure 13. rd Street/Watts Station – Metro Path Concept – 103 Figure 12 rd Street/Watts The implementation of the Metro Path concept in the network surrounding the 103 station includes the following elements : • Improvement of the east -west connection to the station • Time gains regarding improvements at signalized intersections • Time gains due to improvements at crossings along the Path Arterial connections

257 IBI Group Memorandum 27 Sarah Jepson – August 20, 2013 rd Street/Watts Station – Metro Path 15 -minute walk access shed – 103 Figure 13 Additional improvements to the street network resulted in a slight increase in shed size, as can be seen in Figure 14.

258 IBI Group Memorandum 28 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson rd Street/Watts Station – Enhanced Metro Path 15 103 14 Figure -minute walk access shed – The access to the station from the south is one of the constraints that impacts the size and access shed. The application of the improvements to the pedestrian network shape of the increased the overall access to the station, and it is est imated that the population and employment within a 15 minute walk increases about 2% in the first scenario tested, and 4% for the enhanced access scenario, which could result in a ridership increase of 15 to 30 boardings rd Street/Watts is a station with a per day at the station. The ridership survey indicates that 103 small number of transfers, with only 25 % of the riders boarding the station from other transit lines . T he resulting forecast increase in ridership given the change in accessibility to the station would range from about 1.5 % to 3%.

259 IBI Group Memorandum 29 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Wilshire/Normandie Station The Wilshire Normandie Station is a station located along the Metro Purple Line, in the vicinity of Wilshire Boulevard and Normandie Avenue. This station is located in a high density area, as can be observed from the socioeconomic data within a 0.5 mile (15- minute walk without any interference) of the station: • Population – 38,838 • Workers – 12,278 • Jobs – 23,302 The street grid in this station area is regular and closely spaced. Considering the same average speed for walking on sidewalks (2 mph), the existing infrastructure, the number of street crossings (signalized, striped only or not marked), in a 15- minute period of time, it is anticipated that the number of residents (population), workers and jobs reached would be about half of the amount existing in the circular 0.5 mile band around the station. The shape of the existing 15- minute access shed is shown in Figure 15. T he proposed P ath concept is illustrated in Figure 16. Figure 15 – Existing 15- minute walk access shed – Wilshire Normandie Station

260 IBI Group Memorandum 30 Sarah Jepson – August 20, 2013 Figure 16 – Metro Path Concept – Wilshire/Normandie Station It is important to notice that the stations are closely spaced, and that the benefits of the expansion of the shed towards the neighboring stations should be viewed with caution, as there is the potential of considering the benefit more than once. As the network is more consolidated, the changes to the network are not as noticeable as for the other two stations analyzed, and were limited to improvements at signalized intersections and crossings at P ath Arterials . The changes in the shape of the access shed are shown in Figure 17.

261 IBI Group Memorandum 31 Sarah Jepson – August 20, 2013 Figure 17 – Metro Path 15 -minute walk access shed – Wilshire/Normandie Station The changes proposed to the pedestrian network increased slightly the overall access to the station, and it is estimated that the population and reached within a 15 minute walk increases about 2% , which could result in a forecast ridership increase of 55 boardings per day at the station. The ridership survey indicates that the Wilshire/Normandie is a station with a small number of transfers, with only 25% of the riders boarding the station from other transit lines. The anticipated potential increase in ridership given the change in accessibility to the station would be about 1.5% to 3%.

262 IBI Group Memorandum 32 – August 20, 2013 Sarah Jepson Summary The proposed methodology yields numerical results that are considered conservative, given that it does not capture behavioral changes relative to the qualitative improvements in the overall This is an especially important feature for the older population, which has limited streetscape. mobility when compared to adults and young adults. A study published by Daniel Baldwin Hess ) indicate that models estimate that in http://jtlu.org/ in the Journal of Transport and Land Use ( the City of San Jose, California, each additional 5 minutes in perceived to transit walking time decreases ridership frequency by 5% for non- drivers, and by 25% for drivers. The potential to improve access varies by location (place type), but is also impacted by local configurations such as the street fabric and the location of the population and employment densities relative to the station. Caution should be exercised in areas of high station density (stations closer than 0.5 mile) in order to not double count the changes in socioeconomic data, which can lead to an overestimate of the potential new riders.

263 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints LAN tudy IRST ites S S Case AST P TRATEGIC S E L F I L M Appendix Taxonomy of Mobility Devices Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 édrez Mel 15 IBI Group July 2013 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01 March 2013 I Alta Planning Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

264 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED -WALKING - GREEN MODE - PEDESTRIAN Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope Average Speed * Walking is not only one of the best forms mph ft of exercise, but the most common mode 3 3 of transportation. Urban planners have focused recent efforts on creating a built Range = 2 - 4 MPH (Minimum width) environment that allows people to walk; communities with pedestrian-friendly areas, and in some cases partially car-free, ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute allow commuting, shopping, and recreation Access Shed Human powered: to be done by walking. Walking, alone, may not meet the needs of all trips, but it is miles cal/mi easily combined with other active modes 0.5 90 and public transit because it requires no additional facilities or amenities to transition into/out of. As wheeled active and electric devices grow in popularity, maintaining a safe and comfortable environment for all types of Observed Street walkers (leisurely shoppers, exercisers, commuters, etc.) will be increasingly Use important, as many of these other devices utilize sidewalks. Presents observed use, Multi-Modal Access policies governing use vary Sidewalk Traffic Parking Multi-Use Bike Traffic Walking is an integral part of most trips, by municipality. Trail and as the base mode of human movement will remain so. The infrastructure that supports this mode includes a range of associated facilities including; sidewalks, Demographics street crossings, lighting, signage, technology, landscaping and canopies Primary: All Ages to name a few. People are more likely to utilize transit if the urban environment is conducive to walking. http://walking.about.com/library/cal/uccalc1.htm * ** Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adult males, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://walking.about.com/library/ cal/uccalc1.htm Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 16 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

