Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II April 2016 Produced by: Rachel Beck Rachel Edlund Brandt Scanlan Hester Serebrin Ana Seivert Faculty: Daniel Carlson
Acknowledgments
We would like to give special thanks to our sponsors, contributors, and report production staff. Sponsors: Steve Rybolt, Port of Seattle Andrea Clinkscales, Cascade Bicycle Club Contributors: Heather Bornhorst, Port of Seattle Tom Hooper, Port of Seattle Stephanie Meyn, Port of Seattle Mark VandeKamp, Port of Seattle Jason Gately, Port of Portland Kim Scrivner, Puget Sound Regional Council Greg King, King County Metro Kim Voros, Alta Planning + Design Casey Gifford, University of Washington Transportation Services Drew Dresman, Seattle Children’s Hospital Maggie McGehee, Seattle Children’s Hospital Lisa Enns, Toole Design Group Zach Shaner, Pedal Anywhere Report Production: Vicky Clarke
Table of Contents Acknowledgments.................................................................................................................. Executive Summary................................................................................................................ 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................ Why is improving bike access to Sea-Tac Airport important?................................................... Who would benefit from improved bike access?....................................................................... Types of Bicycle Infrastructure..................................................................................................... Current & Projected Demand....................................................................................................... 2. Current Conditions.............................................................................................................. Regional Bicycle Access to Sea-Tac Airport................................................................................. Regional Trails..................................................................................................................... Regional Transit Connections............................................................................................ Local Bicycle Access to Sea-Tac Airport....................................................................................... Bicycle Access to the Sea-Tac Airport Terminal............................................................... Current Bicycle Facilities in the Vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport........................................................ Evaluating Bikeability of Sea-Tac Street Network........................................................................ Levels of Traffic Stress......................................................................................................... Road Conditions................................................................................................................ Gaps in Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access...................................................................................... North Access Gaps............................................................................................................ East Access Gaps............................................................................................................... South Access Gaps............................................................................................................ 3. Future Bicycle Plans............................................................................................................ Future Bicycle Facility Plans......................................................................................................... Planned Near-Term Bicycle Improvements - 2015-2021................................................. Planned Long-Term Bicycle Improvements - 2035-2040................................................ City of SeaTac Zoning................................................................................................................... 4. Bicycle Supportive Policies................................................................................................ State Level.................................................................................................................................... Limiting Greenhouse Gas Emissions.............................................................................. Adoption of Statewide Goals to Reduce Annual VMT Per Capita.............................. Commute Trip Reduction Law......................................................................................... Local Level................................................................................................................................... Comprehensive Plans...................................................................................................... Complete Streets............................................................................................................. Port of Seattle.............................................................................................................................. Sustainable Airport Master Plan..................................................................................... 5. Peer Models...................................................................................................................... Airport Facilities and Amenities................................................................................................. Portland............................................................................................................................ San Jose........................................................................................................................... Pittsburgh......................................................................................................................... Regional Employer Policies....................................................................................................... Transportation Demand Management..........................................................................
2 7 11 14 15 16 18 21 22 22 24 28 26 30 32 32 36 44 44 44 44 47 48 48 52 54 59 60 60 60 61 62 62 62 63 63 69 70 70 72 73 74 74
Table of Contents 6. Findings and Recommendations......................................................................................... 77 Findings......................................................................................................................................... 78 Recommendations Overview....................................................................................................... 79 Connectivity Improvements............................................................................................. 79 Institutional Improvements.............................................................................................. 80 Recommendations in Detail........................................................................................................ 81 7. Funding Opportunities...................................................................................................... 95 The Need for Funding................................................................................................................ 96 Funding Opportunities................................................................................................................ 97 Existing Revenues......................................................................................................................... 101 8. Appendices....................................................................................................................... 103 Appendix A: Phase 1 Bike Amenities and Facilities Matrix..................................................... 104 Appendix B: Bike Levels of Traffic Stress Tables...................................................................... 108 Appendix C: Design Guidance................................................................................................. 109 Appendix D: Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities................................................ 114 Appendix E: Resource Guide for Bicycle Facilities.................................................................. 116
4 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
List of Figures and Tables Figure 1: Percentage of Employees Commuting from Surrounding Zip Codes Map Figure 2: Buffered Bike Lane Image Figure 3: Conventional Bike Lane Image Figure 4: Sharrow Image Figure 5: Cycle Track Image Figure 6: Regional Connections to Sea-Tac Airport with Elevation Map Figure 7: Bicyclist Loading Bike on Bus Image Figure 8: Regional Connections to Sea-Tac By Bike and Transit Map Figure 9: Airport Area Transit Stops Map Figure 10: Sea-Tac Link Light Rail Station Access Image Figure 11: Terminal Bike and Pedestrian Access routes Map Figure 12: Bike Facilities Near Sea-Tac Airport Map Figure 13: Sea-Tac Network Level of Traffic Stress Map Figure 14: South Air Cargo Road Street Section Graphic Figure 15: South Air Cargo Road Rider View Image Figure 16: North Air Cargo Road Street Section Graphic Figure 17: North Air Cargo Road Rider View Image Figure 18: International Boulevard Street Section Graphic Figure 19: International Boulevard Rider View Image Figure 20: South 188th Street Section Graphic Figure 21: South 188th Rider View Image Figure 22: South 170th Street Section Graphic Figure 23: South 170th Rider View Image Figure 24: South 154th Street Section Graphic Figure 25: South 154th Rider View Image Figure 26: 28th Avenue Street Section Graphic Figure 27: 28th Avenue Rider View Image Figure 28: Gaps in Sea-Tac Bicycle Access Map Figure 29: Planned Bike Improvements 2016-2021 Map Figure 30: City of SeaTac 28th Avenue South Street Section Figure 31: Planned Long-Term Bicycle Improvements Map Figure 32: Zoning Adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport Map Figure 33: Air Cargo Road, north of S 188th Street Image Figure 34: Existing Conditions in SeaTac Town Center Image Figure 35: SeaTac TOD Town Center Concept Image Figure 36: Port of Seattle Mode Split Graphic Figure 37: Cashing Out Impacts on Commute Mode Graphic Figure 38: Protected Terminal Multi-Use Path at PDX Airport Image Figure 39: Bike Connectivity Surrounding Portland International Airport Map Figure 40: Guadelupe River Trail in San Jose Image Figure 41: Montour Trail Airport Connector Image Figure 42: Connecting Surface Street Bike Lanes to Sea-Tac Terminal Map Figure 43: Rider View of North Air Cargo Road Figure 44: Extent of Recommended North Air Cargo Road Facility Improvements Map Figure 45: “Good” Illustrative street section for North Air Cargo Road Figure 46: Rendering of “Good” facility option for North Air Cargo Road Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 5
List of Figures and Tables Figure 47: “Better” Illustrative street section for North Air Cargo Road Figure 48: Rendering of “Better” facility option for North Air Cargo Road Figure 49: “Best” Illustrative street section for North Air Cargo Road Figure 50: Rendering of “Best” facility option for North Air Cargo Road Figure 51: Proposed Off Road Connector Vicinity Map Figure 52: Proposed Off Road Connector Extent Map Figure 53: Proposed Off Road Connector Segment Image 1 Figure 54: Proposed Off Road Connector Segment Image 2 Figure 55: Proposed Off Road Connector Segment Image 3 Figure 56: Rider View of South Air Cargo Road Figure 57: Extent of Recommended South Air Cargo Road Facility Improvements Figure 58: “Good” Illustrative Street Section of South Air Cargo Road Figure 59: Rendering of “Good” facility option for South Air Cargo Road Figure 60: “Better” Illustrative Street Section of South Air Cargo Road Figure 61: Rendering of “Better” facility option for South Air Cargo Road Figure 62: “Best” Illustrative Street Section of South Air Cargo Road Figure 63: Rendering of “Best” facility option for South Air Cargo Road Figure 64: Rider View of South 170th Street Figure 65: Extent of Recommended South 170th Street Facility Improvements Figure 66: “Good” Illustrative Street Section of South 170th Street Figure 67: Rendering of “Good” facility option for South 170th Street Figure 68: “Better” Illustrative Street Section of South 170th Street Figure 69: Rendering of “Better” facility option for South 170th Street Figure 70: “Best” Illustrative Street Section of South 170th Street Figure 71: Rendering of “Best” facility option for South 170th Street Figure 72: Location of Recommended Bicycle Connections to Public Transit Map Figure 73: Rendering of Recommended Separation Point for Bicyclists Arriving Via Link Light Rail Figure 74: Rendering of Recommended Separated Bicycle path in Airport Parking Garage Figure 75: Current Road Connections Between Metro/Link Light Rail and Sea-Tac Airport Image Figure 76: Rendering of Recommended Multi-Purpose Path Connecting Metro/Link Light Rail to Sea-Tac Airport. Table 1: Implemented Recommendations from Phase I Report Table 2: 2015 Bike Mode Share of Sea-Tac Airport Employers Table 3: Sea-Tac Bike Network Level of Traffic Stress Ratings Table 4: Impact of Various Employer-Based TDM Strategies Table 5: Regional Employer TDM Program Strategies
Executive Summary Sea-Tac International Airport serves over 42 million passengers annually and supports 23,000 jobs. Increasing the number of passengers and employees that arrive at Sea-Tac Airport by environmentally friendly modes is a key strategy of the Port of Seattle’s long term sustainability goals. Providing safe and convenient bicycle access can play an important part in that strategy. This Bicycle Facilities Plan Phase II, prepared by the University of Washington Urban Planning studio in conjunction with the Cascade Bicycle Club, builds on the 2013 Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I. The Phase II report focus is on the bicycle network surrounding Sea-Tac Airport. It identifies current bike route, roadway, transit and zoning conditions in and around Sea-Tac Airport, planned bicycle facilities improvements and gaps in bicycle access to the terminal. The report finds that: • Gaps in surface bike routes make safe access to Sea-Tac Airport terminal impossible. • Roads proximate to Sea-Tac Airport are dangerous for even the most daring bicyclist. • Access from transit stops is limited and could be improved. • Vendor and Port employees bicycle to Sea-Tac Airport at less than half the King County rate. • The Port could incentivize bicycling by following the example of other private and public organizations. • Several peer airports provide direct bicycle access connected to regional bicycle networks. • The State, region, and neighboring cities have adopted policies promoting bicycling and ‘complete streets’. • The Port of Seattle Aviation Division has strong sustainability goals and targets and has begun to invest in bicycle facilities. The report recommends actions in both the physical and institutional realms to increase bicycle access to Sea-Tac Airport: Physical Connectivity Improvements A. Create bike lanes on surface streets that lead to the main terminal and provide connectivity to the area’s bike lane network. 1. North Air Cargo Road from the regional bike system trail on 154th St, south to the main terminal. 2. South Air Cargo Road from the new multipurpose lane on 28th S directly to the south terminal. 3. 170th S from North Air Cargo Road east to International Blvd. B. Improve bicycle connections to public transit stations. 1. Separate bike traffic from the pedestrian walkway leading from the Link light rail station through the parking garage to the main terminal. 2. Replace the existing sidewalk east of International Blvd with a safe multi-purpose path connecting the Metro/ST station to 170th S to the north and the main terminal the south and west. (The general purpose lanes on this roadway are wider than the minimum width, and could conceivably be narrowed to accommodate a bike lane, as well.)
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 7
C. Accommodate bicycles in future access & amenities improvements. 1. For example, any proposed people mover/ shuttle systems should be able to hold bikes. 2. Implement and upgrade Phase 1 recommendations regarding amenities including bike parking, storage, wayfinding, education etc. Institutional Improvements 1. Create a Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Partnership consisting of the Port, neighboring cities and the Cascade Bicycle Club to jointly plan and implement recommendations. 2. Incentivize Active Transportation through a range of policies and programs. 3. Set Bicycling Targets and Measure Performance. The report also includes a survey of relevant federal, state, and local policies, finding that there is strong policy support for such investments in bicycle infrastructure at all levels of government, as well as in the Port’s internal policy documents. Finally, the report concludes by identifying funding sources the Port could use to pay for the recommended improvements, either individually, or in conjunction with neighboring jurisdictions.
Only have five minutes? Look here first: Gaps in Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access...........................44 Report Findings and Recommendations.........................77 Appendix E: Resource Guide for Bicycle Facilities.........116
8 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Page intentionally left blank.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 9
1-Introduction
In This Chapter:
Why is Improving Bike Access to Sea-Tac Airport Important?... 14 Who Would Benefit From Improved Bike Access?..................... 15 Types of Bicycle Infrastructure....................................................16 Current & Projected Demand..................................................... 18
Introduction Serving over 42 million passengers in 2015, Sea-Tac Airport is the largest airport in the Pacific Northwest and the 13th busiest by passenger volume in the United States.1 Single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips are the primary form of transportation to and from Sea-Tac Airport; increasing alternative modes such as walking, public transportation, and bicycling can help Sea-Tac Airport address its ambitious sustainability goals. This University of Washington (UW) studio course team, in conjunction with Cascade Bicycle Club, analyzed the current bicycle facilities and opportunities therein for the Port of Seattle. This Phase II plan builds on an earlier 2013 UW Urban Planning studio project ((Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I). Many of the recommendations from the SeattleTacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I Report have since been implemented, and this studio builds upon that work by providing recommendations that, if implemented, would continue to improve bicycle access to Sea-Tac Airport. Table 1 summarizes the steps the Port of Seattle has taken to implement Phase 1 recommendations to date. See Appendix A for the complete list of Phase 1 recommendations. As indicated by the table, no on-street facilities have been created. Table 1: Implemented Recommendations from Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I, Report
Recommendation Category
Action to Date
On-Street Facilities
None
Parking
Racks in garage and terminal
Wayfinding
Signs at Link station
Tools/Traveler Assistance Workstand in terminal Showers
Port employee shower access
Storage/Shipping
Port employee storage in gym
Education
Bike access webpage
Port of Seattle. (2016). Airport Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle.org/About/Publications/Statistics/ Airport-Statistics/Pages/default.aspx. 1
12 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Why is improving bike access to Sea-Tac Airport important? Making bicycling safer and more convenient for those riding to Sea-Tac Airport has positive impacts on personal and, subsequently, public health. The health benefits of bicycling are well recognized and include the potential to reduce obesity, heart disease, and other sedentary lifestyle diseases. These diseases pose significant public health issues, and bicycling fills the activity gap for those who don’t participate in physical activity on a regular basis. Increasing bicycle access within a community has significant transportation and mobility benefits. It will reduce reliance on private automobiles, and can extend the reach of transit by providing an additional transportation solution for areas underserved by transit. Furthermore, making bicycling more safe and more convenient can expand the number of people bicycling in a community. By reducing barriers to bicycling, bicycling becomes a feasible transportation option for residents and workers. Arriving at Sea-Tac Airport can be intimidating and stressful for visitors and employees arriving via bicycle. Obstacles to a safe and easy ride include a cold and rainy climate, lack of wayfinding for bicyclists, incomplete or unsafe bike routes, and high traffic volumes and speeds on surrounding roadways. Improving bicycle facilities supports the Port of Seattle’s environmental sustainability goals of reducing air pollutant emissions and carbon emissions. The Port’s 2015 Transportation Policy objective is to “increase the percentage of passengers accessing Sea-Tac Airport via environmentallypreferred modes of transportation from 60 percent in 2014 to 70 percent in 2020. The proposed actions to reach this benchmark are:2 • • • • • •
Increase outreach to help travelers use greener modes Increase bike facilities and safe access Partner with transit agencies to increase access to buses Examine costs and benefits of tolling airport drives Increase electric vehicle charging stations Improve environmental benefits of each mode, where practicable
In order to meet the transportation policy objectives, Sea-Tac Airport recognizes the importance of increasing bike facilities and safe access.
