SABA Letter

Return to list of letters

Letter Date 2005-07-13

Recipient Sacramento Transportation Authority
Subject Measure A and routine accommodation of bicycles and pedestrians

Brian Williams, Executive Director

Board Members
Sacramento Transportation Authority
901 F Street, Suite 210
Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: Measure A and routine accommodation of bicycles and pedestrians

Dear Mr. Williams and Board Members:

Sacramento County, its incorporated cities and Sacramento Regional Transit will receive Measure A funding for the
next three decades. We look forward to working with you to maximize the positive impacts of Measure A
transportation spending on the quality of life in Sacramento County. Specifically, Appendix A, Routine
Accommodation of Pedestrians and Bicyclists and the Creation of “Complete Streets” attached to this letter, spells
out how one provision of the measure should be implemented in order to increase safe walking and bicycling in
Sacramento, thus maximizing transportation safety, improving public health and reducing auto emissions.

Already the voter-approved Measure A policy to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians in all transportation
projects has been cited as a positive example. A May 2005 American Planning Association article, “Complete the
Streets!” notes: “Many local policies have been adopted through internal directives or revised planning documents,
but at least two local governments — in Illinois and California — have passed broadly worded council resolutions or
ordinances, and MPOs in Ohio and California are requiring local governments using MPO-administered funds to
meet complete street standards. In California, Sacramento has joined San Diego in requiring that roads built with
funds raised through voter-approved bonds accommodate pedestrians and cyclists.”

We request that the Sacramento Transportation Authority (STA) apply the guidelines in Appendix A to all Measure
A funding and that the STA and all jurisdictions receiving Measure A funds take action to “Complete the Streets”
and adopt the United States Department of Transportation Policy Statement on accommodating pedestrians and
bicyclists. These actions will satisfy the “Routine Accommodation” provision of Measure A (see Appendix A for a
detailed analysis and recommendations).

We note that the language in the Measure A ordinance requires far more than the mere consideration of bicycle
and pedestrian facilities in transportation projects and that USDOT Policy Statement calls for getting any
exceptions to routine accommodation approved at a senior level. Exceptions for the non-inclusion of bikeways and
walkways shall be approved by a senior manager and be documented with supporting data that indicate the basis
for the decision.

Before exceptions are made, or when there are questions on implementing the routine accommodation policy, we
strongly recommend the Sacramento City/County Bicycle Advisory Committee (SacBAC) or, if established, a local
bicycle advisory committee be consulted.

Transportation projects not only contribute substantially to the economy, they have a profound impact upon myriad
aspects of daily life, including public health and the ability of families to purchase homes and save money for
education or retirement. Appendix B describes these impacts in more detail.

We would be happy to meet with STA board members, local elected officials, local public works officials or others
who would like to resolve any questions that may arise from this letter. By working together, we can avoid costly,
time-consuming delays due to last-minute design changes or other obstacles to speedy implementation of
important transportation projects.

We look forward to working together on Measure A projects to offer all residents of Sacramento safe, convenient
and healthy transportation choices.

file:///C|/...State%20Level/Sacramento_Measure%20A%20and%20routine%20accommodation%20of%20bicycles%20and%20pedestrians.htm[1/3/2010 2:31:03 PM]

SABA Letter

The favor of your reply is requested.

SABA is a nonprofit corporation with more than 850 members. We represent bicyclists. Our aim is more and safer
trips by bike. We’re working for a future in which bicycling for everyday transportation is common because it is safe,
convenient and desirable. Bicycling is the healthiest, cleanest, cheapest, quietest, most energy efficient and least
congesting form of transportation.

Yours truly,

Walt Seifert
Executive Director

Attachments
Appendix A Routine Accommodation of Pedestrians and Bicyclists and the Creation of “Complete Streets”
Appendix B Why Complete Streets and routine accommodation of bicyclists and pedestrians is important

cc: Ron Suter, Sacramento County Parks and Recreation

Gary Kukkola, Sacramento County Parks and Recreation
Tom Zlotkowski, Director, Department of Transportation, Sacramento County
Dan Shoeman, Principal Civil Engineer, Sacramento County
Ron Vicari, Alternate Modes Coordinator, Sacramento County
Marty Hanneman, Director, Department of Transportation, City of Sacramento
Ed Cox, Alternate Modes Coordinator, City of Sacramento
Bob Overstreet, Director, Department of Parks and Recreation, City of Sacramento
Cyrus Abhar, Public Works Director, City of Rancho Cordova
David Wheaton, General Services Director, City of Citrus Heights
Doug Gault, City of Galt, Public Works Director
Bob Lee, City Engineer, City of Elk Grove
Cheryl Creson, Municipal Services Agency Administrator, Sacramento County
Richard Lorenz, Public Works Director, City of Folsom
Jim Konopka, Trails Manager, City of Folsom

Appendix A

Routine Accommodation of pedestrians and bicyclists and the creation of “complete streets”

In section VI of Measure A (“Use of Proceeds”), the ordinance states that “Routine accommodation of bicycles and
pedestrians shall be included in all transportation projects.” This appendix outlines a recommended approach that
jurisdictions should apply to satisfy the requirements of this important provision without delaying the transportation
projects funded by Measure A.