265 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED GREEN MODE - - PEDESTRIAN -JOGGING/RUNNING Average Speed * Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends Typically, jogging/running is a competitive ft mph or fitness related activity, that can take 3 6 place on popular pedestrian and bicycle routes, and therefore should be considered Range = 5 - 12 mph (Minimum width) in the design of first/last mile connections. Theoretically, jogging/running for transportation is within the reach of more Energy Requirements ** Average Ten Minute people than driving a car. It is cheaper than Access Shed Human powered: public transit, or purchasing a bicycle, but it is difficult to translate into a reality in some mile cal/mi circumstances. 1 130 Multi-Modal Access Like walking, transitioning between jogging/running and other modes of public transit is easy, due to the lack of equipment and facilities required; however, Observed Street to make it feasible as a transportation option, commuters often have to identify Use alternative solutions, such as amenities (shower, lockers, etc.) at or near their destination. Presents observed use, policies governing use vary Supporting third party programmatic Multi-Use Traffic Parking Sidewalk Bike Traffic by municipality. elements such as fitness centers can help Trail commuters fold their exercise routines into their commute and should be explored where possible. Some locations (such as remote low density commuter nodes) Demographics could even support integrated shower and changing facilities into the stations Primary: Teens/Adults 12-65 yrs. themselves. Secondary: Adults/Seniors > 45 yrs. National Council on Strength & Fitness * ** Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults males, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.healthstatus.com/ calculate/cbc Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 17 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

266 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints - GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED PEDESTRIAN -PUSH/PULL * Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope Average Speed Carts, strollers, and wheelchairs are mph ft common on today’s sidewalks in urban 4 3 and suburban environments. These devices are typically associated with critical daily Range = 2 - 4 MPH (Minimum width) functions, such as transporting groceries, babies, or the disabled. As these devices are wheeled, they require smooth and even ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute rolling surfaces to be effectively used. As Access Shed Human powered: sidewalks become more crowded with new mobility devices, these devices which miles cal/mi typically require larger spaces to operate 0.5 90 become difficult to maneuver efficiently. Multi-Modal Access Wheelchairs, when being assisted by an individual, have been accounted for in the design of light rail and bus transit; however, Observed Street the minimum clearance requirements at boarding and alighting points are not Use always met. Furthermore, the varying sizes of strollers and hand carts (for groceries, Presents observed use, policies governing use vary laundry, freight, etc.) are a challenge Sidewalk Traffic Traffic Bike Parking Multi-Use by municipality. to accommodate on busses and trains Trail comfortably, alongside other commuters. Station access routes should be designed to accommodate the use of such devices and elevators, lifts and low incline ramps Demographics must be provided to assure easy access to platforms. Primary: Adults/Seniors http://walking.about.com/library/cal/uccalc1.htm * ** Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults males, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://walking.about.com/library/ cal/uccalc1.htm Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 I 18 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

267 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED GREEN MODE - - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION -ADULT BICYCLES Dynamic Envelope * Description & Trends Average Speed There is a vast range of bicycles including; ft ft mph mountain, BMX, utility, folding, road/race, 15 -4 3 recumbent, and hybrids that are utilized for commuter trips. (Minimum width varies Range = 9 - 20 mph from bicycle - tricycles) Bicyclists can achieve significant commute lengths in reasonable time frames, and if ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute opportunities for showers, changing, and storage facilities are leveraged, that length Access Shed Human powered: can be increased even more. Bicycles are miles cal/mi becoming an increasingly popular form of urban transportation. A survey of 55 major 2.5 55 metropolitan areas in the U.S. found that bicycle commuting rates increased, on average, 70 percent between 2000 and 2009. Observed Street Multi-Modal Access Use Bicycle transportation has received significant attention in recent years due to its potential to increase mobility, alleviate traffic Presents observed use, congestion, reduce negative environmental policies governing use vary impacts, and combat public health issues, Bike Sidewalk Parking Multi-Use Traffic Traffic by municipality. but bicycle commuting still represents a Trail small percentage of overall commuters. Better bicycle facilities are needed most notably on routes leading to transit nodes. Bike storage solutions are important as are Demographics strategies that allow bicyclists to bring their Primary: Adults 25-65 yrs. bikes with them on busses and trains. Ramps and lifts that can accommodate bikes are Secondary: Seniors > 65 yrs. critical when making vertical transitions within stations. The average bicycle speed used in commuter bike lanes, according to “Transportation Infrastructure and Engineering”, by Lester A. Hoel. * ** Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 19 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