Port of Seattle. (2015, February 10). Strategy for a Sustainable Sea-Tac. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle.org/ About/Commission/Meetings/2015/2015_02_10_RM_7c_supp.pdf. 2
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 13
Introduction Who would benefit from improved bike access? Adding bicycle infrastructure would benefit both travelers and employees. Specifically: For travelers, who are riding to and from Sea-Tac Airport via bike as well as those who are traveling with their bikes, additional bike infrastructure would contribute to ease of access. Bicycle tourism is a growing attraction within Washington, with visitors from out of state flying in with their bikes. More tourists bringing their bicycles necessitates better infrastructure and amenities to support them. With the rise of cargo bicycles designed to carry heavy loads, travelers can better access Sea-Tac Airport, even with luggage. For those who wish to travel with their bicycles, improved infrastructure would encourage the choice of Seattle as a bicycle tourism destination and improve ease of access to and from Sea-Tac Airport. For employees, one of the key barriers to bicycling is inconvenient or unsafe routes to work. As seen in Figure 1, the majority of employees commute from nearby jurisdictions, many within reasonable biking distance of Sea-Tac Airport. With improved infrastructure, bicycling to work would be feasible for those who live close to Sea-Tac Airport. Furthermore, many of the employees at Sea-Tac Airport are near-minimum wage employees who are sensitive to costs. Improved infrastructure would provide the opportunity for cost-sensitive employees to minimize personal transportation costs.
3
Data source: US Census Community American Survey, 2011
14 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Percentage of Employees Commuting from Surrounding Zip Codes
Figure 1: 10% of Sea-Tac Airport employees commute from within a 15 minute bike ride. Map source: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I, Studio Report. 3 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 15
Introduction Access and Amenities: Types of Bicycle Infrastructure Bicycle facilities are defined as any infrastructure or access areas that are open to use by bicyclists. This includes, but is not limited to, separated bike lanes and bike paths. Bicycle infrastructure allows access to Sea-Tac Airport by helping people to get from point A to point B as efficiently and safely as possible. Bike amenities comprise the resources in place to aid bicyclists when they reach a destination, such as racks, lockers, repair stations, and showers. It is vital to implement both access and amenity improvements because they influence and complement each other. According to the Victoria Transport Policy Institute, “inadequate facilities and fear of theft are major deterrents to bicycle transportation.”4 Increased access and amenities are each a positive step forward on their own, but when a jurisdiction incorporates elements from both it will see a marked increase in bike ridership. The list below are other bicycle terminology that may be used throughout the report. The below facility types are described as per NACTO (The National Association of City Transportation Officials), a non-profit association that facilitates the exchange of transportation ideas, insights and best practices among large cities and produces the most widely accepted bike design guides. Conventional Bike Lane: Defined as a portion of the roadway that has been designated by striping, signage, and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists.5 Buffered Bike Lane: Conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane.6 Protected Bike Lane: An exclusive bike facility that combines the user experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of a conventional bike lane.7 Paved Shoulder: Are provided on rural highways for a variety of safety, operational, and maintenance reasons. Paved shoulders, if they are adequately maintained, provide an excellent place for bicyclists to operate.8 Shared Use (multi-use path, bike path, trail): A bikeway physically separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space or barrier and either within the highway right-of-way or within an independent right-of-way. Shared use paths may also be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers and other non-motorized users.9 Sharrow:Shared Lane Markings (SLMs), or “sharrows,” are road markings used to indicate a shared lane environment for bicycles and automobiles.10 Not every bike facility is created equal. Design elements such as bike lane width, placement, and crosswalk treatment can mean the difference between a safe and comfortable space for bicyclists and a harrowing, unwelcome bike ride. Fortunately, more jurisdictions are adopting policies that support the inclusion and design of safe bike facilities. Nationally recognized design guidelines and road design standards - once guided primarily by engineering specifications to allow for the movement of cars - are also becoming more bicycle-friendly, allowing or even encouraging the inclusion of separated bike facilities on urban roadways. Federal, state, and local jurisdictions have responded with strong policy support for these guidelines. 16 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Conventional Bike Lane
Buffered Bike Lane
Figure 3 Source: NACTO
Figure 2 Source: NACTO
Protected Bike Lane
Sharrow
Figure 5 Source: NACTO
Figure 4 Source: NACTO
See appendix C (page 109) for detailed design guidelines from NACTO and AASHTO. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. (2015, May 29). Bicycle Parking. TDM Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.vtpi. org/tdm/tdm85.htm. 5 NACTO. (2014, March). Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Retrieved from http://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikewaydesign-guide/. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Federal Highway Administration. (2006, July). Shared Roadways. Federal Highway Administration University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation. Retrieved from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/ pedbike/05085/chapt14.cfm. 9 AASHTO. (1999). Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. Retrieved from http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/ docs/b_aashtobik.pdf. 10 NACTO, 2014. 4
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 17
Introduction
Current & Projected Demand The authors of the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I Report provided evidence from WSDOT showing that bicycle use has been consistently increasing in the Puget Sound region since data collection began in 2008. They also found that the average King County bike commute mode split is 2 percent.11 The current bike mode share data for the Port of Seattle Aviation Division and vendors located at Sea-Tac Airport are less than half the county rate. See Table 2 below. By improving Sea-Tac Airport could be Strategy Detailsthe network of bike paths surrounding Employee Vehicle Trip reasonably expected to increase the bike mode share. Reduction Impact Parking charges Previously free parking 20-30% It should also be noted that bike mode share rates are higher for vendors such as Alaska Airlines Services + monetary transit vouchers and some of these employers 24.50% flight operations, Menzies Example: Aviation, and HMS Host, despite not providing incentives guaranteed home generally receive lower wages than Port of showers or lockers. Employees of theseride companies Seattle employees, demonstrating the importance of bike Cash-out Cash benefit offered in lieu of facilities to this population. 17% With added infrastructure, the Port is likely to see free an even larger increase in bicycle utilization among vendor accepting parking employees. The Port of Seattle, as a public entity, has a responsibility to meet the basic transportation Monetary incentives Subsidies for carpool, vanpool, transit 8-18% needs of the diverse population who work at Sea-Tac Airport. alone Ridematching, guaranteed 8.50% InServices addition alone to increasing bike mode share,shuttles, providing alternative commute incentives for employees, 12 ride home such as eliminating free parking, can reduce SOV trips by up to 30 percent. A combined approach of improved bike alone facilities andInformation employee on incentives could even higher than Information available SOV-result in a bike mode share 1.40% the county average of 2 percent. (See Transportation Demand Management for more details.) alternatives Table 2. 2015 Bike Mode Share of Sea-Tac Airport employers.13 Company
Branch
Bike Share
Port of Seattle*
Sea-Tac Airport
0.50%
Alaska Airlines Inc.
Airport Terminal
0.50%
Alaska Airlines Inc.
Flight Operations
0.60%
Doubletree Hotel
Sea-Tac Airport
0.00%
Menzies Aviation**
Sea-Tac Airport
0.70%
HMS Host
Sea-Tac Airport
0.90%
* 765 total reported employees at worksite. Employment numbers not available for vendors at the time of this report. **2013 CTR Data
US Census Bureau. Form DP03: King County Commute Characteristics. American Community Survey 2009-2012. Kearney, A.R., De Young, R. (1996). Changing Commuter Travel Behavior: Employer-Initiated Strategies. J. Environmental Systems, 24 (4): 373-393. 13 2015 CTR data courtesy of Greg King, King County Metro Transit. 11 12
18 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Page intentionally left blank.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 19
2-Current Conditions Many factors affect why and how bicyclists commute, including route convenience, safety, and overlap with public transportation. Bicyclists may use a combination of regional trails, surface streets, and transit connections to reach SeaTac Airport. The biking stress level of key routes and major access gaps are also identified.
In This Chapter:
Regional Bicycle Access to Sea-Tac Airport.......................... 22 Regional Trails...................................................................... 22 Regional Transit Connections............................................. 24 Local Bicycle Access to Sea-Tac Airport................................ 28 Bicycle Access to the Sea-Tac Airport Terminal................. 26
Current Bicycle Facilities in the Vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport.. 30
Evaluating Bikeability of Sea-Tac Street Network................ 32 Levels of Traffic Stress.......................................................... 32 Road Conditions................................................................... 36 Gaps in Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access................................. 44 North Access Gaps............................................................... 44 East Access Gaps.................................................................. 44 South Access Gaps............................................................... 44
Current Facilities
Regional Bicycle Access to Sea-Tac Airport There are two ways to reach Sea-Tac Airport with a bicycle: riding the bicycle through the street and trail network and bringing the bike on transit. While this report is primarily focused on riding to SeaTac Airport, both options may be relevant to anyone wishing to bike to Sea-Tac Airport. Regional Trails There are two major regional bicycle trails in the vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport, the Lake to Sound Trail and the Green River Trail. Together, these two regional trails provide bicycle connections to the immediate vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport from Burien, Kent, Seattle, and Tukwila, and this access will be expanded as the Lake to Sound Trail is completed. However, there are two major challenges to airport access from the regional trail system. The most significant challenge is the lack of a safe and comfortable bicycling route from the Lake to Sound Trail to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. No bike facilities exist to take riders from the trail on S 154th St to the terminal access points on International Boulevard. The state of local bicycle connections will be examined in detail in later sections. The second challenge is topography. Sea-Tac Airport is situated on a plateau approximately 450 feet above the Green River and Kent Valley, which are just a few feet above sea level. Bicycling from the Green River Trail to Sea-Tac Airport requires a steady uphill climb over a distance of 2.8 miles to make up the elevation difference. This elevation gain is likely to be physically challenging for many riders. Establishing bicycling routes that make this climb more gradual on the way to Sea-Tac Airport could help improve bicycling access to Sea-Tac Airport and its surroundings. The Lake to Sound Trail, which currently exists as three disconnected segments, will eventually run from Des Moines to Renton when completed and will pass through Burien, SeaTac, and Tukwila. The longest existing section of the trail consists of bike lanes on S 154th St from Des Moines Memorial Drive in the west to a Green River Trail connection on the east end, passing through Port of Seattle property just north of Sea-Tac Airport runways. King County is actively engaged in planning and constructing additional Lake to Sound Trail segments, though no date is scheduled for completion of the whole trail.14 The Green River Trail follows the course of the Green River in the Kent Valley from downtown Kent in the south to the northern edge of Tukwila in the north. Unlike the Lake to Sound Trail, the Green River Trail is considered complete and no major expansions are planned. The trail is separated from roadways for most of its length, with the segment through downtown Kent being the major exception. A signed bike route along W Marginal Way provides a connection from the north end of the Green River Trail to Seattle’s South Park neighborhood.
King County Parks. (2015, October 14). Lake to Sound Trail. Retrieve from http://www.kingcounty.gov/services/parksrecreation/parks/capital-improvements/l2s.aspx. 15 Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan; data from King County 14
22 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Regional Connections to Sea-Tac Airport with Elevation
Figure 6: Two regional bike trails run near SeaTac airport but require an elevation gain of 450 feet over 2.8 miles. This steep climb poses a challenge for many potential bicyclists, though it may be ameliorated by alternative regional bicycling routes to Sea-Tac Airport with more gradual elevation gain.15 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 23
Current Facilities
Regional Transit Connections Bicycle access to Sea-Tac Airport is facilitated by multiple public transit options as an alternative to riding through the vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport. All public transit vehicles serving Sea-Tac Airport are capable of carrying bicycles. This may be a preferred option for accessing Sea-Tac Airport with a bike because no designated bike route or bike route currently exists to facilitate direct bike access by riding. King County Metro buses and Sound Transit Express buses are equipped with front racks that can carry three bicycles on the exterior of the bus, while Sound Transit’s Link light rail has two interior bicycle racks per train car. The following regional connections are available: • Link Light Rail: Provides frequent train service between downtown Seattle, the University of Washington, and Sea-Tac Airport via Seattle’s Rainier Valley. An extension 1.6 miles south of the Sea-tac Airport Lin light rail station to Angle Lake will be open in late 2016. The Link light rail station at Sea-tac Airport is located northeast of Sea-Tac Airport’s parking garage and serves as the primary walk and bike access point to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. • King County Metro RapidRide A Line: Provides frequent bus service along International Boulevard from Federal Way to Sea-Tac Airport and Tukwila. The A Line stops along International Boulevard at both walk and bike access points to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal at S 176th St and S 182nd St. • King County Metro Route 156: Provides half-hourly bus service between Highline College in Des Moines and Southcenter in Tukwila via International Boulevard in SeaTac. This route serves both stops at S 176th St and S 182nd St. • King County Metro Route 180: Provides half-hourly bus service between Burien and southeast Auburn via International Boulevard in SeaTac. This route connects downtown Auburn and Kent to Sea-Tac Airport and serves both stops at S 176th St and S 182nd St. • Sound Transit Express Bus Route 560: Provides half-hourly express bus service to Bellevue, Renton, and Westwood Village in southwest Seattle via the Airport Expressway. This route serves the bus stop located at the south entrance to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. • Sound Transit Express Bus Route 574: Provides half-hourly express bus service from Lakewood, Tacoma, and Federal Way to Sea-Tac Airport via Interstate 5 and the Airport Expressway. This route serves the bus stop located at the south entrance to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. Figure 7: A bicyclist loads his bike onto a King County Metro bus. Public transit can be used to reach Sea-Tac Airport with a bicycle.16
McGrody, L. (2012, May 14). Try Bike-and-Bus for Bike to Work Week. Washington Bikes. Retrieved from http://wabikes. org/2012/05/14/try-bike-and-bus-for-bike-to-work-week/. 17 Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan; data from King County 16
24 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Regional Connections to Sea-Tac By Bike and Transit
Figure 8: Several public transit routes connect Sea-Tac Airport to the wider region, including frequent bus and Link light rail service. Buses and Link light rail vehicles are equipped to carry several bikes for multimodal trips.17 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 25
Current Facilities: Bicycle Access to Sea-Tac Terminal One challenge for passengers or employees that arrive at Sea-Tac Airport by bicycle or on transit with their bike is a lack of easy access points to the terminal itself. While many regional trails, Link light rail or buses will bring riders close to Sea-Tac Airport, the “last mile” connections are often challenging, forcing riders to cross busy streets, be exposed to the elements, or walk long distances. There are three options available to enter the Sea-Tac Airport terminal with a bicycle (shown in Figure 9). All three routes are located at the eastern edge of Sea-Tac Airport, and none connect directly with any existing bike facilities. Two routes connect to Sea-Tac Airport’s southern entrance on the ground floor, while the third route leads through the parking garage to several skywalks connecting to the terminal above the Arrivals Drive.
18
Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan
26 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Airport Area Transit Stops Do Not Connect to Bike Facilities
Figure 9: Bicyclists that use transit for a portion of their trip will disembark at one of the marked stations on the map. With the exception of the Sound Transit express buses, which stop directly at the terminal, passengers riding other buses or Link light rail must walk at least 1/3 of a mile from the Link light rail station or International Boulevard to reach Sea-Tac Airport. 18 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 27
Current Facilities North Entry
The most direct route for bicycle access to the Sea-Tac terminal from all points north is from Sound Transit’s SeaTac/Airport Link light rail station on International Boulevard. The station entrance point for bikes is an elevator or stairs to the station’s elevated walkway, located on International Boulevard to the east of Sea-Tac Airport. Continuing to the terminal from the Link light rail station requires walking along the edge of the Sea-Tac Airport parking garage to another set of elevated walkways that connect the parking garage and Sea-Tac Airport terminal building. Riding along this unmarked path is not allowed because it is shared with pedestrian traffic to and from the Link light rail station. From the entrance on International Boulevard, a bicycle must be walked 1,600 feet to reach the SeaTac Airport terminal. This is more than a quarter-mile, the generally recognized maximum walking distance between a transit station or stop and a destination.19 Sea-Tac Link Light Rail Station Access
Source: Phase I Studio Report
Figure 10: Although bicyclists accessing Sea-Tac Airport via the Link light rail station have the option of an elevator or stairs, the elevator is often full of passengers with their luggage, and the size of the elevator does not easily accommodate a bicycle.
South Entry The south end of Sea-Tac Airport terminal can be accessed through the ground-floor doors on the arrivals level. The south entrance is connected to International Boulevard to the east via a 1,050 foot sidewalk that can accommodate bicycles. The southern entrance also opens to the southern portion of Air Cargo Road. Bicyclists can ride along this road to connect to S 188th St southeast of Sea-Tac Airport.