What is Routine Accommodation? How should it be applied as STA and local jurisdictions implement Measure A?

The thrust of Routine Accommodation is the creation of “complete streets,” defined as streets that provide for safe
and convenient travel by all road users. Unfortunately, many streets are incomplete. They are neither safe nor
convenient for bicyclists and pedestrians.

For most of Measure A’s programs, but especially the roadway construction, reconstruction, expansion or
maintenance programs as put forth in Section IV, the Local Road Maintenance Safety and Congestion Relief
Program and Section VIII, the Freeway Safety Congestion Relief Program, the guiding document in applying the
concept of Routine Accommodation is the United States Department of Transportation Design Guidance
“Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel.”

file:///C|/...State%20Level/Sacramento_Measure%20A%20and%20routine%20accommodation%20of%20bicycles%20and%20pedestrians.htm[1/3/2010 2:31:03 PM]

SABA Letter

Please find below the key excerpt from that document (The complete document is available at
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bikeped/Design.htm):

US DOT Policy Statement

1. Bicycle and pedestrian ways shall be established in new construction and reconstruction projects in all urbanized
areas unless one or more of three conditions are met:
• bicyclists and pedestrians are prohibited by law from using the roadway. In this instance, a greater effort may be
necessary to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians elsewhere within the right of way or within the same
transportation corridor.
• the cost of establishing bikeways or walkways would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use.
Excessively disproportionate is defined as exceeding twenty percent of the cost of the larger transportation project.
• where sparsity of population or other factors indicate an absence of need. For example, the Portland Pedestrian
Guide requires "all construction of new public streets" to include sidewalk improvements on both sides, unless the
street is a cul-de-sac with four or fewer dwellings or the street has severe topographic or natural resource
constraints.
2. In rural areas, paved shoulders should be included in all new construction and reconstruction projects on
roadways used by more than 1,000 vehicles per day, as in States such as Wisconsin. Paved shoulders have safety
and operational advantages for all road users in addition to providing a place for bicyclists and pedestrians to
operate.
Rumble strips are not recommended where shoulders are used by bicyclists unless there is a minimum clear path
of four feet in which a bicycle may safely operate.
3. Sidewalks, shared use paths, street crossings (including over- and undercrossings), pedestrian signals, signs,
street furniture, transit stops and facilities, and all connecting pathways shall be designed, constructed, operated
and maintained so that all pedestrians, including people with disabilities, can travel safely and independently.
4. The design and development of the transportation infrastructure shall improve conditions for bicycling and
walking through the following additional steps:
• planning projects for the long-term. Transportation facilities are long-term investments that remain in place for
many years. The design and construction of new facilities that meet the criteria in item 1) above should anticipate
likely future demand for bicycling and walking facilities and not preclude the provision of future improvements. For
example, a bridge that is likely to remain in place for 50 years, might be built with sufficient width for safe bicycle
and pedestrian use in anticipation that facilities will be available at either end of the bridge even if that is not
currently the case
• addressing the need for bicyclists and pedestrians to cross corridors as well as travel along them. Even where
bicyclists and pedestrians may not commonly use a particular travel corridor that is being improved or constructed,
they will likely need to be able to cross that corridor safely and conveniently. Therefore, the design of intersections
and interchanges shall accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians in a manner that is safe, accessible and
convenient.
• getting exceptions approved at a senior level. Exceptions for the non-inclusion of bikeways and walkways shall be
approved by a senior manager and be documented with supporting data that indicates the basis for the decision.
• designing facilities to the best currently available standards and guidelines. The design of facilities for bicyclists
and pedestrians should follow design guidelines and standards that are commonly used, such as the AASHTO
Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, AASHTO's A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and
Streets, and the ITE Recommended Practice "Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities".
The Sacramento Area Council of Governments has already endorsed this USDOT policy statement.