268 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED -CHILD BICYCLES ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GREEN MODE - - Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope * Average Speed Children’s bicycles and tricycles are made ft mph of both steel and plastic frames. While typically used in suburban communities, 7 2 children on bicycles and tricycles have Range = 5 - 10 mph (Minimum width) become more common on sidewalks in urban environments, often commuting alongside parents and adults. The age of users being ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute young, requires additional safety precautions, Access Shed especially given the number of devices also Human powered: used on sidewalks, and the range of speeds miles cal/mi they will be mixed with. 1.25 40 Multi-Modal Access The most important consideration to make when considering mobility infrastructure for children riding bikes, is they should not be expected to utilize bike facilities that are integrated with the vehicular roadway. Observed Street Children’s bicycles have the same functional Use requirements when considering access to transit as their adult counterparts, though they are typically too small (or the riders are Presents observed use, too small) to be effectively mounted on bus policies governing use vary racks. Accommodations should be made to Traffic Multi-Use Bike Traffic Parking Sidewalk by municipality. allow the easy transition onto busses and Trail trains especially when considering public transit offers a safe route to schools, and bikes help extend the associated access shed of students. Demographics Primary: Children 2-10 yrs. The average bicycle speed, according to “Transportation Infrastructure and Engineering”, by Lester A. Hoel. * Based on the maximum pediatric recommendations for weight of 10 year old, in the United States, of 100 lbs. This number reflects the high end of ** the demographics that typically use this device. http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 July 2013 I 20 IBI Group Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

269 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints - GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION -FREIGHT BICYCLES * Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends Average Speed The modern evolution of the cargo-bike ft mph as personal transport began in Europe 4 12.5 in the 1980s, with Holland and Denmark as epicenters; kid-and-grocery-carrying Range = 9 - 20 mph (Minimum width) bakfiets (“box bike”) caught on with families. Urbanites and suburban dwellers are swept up in the cargo-bike cult, integrating bicycles ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute into their daily lives. In Brooklyn, cargo-bikes Access Shed Human powered: have become the most fashionable means of delivering kids to school. miles cal/mi Freight bicycles come in many varieties 2 90 including tricycle and tandem style, and store cargo on open platforms, built-in cargo cases, open buckets, and often times homemade contraptions for securing freight. Multi-Modal Access Observed Street While freight bicycles are not typically used Use as a part of a longer commute, they are a growing trend used for both residents (running errands, transporting children) and businesses (delivering food, mail, Presents observed use, policies governing use vary and other goods) that will require special Parking Sidewalk Multi-Use Bike Traffic Traffic by municipality. consideration to fit into the larger mobility Trail puzzle. Their larger spatial requirements may need special bicycles lockers and parking to keep from over capacitating existing bicycle infrastructure. Demographics Primary: Adults 25-65 yrs. Secondary: Teens/Young Adults 12-25 yrs. http://bikes-as-transportation.com * Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs.- weight was multiplied by a factor of ** 1.5 to account for freight. http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 July 2013 I 21 IBI Group Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

270 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED -WHEELED SHOES - GREEN MODE - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Dynamic Envelope * Average Speed Description & Trends Heely’s were patented in late 2000, and ft mph are the most common brand of roller shoes 3 4 sold in the U.S. (followed by Street Gliders, a similar product that attaches to regular (Minimum width varies Range = 3 - 6 mph shoes). After becoming popular in Korea, from bicycle - tricycles) Singapore, and Europe, Heely’s, Inc. shipped over 10 million pairs to the U.S. between ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute 2000 and 2007, with sales tripling from Access Shed Human powered: 2005-2006. In 2007 sales fell drastically, and roller shoes remain a blip in the market of miles cal/mi alternative mobility devices. .65 70 An important aspect to consider when considering this mobility device, is the fact that the millions of pairs that have been sold in the U.S. have almost exclusively been sold to today’s youth. This suggests a demographic that is being exposed to an Observed Street alternative mobility device at a young age, and reflects a desire and willingness to use Use such new devices. As this demographic group ages, it is expected they will continue to do so. Presents observed use, policies governing use vary Parking Sidewalk Multi-Use Bike Traffic Traffic by municipality. Trail Multi-Modal Access If Heely style devices became a larger part of the market, they could contribute to pedestrians’ commuters’ ease and Demographics time efficiency, and expand the distance Primary: Children/Teens 6-15 yrs. that can be covered comfortably. And as a device that is integrated with shoes, they Secondary: Young Adults 16-20 yrs. essentially have no spatial impact on existing infrastructure. Recommended safe speeds from manufacturers: Heely * ** Based on the maximum pediatric recommendations for weight of 14-15 year old, in the United States, of 125 lbs. This number reflects the high end of the demographics that typically use this device. http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 22 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

271 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints GREEN MODE -ROLLER SKATES - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION - HUMAN POWERED * Average Speed Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope First patented in 1760, and later reinvented ft mph in 1863, Roller skates hit its popularity peak 4-5 3 during the disco era, later tapering off in the 1980s and 90s. From speed skating, to (Minimum width/skate-like motion) Range = 3-6 mph roller derby, to Roller skating even making an appearance in the Olympics in 2012, Roller skates are enjoyed today both as a pastime ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute and in competitive sports. Human powered: Access Shed Roller skates are not typically used for miles cal/mi commuting, partially due to the speed limitations they face when not on perfectly 0.5 120 smooth surfaces, such as new pavement. The width required to build up proper momentum, through the skating motion, is larger than roller blades, because of the larger 4-wheeled base, causing more conflicts on sidewalks where pedestrians and others modes are operating as well. Multi-Modal Access Observed Street Use The restrictions of roller skates have been addressed through inline skates and roller blades, making them a less likely choice Presents observed use, for urban commuters. If utilized as a part of policies governing use vary a longer commute, their size makes them Traffic Traffic Bike Parking Sidewalk Multi-Use by municipality. Trail easily transported on and off of buses and light rail. Demographics Primary: Children/Teens 8-18 yrs. Secondary: Adults 18-35 yrs. * http://www.livestrong.com/ Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.livestrong.com/ ** Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 23 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