Fairfax County Planning Commission TOD Committee. (no date.) Walking Distance Research. Retrieved from: http:// www.fairfaxcounty.gov/planning/tod_docs/walking_distance_abstracts.pdf 20 Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan 19
28 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Terminal Bike and Pedestrian Access Routes
Figure 11: This map shows in greater detail the route that bicyclists and pedestrians must take if they have arrived via transit on International Blvd. They currently face a long walk through the Link light rail station and Sea-Tac Airport’s large parking garage to reach the terminal from the north. The southern entrance to the terminal can be reached by biking along Air Cargo Road or by walking along a pedestrian path from International Boulevard.20 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 29
Current Facilities
Current Bicycle Facilities in the Vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport In the area north and east of Sea-Tac Airport there are bike lanes along S 154th St, S 170th St, and a portion of Air Cargo Road. West of Air Cargo Road the S 154th St bike lanes are paralleled by an off-street multi-use path. Additionally, a southbound bike lane extends along 24th Ave S to the north of Air Cargo Road and S 154th St, though there is no corresponding northbound bike lane. While these bike lanes do provide connections east, west, and north of Sea-Tac Airport, they do not form a complete or well-connected network, and bicycling trip through the area that is not entirely on S 154th St will have to leave the safety of bike lanes at some point. There are no bicycle facilities that actually connect to Sea-Tac Airport’s north entry point at the Link light rail station. Reaching SeaTac Airport on bike thus requires either riding in mixed-traffic on high-speed streets, riding on the sidewalk, walking the bike a considerable distance, or arriving with a bike on transit. In the area to the south of Sea-Tac Airport, the nearest bicycle facility to the terminal is the Des Moines Creek Trail. This trail provides a bike connection to Downtown Des Moines and to residential land south of Sea-Tac Airport. However, the trail does not enable any major regional connections and is located 1.7 miles from Sea-Tac Airport terminal’s south entrance. The City of SeaTac is currently adding multi-use paths to 28th Ave S between S 188th St and S 200th St. When these paths open later in 2016, they will provide a greatly improved bicycle connection between the Des Moines Creek Trail and Air Cargo Road south of the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. However, bicycling along Air Cargo Road to the terminal entrance will still present a barrier to access without the addition of bike facilities along this road.
21
Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan
30 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Bicycle Facilities Near Sea-Tac Airport
Bicycle Facilities Near Sea-Tac Airport
South154th Street Trail
S 144thSt
S 154th St
1st Ave S
Air C argo
Road
S 154th St
Westside Trail
24th Ave S
Miller Creek Trail
S 170th St tary
Mili
28th Ave S
1st Ave S
dS
Roa
SeaTac/Airport Station
Sea-Tac Airport Terminal
LEGEND Bike Path
On-Street Bike Lane Intermittent Bike Lane Des Moines Creek Bike Access Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, Location IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community 0
0.25
0.5
1 Miles
Figure 12: There are several bike lanes and trails in the vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport, but none lead to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. Furthermore, there are few connections between the existing bike facilities, meaning most travel to and through the area by bike will require riding without the aid of bike lanes or trails for at least part of the trip.21 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 31
Current Facilities: Evaluating Bikeability Evaluating Level of Traffic Stress Since there are only three connections between the Sea-Tac terminal and the surrounding road network that are available to bicyclists, a limited number of roads are available on which to reach Sea-Tac Airport by bike. Few of these roads are safe or comfortable for use by the average bicyclist. The Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity Report by the Mineta Transportation Institute22 provides a framework for evaluating roads based on bicycling comfort levels, identifying a level of traffic stress (LTS) score based on several factors. This framework was applied to all roads along the north, east, and south sides of Sea-Tac Airport to evaluate their comfort level for bike access. Roads along the west side of Sea-Tac Airport were not evaluated because the terminal is on Sea-Tac Airport’s east edge, with runways in between. Considerations for the Mineta Institute’s traffic stress rating include car volumes, perceived danger of collisions or injury, noise level and exhaust fumes. A large majority of riders are not willing to ride with high levels of these stressors. The Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity Report established the following road classifications for bicyclist comfort levels:
LTS1- Level most children can tolerate LTS2- Level most adults can tolerate LTS3- Level most confident bicyclists can tolerate LTS4- Level only the “strong and fearless” would tolerate
Based off the level of traffic stress tables, (see Appendix B for more information on the LTS rating methodology) we can identify what type of rider would feel comfortable on the analyzed the following surrounding roads surrounding into SeaTac Airport. The final road classification (in bold and highlighted in Table 3) is determined based on the highest LTS score across the table categories.* All but one of the adjacent roadways that serve as possible bike access routes to Sea-Tac Airport discussed in this report section have a speed limit of 35 mph or higher. However, the most widely accepted bike design guides (NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide), recommends conventional bike lanes on streets with ≥ 3,000 motor vehicle average daily traffic or a posted speed ≥ 25 mph. In these cases, the desirable bike lane width is 6 feet, and a 6-8 inch solid white lane line marking shall be used to separate motor vehicle travel lanes from the bike lane. On streets with higher traffic volume, regular truck traffic, high parking turnover, or speed limit > 35 mph, the guide recommends treatments that provide even greater separation between bicycles and motor traffic.23 All but one of the adjacent roadways that serve as possible bike access routes to Sea-Tac Airport discussed above have a speed limit of 35 mph or higher. See Appendix C for a brief overview of this and other relevant bike facility design guidelines, as well as jurisdictional recommendations and requirements.
Mekuria, M.C., Furth, P.G., Nixon, H. (2012, May). Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity. Mineta Transportation Institute. Retrieved from http://transweb.sjsu.edu/project/1005.html. 22
32 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Current Facilities: Evaluating Bikeability Sea-Tac Bike Network Level of Traffic Stress Ratings Our analysis using the LTS ratings reveals that half of the roads within the Sea-Tac Bike Network are LTS4 and only hospitable to strong and fearless riders. Only one road, S 170th St, is LTS2 and hospitable to most adults.** Table 3: Sea-Tac Street Network Level of Traffic Stress Rating Speed Limit
Bike Lane Width
Mixed Traffic (Yes/No)
Level of Traffic Stress Score
2
35 MPH
N/A
Yes
LTS4
Air Cargo Road (North of Airport)
4
Not Signed
N/A
Yes
LTS4
Air Cargo Road (South of Airport)
2
Not Signed
N/A
Yes
LTS3
International Boulevard
7
40 MPH
N/A
Yes
LTS4
S 154th St
2
35 MPH
5 ft
No
LTS3
S 170th St (East of Int Blvd)
2
30 MPH
5 ft
No
LTS2
S 170th St (West of Int Blvd)
5
30 MPH
N/A
Yes
LTS3
S 188th St
4-6
40 MPH
N/A
Yes
LTS4
Street Name
Total Number of Street Lanes
28th Ave S
Notes: *The final road classification (in bold and highlighted) is determined based on the highest LTS score across the table categories. For example if the street has an LTS1 for street lanes but has an LTS4 for speed limit then the final score is LTS4. The only place this methodology differs is for bike lane width. If this category gets an LTS3/4 and no other categories receive higher scores, the final score will be LTS3. **For the LTS scores traffic volume isn’t a metric included in these criterion. This is due to the difficulty in compiling this information for every road type and therefore isn’t included in the report. During our site visit, traffic volumes on 28th Ave S and Air Cargo Rd seemed fairly low. This could be due to the fact that it was a Friday afternoon around 2pm and 28th Ave S was being impacted by the new Angle Lake Link light rail station construction.
NACTO. (2014, March). Conventional Bike Lanes. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Retrieved from http://nacto.org/ publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/bike-lanes/conventional-bike-lanes/. 23
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 33
Sea-Tac Bike Network Level of Traffic Stress
Figure 13: Most of the road network surrounding Sea-Tac Airport scores as LTS3 or LTS4 based on the Mineta Transportation Institute’s level of traffic stress rating scheme, meaning these streets are only comfortable for confident to fearless bike riders. One segment of S 170th rates as manageable for the average bicyclist with a score of LTS2.24 24
34 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Courtesy of Ana Seivert
Page intentionally left blank.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 35
Current Facilities: Road Conditions 25 Figure 14. South Air Cargo Road Street Section Number of Travel Lanes: 2 Bike Lane Type: N/A Bike Lane Width: N/A Speed Limit: Not Signed Daily Traffic Volume: Unknown Right of Way: 20ft Jurisdiction: Port of Seattle LTS Rating: LTS3
Source: Ana Seivert
Figure 15. South Air Cargo Road Rider View
Source: Brandt Scanlan
Facility conditions data gathered from: Port of Seattle Property Map, Google Earth, City of SeaTac Inventory of Existing Transportation Systems and Conditions 25
36 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Figure 16. North Air Cargo Road Street Section Number of Travel Lanes: 4 Bike Lane Type: Paved Shoulder-None Speed Limit: Not Signed Daily Traffic Volume: Unknown Right of Way: 40ft Jurisdiction: Port of Seattle LTS Rating: LTS4
Source: Ana Seivert
Figure 17. North Air Cargo Road Rider View
Source: Brandt Scanlan
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 37
Current Facilities: Road Conditions 26 Figure 18. International Boulevard Street Section
Number of Travel Lanes: 7 Bike Lane Type: None Speed Limit: 40 MPH Daily Traffic Volume: 30,200-31,600 Right of Way: 95ft Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac LTS Rating: LTS4
Source: Ana Seivert
Figure 19. International Boulevard Rider View
Source: Brandt Scanlan Facility conditions data gathered from: Port of Seattle Property Map, Google Earth, City of SeaTac Inventory of Existing Transportation Systems and Conditions 26
38 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Figure 20. S 188th St Street Section
Source: Ana Seivert
Number of Travel Lanes: 4 + Bike Lane Type: None Speed Limit: 40 MPH Daily Traffic Volume: 25,400-31,900 Right of Way: 88ft Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac LTS Rating: LTS4
Figure 21. S 188th St Rider View
Source: Brandt Scanlan
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 39
Current Facilities: Road Conditions 27 Figure 22. S 170th St Street Section Number of Travel Lanes: 2-5 Bike Lane Type: None Designated Bike Lane Bike Lane Width: 0-5ft Speed Limit: 30 MPH Daily Traffic Volume: 4,700 Right of Way: 50ft Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac LTS Rating: LTS2-LTS3
Source: Ana Seivert
Figure 23. S 170th Street Rider View
Source: Brandt Scanlan
Facility conditions data gathered from: Port of Seattle Property Map, Google Earth, City of SeaTac Inventory of Existing Transportation Systems and Conditions 27
40 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Figure 24. S 154th St Street Section Number of Travel Lanes: 2 Bike Lane Type: Designated Bike Lane Bike Lane Width: 5ft Speed Limit: 35 MPH Daily Traffic Volume: 15,100 Right of Way: 55ft Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac LTS Rating: LTS3
Source: Ana Seivert
Figure 25. S 154th St Rider View
Source: Google Streetview
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 41
Current Facilities: Road Conditions 28 Figure 26. 28th Avenue S Street Section* Number of Travel Lanes: 2 Bike Lane Type: None Speed Limit: 35 MPH Daily Traffic Volume: 2,100 Right of Way: 35ft Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac LTS Rating: LTS4 *Note: The City of SeaTac will reconfigure 28th Ave S and add shared-use paths for bicycles and pedestrians along each side of the street. These paths will improve bicycling conditions along 28th Ave S and are scheduled to open in 2016. See pages 46-47 for more details on this project. Source: Ana Seivert
Figure 27. 28th Avenue S Rider View
Source: Brandt Scanlan
Facility conditions data gathered from: Port of Seattle Property Map, Google Earth, City of SeaTac Inventory of Existing Transportation Systems and Conditions 28
42 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Page intentionally left blank.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 43
Current Facilities: Gaps in Sea-Tac Bicycle Access North Access Gaps • North Air Cargo Road - from S 154th St to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. This road serves as the primary route to Sea-Tac Airport from the north and currently receives an LTS4 rating, meaning it is only comfortable for strong and fearless bicyclists. • S 170th St - from Air Cargo Road to International Boulevard. This segment of S 170th St currently serves as part of the route to the Link light rail station from North Air Cargo Road. If a direct bicycle connection to the terminal is built along North Air Cargo Road in the future, S 170th St will facilitate access for bicyclists coming from the east. This segment of S 170th St currently receives an LTS4 rating for strong and fearless bicyclists.
East Access Gaps • International Boulevard - from S 170th St to the Link light rail station overpass. This stretch of International Boulevard links riders coming from the north on Air Cargo Road and from the east on S 170th St to the Link light rail station. International Boulevard receives an LTS4 rating for strong and fearless bicyclists and can only safely be cycled using the sidewalk at present.
South Access Gaps • South Air Cargo Road - from S 188th St to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. This road serves as the primary bicycle route to Sea-Tac Airport’s south entrance from points south, including bicyclists approaching on 28th Ave S and S188th St. It currently receives an LTS3 rating for confident bicyclists, meaning it is not a comfortable bike route for most adult bicyclists. • 28th Ave S - from S 200th St to S 188th St. This road is the main connection to South Air Cargo Road from the south. While this road currently rates as an LTS4, the City of SeaTac is constructing multi-use paths along 28th Ave S that will open later in 2016 and will lower its rating to LTS2, meaning comfortable for most adult bicyclists. • S 188th St - from SR 509 to International Boulevard. This road may serve as a connection to South Air Cargo Road from the southwest and southeast. This road receives an LTS4 rating for strong and fearless bicyclists. A tunnel under the Sea-Tac Airport runway and several freeway ramps along this stretch of road present significant hazards to bicyclists, and directing bicyclists toward using 28th Ave S may be preferable to having people bike along S 188th St.
29
Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan
44 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Gaps in Sea-Tac Bicycle Access
Gaps in Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Westside Trail
South154th Street Trail
S 154th St
S 170th St
tary dS
Roa
Sea-Tac Airport Terminal
International Boulevard
Mili
1st Ave S
S 154th St
S 144thSt 24th Ave S
Miller Creek Trail
South Air Cargo Road
1st Ave S
28th Ave S
S 188th St
S 200th St
LEGEND Off-Street Bike Path
On-Street Bike Lane Intermittent Des Moines Creek Trail Bike Lane Bike Access Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, Gap IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community 0
0.25
0.5
1 Miles
Figure 28: Bike access gaps exist along all bicycle approaches to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. These include both stretches of Air Cargo Road, S 170th St, S 188th St, S 200th St, 28th Ave S, and International Boulevard.29 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 45
3-Future Bicycle Plans To address the lack of bicycle infrastructure, all of the jurisdictions surrounding Sea-Tac Airport have included near-term and long-term bicycle improvements in their comprehensive and capital improvement plans. The Port of Seattle should be aware of these plans and how they will benefit commuters to Sea-Tac Airport. Zoning and development plans for the City of SeaTac are also included to provide a frame of reference for how the area surrounding Sea-Tac Airport may change in the future.
In This Chapter:
Future Bicycle Facility Plans..................................................... 48 Planned Near-Term Bicycle Improvements - 2015-2021....... 48 Planned Long-Term Bicycle Improvements - 2035-2040....... 52
City of SeaTac Zoning............................................................... 54
Future Bicycle Facility Plans The cities surrounding Sea-Tac Airport prepare two types of plans that show where bicycle facilities will, or at least might, be built. Capital improvement programs (CIPs) and transportation improvement programs (TIPs) typically cover a 4-6 year period, rank projects by priority, and identify project funding sources if they exist. Comprehensive plans cover a longer time frame, generally 20-25 years, and do not include budgets or identify sources of funding. Projects identified in CIPs and TIPs are more likely to be built because of the shorter time frame and the identification of funding.