The state Legislature has also addressed this issue. California Assembly Concurrent Resolution 211 (ACR 211),
authored by Assemblyman Joe Nation (D-San Rafael), was approved on August 12th, 2002. ACR 211 encourages
cities and counties to implement Caltrans’ Deputy Directive 64 (DD-64) and the U.S. Department of
Transportation’s design guidance document on integrating bicycling and walking when making road improvements:

”(t)he Legislature of the State of California hereby encourages all cities and counties to implement the policies of
the California Department of Transportation Deputy Directive 64 and the United States Department of
Transportation's design guidance document on integrating bicycling and walking when building their transportation
infrastructure.”

DD-64 (2000) is an internal California Department of Transportation policy requiring department employees to give
the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists “full consideration” during all phases of transportation projects. Of course,
the Measure A ordinance language approved by voters requires accommodation, not just consideration, of the
needs of pedestrians and bicyclists.

file:///C|/...State%20Level/Sacramento_Measure%20A%20and%20routine%20accommodation%20of%20bicycles%20and%20pedestrians.htm[1/3/2010 2:31:03 PM]

SABA Letter

We strongly urge the Sacramento Transportation Authority and all cities, agencies and other jurisdictions to adopt
the USDOT statement as their official policy in all phases of maintenance, construction, reconstruction, and
expansion projects.

Local Arterial Program

This concept of Routine Accommodation is easily applied to Measure A’s Local Arterial Program.

Bicyclists will have bike lanes in order to bicycle along streets with high volumes of fast-moving vehicles (five feet
wide next to curbs, six feet next to parked cars).

Traffic Control and Safety Program

Within the Traffic Control and Safety Program, Routine Accommodation means that anytime traffic signals are
added or modified, their timing shall be such that pedestrians and bicyclists can safely and conveniently cross
streets. For bicyclists of all ages, the duration of green, yellow or all-red cycles must be such that they can cross a
street safely when presented with a green or yellow light upon reaching an intersection.

This is not currently the situation at many intersections in the county. Instead at dozens, perhaps hundreds of busy
intersections, bicyclists simply do not have enough time to get across the street. Numerous experienced,
competent, law-abiding bicyclists have reported near-death experiences from having signals suddenly switch from
green-to-yellow-to-red, exposing the bicyclists to high-speed cross traffic. At least once, Sacramento County
reached a settlement that called for more than $1 million in damages for serious, life-altering injuries suffered by
cyclists under just such a scenario. All jurisdictions receiving Measure A funds may also be held liable should
something similar happen in their community.

Local jurisdictions should set aside at least one-third of the 3 percent for this program to identify intersections that
are unsafe for pedestrians and bicyclists because of operational deficiencies ($47million over 30 years, roughly
$1.6 million annually). Neighborhood associations, consultants, or advocacy groups such as WalkSacramento and
the Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates could collaborate with local officials to generate a list of the priority
intersections needing operational modifications. All jurisdictions using Measure A funds should, as a matter of
course, ensure that any new or modified signalized intersection have traffic signal phasing that ensures safe and
convenient crossing by pedestrians and bicyclists. Perhaps the best solution is adopting best practices regarding
Level of Service (LOS) that provide for equal consideration for pedestrians and bicyclists whenever LOS is used as
a mechanism for assessing the performance of a street or intersection.

In addition to ensuring adequate signal timing, traffic signals should detect and respond to the presence of
bicyclists. Absent detection, bicyclists may treat the signal as inoperative. This may result in collisions, injuries and
fatalities.

City Street and County Road Maintenance Program

Basic maintenance as funded by the City Street and County Road Maintenance Program is of particular importance
to bicyclists, as no other roadway user group is so vulnerable to injuries or deaths caused by poor pavement
quality. Here, Routine Accommodation means that roads shall be swept, paved or otherwise maintained as to
provide reasonably safe conditions for bicyclists. All jurisdictions should issue memorandums to their street
cleaning employees directing them to ensure that the right edge of the roadway (or when present, a bike lane) is
reasonably clear of debris and to their maintenance crews ensuring smooth pavement along the right edge of the
roadway (or when present, a bike lane). For motorists, a pothole is a nuisance. For bicyclists, a pothole can be a
killer.

When streets are resurfaced with Measure A funds, bike lanes in master plans should be added and wide outside
lanes should be created on collector streets where bike lanes are not possible. This may require the narrowing, or a
reduction in the quantity, of motor vehicle traffic lanes.