272 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints - GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION -ROLLER BLADES Average Speed Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope * From the beginning of Roller blade, Inc. in mph ft 1984, the inline skating industry has grown 14 4 to encompass over 30 million participants (as of 1996) and several hundred companies that (Minimum width/skate-like motion) Range = 10-20 mph manufacture a wide variety of skates, safety gear, and other inline merchandise. Average Ten Minute Energy Requirements ** According to the International Inline Skating Access Shed Association (IISA), inline skating participation Human powered: has increased 630% since 1989, and was the fastest growing sport in the United States in miles cal/mi 1996. Although the rate of increase declined 2.3 75 slightly in 1997, the sport itself continues to spread and diversify. Manufacturers offer an increasing range of specialized skates, including inline hockey skates, speed skates, aggressive skates, and skates designed specifically for women and fitness skaters. Observed Street Use Multi-Modal Access Aside from weather conditions, roller blades, Presents observed use, while not currently an extremely common policies governing use vary choice, do not face many challenges as a Sidewalk Multi-Use Parking Bike Traffic Traffic by municipality. commuter mode. They are able to negotiate Trail most surface conditions, except for major potholes, and have a quick breaking/reaction time for maneuvering crowded sidewalks. Expert skaters can utilize them in bike lanes Demographics and on multi-use paths at speeds similar to commuter bicyclists. Their size makes them Primary: Adults 25-45 yrs. easy to transport on and off of light rail and Secondary: Teens/Young Adults 12-15 yrs. buses as part of a larger commute length. http://www.livestrong.com/ * Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.livestrong.com/ ** Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 24 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

273 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED GREEN MODE - - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION -KICK SCOOTER Average Speed * Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends The foldable aluminum scooter that uses ft mph inline skate wheels was created in 1996 by 3 5 Wim Ouboter, in Switzerland. The first Razor scooter was distributed by The Sharper Range = 10 mph (Minimum width) Image in 1999 (Japan) and became extremely popular in 2000 in the U.S. It was designed as a portable transporter, but is Energy Requirements ** Average Ten Minute primarily used as a toy for children. Access Shed Human powered: The U.S. marketers of Razor scooter, in miles cal/mi California, sell more than 3 million scooters 0.8 35 each year. The wheels of kick-scooters are small and they have very low clearances, making sidewalks with potholes, and high curbs difficult to maneuver. Some brands provide limited breaking capabilities; however, many require foot breaking, or dismounting to fully stop. Observed Street Use Multi-Modal Access Much like children’s’ bicycles, kick scooters Presents observed use, are often used in suburban neighborhoods, policies governing use vary where vehicle traffic is slower and there Traffic Bike Multi-Use Sidewalk Traffic Parking by municipality. Trail are fewer pedestrians, and they are often observed on routes to school, or alongside parent/adult commuters. Kick scooters low cost and ability to fold up quickly make them a seamless device when transferring Demographics between transit modes. Primary: Children < 12 yrs. Secondary: Teens/Young Adults 13-22 yrs. The greatly increased speed of kick- scooters can cause safety concerns on sidewalks, and the young age of most riders precludes the notion of relegating their use to roadway located bike facilities. * http://www.nycewheels.com/ ** Based on the maximum pediatric recommendations for weight of 10 year old, in the United States, of 100 lbs. This number reflects the high end of the demographics that typically use this device. http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 July 2013 IBI Group 25 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

274 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED GREEN MODE - - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION -ADULT SCOOTER Dynamic Envelope * Description & Trends Average Speed Push scooters for adults have become ft mph popular in the last several years, as active 10 2 transportation is on the rise in urban environments. They are marketed as Range = 5-20 mph (Minimum width) “opportunistic” devices that can be used on both roads and footpaths depending on traffic conditions. In 2010 sales in New York ** Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute City made up 45% of all sales for Xootr, Access Shed Human powered: one of the largest manufacturers of adult scooters, up from 35% in 2009. As the miles cal/mi trend of adults riding scooters continues 1.6 90 to grow with more adults commuting to work, parents scooting with their kids, and college students riding to class, Razor scooter, the popular childrens’ brand, has introduced scooters for adult riders with larger wheels, deck and weight limits. Observed Street As a market that grew out of a childrens’ device, they are most commonly used on Use sidewalks; however, the adult versions can reach much faster speeds and interfere with pedestrian traffic and slower modes Presents observed use, that require sidewalks. policies governing use vary Sidewalk Multi-Use Traffic Bike Parking Traffic by municipality. Trail Multi-Modal Access While the folding childrens’ and smaller adult scooters can be carried on and off transit, the larger models require little Demographics additional infrastructure such as bicycle Primary: Teens/Young Adults 16-35 yrs. locking racks or lockers for storage. Secondary: Adults 35-50 yrs. * http://www.nycewheels.com/ Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.livestrong.com/ ** Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 26 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