Planned Near-Term Bicycle Improvements - 2015-2021 Capital improvement programs (CIPs) and transportation improvement programs (TIPs) for the cities of Burien, Des Moines, SeaTac, and Tukwila were reviewed for planned bicycle infrastructure investments. These CIP/TIPs cover the period from 2015 to 2021. CIPs and TIPs are prioritized lists of capital projects that include a schedule and identify potential funding sources. Only projects with funding sources identified in the jurisdictions’ CIP/ TIPs have been included for discussion here and in the associated map. 30 City of Burien 2016-2021 TIP 31 • S 152nd St. This street will be rebuilt with bicycle lanes and pedestrian improvement from 1st Ave S to 8th Ave S. The exact configuration of the planned improvements is not specified, but this project will improve the bicycle connection between central Burien and the West Side Trail, linking bikes to the S 154th St bike lanes along the north edge of Sea-Tac Airport. This project has funding from Safe Routes to Schools and the Washington Transportation Improvement Board and is ranked as a high priority project in the City of Burien’s TIP. • S 146th St. This project will add either bike lanes or sharrows between 8th Ave S and Des Moines Memorial Drive. Funding from both the City of Burien and the Federal Aviation Administration has been identified for this project, and has been rated a medium priority in Burien’s TIP. City of Des Moines 2016-2035 TIP 32 • No bicycle projects are planned in the vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport within the Des Moines city limites in the 2016-2021 period. • Des Moines Memorial Drive. King County is currently designing a bicycle path along Des Moines Memorial Drive west of Sea-Tac Airport as part of the Lake to Sound Trail project.33
King County Parks, 2015. City of Burien. (2012). Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2016-2021. Retrieved from http://burienwa.gov/ DocumentCenter/View/5652. 32 City of Des Moines. (2015). Transportation Improvement Plan. Retrieved from http://www.desmoineswa.gov/ DocumentCenter/View/2055. 33 King County Parks, 2015. 33 Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan 30 31
48 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Planned Bike Improvements 2016-2021
Figure 29: Planned bicycle facility projects identified in the CIPs and TIPs of surrounding jurisdictions are shown in relation to existing bike facilities. Shared-use paths along 28th Ave S will improve bike access to the south end of Sea-Tac Airport this year, making closing the identified gap at the south end of the terminal more critical. Several new facilities north of Sea-Tac Airport will create incremental improvements over the next five years.33 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 49
Future Bicycle Facility Plans City of SeaTac 2016-2021 TIP34 • 28th Ave S. This street is currently undergoing significant changes as part of the southward expansion of Sound Transit’s Link light rail and to accommodate development plans in SeaTac and Des Moines (See Figure 30). 28th Ave S has been rebuilt from S 188th St to S 200th St with shared-use paths on each side of the street. These paths are essentially wide sidewalks that are designed to accommodate both pedestrian and bicycle traffic. This segment of 28th Ave S will open when Angle Lake Link light rail station is completed before the end of 2016. Continuing work on 28th Ave S will extend the shared-use paths south to S 208th St by 2018. This project will deliver bicyclists to Air Cargo Road at the south edge of Sea-Tac Airport and will represent an improvement in bicycle access to Sea-Tac Airport from the south. • International Boulevard. A safety study is planned for this street from S 170th St to S 188th St. No plans for bicycle facilities have been stated, though this may present an opportunity for the Port to partner with the City of SeaTac on improving non-motorized access along this high-speed street that borders Sea-Tac Airport. City of Tukwila 2015-2020 CIP35 • S 144th St. Bike lanes are being added to this street between International Boulevard and 42nd Ave S. This project is in the design phase and construction has not yet started. • 42nd Ave S. This project is adding bike lanes along 42nd Ave S between 154th/Southcenter Blvd and S 160th St. Tukwila’s CIP identified this project as scheduled for construction in 2015, though the project has not actually started yet. This project may present an opportunity for an alternative bicycle connection between the Lake to Sound Trail on S 154th St and the SeaTac/Airport Link light rail station along International Boulevard. This route would use Military Drive S and S 170th St rather than Air Cargo Road. Implementing this connection would require cooperation between SeaTac and Tukwila to extend bike lanes along 42nd Ave S to Military Road.
City of SeaTac. (2015). 2016-2021 Transportation Improvement Plan. Retrieved from http://www.ci.seatac.wa.us/Modules/ ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=11323. 35 City of Tukwila. (2015). Capital Improvement Program. Retrieved from http://www.tukwilawa.gov/pubwks/2015-2020%20 CIP.pdf. 34
50 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
City of SeaTac
Figure 30. City of SeaTac 28th Ave S Street Section
Connecting 28th/24th Avenue South Cross Section 47’
47’ 30’
30’ 4’
12’
5’
12’
12’
12’
12’
12’
5’
12’
Shared Use Path
Planter Strip
Southbound Thru/ Right Turn
Southbound Thru
Left Turn Lane/Median
Northbound Thru
Northbound Thru/ Right Turn
Planter Strip
Shared Use Path
4’
Source: City of SeaTac
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 51
Future Bicycle Facility Plans Planned Long-Term Bicycle Improvements - 2035-2040 The comprehensive plans for the cities of Burien, Des Moines, SeaTac, and Tukwila identify a large number of bicycle infrastructure projects. These comprehensive plans are on a 20-25 year planning horizon. Unlike the CIPs and TIPs used to identify near-term plans, comprehensive plans are not constrained by funding considerations. Instead, they provide a long-term vision of the places that the community will focus on creating bicycle facilities. Comprehensive plans generally do not specify what types of bicycle facilities would be implemented. The plans of cities surrounding Sea-Tac Airport show broad support for expansion of the bicycle network by 2040. Most arterial streets near Sea-Tac Airport are identified as potential bike facility locations. If these plans are implemented, these new bicycle facilities would make it much easier to reach Sea-Tac Airport by bike from the surrounding communities and would provide several possible approaches to Sea-Tac Airport for bicyclists. However, it is unlikely that all of these projects will actually be implemented in that time period. These cities’ CIP/TIPs, which are funding-constrained and examined in the previous section, show very few bike projects compared to those shown in the comprehensive plans. One item of note in the reviewed comprehensive plans is that the City of SeaTac has no plans for bicycle facilities on International Boulevard, meaning it will likely remain a high-speed, high-traffic car corridor for the foreseeable future. This underscores the importance of building a bicycle route to the north end of the Sea-Tac Airport terminal through Port of Seattle property, as even the very ambitious plans for bicycle facilities shown in Figure 31 will not correct the bicycle access gaps identified at the north end of Sea-Tac Airport.
36
Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan
52 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Planned Long-Term Bicycle Improvements - 2035-2040
Figure 31: Surrounding jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans call for an expansion of bicycle facilities around Sea-Tac Airport. However, bike access gaps will still exist at the north end of Sea-Tac Airport even if all of the plans shown are implemented.36 Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 53
City of SeaTac Zoning Zoning regulations, or the designation of allowed land uses, are important because they can identify the types of activities and development that can occur in a particular area. Certain types of land uses are more suitable for promoting alternative modes of transportation such as walking or biking. Zoning provides a view of how the land should be used and developed, giving an indication of what may be built in the future. Zoning is constantly evolving as comprehensive plans are updated, and new requirements may not be applicable to existing developments. While Sea-Tac Airport can influence but not control local zoning, it is essential that the Port understands how current zoning around SeaTac Airport supports their efforts to establish a bike network. The City of SeaTac zoning adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport is primarily Community Business, Aviation Business Center, and Aviation Commercial. Each of these zoning addresses nonmotorized and transit access in a slightly different way: Community Business (CB) - shown in red in Figure 32. According to SeaTac municipal code Title 15, the CB zone is meant for retail/personal services that serve the needs of the local neighborhood and nearby communities. This includes professional offices, mixed use development, shopping and personal services, and “the potential integration of high capacity transit stations or lines.” This area is mainly concentrated along International Boulevard. (Municipal Code 15.200.030). Community Business in the Urban Center (CB-C) - shown in red with crosshatching in Figure 32. This is a zone particular to the area adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport that is located within the city center. The land uses are the same as the CB designation, however there are additional design standards that specify that pedestrian and bike pathways must be separate from the roadway and should tie into other off-site facilities. This area includes International Boulevard and extends east to 32nd Ave S and 28th Ave S (Municipal Code 15.515.100) Aviation Business Center (ABC) - shown in dark purple in Figure 32. ABC is intended to support a major commercial center with large concentrations of customers, tourists, employees and pedestrian activity. It also focuses on promoting multimodal transportation that includes cars, public transportation, pedestrians and parking. (Municipal Code 15.200.030). While ABC zoning tries to encourage an environment that would accommodate pedestrians, the current build out of this area does not reflect this vision and it not safe for bicyclists. Aviation Commercial Business (AVC) - shown in light blue in Figure 32. This land use is specifically for assisting in airport operations as well as serving travelers and cargo needs. This zoning designation is primarily automobile- and large cargo truck-focused and translates to large scale businesses such as car rental locations around Sea-Tac Airport (Municipal Code 15.200.030). The zoning and design specifications outlined in the ABC and CB-C zones support safe spaces for pedestrians and bicyclists, but these facilities will not be seen until a new development moves in. For example, new developments along International Boulevard within the CB-C zone will be required to create a separated bike and pedestrian path on their property. These changes will provide very slow bike network improvements adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport that could potentially provide access for bicyclists over the long-term. 54 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Zoning Adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport
Figure 32 Source: City of SeaTac 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 55
City of SeaTac Zoning Future Development and Zoning The City of SeaTac has identified an interest in redeveloping the CB zone east of International Boulevard into a Transit Oriented Development (TOD), or development with ample access to a variety of transportation options and connectivity. Seth Harry and Associates, an architecture and planning firm in Maryland, have drafted plans that show what this area could look like when it is developed If this redevelopment occurs, sidewalk and street improvements will be required, which would promote safer bike and pedestrian access such as bike lanes or wider sidewalks.37 Zoning on the Ground
Figure 33: Air Cargo Road just north of S 188th Street, where AVC and ABC uses are designated. Note that while ABC acknowledges the importance of pedestrian circulation and multimodal transportation this doesn’t translate to the current build out on the ground: the sidewalks end as 188th meets Air Cargo Road. Source: Google Earth.
Seth Harry & Associates, Inc. SeaTac TOD Town Center. Retrieved from http://www.sethharry.com/tc_seatac_2.html. Source: Courtesy of Brandt Scanlan; image from Google Earth. 39 Seth Harry & Associates, Inc. SeaTac TOD Town Center. Retrieved from http://www.sethharry.com/tc_seatac_2.html. Modified by Brandt Scanlan. 37 38
56 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
International Boulevard and TOD
Figure 34: Existing conditions in the City of SeaTac’s Community Business (CB) zone east of the Sea-Tac Airport terminal. Large blocks prevent movement of pedestrians and bicycles. 38
Figure 35: SeaTac TOD Town Center concept rendering by Seth Harry and Associates. Sea-Tac Airport is at the bottom of the image. The City of SeaTac envisions the development of a walkable and bikeable town center adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport, which may provide new pedestrian and bicycle routes from S 170th St to the Link station and airport terminal. 39
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 57
4 - Bicycle Supportive Policies In addition to enhancing regional connectivity, policies at the Port, local, and state levels have the potential to increase demand for bike infrastructure. The following section details policies that can be implemented to incentivize biking among airport employees, as well as existing local and state policies that encourage improvements to bike facilities.
In This Chapter:
State Level Policies................................................................................. 60 Limiting Greenhouse Gas Emissions....................................................... 60 Adoption of Statewide Goals to Reduce Annual VMT Per Capita....... 60 Commute Trip Reduction Law.................................................................. 61 Local Level Policies................................................................................. 62 Comprehensive Plans.............................................................................. 62 Complete Streets..................................................................................... 62
Port of Seattle Policies........................................................................... 63 Sustainable Airport Master Plan.............................................................. 63
State Level Improving bike access and encouraging alternative modes of transportation directly support Washington State’s climate and energy goals for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction. As a major hub for tourism and commerce for Washington State, Sea-Tac Airport has the opportunity to transform itself into one of the region’s premier sustainable institutions. This requires addressing minimum state-mandated targets and identifying innovative solutions to meet and surpass these goals.
Limiting Greenhouse Gas Emissions40 In 2008 Washington State adopted an ambitious set of GHG emission reduction targets in the form of RCW 70.235. This law states that Washington will reduce its GHG emissions to the following levels: • 1990 levels by 2020 • 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2035 • 50 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2050 RCW 70.235 does not identify specific actions needed to meet these goals. Washington is fairly unique in that nearly half of its GHG emissions are the result of transportation, a much larger share than most states.41 This suggests that promoting non-motorized transportation, including biking, as an alternative to driving may be a particularly effective method of reducing GHG emissions in Washington.
Adoption of Statewide Goals to Reduce Annual VMT Per Capita42 In RCW 47.01.440, the Washington State Legislature passed a set of VMT reduction goals in tandem with the above GHG emissions targets in 2008. This law establishes a baseline estimate of 75 billion annual VMT in 2050 and establishes the following reduction targets: • 18 percent reduction in VMT per capita by 2020 • 30 percent reduction in VMT per capita by 2035 • 50 percent reduction in VMT per capita by 2050 VMT reduction is intended to reduce carbon emissions, thereby supporting RCW 70.235, and to maintain efficient operation of Washington’s existing transportation infrastructure. As one of the state’s largest generators of SOV trips, efforts by Sea-Tac Airport to encourage alternative modes would make a significant impact toward these goals. As with the GHG reduction targets, there are no specific implementation or measurement plans included in the VMT reduction law.
60 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Commute Trip Reduction Law The Commuter Trip Reduction (CTR) Law was passed by the Washington State Legislature in 1991 in an effort to reduce SOV trips.43 The law applies to employers with more than 100 full-time employees arriving at a specific work location during peak AM periods. In order to comply with the law, employers must “make a good faith effort to implement CTR at their worksites.”44 As a result, employers like the Port of Seattle are required to administer a CTR employee questionnaire to gather data related to number of trips, mode, and trip length, as well as pick from a number of program strategies designed to reduce trips. The Port has access to CTR data for its own employees as well as large employers who also operate at Sea-Tac, including Alaska Airlines, Menzies Aviation, and HMS Host. This information can be used to analyze future use of bike facilities after access and amenities improvements have been made.
Washington State Legislature. (2008). Chapter 70.235 RCW. Retrieved from http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default. aspx?cite=70.235. 41 Washington State Department of Ecology. (2008). Washington State Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory, 2007-2008. Retrieved from https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/1002046.pdf. 42 Washington State Legislature. (2011). RCW 47.01.440. Retrieved from http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default. aspx?cite=47.01.440. 43 Washington State Department of Transportation. (2016). Commute Trip Reduction. Retrieved from http://www.wsdot. wa.gov/transit/ctr. 44 Washington State Department of Transportation. CTR Program Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ NR/rdonlyres/9F01509B-54C3-4871-A5B3-896D556CD57F/0/CTRPrgroamGuidelines.pdf. 40
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 61
Local Level Comprehensive Plans The cities of Burien, Des Moines, Normandy Park, SeaTac, and Tukwila are located in the immediate vicinity of Sea-Tac Airport. The comprehensive plans and transportation master plans of these five cities all show extensive support for non-motorized transportation, including bicycling. Four of the five cities currently have bicycle infrastructure projects in progress or funded projects planned in the next five years. Looking out to the 20-year timeframe that is typical of comprehensive plans in Washington, these cities have identified major expansions to the bicycle infrastructure network surrounding Sea-Tac Airport (see Long-Term Planned Bicycle Improvements). This reflects widespread support for improving bicycling conditions in the Sea-Tac Airport area amongst its residents.
Complete Streets Complete Streets policies direct a jurisdiction’s transportation planners and engineers “to routinely design and operate the entire right of way to enable safe access for all users, regardless of age, ability, or mode of transportation. This means that every transportation project will make the street network safer for drivers, transit users, pedestrians, and bicyclists.”45 While complete streets policies generally do not specify the dimensions, placements, or design of specific bike facilities, they do emphasize the creation of a complete transportation network for all modes of travel, and lay the groundwork for jurisdictions to apply the bikeway designs as specified below. The Complete Streets movement was launched in 2004 by the National Complete Streets Coalition, a non-profit, non-partisan alliance of public interest organizations and transportation professionals committed to the development and implementation of Complete Streets policies and practices. To date, over 700 agencies in the U.S. have adopted Complete Streets policies,46 including two jurisdictions directly adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport. The City of SeaTac adopted a complete streets plan in 2012, and the City of Burien passed a complete streets ordinance in 2011.47
Smart Growth America. (2016). What Are Complete Streets? Retrieved from http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/ complete-streets/complete-streets-fundamentals/completestreets-faq. 46 Smart Growth America. (2016). Who We Are. Retrieved from http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets/ who-we-are. 47 Smart Growth America. (2016). Policy Atlas. Retrieved from http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/complete-streets/ changing-policy/complete-streets-atlas. 45
62 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Port of Seattle Transportation Demand Management Transportation demand management (TDM) refers to “a set of strategies aimed at reducing the demand for roadway travel, particularly in single occupancy vehicles.”48 These tools are meant to address the externalities of driving, such as pollution, congestion, and reliance on fossil fuels. TDM can be punitive, in the form of charging for parking, or rewarding, such as providing free or reduced price transit passes. One academic study found that the most successful TDM employer programs (reducing SOV trips by over 30 percent) provided incentives and disincentives for changing employee behavior.49 Table 4 shows some examples of TDM strategies and the estimated reduction in SOV trips. Table 4. Impact of Various Employer-Based TDM Strategies50 Strategy
Details
Parking charges Services + monetary incentives Cash-out
Previously free parking Example: transit vouchers and guaranteed ride home Cash benefit offered in lieu of accepting free parking Subsidies for carpool, vanpool, transit
Monetary incentives alone Services alone Information alone
Ridematching, shuttles, guaranteed ride home Information on available SOV-alternatives
Employee Vehicle Trip Reduction Impact 20-30% * 24.50% 17% 8-18% * 8.50% 1.40%
* Indicates range of impact measured through various studies
Company Branchof various TDM tactics, but Bike There is significant research on the efficacy thisShare section focuses specifically on strategies that encourage biking. Passes for transit are included since King County Metro and Port of Seattle* Sea-Tac Airport 0.50% part of a bike trip. Sound Transit both accommodate bicycles, and transit can be an important
48
Alaska Airlines Inc.