Transit Congestion Relief Program,

For capital and design projects funded under the Transit Congestion Relief Program, Routine Accommodation
would include, for example, bicycle access to and bicycle parking at new or expanded bus or light rail lines, the
inclusion of walking and bicycling crossings with any bridge or freeway overpass designed or built for the
Downtown Natomas Airport (DNA), South Line extension or any other light rail line, bicycle racks in all new light rail
cars and on all new buses.

file:///C|/...State%20Level/Sacramento_Measure%20A%20and%20routine%20accommodation%20of%20bicycles%20and%20pedestrians.htm[1/3/2010 2:31:03 PM]

SABA Letter

Neighborhood Shuttle System

Neighborhood Shuttle System projects should include bike racks for all bus or shuttle vehicles purchased with
Measure A dollars. Sportworks, located in the greater Seattle region, is the leading manufacturer of such devices.

Freeway Safety Congestion Relief Program

There are two components of the Freeway Safety Congestion Relief Program, each of which has major implications
for people who walk or bicycle. Providing Routine Accommodation for bicycles and pedestrians for projects that
are either Regional Bus/Carpool Lane Connectors/Extensions or Local Freeway Interchange Congestion Relief
Upgrades will be absolutely essential for the safety and convenience of walking and bicycling in Sacramento
County. For the purposes of providing Routine Accommodation, our concerns lie primarily in mitigating the
enormously detrimental impact upon walking and bicycling of the new or expanded ramps typically associated with
such projects. Our assumption is that the County, the California Department of Transportation and perhaps other
local jurisdictions intend to construct multi-lane on- and off-ramps as part of many of the projects listed in these two
categories. Bluntly stated, when a ramp connecting a surface street to a freeway (or other surface street) is
expanded from one to two (or three) lanes, pedestrians and bicyclists are de facto prohibited from using that
surface street; the task of merging across several lanes of vehicular traffic is daunting for all but the most skilled
bicyclists, and it’s simply unsafe for pedestrians to cross multiple lanes of traffic entering or exiting a freeway.
Furthermore, the increasingly complicated nature of many interchanges poses dangers for less-experienced and
very elderly drivers.

We believe that the solution is that whenever a jurisdiction is either expanding ramps that connect surface streets
to limited-access roadways or constructing new multi-lane ramps, the jurisdiction must concurrently build either
separated walking and bicycling bridges (such as the one east of Hazel over Hwy 50) or new, two-lane crossings
that motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians can all safely use. Alternatively, we are open to new interchange designs
(bike-pedestrian flyovers, for example) that permit pedestrians and bicyclists to safely navigate these intersections.

When new freeway ramps are added, such as new High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane on-and off-ramps, the
design should accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians and there should be additional mitigation in the form of
surface street improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians.

The Routine Accommodation clause of Measure A requires this (or a comparable solution someone else may
propose), and we look forward to both working with STA officials and others to issue guidance language to this
effect and cooperating with all jurisdictions in implementing these much-needed solutions.

Safety, Streetscaping, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities

This category sets aside 5 percent of Measure A funding for “non-motorized pedestrian and bicycle safety
improvements.” This category includes $30M dedicated to the American River Parkway/Bikeway Network.

The American River Parkway/Bikeway Network Improvement Program subcategory should be restricted to bicycle-
related transportation projects that add to the safety, accessibility, convenience and desirability of using the
parkway for transportation. Eligible projects include access improvements to the parkway paved bike trail network
and maintenance of the paved bike trails in the parkway

Funds should be used for projects directly in the American River Parkway, as the parkway is defined in the
American River Parkway Plan, or for access improvement projects that are immediately adjacent to the parkway,
such as within ¼ mile of parkway boundaries.

Funds should be made available to Sacramento County, the California Department of Parks and Recreation and to
cities and other public entities adjacent to the parkway.

The Sacramento City/County Bicycle Advisory Committee should help the STA establish project priorities for the
American River Parkway funds.

Bicycle Transportation uses include:

Maintenance and resurfacing of the paved bike trail
Bicycle/pedestrian bridges
New paved trails, including “short cuts” and trail extensions
Hazard removal
Adjacent access improvements
Wayfaring and safety signage

file:///C|/...State%20Level/Sacramento_Measure%20A%20and%20routine%20accommodation%20of%20bicycles%20and%20pedestrians.htm[1/3/2010 2:31:03 PM]

SABA Letter

Bike parking
Fair share of access road maintenance costs

Bicycle Transportation uses do not include

Trash pick up
Parking lot resurfacing
Development of unpaved trails
Total cost of access road maintenance costs

As with other Measure A level of effort restrictions (Section Two, Paragraph C of the Ordinance—Mandated
Taxpayer Safeguards), Measure A funding should not replace general funds currently used for American River
Parkway trail maintenance. We recommend that Sacramento County and State Parks create a joint maintenance
plan and schedule for using Measure A funds and general funds to maintain and resurface the paved bike trails
within the parkway.