275 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION -SKATEBOARD GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED - Description & Trends * Dynamic Envelope Average Speed Skateboarding started in the 1950’s when mph ft Californian surfers got the idea of trying 8 3 to surf the streets. It reached the peak of popularity in 1963, but crashed in 1965 (Minimum width) Range = 6-18 mph and disappeared like many fads. When the urethane skateboard wheels used today where invented in 1972, new interest in Average Ten Minute ** Energy Requirements skateboarding amongst surfers and other Access Shed Human powered: youth took an evolutionary step toward the sport we see today. It took several ups and miles cal/mi downs in popularity through the 80’s, but 1.3 60 remained an underground sport until its inception into the mainstream in the early 90’s. Since 2000, skateboarding has become commercialized and sold as a commuter alternative, with many variations and Observed Street styles on the market. For commuters, Use long-boarding is the style most common, because of the greater stability, traction, and durability. Long-boards include Presents observed use, features that allow easier lifting to policies governing use vary maneuver over bumps, cracks, and Parking Bike Sidewalk Multi-Use Traffic Traffic by municipality. obstacles. Trail Multi-Modal Access Skateboards and long-boards can achieve Demographics relatively high speeds, while being small enough to easily carry on and off transit, Primary: Teens 12-18 yrs. and store without additional infrastructure Secondary: Young Adults 18-30 yrs. such as locking racks. This mode also requires less effort to operate, making shower and changing facilities less necessary for commuters. http://www.livestrong.com/ * Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.livestrong.com/ ** Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 27 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

276 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints - GREEN MODE HUMAN POWERED - ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION -INNOVATIONS Description & Trends * Dynamic Envelope Average Speed The Elliptigo is a derivative of both a mph ft stationary elliptical trainer and a bicycle. 4-8 12 While reducing the amount of impact your body sustains. Everyday fitness Range = 10 - 17 mph (Minimum width) enthusiasts have turned to the elliptigo in place of bicycles and running for exercise, recreation, and small trips. The Average Ten Minute Energy Requirements ** elliptigo offers a commute option for those Access Shed Human powered: uncomfortable with bicycling; the standing position provides added safety with less miles cal/mi resistance to stop and go, being at eye 2 40 level with pedestrians, and less balance required to operate. The Trikke is a new mobility device, very similar to the Elliptigo with a few varying features. Trikkes do not use two inline wheels, rather 3-wheels, hinged like a Observed Street tricycle. The trikke can fold small enough Use to fit in a car or under a desk, making it a practical option for commuting or as part of a larger commute trip (to be carried). Unlike Presents observed use, the elliptigo, trikkes require more balance policies governing use vary and skill to learn to operate, and cannot Traffic Sidewalk Multi-Use Parking Bike Traffic by municipality. function on unsmooth surfaces. They attain Trail similar speeds, with low impact. Multi-Modal Access Both of these emerging innovations are Demographics bulky and would be difficult to integrate Primary: Adults 25-65 yrs. directly on rolling stock (bus or train) Secondary: Teens/Young Adults 12-25 yrs. but could be accommodated at stations through provision of lockable storage. These devices reflect an on-going interest in new modes of active transportation that combine exercise with commuting. * www.commutebybike.com Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.trikketampastore.com ** Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 28 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

277 STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints FIRST LAST MILE - GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED UNIVERSAL ACCESS DEVICE -CANE * Average Speed Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope A cane (or walking stick) is a device most ft mph commonly used to help a person with a 2 3 disability balance while walking, similar to a crutch. They are typically used as a (Minimum width) Range = 1-3 mph mobility or stability aide, in the opposite hand of the injury or weakness. Average Ten Minute Canes help redistribute weight from the Energy Requirements ** Access Shed lower leg that is weak or painful, improve Human powered: stability by increasing the base of support, and provide tactile information about the miles cal/mi ground to improve balance. Ten percent 0.3 80 of adults older than 65 use canes, a much larger group than those using walkers. Multi-Modal Access Along with the demographic of users Observed Street requiring additional safety precautions, Use especially amongst faster mobility devices being operated on sidewalks, facilities such as drop off sites, and ADA compliant Presents observed use, designs at transit stations should be policies governing use vary Sidewalk updated to accommodate the growing Traffic Parking Multi-Use Bike Traffic by municipality. population of those using canes. Trail Mobility infrastructure must consider the slower speeds of pedestrians using canes, especially at street crossings. Tiered Demographics signalization programs that allow for longer crossing times should be considered along Primary: Seniors 65+ yrs. transit access routes. Secondary: All ages with injuries or disabilities. www.livestrong.com * Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://walking.about.com/library/cal/ ** uccalc1.htm Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 29 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

278 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED GREEN MODE - - UNIVERSAL ACCESS DEVICE -CRUTCHES * Dynamic Envelope Average Speed Description & Trends Crutches are used as a mobility aid when ft mph a person has an injury or impairment to 1 3 a leg(s) and cannot fully support one’s weight. They come in several types; such (Minimum width) Range = 1-2 mph as forearm, underarm, strutters, platform, and leg support, and have more load bearing capacity than canes or lift walkers. Average Ten Minute Energy Requirements ** Access Shed Crutches offer a larger variation of gait Human powered: patterns for movement; however, they miles require more work to utilize and are cal/mi typically used for younger people with 0.17 400 mobility needs. Facilities such as drop off sites should be provided for those temporarily bound to crutches during their commute. Multi-Modal Access Observed Street Use ADA compliant transit facilities and appropriate seating on light rail and bus transit should be provided to ensure efficient commuting. Those using crutches Presents observed use, policies governing use vary typically make up a younger population Bike Sidewalk Multi-Use Traffic Traffic Parking by municipality. than canes and wheelchairs, but there are Trail still challenges for long commutes as the energy requirements are quite high. Tiered signalization programs that allow for longer crossing times should be considered Demographics along transit access routes. Primary: All Ages * www.livestrong.com ** Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. www.livestrong.com Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 30 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