Airport Terminal
0.50%
Alaska Airlines Inc.
Flight Operations
0.60%
Doubletree Hotel
Sea-Tac Airport
0.00%
Menzies Aviation** Sea-Tac Airport 0.70% Demand Management Kalhra, N., Ecola, L., Keefe, R., Weatherford, B., Wachs, M. (2012, February). Transportation
Strategies. Reference Sourcebook for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation Sources. Retrieved from HMS Host Sea-Tac Airport 0.90% https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/climate_change/mitigation/publications_and_tools/reference_sourcebook/ page05.cfm. 49 Kearney, A.R., De Young, R. (1996). Changing Commuter Travel Behavior: Employer-Initiated Strategies. J. Environmental Systems, 24 (4): 373-393. 50 City of Seattle. (2008, January). Best Practices in Transportation Demand Management. Seattle Urban Mobility Plan: 7E3.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 63
Port of Seattle According to 2013 data, 82.1 percent of Port employees drove alone to Sea-Tac Airport that year, and this ratio has been steadily increasing since 2007.51 The mode split was 0.3 percent for bicyclists, 6.0 percent for bus, 3.2 percent for rail, and 0.0 percent for walking for employees surveyed in 2013 (see Figure 36).52 These results are based on 292 CTR surveys returned out of 765 total employees reported for the Sea-Tac worksite. The top three reasons cited by employees for not driving alone to work were to save money, free or subsidized transit, and environmental and community benefits. The top two reasons for choosing to drive alone were related to convenience. The authors did not have access to more recent detailed data for Port employees or for employees of Sea-Tac vendors at the time of this report. Figure 36: Port of Seattle Employee Mode Split
Drive Alone - 81% Ferry “Walk On” - 0.4% Boarded Ferry - 0.6% CWW - 0.5% Telework - 0.5% Bike - 0.3% Rail - 3% Bus - 6% Motorcycle - 1% Vanpool - 0.4% Carpool - 5% Other - 0.7%
WSDOT. (2013). CTR Employer Survey Report: Port of Seattle, Seatac International Airport. 0.3 percent bike mode split equates to 5 bike trips to work in the survey week. 53 Dowling, R., Feltham, D., Wycko, W. (1991). Factors affecting transportation demand management program effectiveness at six San Francisco medical institutions. Transportation Research Record, 1321. 54 Shoup, D. (1997). Evaluating the effects of parking cash out: Eight case studies, final report. Sacramento, CA: California Air Resources Board Research Division. 51 52
64 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
The Port of Seattle does not currently have a written TDM policy, but the commuter benefits program for Port employees heavily encourages SOV driving by providing free parking for all employees at Sea-Tac Airport. Incentives for using other forms of transportation are present but limited. The Port currently offers the following commute benefits for airport employees (which do not apply to airport vendor employees, such as airlines and concessions companies): • Free parking at Sea-Tac Airport • Validated parking at Sea-Tac Airport when on vacation • Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) up to 8 times per year for non-SOV commuters with purchase of ORCA card • Subsidized ORCA card for $25/year • Bicycle racks • Showers in Airport Office Building (Fitness Center) There are a number of reasons for employers such as the Port to implement a TDM program. In addition to aligning with the Port’s goal of sustainability, TDM strategies have demonstrated cost savings in the maintenance of parking facilities and employee healthcare premiums. These incentives are also helpful for attracting and retaining employees. As a large employer, the Port of Seattle is also subject to CTR and is required to implement TDM. The biggest obstacle to implementing TDM at Sea-Tac Airport is free parking. A 1991 study found that free parking accounted for 80 percent of the difference in SOV trips between employees at peer institutions.53 An increasingly popular alternative to eliminating free parking is parking cash-out, which consists of paying employees for days they choose to use an alternative form of transportation. One frequently-cited study found a 17 percent decrease in SOV trips at various worksites after parking cash-out was implemented (see Figure 37).54 The study also found a 1 percent increase in biking/ walking and 3 percent increase in transit ridership. This is just one example of how parking incentives and disincentives can be used to modify demand for alternative modes. Figure 37: Cashing Out Impacts on Commute Mode (Shoup 1997)
Free parking is only available for Port employees and does not apply to vendor employees, who pay to park in an off-site lot. In order to encourage bike ridership, as well as public transportation and carpooling, the Port may need to reconsider how it allocates free parking for its own employees as well as how vendors provide parking benefits to their employees. Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 65
Port of Seattle Sustainable Airport Master Plan Century Agenda According to the Port of Seattle website, “Sea-Tac is the first large hub airport in the U.S. to fully incorporate sustainability as a key component of its master planning effort.”55 Although the Sustainable Airport Master Plan plan is still in development, one can reasonably assume that full incorporation of sustainability includes a recognition of alternative modes of access to Sea-Tac Airport. Century Agenda 25-year environmental goals include: • “Reduce air pollutant emissions by 50 percent from 2005 levels. • Lead our industry’s greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction strategies by reducing carbon emissions from all port operations by 50 percent from 2005 levels and reducing aircraft-related GHG emissions at Sea-Tac by 25 percent.”56 Other stated goals, from the Port’s Strategy for a Sustainable Sea-Tac (S3), include increasing “the percentage of passengers accessing Sea-Tac Airport via environmentally-preferred modes of transportation from 60 percent in 2014 to 70 percent in 2020.”57 This goal does not mention employee bicycle ridership, but improving network connectivity and bike amenities would benefit both groups and improve sustainability for Sea-Tac Airport as a whole. Proposed actions contained within S3 include increasing traveler outreach to educate them about greener modes, improving the number and safety of bike facilities, partnering with transit agencies to increase bus access (which is often used by bicyclists), and increasing the environmental benefits of all modes.
Port of Seattle. (2016). Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP). Retrieved from https://www.portseattle.org/Business/ Construction-Projects/Airport-Projects/Pages/airport-master-plan. aspx. 56 Port of Seattle. Sea-Tac Airport: Sustainable Airport Master Plan. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle.org/Business/ Construction-Projects/Airport-Projects/Documents/ SEATACOpenHouseHandouts_Sustainability.pdf. 57 Leavitt, E., Stanton, L. (2015, February 10). Strategy for a Sustainable Sea-Tac. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle. org/About/Commission/Meetings/2015/2015_02_10_RM_7c_supp.pdf. 55
66 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Environmental Strategy Plan Sea-Tac Airport’s 2014 Environmental Strategy Plan revealed certain goals related to bicycling and indicated progress made toward these goals. According to the plan, the Port has made significant progress toward improved air quality by reducing traveler and employee VMT and promoting the use of clean vehicles. The transportation goal, which states that “Sea-Tac will increase the average occupancy of passenger vehicles accessing Sea-Tac Airport from 2.6 in 2009 to 3.6 in 2015”58 has only been met with some progress. The 2015 action steps for this goal include “increasing connection among bike lanes near the Airport,” thereby reducing the number of SOV trips. 59 The Port also hopes to “reduce airport owned and controlled greenhouse gas emissions by 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.”60 Significant progress toward this goal has already been made, primarily by switching to renewable natural gas for their bus fleet. However, the Port needs to reduce emissions by an additional 9 percent below 2005 levels in the next four years to achieve their target.
58 Port of Seattle. (2014). 2014 Progress Report, A Vision for 2014 And Beyond: Environmental Strategy Plan 2009. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle.org/Environmental/Environmental-Documents/Documents/2014_av_env_strat_progress_ rept.pdf. 59 Ibid. 60 Ibid.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 67
5 - Peer Models Many of the Port of Seattle’s airport and regional employer peers have implemented exemplary facilities and bikeriding encouragement programs. These creative programs and improvements in this section can serve as a model and inspiration for the future of bike access at Sea-Tac Airport.
In This Chapter:
Airport Facilities and Amenities....................... 70 Portland.......................................................... 70 San Jose......................................................... 72 Pittsburgh....................................................... 73
Regional Employer Policies.............................. 74 Transportation Demand Management........ 74
Airport Facilities and Amenities In order to attract employees and travelers to use bike facilities, end of trip amenities must be addressed in addition to network connectivity. Many of the potential amenity improvement projects were addressed in the Phase I report, and some of these additions have been made at Sea-Tac Airport (see Appendix A). The following section highlights peer airports who have implemented exceptional facilities and amenities improvement projects that maximize safety and comfort for bike commuters.
Portland International Airport Portland International Airport (PDX) is a strong leader in creating safe bike facilities and amenities for bike commuters and travelers. Several regional trails connect to Port of Portland infrastructure and Port bike facilities and resources. PDX prioritized completion of this project not because of any policy or plan mandate, but because they valued improving accessibility for all modes of transport, delivering exceptional customer service, and meeting environmental sustainability goals. Marine Drive Trail is a regional trail for bikes and pedestrians that passes just north of PDX. In 2007 a connection trail was completed by the Port with the goal of making the airport safer for bikes and pedestrians. It is a 12 feet wide path that extends approximately one half mile and cost the Port about $800,000.61 This path connects to Terminal Trail, which allows people to bike directly to the terminal and its adjacent secure bike parking. There is also bike facility connectivity that joins the Terminal Trail for those traveling from the south. PDX has adequate secure bike parking that includes one bike cage requiring key code access in the north end of the airport, as well as free parking options available at the south end. Another amenity is a bike assembly/repair station. The airport also provides a tool check-out with wrenches, tire pumps, and other tools provided to the airport with the help of Travel Oregon, a bike resource organization. This check-out is located at baggage claim 5 where bicyclists also have the opportunity to pick up regional bike information. Similar to the Link light rail, MAX trains are equipped with hooks to hold bikes, making it easy to complete or begin a bike trip via transit. In addition, the MAX platform is located directly next to the Baggage Claim exit for maximum convenience. Figure 38. Protected terminal multi-use path at PDX Airport62
Maus, J. (2007, December 14). New bike path from Marine Drive to Airport completed. BikePortland.org. Retrieved from http:// bikeportland.org/2007/12/14/new-bike-pathfrom-marine-drive-to-airport-completed-6198. 62 Ibid. 63 Figure 39. Andersen, M. (2014, November 26). Does your airport have a 50-page bike plan? BikePortland.org. Retrieved from: http:// bikeportland.org/2014/11/26/airport-50-pagebike-plan-114017. 61
70 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Bike Connectivity Surrounding Portland International Airport63
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 71
Airport Facilities and Amenities Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport Bicyclists can currently access the San José International Airport via the protected multi-use Guadalupe River Trail, which runs through the city and includes public art in places, as well as designated bike lanes on Airport Parkway for X miles. The City of San José has identified three additional planned bikeways to improve connection to the airport, included in its San José Bike Plan 2020.64 The airport also provides a free Airport Flyer shuttle between light rail, the airport, and the Santa Clara Caltrain station. The shuttle includes bicycle racks and operates every 15 to 30 minutes during peak hours. In addition, bicycle commuters have access to covered parking at both terminals, wayfinding signs, and two showers and changing rooms for both employees and travelers.65
Figure 40. Guadalupe River Trail in San José66
City of San José. (2009). San José bike Plan 2020. Retrieved from: http://sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/245. Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport. (2016). Bicycle and Pedestrian Access. Retrieved from http://www. flysanjose.com/fl/travelers.php?page=maps/bicycle&subtitle=Maps+&+Directions+%7C+Bicyle+Parking. 66 DeBra, C. (2011). Guadalupe River Trail. Walking San Francisco Bay. Retrieved from http://www.walking-the-bay. com/2011/11/guadalupe-river-trail-nov-26-2011.html. 64 65
72 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Pittsburgh International Airport In 2012, Pittsburgh International Airport unveiled the six-mile long Montour Trail connection, connecting the airport with southwest Pittsburgh. This project, which was initially proposed in 2000, was designed to improve access to shopping destinations downtown, increase recreational bike ridership, and provide a safe commute option for employees and passengers to the airport. The Montour Trail connects to the Great Allegheny Passage, a 330-mile trail network stretching between Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C. The Airport Connector segment of the trail begins at the extendedterm parking lot located on the west side of the airport and is marked with wayfinding signs directing riders to downtown. The path is almost entirely protected, with the exception of two brief shared roadways, and includes a solar-powered flashing signal crossing.67 The project was funded in part by a $57,000 grant from the Allegheny Regional Asset District and makes use of pre-existing airport personnel roads.68 Additional airport amenities for bicyclists include an assembly station with tools, wrenches, and an air pump. Figure 41. Montour Trail Airport Connector 69
TrailLink. (2016). Montour Trail - Airport Connector. Retrieved from http://www.traillink.com/trail/montour-trail---airportconnector.aspx. 68 Schmitz, J. (2012, March 5). Airport section of Montour Trail set for opening. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Retrieved from http://www.post-gazette.com/local/west/2012/03/05/Airport-section-of-Montour-Trail-set-for-opening/ stories/201203050220. 69 Shaw, M. (2012). 2012 NRT Photo Contest Winners. National Recreation Trails. Retrieved from http://www.americantrails. org/photoGalleries/photocontest2012/12photowins.html. 67
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 73
Regional Employer Policies Many of the Port’s peers in terms of regional employment have used creative Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to encourage alternative mode use (see Table 5). These include parking cash out, which allows employees to receive a small cash credit for days they do not drive. To facilitate the transition to biking, employers like Seattle Children’s and the University of Washington (UW) offer commute assistance by helping employees plan their route. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) has even designed a “My Impact” program in which employees can see the environmental impact of their choices through “vehicle miles traveled, number of trips reduced, vehicle cost savings, CO2 reductions and gas savings.”70 Many of these programs, like BMGF and UW, have won awards for their sustainability and efficacy. The UW’s universal transportation pass, U-PASS, is considered a national model, providing unlimited access to all regional public transit systems and discounts on car- and bike-share programs.71 UW, Microsoft, and Seattle Children’s operate private shuttles which are outfitted with bike racks to accommodate employees who wish to begin or complete a portion of their commune trip with a bicycle. Microsoft is a unique example of a robust bicycling program despite providing free parking to employees, like the Port of Seattle. Employees are encouraged to bike via transportation fairs on campus, a bike challenge month, an on-site repair shop, on-site free classes with Cascade Bicycle Club, and an annual subsidy that can be applied toward the purchase of a bike or biking equipment. Microsoft has also collaborated with the City of Redmond on a grant-funded “my R-TRIP” commuter program, through which employees can earn a cash incentive or carbon offset for 50 alternative commute trips in a six-month period. 72 As a result of these benefits, bike ridership at Microsoft is 3 percent, higher than the King County average of 2 percent, even with free parking available.73
Cascade Bicycle Club. (2013, December 4). Bike-friendly business highlight: the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Cascade Bicycle Club Blog. Retrieved from http://www.cascade.org/blog/2013/12/bike-friendly-business-highlight-billmelinda-gates-foundation. 71 University of Washington Transportation Services. (2016). Student U-PASS. Retrieved from https://www.washington.edu/ facilities/transportation/student-u-pass. 72 Ensign, A. Employee Cycling Incentive Programs Are on The Rise. BicyclePaper.com. Retrieved from http://www. bicyclepaper.com/articles/63-Employee-Cycling-Incentive-Programs-Are-on-The-Rise-. 73 2015 Microsoft CTR data courtesy of Greg King, King County Metro Transit. 70
74 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Table 5. Regional Employer TDM Program Strategies Employer
Number of Employees
TDM Strategies
University of Washington (Seattle, WA)
59,000 (incl. staff, faculty, and students)
U-PASS, high parking charges for SOVs, motor pool vehicles, commuter concierge, bike awards/competitions
Microsoft (Redmond, WA)
42,000
FlexPass, transportation fairs, commute info online, guaranteed ride home, lockers/showers, subsidy for bike equipment, bike shop on campus
Seattle Children's (Seattle, WA) 5,900
FlexPass, showers/locker rooms, bike commuting events, commute assistance in employee orientation, parking cashout, bike parking, transit passes
Expedia (Bellevue, WA)
3,000+
Bike parking, lockers/showers, commute awards
Puget Sound Energy (Bellevue/Tacoma, WA)
3,000
Transit & vanpool subsidies, guaranteed ride home, bike parking, showers/lockers
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (Seattle, WA)
1,300
Parking cash out, employee “My Impact” program, secure bike parking, lockers/showers, heated mud room for wet clothes
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 75
6-Findings & Recommendations
In This Chapter:
Findings.............................................. 78
Recommendations Overview.............. 79 Connectivity Improvements......... 79 Institutional Improvements.......... 80
Recommendations in Detail................ 81
Findings This studio focused on a network analysis of both regional, local, and adjacent bike facilities surrounding the Sea-Tac Airport. Below is a summary of our findings: • The surface street bicycle routes proximate to Sea-Tac Airport do not serve Sea-Tac Airport terminal. • Roadways that do serve the terminal were rated with the Mineta Institute’s rating scale and found to be usable by only the most fearless bicyclists. • Our network analysis found three major gaps in the bike network that are proximate to the terminal and not already slated for improvement: • North Air Cargo Road from the regional bike system trail on 154th St directly to the terminal • South Air Cargo Road from the new multipurpose lane on 28th S directly to south terminal • 170th S from North Air Cargo Road east to International Blvd • There are other gaps in the regional bike network that do not connect directly to the airport, but could lead to the airport. These gaps are not addressed in the recommendations, but may be addressed in subsequent projects. • Given existing traffic volumes, road speeds, and width of right-of-way, national design standards recommend protected bike facilities in order to ensure a safe and comfortable trip for bicyclist using these roads. • Federal, state, and local policies of neighboring jurisdictions were all found to be supportive of accommodating bicycles and other nonmotorized modes in the right-of-way. • Port of Seattle goals are also in line with encouraging bicycle access. • Employees who bicycle to work at the airport do so at less than half the King County rate of 2 percent, and a small fraction of several other major employers in the region. • The Port does not employ transportation demand management incentives and strategies to promote non motorized transport. • Airport employees living in zip codes near Sea-Tac Airport represent potential demand for bike access, and any improvements in facilities and amenities could generate additional demand. • Airports in Portland, San Jose, and Pittsburgh have invested in bike paths that directly connect the terminal with regional bike networks. • Multiple possible funding opportunities to help Sea-Tac Airport and its surrounding cities pay for local improvements.