Other than the $30M ($1M per year) for the American River Parkway/Bikeway Network Improvement Program,
there is no specific allocation for funding in the Safety, Streetscaping, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities category.
We suggest the remaining $205 million in the category be allocated as follows:

Pedestrian, Bike, and Road Safety Improvements 50%

Local Corridor Streetscape Enhancements 25%
Smart Growth Transportation Objectives 25%

We suggest ranking criteria be established for each set of projects and projects compete based on how well they
meet the criteria. The entire 5 percent of revenues allocated to this category, according to the ordinance, “shall
fund non-motorized pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements.” Therefore, the criteria must show the connection
in each of the three subcategories (Pedestrian, Bike, and Road Safety, Local Corridor Streetscape and Smart
Growth Transportation) to bicycle and pedestrian safety. Whether or not ranking criteria are used, projects in this
category must be for pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements.

Expenses for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and for including pedestrian and bicycle
facilities in large projects should come from the appropriate funding program that covers the projects. For example,
costs incurred to ensure widened arterials are in compliance with ADA should come from the Local Arterial
Program. Funding for compliance should not be from the Safety, Streetscaping, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Program which is intended for stand-alone improvement projects.

Appendix B

Why Complete Streets and routine accommodation of bicyclists and pedestrians is important

Based upon statistics provided by the California Air Resources Board, California Department of Health Services
and the United States Centers for Disease Control, it is clear that Sacramento’s auto-dominated transportation
system is a leading contributor to record levels of asthma and obesity, disease-related premature death and
disability, and fatalities and other debilitating injuries stemming from crashes.

For example, extrapolating from national figures, obesity costs the Sacramento economy an estimated $3 billion per
year in lost worker productivity, hospital care, etc. Auto dependency is a leading contributor to obesity since the
lack of safe and convenient walking and bicycling infrastructure limits opportunities for physical activity.

Information from the American Lung Association of Sacramento-Emigrant Trails indicates there are 144,842
asthmatics in its nine-county area. Of those cases, 45,350 are children and 99,492 are adults. The numbers
continue to increase. The prevalence of pediatric asthma nationally has increased 160% from 1982 to 1995. In
California, adult asthma has increased 60% from 1984 to 1996. Asthma is the leading cause of school absences
due to chronic illness and lost workdays. Auto emissions are linked to asthma.

During the years 1988-2004, i.e., the life of Measure A so far, based on California Office of Traffic Safety statistics,
we estimate 2,000 people died in automobile crashes in the county. Another 224,000 people were injured in
crashes in the county during that same period. In 2000, 25 percent of the fatalities were pedestrians or cyclists.
Bicyclists, pedestrians, low income people and people of color are disproportionately victimized by poor pedestrian

file:///C|/...State%20Level/Sacramento_Measure%20A%20and%20routine%20accommodation%20of%20bicycles%20and%20pedestrians.htm[1/3/2010 2:31:03 PM]

SABA Letter

or bicyclist infrastructure.

If low income and working-class residents are to afford homes in this region or save money for college tuition, they
must reduce their auto dependency. Nationwide, the average family spends roughly 19 percent of its income on
transportation (mostly autos). After housing, transportation expenses vie with the cost of food as the second biggest
item in family budgets. Providing viable, interconnected transit, walking and bicycling options are a must if families
are to shift family expenditures from spending on autos to more productive investments such as housing, education
or retirement. Walking and bicycling can help more Sacramento residents access the American Dream and make
more effective use of their limited resources.

Despite widespread, decades-long institutional neglect that only recently has begun to be addressed, walking and
bicycling remain inherently enjoyable modes of transportation and important components of Sacramento County’s
transportation mix. Combined, they constitute 7 percent of all trips made in the county (walking 5 percent, bicycling
2-3 percent). Of course, nearly everyone walks. Plus, Sacramento has one of the highest bicycling rates among
large cities in the United States. In fact, SACOG reports as many trips are made by bicycle in Sacramento County
as by transit, despite a funding discrepancy on the order of 50-1 in favor of transit. National surveys conducted by
both Democratic and Republican pollsters show a solid majority of American in favor of increasing expenditures for
multipurpose trails and bike lanes. Improving walking conditions is essential to boosting transit use, and a better
alternative than surrounding light rail stations with seas of asphalt parking lots.

Fortunately, Measure A offers hope of addressing the dangers and inequities of our current transportation system.

Return to list of letters

file:///C|/...State%20Level/Sacramento_Measure%20A%20and%20routine%20accommodation%20of%20bicycles%20and%20pedestrians.htm[1/3/2010 2:31:03 PM]