279 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints UNIVERSAL ACCESS DEVICE -WHEELCHAIR GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED - Average Speed * Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends The wheelchair originated from England in mph ft the 1670s to assist in transporting people 3 4 with walking disabilities. The standard wheelchair has a seat, a back, two small (Minimum width) Range = 2-4 mph front wheels, two large wheels, and a footrest. Recently, various accessories have become available for wheelchairs, such as Average Ten Minute seat belts, adjustable back rests, pouches, Energy Requirements * * Access Shed and cup holders to offer more freedom to Human Powered: the users. 120 cal/mi miles Many still prefer to use manual .5 wheelchairs, even with the advent of electric powered devices. Many wheelchair users are only temporarily in need of assistance and can get around easily in a manual wheelchair for a short period of time: however, the main factor in determining to use manual chairs for most Observed Street people is cost. Use Multi-Modal Access Presents observed use, Most public transportation stations, trains, policies governing use vary and buses are accommodating to manual Bike Traffic Multi-Use Parking Sidewalk Traffic by municipality. Trail wheelchair users; however, they have historically been treated as an isolated group, with limited number of spaces on buses. As the population ages and more manual and electric wheelchair users ride public transit, new seating configurations Demographics and storage may be required. Primary: Teens/Adults 16-40 yrs. Sidewalks and routes to transit nodes must Secondary: All ages with injuries or disabilities. maintain smooth and clear rolling surfaces, accessible curb ramps, and signal times conducive to safe street crossings. http://www.wheelchairs.com/index.htm * Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://www.utk.edu/tnto- * * day/2011/10/28/wheelchair-exercise-calorie-burning/ Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 I 31 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

280 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints UNIVERSAL ACCESS DEVICE - -LIFT WALKER GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED Average Speed Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope * First appearing in the 1950s and later mph ft patented in the U.S. in 1953. A walker, 3 1 or “Zimmer Frame”, is a tool designed to support disabled or elderly people while (Minimum width) Range = 1-4 mph walking. Both easy to use and easy to store, the walker is the alternative choice to a cane when a person needs assistance Average Ten Minute * * Energy Requirements keeping balance while walking. Access Shed Human powered: While having few disadvantages, the miles walker does require the patient lift the cal/mi walker every step, thus slowing down a 0.17 40 patients stride. Multi-Modal Access Along with the facilities provided for other access devices, such as drop-off sites Observed Street and ADA compliant transit stations, the lift Use walker takes up additional space on light rail and bus transit, additional storage may be required. As the population of those Presents observed use, requiring assisted devices grows, the lift policies governing use vary walker remains one of the slower modes. Traffic Bike Traffic Parking Sidewalk Multi-Use by municipality. Trail Tiered signalization programs that allow for longer crossing times should be considered along transit access routes. Demographics Primary: Seniors 65+ yrs. Secondary: All ages with injuries or disabilities. www.livestrong.com * ** Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://walking.about.com/library/cal/ uccalc1.htm Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 32 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

281 STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints FIRST LAST MILE - GREEN MODE - HUMAN POWERED UNIVERSAL ACCESS DEVICE WHEELED WALKER - Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends Average Speed * Serving as an alternative to a traditional mph ft walker, the rolling walker is easier to 2 2.5 operate and provides additional comfort to the user; however, the small wheels are not (Minimum width) Range = 1-5 mph suited for use on grass or paved surfaces with obstructions. The small wheels can also cause the wheeled walkers to be less Average Ten Minute stable than lift walkers, but alleviate the Energy Requirements ** Access Shed lifting for those with additional disabilities/ Human powered: needs. miles cal/mi The wheeled walker comes in several 0.3 80 variations, the front-wheeled walker is most similar to the lift walker, with two small wheels to make movement smoother. The rollators, are a later variation of wheeled walkers, with four wheels, hand brakes, and a built-in seat (often a basket Observed Street is also included). Rollators allow the user to stop and rest when needed, and have more Use adjustable features such as height. Braking on the handlebars allows for immediate stopping and for maneuvering the rollator Presents observed use, by braking one side making the turning policies governing use vary radius much tighter. Traffic Multi-Use Sidewalk Parking Bike Traffic by municipality. Trail Multi-Modal Access Similar drop off, ADA compliant, and Demographics storage facilities are required in transit stations and on light rail and bus transit, as Primary: Seniors 65+ yrs. for typical walkers. Secondary: All ages with injuries or disabilities. Sidewalks and routes to transit nodes must maintain smooth and clear rolling surfaces, accessible curb ramps, and signal times conducive to safe street crossings. * www.livestrong.com ** Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://walking.about.com/library/cal/ uccalc1.htm Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 33 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