78 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Recommendations - Overview The Port of Seattle, Aviation Division is committed to developing and operating an airport that is sustainable, environmentally and customer friendly. To improve bicycle access, reach its larger sustainability goals and keep pace with other airports, we recommend specific actions in both physical and institutional dimensions.
Connectivity Improvements A. Create bike lanes on surface streets that lead to the main terminal and provide connectivity to the area’s bike lane network. Current bike facilities adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport are insufficient for providing a safe and comfortable trip to Sea-Tac Airport via bike. We recommend adding bike lanes along three main sections of road leading to Sea-Tac Airport. Ultimately, the best bike facilities are protected bike lanes, but if funds are limited and demand is low, conventional bike lanes will be a substantial improvement. A midlevel option is a buffered bike lane. A buffered bike lane is a conventional bicycle lane paired with a designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/ or parking lane. These facilities appeal to a wider cross-section of bicycle users. Flexible delineator posts (plastic bollards) in the buffer area can create an even greater perception of safety. 1. North Air Cargo Road from the regional bike system trail on 154th St, south to the main terminal. 2. South Air Cargo Road from the new multipurpose lane on 28th S directly to the south terminal. 3. 170th S from North Air Cargo Road east to International Blvd. B. Improve bicycle connections to public transit stations. Many people who bike will not make every trip exclusively by bike. Some will bike one way, and take transit in the other direction. Some will bike a certain distance before board the bus or Link light rail, or vice versa. Therefore, it is important to consider bike access in conjunction with transit connections to Sea-Tac Airport. Currently, accessing Sea-Tac Airport by transit with a bicycle remains challenging. 1. Separate bike traffic from the pedestrian walkway leading from the Link light rail station through the parking garage to the main terminal. 2. Replace the existing sidewalk east of International Blvd with a safe multi-purpose path connecting the Metro/Sound Transit bus stop on 170th S to the north and the main terminal to the south and west via the elevated Link light rail pedestrian walkway. (It should be noted that the general purpose lanes on this roadway are wider than the minimum width, and could conceivably be narrowed to accommodate a bike lane, as well.) C. Accommodate bicycles in future access & amenities improvements. Re-allocating or rebuilding the right-of-way can be costly, so to the greatest extent possible, any new airport roadway or infrastructure projects should incorporate bicycle facilities in the planning stages. If bike facilities are improved, and demand for bike access increases, Sea-Tac should monitor demand for bike amenities and increase or improve them to accommodate the new demand. 1. For example, any proposed people mover/ shuttle systems should be able to hold bikes. 2. Implement and upgrade Phase I Report recommendations regarding amenities including bike parking, storage, wayfinding, education, etc. Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 79
Recommendations - Overview Institutional Improvements Create a Sea-Tac Airport bicycle access partnership. 1. An inter-local partnership consisting of the Port, neighboring municipalities and the Cascade Bicycle Club would work together to plan, fund, and build sub-regional bicycle improvements that transcend jurisdictional boundaries. Such an entity would advantage federal funding through the Puget Sound Regional Council and build trust and cooperation amongst the Port and its neighbors.74 Incentivize active transportation. 1. The Port needs to implement employee transportation policies that reward Port and vendor employees for shifting mode choice away from drive alone dependence to ride-sharing, transit, bicycling and walking. The Port should adopt more assertive transportation demand management tools including pricing parking or parking cash out. The Port has several private, non-profit, and public organizations from Seattle Children’s to Microsoft to emulate. Set bicycling targets and measure performance. 1. At present, the Port has no targets for bicycle trips to or from the airport and no system to count trips. For starters, the Port should strive to achieve the same 2 percent bike mode share that King County has. As bike access improvements are made, this target can be raised. (Seattle Children’s bike commute rate is approaching 10 percent, while the City of Portland bike commute rate is nearly 13 percent).
74 Improving the regional and local bike network around Sea-Tac Airport will require cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions, for which there is already a precedent. The Port recently renewed its interlocal agreement (ILA) with the City of SeaTac, which is in effect until February 2018. This agreement covers land use, stormwater management, interagency cooperation and development, and material haul for port projects. Other ILAs between neighboring jurisdictions include the creation of a tourism promotion area (SeaTac/Tukwila/Des Moines) and an ILA with multiple cities (including Burien and Tukwila) for climate change mitigation. The Port has also had ILAs with Des Moines and Burien in the past for various infrastructure projects.
80 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Recommendations - In Detail A. Create bike lanes on surface streets that lead to the main terminal and provide connectivity to the area’s bike lane network.
Miller Creek Trail
Westside Trail
S 144thSt 24th Ave S
South154th Street Trail
2. South Air Cargo Road from the new multipurpose lane on 28th S directly to the south terminal. (page 84).
S 154th St
S 154th St
1 1st Ave S
3 S 170th St
dS
Sea-Tac Airport Terminal
Roa
International Boulevard
tary
Mili
3. 170th S from North Air Cargo Road east to International Blvd. (page 86).
2
South Air Cargo Road
S 188th St
1st Ave S
28th Ave S
1. North Air Cargo Road from the regional bike system trail on 154th St, south to the main terminal. (page 82).
Connecting Surface Street Bike Lanes to the Terminal
S 200th St
LEGEND Recommendation A1 Recommendation A2 Recommendation A3 Off-Street Bike Path On-Street Bike Lane
Des Moines Creek Trail
Intermittent Bike Lane
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Bike Access Gap
0
0.25
0.5
1 Miles
Figure 42. Connecting Surface Street Bike Lanes to the Terminal
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 81
A1. Improve North Air Cargo Road Existing Conditions
Figure 43. Rider View of North Air Cargo Road
Number of Travel Lanes: 4 Bike Lane Type: Ranges Paved Shoulder to None Speed Limit: Not Signed Daily Traffic Volume: Unknown Right of Way: 40ft Jurisdiction: Port of Seattle LTS Rating: LTS4
Source: Brandt Scanlan
Recommended North Air Cargo Road Facility Improvements The three options on the right present a range of facility types that the Port can consider. With limited right of way available, each of the options requires road re-channelization.
Figure 44. Extent of Recommended North Air Cargo Road Facility Improvements
North Air Cargo Road
North Air Cargo Road road terminates at a security gate, several hundred feet north of the terminal entrance. The Port has produced schematics of how bike access could be created via an off road facility. A selection of the schematics are shown on the following pages.
Sea-Tac Terminal
Source: Brandt Scanlan
82 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Good: Narrow road to three lanes, and add a three foot bike lane on each side.*
Figure 45. “Good” illustrative street section
Figure 46. Rendering of “Good” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Phase I Report
Better: Narrow road to three lanes, add a three foot buffered bike lane on each side.*
Figure 47. “Better” illustrative street section
Figure 48. Rendering of “Better” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Phase I Report
Best:
Narrow road to two lanes, add a 6 feet protected bike lane on each side.*
Figure 49. “Best” illustrative street section
Figure 50. Rendering of “Best” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Vicky Clarke. Amended from Phase I Report
*Requires rechannelization of the roadway based on traffic circulation. Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 83
Proposed Off Road Connection to the Terminal N. Cargo Rd ultimately goes under the main terminal in a tunnel and is closed to bicycles and vehicles by a security gate. Bicycle access to the main terminal can be achieved by means of an off road bike path, as envisioned by Port planners in Figures 51 through 55.
Vicinity Map for North End Bike Route Vicinity and Extent of Trail
North End Bike Route
Bike Connecon from Air Cargo Rd. Figure 51 Source: Port of Seattle
Figure 52 Source: Port of Seattle
84 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
ow the Jet Blast Segment Details
Staying Below the Jet Blast Figure 53 Source: Port of Seattle
d of Bike Path
t
Figure 54 Source: Port of Seattle
Figure 55 Source: Port of Seattle
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 85
A2. Improve South Air Cargo Road Existing Conditions
Figure 56. Rider View of South Air Cargo Road
Number of Travel Lanes: 2 Bike Lane Type: N/A Bike Lane Width: N/A Speed Limit: Not Signed Daily Traffic Volume: Unknown Right of Way: 20 to 25ft Jurisdiction: Port of Seattle LTS Rating: LTS3
Source: Brandt Scanlan
South Air Cargo Road Facility Improvements
Figure 57. Extent of Recommended South Air Cargo Road Facility Improvements
The three options on the right present a range of facility types that the Port can consider.
Sea-Tac Terminal
South Air Cargo Road conditions vary, with a two foot to ten foot landscaped area on the west side of some segments; other sections have a shoulder, while yet others have a turning lane. Conditions make any bike treatment running consistently from S 188th Street to the Sea-Tac Airport terminal challenging, with roadway widening required to safely accommodate bicycles in many segments.
South Air Cargo Road
Source: Brandt Scanlan
86 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
500 Feet
Good: Three foot bike lane on both sides of the road.
Figure 58. “Good” illustrative street section
Figure 59. Rendering of “Good” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Vicky Clarke
Better: Five foot bike lane with buffer on both sides of the road.
Figure 60. “Better” illustrative street section
Figure 61. Rendering of “Better” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Vicky Clarke
Best:
Five foot protected bike lanes on both sides of the road.
Figure 62. “Best” illustrative street section
Figure 63. Rendering of “Best” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Vicky Clarke
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 87
A3. Improve South 170th Street Existing Conditions
Figure 64. Rider View of South 170th St.
Number of Travel Lanes: 2-5 Bike Lane Type: None Designated Bike Lane Bike Lane Width: 0-5ft Speed Limit: 30 MPH Daily Traffic Volume: 4,700 Right of Way: 50ft Jurisdiction: City of SeaTac LTS Rating: LTS2-LTS3
Source: Brandt Scanlan
S 170th Street (West of International Boulevard) Facility Improvements
Figure 65. Extent of Recommended S 170th St Facility Improvements
This section of the roadway runs east to west between International Boulevard to Air Cargo Road. There is ample existing right of way for the recommended bicycle facilities. An existing bike lane runs along both sides of S 170th on the segment east of the intersection at International Boulevard.
S 170th
Sea-Tac Terminal
Source: Brandt Scanlan
88 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Good: Continuation of five foot bike lane on both sides of the street.*
Figure 66. “Good” illustrative street section
Figure 67. Rendering of “Good” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Vicky Clarke
Better: Five foot bike lanes with a buffer on both sides of the street.*
Figure 68. “Better” illustrative street section
Figure 69. Rendering of “Better” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Vicky Clarke
Best:
Five foot protected bike lanes on both sides of the street.*
Figure 70. “Best” illustrative street section
Figure 71. Rendering of “Best” facility option
Source: Ana Seivart
Source: Vicky Clarke
*Requires rechannelization of the roadway based on traffic circulation. Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 89
Recommendations - In Detail Improve Bicycle Connections to Public Transit Stations S 170th Street
International Boulevard 2 1
Sea-Tac Terminal
LEGEND Recommendation B1 Recommendation B2
0
0.25
0.5
1 Miles
Figure 72. Location of recommended bicycle connections to public transit
90 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
B1. Separate bike traffic from the pedestrian walkway leading from the Link light rail station through the parking garage to the main terminal. Figure 73. Rendering of recommended separation point, where bicycles arriving by Link light rail can connect to the vehicular route to enter and exit Sea-Tac Airport.
Source: Vicky Clarke. Amended from Phase I Report
Figure 74. Rendering of recommended separated bicycle path running alongside pedestrian path from bicycles to enter and exit Sea-Tac Airport.
Source: Vicky Clarke. Amended from Phase I Report
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 91
B2. Replace existing sidewalk east of International Blvd with a multi-purpose path connecting the Metro/ST station to170th S to the north and the main terminal the south and west. Figure 75. Current road connections between Metro/Sound Transit buses and Link light rail and Sea-Tac Airport. Source: Google Earth.
Source: Google Earth
Figure 76. Rendering of recommended multi-purpose path connecting transit, pedestrians and bicycles to Sea-Tac Airport.
Source: Vicky Clarke
92 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Page intentionally left blank.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 93
7- Funding
Opportunities
In order to implement the recommendations proposed in this report, the Port of Seattle will need access to secure funding. This section identifies public and non-profit grant opportunities, as well potential sources of airport revenue that could be directed toward bike improvement projects. A combination of these options may be needed to fund a full suite of changes.
In This Chapter:
The Need for Funding............ 96
Funding Opportunities........... 97
Existing Revenues................... 101
The Need for Funding Identifying facilities needed to complete the regional and proximate bike networks is only the first step; funding these projects is an additional challenge. As is the case across the country, our region’s infrastructure needs far outpace available funding: Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has identified more than $35 billion dollars in unfunded transportation improvements in the Puget Sound area.75 The Port of Seattle currently has $38 million allocated to landside improvements in its 20162020 capital budget (out of $1.6 billion for the aviation division as a whole), but no bike facility improvements have been identified.76 However, the Port’s 2016 budget includes an aviation business plan that identifies actions that directly support Port-wide strategies. One previously mentioned strategy, “Lead the U.S. airport industry in environmental innovation and minimize the airport’s environmental impacts,” includes a target of 70% of passengers using environmentally-preferred modes of travel to access the airport by 2020. An associated action aims to “continue to implement recommendations from bike plan, including working with stakeholders to facilitate bike access and provide infrastructure for employees and passengers traveling to and from the airport.” There is $20,000 allocated to developing messaging in the terminal for other environmental initiatives, including “bicycle support.”77 As the Port makes budget allocations in the future, it might consider how non-motorized modes are funded across the region. For instance, PSRC grants include a 10 percent set-aside for non-motorized projects. If the Port allocated the same proportion of capital improvement dollars into non-motorized access investments, they could make significant strides in completing the regional and local bike network. The Port of Portland garnered a lot of attention from bicycle groups when it spent $800,000 of its own funds to build the aforementioned bike connection to PDX airport. Although the long-range plans of surrounding jurisdictions indicate that many of the identified gaps are slated to be filled over the next 20 to 25 years, no funding has been identified for these projects at this time. The following revenue sources are available for funding bike facility projects. While there are many grants available for nonmotorized projects, most of them require a match. There is therefore an opportunity for some existing Sea-Tac Airport revenues to be used as leverage.