282 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints HUMAN POWERED GREEN MODE - - UNIVERSAL ACCESS DEVICE -WHITE CANE Description & Trends Average Speed Dynamic Envelope * White canes are used by those who are ft mph blind or visually impaired as a mobility tool. 4 2 There are several variations and lengths of white canes, but the primary purpose (Minimum width) Range = 1-3 mph of each is to scan for curbs and steps, make others aware of the bearer’s visual impairment, and offer balance, support or Average Ten Minute stability. Energy Requirements ** Access Shed Human powered: Techniques used to navigate with a white cane include synchronized tapping and miles cal/mi stepping, and two-point touch techniques, 0.3 80 which traditionally have provided enough information to the user about the immediate environment to make safe move decisions. The use of a white cane does not account Observed Street for abruptly approaching devices and Use erratic movements, a concern given the growing number of faster moving mobility devices observed on sidewalks. Presents observed use, policies governing use vary Multi-Modal Access Traffic Multi-Use Sidewalk Parking Traffic Bike by municipality. Trail Alterations to traffic signals and transit facilities, such as bus arrival notifications, require noise enhancements to account for the visually impaired. Routes to transit nodes will benefit from the use of tactile Demographics wayfinding strategies. Primary: Visually Impaired (All Ages) * http://www.nfbnj.org/mobility.php Based on the National Center for Health Statistics average weight for adults, in the United States, of 175 lbs. http://walking.about.com/library/cal/ ** uccalc1.htm Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 I July 2013 IBI Group 34 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

283 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints GREEN MODE - ELECTRIC - NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLES * Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends Average Speed Neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs), mph ft refer to battery electric vehicles that are 6 30 operated on roads that have speed limits up to 35 mph. In the United States, they fall (Minimum width) Maximum = 45 mph under the legal categorization of low-speed vehicles. Average Ten Minute Golf carts are a sub-category of NEVs, Energy Requirements Access Shed originally built to carry 2 golfers and Battery powered: their clubs, but with the price of gasoline Approximately 30 miles/ skyrocketing, electric golf carts have miles charge (varies) become a green and convenient alternative 6 mode of transportation for short trips. Whole communities have been built around golf cart and NEV transportation. With more of them hitting the market for transportation use each year, the safety Observed Street concerns have encouraged many cities to begin introducing golf carts and NEVs into Use their vehicle codes. Presents observed use, Multi-Modal Access policies governing use vary Sidewalk Multi-Use Traffic Bike Traffic Parking by municipality. Transit stations/hubs and urban Trail infrastructure will need to re-evaluate design guidelines for parking and charging stations as NEVs continue to grow as a commuter device due to rising gas prices, an aging population, and their low priced Demographics batteries, when compared to other electric Primary: Adults 18+ yrs. devices on the market. http://www.pikeresearch.com/research/neighborhood-electric-vehicles * Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group I July 2013 35 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

284 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints GREEN MODE - ELECTRIC - ELECTRIC BICYCLE Description & Trends * Dynamic Envelope Average Speed The Power-Assisted Bicycle is an emerging mph ft form of transportation that attempts 3 15 to merge the health and environmental benefits of a bicycle with the convenience (Minimum width) Maximum = 25 mph of a motorized vehicle. The environmental impact of an electric bike is more favorable than cars, busses, or other forms of urban Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute transit. Access Shed Battery powered: Electric bicycle usage worldwide has 1 amp hour/mile miles experienced rapid growth since 1998. It (10-20 miles/charge) is estimated that there were roughly 120 2.5 million e-bikes in China as of early 2010 and over 700,000 electric bicycles were sold in Europe in the same year. Multi-Modal Access Observed Street E-bikes are not considered motor vehicles Use by the federal government and are subject to the same consumer safety laws as unassisted bicycles; because of this, they Presents observed use, often operated on sidewalks and in bike policies governing use vary lanes, even though they achieve speeds Sidewalk Bike Traffic Multi-Use Parking Traffic by municipality. similar to car traffic on many urban Trail roadways. They have similar dimensions as regular commuter bikes, and can be stored at transit facilities with basic bicycle lockers and locking racks. Charging facilites could be added at stations to help Demographics strengthen the link between their use to Primary: Adults 18-65 yrs. access transit. Secondary: Teens/Young Adults 12- 18 yrs. http://www.electric-bicycle-guide.com/ * Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 I 36 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

285 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints GREEN MODE - ELECTRIC - ELECTRIC SCOOTER * Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends Average Speed Electric kick scooters have small platforms mph ft with two wheels, and are propelled by an 2 15 electric motor, alongside human propulsion (pushing off the ground). The most (Minimum width) Maximum = 20 mph common, have two hard small wheels, and are aluminum folding scooters much like the popular Razor kick scooters for Average Ten Minute children. Energy Requirements Access Shed Battery powered: While they can attain similar speeds to electric bicycles and urban area car traffic, 17 watt/mile miles they are less safe to operate in the vehicle (Assisted propelling) 2.5 right of way, especially given the assisted propelling method of achieving such speeds. Multi-Modal Access E-scooters are amongst newly popular Observed Street mobility devices that do not have a safe Use operating area, as they are too fast for sidewalks and have limited breaking/ maneuvering around pedestrians. They also have rather small wheels, which makes Sidewalk Presents observed use, them difficult to operate on surfaces with policies governing use vary Multi-Use Traffic Traffic Parking Bike any obstructions. They can be locked by municipality. Trail to bicycles racks and stored in lockers at transit stations, but charging may be required as they have limited battery life. Demographics Primary: Adults 25-40 yrs. Secondary: Children/Young Adults 6-25 yrs. www.trendtimes.com/electric-scooters * Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 I 37 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