Puget Sound Regional Council. (2014, May 29). Transportation 2040: Update Report. Retrieved from http://www.psrc. org/assets/10550/T2040Update2014.pdf?processed=true. 76 Port of Seattle. (2015). Capital Budget. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle.org/About/Financial-Info/Budget/ Documents/2016/_14_sec_IX_capital.pdf. 77 Port of Seattle. (2015). 2016 Budget and Business Plan and Draft Plan of Finance. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle. org/About/Financial-Info/Budget/Documents/2016/2016_budget_business_plan.pdf. 75
96 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Funding Opportunities Federal TIGER Discretionary Grants Department of Transportation (DOT) is currently authorized to award up to $500 million to road, rail, transit, and port projects that will have a “significant impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or a region,” recognizing projects nationwide that will advance key transportation goals such as safety, innovation, and opportunity. Since 2009, more than $210 million have gone to bicycle and pedestrian projects. Applicants must detail the benefits their project would deliver for five long-term outcomes: safety, economic competitiveness, state of good repair, quality of life, and environmental sustainability. DOT also evaluates projects on innovation, partnerships, project readiness, benefit cost analysis, and cost share. TIGER can provide capital funding directly to any public entity, including municipalities, counties, port authorities, tribal governments, MPOs, or other groups, in contrast to traditional Federal programs which provide funding to very specific groups of applicants, typically State DOTs and transit agencies. TIGER can fund projects that have a local match as low as 20 percent of the total project costs.78 Transportation Alternatives Program (Applications due: see specific programs below) One of the most well-known sources of federal bicycle funding is the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), which provides funding for programs and projects defined as “transportation alternatives,” including on- and off-road pedestrian and bicycle facilities; infrastructure projects for improving non-driver access to public transportation and enhanced mobility; recreational trail projects; safe routes to school projects; and projects for planning, designing, or constructing boulevards and other roadways.79 TAP is currently funded at $820 million annually.80 The U.S. DOT apportions TAP funds to state DOTs, which in turn apportion most to regional MPOs, and set aside the rest. In Washington, PSRC receives a majority of the MPO dollars, and the set-aside funds the Priority Safe Routes to School grant program.81 Additionally, bicycle projects are eligible for many programs through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). See Appendix D for a matrix of types of bike projects that are eligible for a variety of federal funds. Please note that many federal funds are distributed through the state or the regional MPO.82 U.S. Department of Transportation. (2016, February 23). TIGER Discretionary Grants. Retrieved from https://www. transportation.gov/tiger. 79 Federal Highway Administration. (2016, February 19). Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). Retrieved from http:// www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/transportation_alternatives/. 80 Oregon Department of Transportation. (2015, December). Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act): Summary and Impact on Oregon. Retrieved from http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/COMM/Documents/FASTAct_Summary. pdf. 81 WSDOT. (2016). Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). Retrieved from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/ ProgramMgmt/TAP.htm. 82 WSDOT. (2016). Funding Programs for Local Agencies. Retrieved from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/ ProgramMgmt/funding.htm. 78
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 97
Funding Opportunities State Washington Traffic Safety Commission Each year, the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) invests federal traffic safety grants in projects that will help realize the vision of zero deaths and serious injuries. WTSC is seeking projects that strike a balance between strategies that are known to be effective and those that identify innovative, yet measurable ways to reduce traffic deaths and serious injuries.83 Projects that involve higher priority areas (based on the percentage of statewide traffic fatalities and serious injuries associated with impairment, speeding, and run-off-the-road collisions) will receive special consideration for funding, as will project proposals that include “Proven” strategies (proven effective either through national research studies or sound project evaluation efforts) will receive extra consideration for funding. Cities, counties, and their sub-agencies can apply for the grants, which typically range from $5,000 to $150,000. WTSC distributes funds on a “cost reimbursement” basis only. WTSC does not make payments in advance or in anticipation of goods or services.84 WSDOT Pedestrian and Bicycle Program and the Safe Routes to School Program Although these are technically two separate programs with different but related program purposes, there is one application form for both programs. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Program aims to reduce pedestrian and bicycle collisions and increase the number of people who choose to walk and bike for transportation, and Safe Routes to School is intended to increase the number of children walking and biking to school safely. A large percentage of the ranking criteria is based on whether a project is in an area with a known collision history (or locations with potentially high safety risks for pedestrians and bicyclists), in an area where there is a gap in the bicycle/pedestrian network, or in an area where it would serve populations at a higher risk for poor health outcomes, including people living in poverty. For the 2017-19 biennium, funding for these programs is approximately $18 million for the Pedestrian and Bicycle Program and $19 million for the Safe Routes to School Program. There is no match requirement but preference will be given to projects with match. These are not “cash-up-front” programs.85
Washington Traffic Safety Commission. (2015). Grants. Retrieved from http://wtsc.wa.gov/grants/. Washington Traffic Safety Commission. FFY 2017 Traffic Safety Project Proposal Overview & Instructions. Retrieved from http://wtsc.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2015/12/FFY2017_Proposal_Overview_ Instructions.pdf. 85 WSDOT. (2016). Call for Projects - Pedestrian and Bicycle Programs and Safe Routes to School Program. Retrieved from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/SafeRoutes/CallForProjects.htm. 83 84
98 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Funding Opportunities Washington Transportation Improvement Board Complete Streets Awards As of late 2015, Washington law was updated to create a new complete streets grant program. The purpose of the grant program, managed by the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB), is to encourage local governments to adopt urban arterial retrofit street ordinances designed to provide safe access to all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists, and public transportation users.86 TIB will award several merit-based grants totaling approximately $7 million dollars for jurisdictions doing innovative complete streets design. Jurisdictions must be nominated by another party.87
Regional & Countywide PSRC Project Selection Process PSRC conducts a process approximately every two years to distribute Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds, including Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds (the most flexible and can be used for a variety of projects and programs) and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds (which can only be used for projects that improve air quality within certain areas).88 Ten percent is taken from both the STP and CMAQ funds and set aside for bicycle and pedestrian projects. These funds (approximately $20 million dollars for 2018-2020) are distributed through the individual counties, which each conduct their own competitions. King County is still finalizing their competition applications and project selection/evaluation criteria, but generally favors projects that improve air quality and induce mode shift, and those that improve connectivity and safety. A project will receive a high score if it receives a three-star comfort rating in the “Resource Guide for Bicycle Facilities” guidance document produced by PSRC (see Appendix E). PSRC staff have indicated that ambitious bicycle projects do well in these competitions, and that some grants give emphasis to partnerships. Regional and local networks are supposed to be equally important.89
Washington State Legislature. (2015). RCW 47.04.320. Retrieved from http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default. aspx?Cite=47.04.320. 87 Gorcester, S. (2016, February 18). TIB Overview. 88 Puget Sound Regional Council. (2016). Project Selection for PSRC Federal Funds. Retrieved from http://www.psrc.org/ funding/selection/. 89 Interview with Kim Scrivner, PSRC staff, 2/22/2016 86
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 99
Funding Opportunities Nonprofit / Philanthropic Organizations PeopleForBikes Community Grant Program The PeopleForBikes Community Grant Program supports bicycle infrastructure projects and targeted advocacy initiatives that make it easier and safer for people of all ages and abilities to ride. PeopleForBikes accepts grant applications from non-profit organizations with a focus on bicycling, active transportation, or community development, from city or county agencies or departments, and from state or federal agencies working locally. PeopleForBikes accepts requests for funding of up to $10,000 to fund engineering and design work, construction costs including materials, labor, and equipment rental, and reasonable volunteer support costs. The organization will not consider grant requests in which PeopleForBikes funding would amount to 50% or more of the project budget. Some of the criteria considered are project quality, benefits to the community, community support and partnerships, and diversity (geographic, project type, and size of community.90
90
People for Bikes. (2016). Grant Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.peopleforbikes.org/pages/grant-guidelines.
100 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Existing Revenues Aeronautical Funds Aeronautical funds such as the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Program allows the collection of fees up to $4.50 for every air passenger at commercial airports controlled by public agencies. Airports use these fees to fund FAA-approved projects that enhance safety, security, or capacity; reduce noise; or increase air carrier competition.91 The FAA determines the eligibility of airport ground access transportation projects on a case-by-case basis. Guidance published in the Federal Register in 2004 states that although “the FAA has a more extensive background in evaluating highway ground access projects,” the PFC “can be used for any proposed mode of transportation,” assuming the project meets the following conditions: (1) The road or facility may only extend to the nearest public highway or facility of sufficient capacity to accommodate airport traffic; (2) the access road or facility must be located on Sea-Tac Airport or within a right-of-way acquired by the public agency; and (3) the access road or facility must exclusively serve airport traffic.92 In 2014 Sea-Tac had approximately $135 million available in PFC collections.93
Non-Aeronautical Funds Revenue generated from parking fees at the Sea-Tac Airport can be used at the Port’s discretion. In 2014, public parking generated more than $57 million in revenue. Additionally, the City of SeaTac collects a parking tax on Port-owned lots that, through an ILA initially signed in 2005, is to be used on capital improvement projects identified jointly by the Port and the city.94 As of late 2015, when the ILA was recently amended, the two parties anticipated an additional $3 million in parking tax revenues that would be “spent on transportation projects that mitigate impacts on City traffic and/or provide airport access. The parties should work together to identify an appropriate project(s) for the expenditure of these remaining parking tax funds.”95
Federal Aviation Administration. (2015, October 26). Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Program. Retrieved from http:// www.faa.gov/airports/pfc/. 92 U.S. Government Publishing Office. (2004, February 10). Notices. Federal Register, 69 (27). Retrieved from https://www. gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2004-02-10/pdf/04-2884.pdf. 93 Port of Seattle. (2015, June 15). Annual Disclosure Report. Retrieved from https://www.portseattle.org/About/FinancialInfo/Investor-Information/Documents/Annual_Disclosure.pdf. 94 City of SeaTac. (2015). Interlocal Agreement. Retrieved from http://www.ci.seatac.wa.us/index.aspx?page=109. 95 City of SeaTac. Amendment No. 4 to Port of Seattle and City of SeaTac 2005 Interlocal Agreement (ILA-2). Retrieved from http://www.ci.seatac.wa.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=12028. 91
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 101
8 - Appendices
In This Chapter:
Appendix A: Phase 1 Bike Amenities and Facilities Matrix........ 104
Appendix B: Bike Levels of Traffic Stress Tables........................ 108
Appendix C: Design Guidance.................................................... 109
Appendix D: Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities..... 114
Appendix E: Resource Guide for Bicycle Facilities..................... 116
A: Phase I Bike Facility Recommendations and Implementation Status The following chart summarizes recommendations made in the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I, studio report. Four levels of recommendations were provided for each bicycle infrastructure improvement. The bronze, silver, gold, and platinum rating scale was created to mirror the League of American Bicycles (LAB) Bicycle Friendly America recognition levels. Platinum represents the safest, most bicycle-friendly, industry-leading interventions and improvements. For more information see page 65 of the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Bicycle Facilities Plan, Phase I Report. Facility Category
On-Street Facilities
Parking
Quality Options
Description
Status as of 2016
Benefits
Bronze
Shared Lane Markings
Incomplete
Wayfindi
Silver
Bike Lanes
Incomplete
Designat
Gold
Buffered Bike Lanes
Incomplete
Reduced
Platinum
Grade-Separated
Incomplete
Highest p
Bronze
Racks at south end of terminal in parking garage
Completed
Provides
Silver
Additional racks at south end of terminal and secured parking on garage 4th floor
Incomplete
Provides
Gold
Bike cages at both south terminal entrance and 4th floor garage
Incomplete
Provides
Platinum
Bike cages at both locations and lockers in garage
Incomplete
Additiona
Bronze
Signage directing cyclists to bike parking from light rail station
Completed
Allows us
Silver
Additional signs on 188th and Air Cargo
Incomplete
Provides
Gold
Additional terminal signage directing cyclists to other bike parking locations
Incomplete
Improves
Platinum
Bike path through the garage from light rail to bike parking
Incomplete
Improves
Bronze
N/A
N/A
N/A
Silver
Workstand at baggage claim
Completed
Allows tr
Gold
Additional informational materials, ideally a staffed traveler information booth
Incomplete
Bike rout
Platinum
Bicycle-specific vendor
Incomplete
Bike ass
Wayfinding
Tools and Traveler Assistance
104 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
s of
Benefits of Recommended Improvements
2013 Estimated Cost
e
Wayfinding & driver awareness
$165 per marking
e
Designated right of way for bikes
$30,000 per mile
e
Reduced conflicts with other vehicles
$40,000 per mile
e
Highest perceived safety and comfort level
$400,000 per mile
d
Provides some additional parking
$200-$1,000 per unit $5,000 total
e
Provides additional parking capacity and higher level of security for bike storage
$1,000-$1,800 per unit $15,000 total
e
Provides additional security for bike storage
$2,000-$10,000 per unit $25,000 total
e
Additional security for bike storage, including reserved spaces for regular users
$2,000-$10,000 per unit $30,000 total
d
Allows users to easily find bike parking
N/A
e
Provides bike routing information, provides driver awareness of bikes
N/A
e
Improves wayfinding to bike parking facilities
N/A
e
Improves access and wayfinding to bike parking facilities
N/A
N/A
N/A
d
Allows travelers to assemble bikes and commuters to make adjustments
$800-$1,500 per unit
e
Bike route and facilities guidance for travelers
Materials free of charge, staffed booth ~2 FTE
e
Bike assembly and repair service plus information for all bike users
No direct cost to Port; run by third party
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 105
A: Phase I Bike Facilities Improvements Facility Category
Quality Options
Description
Status as of 2016
Benefit
Bronze
Shower facilities for Port staff
Completed
Port emp
Open Port showers to vendor employees
Incomplete
Encoura
Gold
Additional showers for Port and vendor employees
Incomplete
Increas
Platinum
Publicly accessible showers
Incomplete
All cyclis
Bronze
Storage lockers for Port employees in gym
Completed
Port bike
Silver
Additional lockers at bike parking locations
Incomplete
All bike c
Gold
Bicycle box vending machine
Incomplete
Consiste
Platinum
Bicycle-specific vendor
Incomplete
Provide
Bronze
Sea-Tac bike web page and app
Completed
Traveler
Silver
Partner with advocacy groups and neighboring jurisdictions
Incomplete
Advocac effective
Gold
Market the airport as a business that cares about the community
Incomplete
Positive
Platinum
Fund/promote bike safety classes/ Host bike events
Incomplete
Safety co bike eve gateway
Silver
Showers
Storage/Shipping
Education
106 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
atus as of 016
Benefits of Recommended Improvements
2013 Estimated Cost
ompleted
Port employee shower access
Already in place
complete
Encourage vendor employees to bike to Airport
Minimal - use existing facilities, but may require additional maintenance and cleaning
complete
Increased capacity - needed if demand increases
$13,100-$30,350
complete
All cyclists to airport have shower access, general travelers can also use
$13,100-$30,350 - costs may be defrayed through user fees
ompleted
Port bike commuters can store gear
Already in place
complete
All bike commuters to Airport can store gear near their bike
$150-$300 per locker
complete
Consistent access to bike boxes at lower cost for travelers
$5,000-$10,000 for vending machine
complete
Provide bike shipping service
No direct cost to Port; run by third party
ompleted
Traveler info on bike routing to and amenities at Airport
$50,000-$100,000 for app, employee time for web page
complete
Advocacy groups provide "best practices" guidance, jurisdictions help with effective implementation of bike improvements
complete
Positive attention for Airport
complete
Safety courses encourage and enable Airport employees to commute by bike, bike events showcase Airport's bike improvements and promote Sea-Tac as gateway for bicycle tourism
Bike Safety: $3,000-$5,000 for 10 hr course/15 students Bike Fest: $50,000-$150,000 dependent on level of volunteer planning/staffing
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 107
B: Bike Level Stress Road Criteria Tables Criteria for Bike Lanes Not Alongside Parking96 LTS1 Number of Street* Lanes per Direction Bike Lane Width** (includes buffer) Number of Street* Speedper Limit Lanes Direction
1 LTS1 6ft or more 1 30 mph or less
LTS2 2, if separated by median LTS2 5.5ft or less 2, if separated by median 30 mph or less
LTS3
LTS4
2 or more
2 or more
LTS3 5.5ft or less
LTS4 5.5ft or less
2 or more 35mph
2 or more 40 mph or more
Bike No Lane Width**evaluated around Sea-Tac Airport have bike lanes next to parking Note: roadways 6ft or more 5.5ft or less 5.5ft or less (includes buffer) *Typically higher traffic speeds occur as number of lanes increases. Speed Limit **Indicates the amount of operating 30 mph space or lessa rider has 30 mph or less 35mph Criteria for mixed traffic
Speed Limit Number of Street* Lanes per Direction International Blvd Speed Limit International Blvd LTS Rank North Air Cargo Road LTS Rank North Air Cargo Road
96 97
40 mph or more
LTS1
LTS2
LTS3
LTS4
Less than 2
Less than 2
2-3
3 or more
Up toLTS1 25 MPH
Up toLTS2 25 MPH
30LTS3 MPH
LTS4 35 MPH or more
Less than 2
Less than 2
2-3
3 or more
Numberfor of Level Street*of Traffic Stress in Mixed Traffic97 Criteria Criteria traffic Lanesfor permixed Direction
5.5ft or less
Total Up toNumber 25 MPH of Street Lanes
Up Speed to 25 MPH Limit
30 MPH Bike Lane Width
Mixed Traffic 35 MPH or more (Yes/No)
7
40 MPH
N/A
YES
Total Number of LTS4 Street Lanes
Speed Limit LTS4
Bike LTS3/4 Lane Width
Mixed Traffic LTS4 (Yes/No)
7
40 MPH
N/A
YES
Total LTS4 Number of Street Lanes
LTS4 Speed Limit
Bike LTS3/4 Lane Width
Mixed Traffic LTS4 (Yes/No)
4
Not Signed
N/A
YES
Total Number of Street Lanes
Speed Limit
Bike Lane Width
Mixed Traffic (Yes/No)
4
Not Signed
N/A
YES
Mekuria et al., 2012: 18. Ibid: 20.