286 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints GREEN MODE - ELECTRIC - ELECTRIC SKATEBOARD * Dynamic Envelope Description & Trends Average Speed Electric skateboards are modified to be mph ft propelled by an electric engine, controlled 2 15 by a remote that the user holds in their hand. Originally designed for local (Minimum width) Maximum = 25 mph transport, there are versions with larger wheels that allow for traversing grass, gravel, dirt, and sand to make them Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute functional in many environments. Access Shed Battery powered: 800 watt/mile (9-12 miles Unlike scooters, they do require the skills miles per charge) for operating a skateboard (turning, foot 2.5 breaking, etc.) and are more difficult to learn to operate. They reach higher speeds than is safe to be operated on sidewalks amongst pedestrians, but only experienced riders should utilize them on bicycle paths and shared roadways. Observed Street Electric skateboards are a reflection of the Use increased efficiency and reduced price of electric motors, and the fact that just about all human powered electric devices can be Presents observed use, electrified. policies governing use vary Sidewalk Traffic Bike Parking Traffic Multi-Use by municipality. Trail Multi-Modal Access Much like typical skateboards, they are lightweight and easy to store, making them a good device to transition between transit modes. Demographics Primary: Young Adults 16-25 yrs. Secondary: Teens/Young Adults 25-40 yrs. www.electricskateboardreview.com * Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 I 38 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

287 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints GREEN MODE - ELECTRIC - GYROSCOPIC DEVICES Dynamic Envelope * Description & Trends Average Speed The electric Segway (the most common mph ft brand of gyroscopic devices) is a personal 6 2 transporter (PT), designed to be used by an individual as an eco-friendly mode of (Minimum width) Range = 3-12 mph transportation. The self balancing nature of gyroscopic devices, makes them easy to learn to operate and generally more Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute safe than many other wheeled devices. Access Shed Battery powered: Segways decrease risks additionally, by 12 miles/charge slowing and stopping when the operator is miles not on the devices. 1 Segways are used for a variety of purposes; tourists, police forces, postal service, and other small delivery companies began the trend of Segway use in the United States. The company that created Segways has challenged sidewalk bans throughout the Observed Street United States, and have won in all but Use few municipalities to allow their use on sidewalks and in public transportation because of their classification as a medical Presents observed use, device. policies governing use vary Multi-Use Traffic Parking Sidewalk Bike Traffic by municipality. Trail Multi-Modal Access More popular for recreation currently, they are beginning to grow in use by commuters. As part of a larger commute, new designs for charging stations, lockers, Demographics or storage may be needed to accommodate Primary: Adults/Seniors 41+ yrs. the larger size and shape of gyroscopic devices. www.segway.com/support/FAQs * Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 39 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

288 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints GREEN MODE - ELECTRIC - MOBILITY SCOOTER Description & Trends Dynamic Envelope * Average Speed Since 1990 the number of people using mph ft wheeled mobility devices has increased 3 3 specifically in the mobility scooter sector; however, the unmet need for assisted (Minimum width) Maximum = 15 mph technology devices is still substantial. The cost of mobility scooters (ranging from $1000-$20,000) is quite high given Energy Requirements Average Ten Minute that only 18% of users ages 16-64 are Access Shed Battery powered: employed. 45 miles/charge miles Relying on mobility scooters for .5 transportation is a growing trend, because the benefits outweigh those of electric wheelchairs. For instance, they can travel over more challenging ground and are easier to navigate, removing the need for assistance from a nursing aid. The sportier aesthetic of mobility scooters is considered Observed Street a psychological advantage for people who don’t want to look like they are reliant on Use medical equipment. Multi-Modal Access Presents observed use, policies governing use vary Multi-Use Traffic Parking Sidewalk Bike Traffic by municipality. Mobility scooters and their users require Trail large turning radius, ramps and transition zones, and lifts to transition between light rail and bus transit. They are constantly evolving; they are gaining power, speed, range and stability. New design guidelines Demographics to facilitate the changing device should be considered, including charging stations and Primary: Seniors 65+ yrs. access to stations. Secondary: All ages with injuries or disabilities. www.activeforever.com * Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 40 I Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

289 FIRST LAST MILE STRATEGIC PLAN Opportunities and Constraints - GREEN MODE - ELECTRIC INNOVATIONS Description & Trends Average Speed * Dynamic Envelope Devices such as the Puma, Uni-Cub, mph ft and Solowheel follow the trend of 8 2-5 mobility devices with an environmental commitment; however, they offer more (Minimum width) Maximum = 20 mph interesting and portable alternatives than many forms of electric transportation (such as NEVs). Energy Requirements ** Average Ten Minute Access Shed Battery powered: As more devices such as these become Varies popular amongst commuters, who are miles the main audience they are designed for, 1.3 more frequent charging stations and new parking types will need to be designed to accommodate them. Cost is a main concern for these devices, which are cheap to operate, but have initially high prices to purchase; the Observed Street transportation network could benefit from Use the inclusion of personal transport devices such as these by utilizing a bike share or car model. Presents observed use, policies governing use vary The Puma, in particular, is a modification Traffic Sidewalk Multi-Use Parking Bike Traffic by municipality. to an existing device (Segway/Gyroscopic) Trail that will aims to serve a population as the baby boomer generation begins to require assisted access devices; it is the beginning of a trend of customizing Demographics personal transportation for mobility without sacrificing speed and function. Primary: Adults 18+ yrs. (These are relatively new devices aimed at Multi-Modal Access commuter populations) New design guidelines to facilitate these evolving devices should be considered, including charging stations and access to stations. www.solowheel.com * www.inhabitat.com www.segway.com Contract PS-4010-2178-01-08 IBI Group July 2013 I 41 Task/Revision No. PS-4010-2178-01-08-01

Related documents