108 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
C: Design Standards Guidance NACTO NACTO (The National Association of City Transportation Officials) is a non-profit association that facilitates the exchange of transportation ideas, insights and best practices among large cities. NACTO aims to raise the state of the practice for street design and transportation by building a common vision, sharing data, peer-to-peer exchange. In 2014, NACTO published its second edition of the Urban Bikeway Design Guide,98 which provide cities with innovative solutions for creating complete streets that are safe and enjoyable for bicyclists. The guide covers bike lanes, cycle tracks, intersection treatments, bike signals, bikeway signing and marking, and bicycle boulevards. The guide suggests that conventional bike lanes are most helpful on streets with ≥ 3,000 motor vehicle average daily traffic or a posted speed ≥ 25 mph. In these cases, the desirable bike lane width is 6 feet, and a 6-8 inch solid white lane line marking shall be used to separate motor vehicle travel lanes from the bike lane. The bike lane is located adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes and flows in the same direction as motor vehicle traffic. Bike lanes are typically on the right side of the street, between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road edge, or parking lane.99 On streets with higher traffic volume, regular truck traffic, high parking turnover, or speed limit > 35 mph, the guide recommends treatments that provide greater separation between bicycles and motor traffic. The Urban Bikeway Design Guide was the first national guide to offer standards for cycle tracks or protected bike lanes, which provide such separation.100
MassDOT The 2015 Massachusetts Department of Transportation’s Separated Bike Lane Planning & Design Guide is a resource for considering, evaluating and designing separated bike lanes as part of a complete streets approach for providing safe and comfortable accommodations for all roadway users.
FHWA The 2015 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide defines separated bike lanes, discusses context for use in low-stress bicycle networks, provides design guidance for midblock and intersection configurations, and discusses lessons learned from installations throughout the United States. The guide also provides guidance to accommodate driveways, transit stops, accessible parking, and loading zones with separated bike lanes. The guide includes a literature review of research on separated bike lanes within the United States. NACTO, 2014. NACTO. (2014, March). Conventional Bike Lanes. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Retrieved from http://nacto.org/ publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/bike-lanes/conventional-bike-lanes/. 100 PeopleForBikes. (2012, September 7). NACTO releases second edition of Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Retrieved from http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/nacto-releases-second-edition-of-urban-bikeway-design-guide. 98 99
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 109
C: Design Guidance National Organizations’ Guides and Requirements AASHTO AASHTO (The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan association representing highway and transportation departments in the United States. It includes air transportation, highways, public transportation, rail, and water transportation. Its primary goal is to foster the development, operation, and maintenance of an integrated national transportation system. AASHTO sets technical standards for all phases of highway system development. Standards are issued for design, construction of highways and bridges, materials, and many other technical areas.101 In 2012 AASHTO published an update to its 1999 bike design guide,102 which covers comprehensive design guidance on bike facilities. It includes guidance on how to choose bikeway type depending on the roadway characteristics, showing support for bike lanes and shared use paths where volumes and speeds are higher, and gives “permission” to narrow travel lane widths to create bike lanes. The guide also provides input on how to integrate bikes with transit including information on bike access to transit vehicles, bike parking at transit stations, and bikeways to transit.103 PeopleForBikes, one of the premier national bike advocacy groups, identifies that while the current AASHTO bikeway guide does not spell out standards for protected bike lanes, the next update (expected sometime in or after 2018) will almost certainly include protected lanes.104 MUTCD The MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) defines the standards used by road managers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control devices (such as road markings, highway signs, and traffic signals) on all public streets, highways, bikeways, and private roads open to public travel.105 The MUTCD is published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The most recent update was completed in 2014. FHWA maintains a list of various bicycle-related signs, markings, signals, and other treatments and identifies their status under MUTCD (e.g., can be implemented, currently experimental, etc).106
AASHTO. AASHTO Overview. Retrieved from http://www.transportation.org/Pages/Organization.aspx. AASHTO, 1999. 103 Toole, J. (2012, August 10). The 2012 AASHTO Bike Guide: An Overview. Retrieved from http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/ pdf/Webinar_PBIC_LC_081012_AASHTO_1.pdf. 104 Andersen, M. (2015, January 27). Another breakthrough: AASHTO moves toward endorsing protected bike lanes. People for Bikes. Retrieved from http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/another-breakthrough-aashto-moves-towardendorsing-protected-bike-lanes. 105 Federal Highway Administration. (2016). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Retrieved from http:// mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/. 106 Federal Highway Administration. (2009). Bicycle Facilities and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Retrieved from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/mutcd/index.cfm. 101 102
110 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
ITE The ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) is an international association of transportation professionals who are responsible for meeting mobility and safety needs. ITE facilitates the application of technology and scientific principles to research, planning, functional design, implementation, operation, policy development and management for any mode of ground transportation. In 2010, ITE published Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach, which provides guidance for designing urban thoroughfares—25-35 mph boulevards, avenues, and streets—to support walkable communities: compact, pedestrian-scaled villages, neighborhoods, town centers, urban centers, urban cores and other areas where walking, bicycling and transit are encouraged.107 The standards in the report were hailed as “progressive” by Streetsblog, a news site focused on sustainable transportation and livable communities.108 ITE states that it is desirable to provide bicycle lanes on major thoroughfares with target speeds of 30 mph or more and on streets with high traffic volumes and speeds less than 30 mph. Bike lanes should be a minimum of 5 feet in width, but ideally 6 feet. Bicycle facilities should encompass a system of interconnected routes, paths and on-street bicycle lanes that provide for safe and efficient bicycle travel.109
Institute of Transportation Engineers. (2010). Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Approach. Retrieved from http://library.ite.org/pub/e1cff43c-2354-d714-51d9-d82b39d4dbad. 108 Kazis, N. (2010, April 8). Making Streets for Walking: Dan Burden on Reforming Design Standards. StreetsBlog NYC. Retrieved from http://www.streetsblog.org/2010/04/08/making-streets-for-walking-dan-burden-on-reforming-designstandards/. 109 Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2010. 107
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 111
C: Design Guidance Jurisdictional Requirements & Recommendations U.S. DOT Federal laws and policies show strong support for completing safe bicycle networks. In 2010 the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a policy statement stating that “transportation agencies should plan, fund, and implement improvements to their walking and bicycling networks, including linkages to transit. In addition, DOT encourages transportation agencies to go beyond the minimum requirements, and proactively provide convenient, safe, and context-sensitive facilities that foster increased use by bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities, and utilize universal design characteristics when appropriate.”110 In a 2013 memo from the FHWA, the agency states that it supports the use of AASHTO, ITE, and NACTO bicycle facility design guides to further develop non-motorized transportation networks, especially in urban areas.111 In 2015, the FAST Act (Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act) made small changes to federal policy and planning language that “strengthen the expectation that states and localities should have a ‘complete streets’ approach to roadway design,”112 including: • Requiring State DOTs to “consider” the access of all users to non-Interstate National Highway System roads. • “Encouraging” States and MPOs to adopt design standards that ensure the safe and accessible accommodation of all users (i.e. Complete Streets). • The addition of the NACTO Urban Streets Design Guide to the list of appropriate design manuals to use for Federally-funded projects. State DOT Requirements In 2013, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) became the first state DOT in the nation to officially endorse the NACTO Urban Street Design Guidelines, a publication that focuses on the complex needs of city streets and making them work for everyone. According to WSDOT, the guide gives transportation engineers and planners more flexibility when designing elements of a project and can shift their focus toward the livability, economic, and mobility needs of a community.113
Federal Highway Administration. (2010). United States Department of Transportation Policy Statement on Bicycle and Pedestrian Accomodation Regulations and Recommendations. Retrieved from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/ bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/policy_accom.cfm. 111 Federal Highway Administration. (2013, August 20). Guidance: Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design Flexibility. Retrieved from http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/design_flexibility_memorandum_092013.pdf. 112 Toole Design Group. (2015, December 11). Fast Summary of the FAST Act. Retrieved from http://www.tooledesign.com/ resources/news/fast-summary-fast-act. 113 Boyd, N. (2013, December 18). WSDOT endorses Urban Street Design Guidelines. WSDOT News. Retrieved from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/News/2013/12/WSDOTEndorsesUrbanStreetDesignGuide.htm. 110
112 | Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II
Page intentionally left blank.
Sea-Tac Airport Bicycle Access Plan - Phase II | 113
D: Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities
Revised October 1, 2015
Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit, and Federal Highway Funds
$
$
FTA ATI
$
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
CMAQ
$
see note below
$ $ $ $ $ $* $
$ Limit 1 per State $* $*
$ $ $ $
$
$
$ $
HSIP NHPP NHS
$
$
$ $ $ $
STP
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
TAP TE
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ as SRTS
RTP SRTS
$ $
until expended
$
$
$
$
$
$ $ $ $
PLAN
see note below
$ $
$* $*
402 FLTTP
$
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$ as SRTS $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$*
$ $ $plan $plan
$plan $plan $ $* $ $ $* $ $
see note below
TIGER
Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit, and Federal Highway Funds
This table indicates potential eligibility for pedestrian and bicycle projects under Federal Transit and Federal Highway programs. Specific program requirements must be met, and eligibility must be determined, on a case-by-case basis. For example: transit funds must provide access to transit; CMAQ must benefit air quality; HSIP projects must be consistent with the State Strategic Highway Safety Plan and address a highway safety problem; NHPP must benefit National Highway System (NHS) corridors; RTP must benefit trails; the Federal Lands and Tribal Transportation Programs (FLTTP) must provide access to or within Federal or tribal lands. See more information about Bikes and Transit and Eligibility of Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements under Federal Transit Law.
Activity Access enhancements to public transportation (includes benches, bus pads) ADA/504 Self Evaluation / Transition Plan Bicycle and/or pedestrian plans Bicycle lanes on road Bicycle parking Bike racks on transit Bicycle share (capital and equipment; not operations) Bicycle storage or service centers Bridges / overcrossings for bicyclists and/or pedestrians Bus shelters and benches Coordinator positions (State or local) Crosswalks (new or retrofit) Curb cuts and ramps Counting equipment Data collection and monitoring for bicyclists and/or pedestrians Helmet promotion (for bicyclists) Historic preservation (bicycle and pedestrian and transit facilities) Landscaping, streetscaping (bicycle and/or pedestrian route; transit access); related amenities (benches, water fountains)
Activity Lighting (pedestrian and bicyclist scale associated with pedestrian/bicyclist project) Maps (for bicyclists and/or pedestrians) Paved shoulders for bicyclist and/or pedestrian use Police patrols Recreational trails Safety brochures, books Safety education positions Separated bicycle lanes* Shared use paths / transportation trails Sidewalks (new or retrofit) Signs / signals / signal improvements Signed bicycle or pedestrian routes Spot improvement programs Stormwater impacts related to pedestrian and bicycle projects Traffic calming Trail bridges Trail/highway intersections Training Tunnels / undercrossings for bicyclists and/or pedestrians KEY: $: Funds may be used for this activity.
$ $
$
$
$
$ $ $ $ $
$
FTA ATI
$
$
HSIP NHPP NHS
$
$
$ $ $ $
$
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
RTP SRTS
$
$ $
$
TAP TE
$ $
$ as SRTS
STP
$ as SRTS
$
$ $
$
$
$ as SRTS
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
until expended
$ as SRTS
$ as SRTS
$ $
$ $ $ $ $
$
$ as SRTS
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
$
$
$ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $
$
$ $ $ $ $
PLAN
see note below
$*
$*
$*
$
$ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
$
$
$
402 FLTTP
$
$
$
$
TAP/TE: Transportation Alternatives Program / Transportation Enhancement Activities RTP: Recreational Trails Program SRTS: Safe Routes to School Program PLAN: Statewide or Metropolitan Planning 402: State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program FLTTP: Federal Lands and Tribal Transportation Programs (Federal Lands Access Program, Federal Lands Transportation Program, Tribal Transportation Program)
$* $* $ $*
$ $* $ $ $
$ $*
see note below
CMAQ
Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Opportunities US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit, and Federal Highway Funds
TIGER $
see note below
$
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
$*
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
$
$
$ $ $ $
ADA/504: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 / Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 TIGER: Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery Discretionary Grant program FTA: Federal Transit Administration Capital Funds ATI: Associated Transit Improvement (1% set-aside of FTA) CMAQ: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program HSIP: Highway Safety Improvement Program NHPP/NHS: National Highway Performance Program/National Highway System STP: Surface Transportation Program
* TIGER: Subject to annual appropriations. $plan = Eligible for TIGER planning funds. $* = Eligible, but not competitive unless part of a larger project. * CMAQ: See the CMAQ guidance at www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/cmaq/ for a list of projects that may be eligible for CMAQ funds. Several activities may be eligible for CMAQ funds as part of a bicycle and pedestrian-related project, but not as a highway project. CMAQ funds may be used for shared use paths, but may not be used for trails that are primarily for recreational use. * STP and TAP: Activities marked “as SRTS” means the activity is eligible only as an SRTS project benefiting schools for kindergarten through 8th grade. * Planning funds must be for planning purposes: Maps: System maps and GIS; Safety brochures, books: As transportation safety planning; Training: bicycle and pedestrian system planning training. * Separated Bicycle Lanes, also known as protected bike lanes or cycle tracks.
E: Resource Guide for Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
Resource Guide for Bi BICYCLE FACILTY TYPE
Shared Use Paths
†
Protected Bike Lanes (one way, two-way, raised)*
Neighborhood Greenways*
Bike Lanes*
Shared Lane Markings*
Definition
Recommended Volume Limits*
Recommended Posted Speed Limits*
recommend to separate pedestrians and cyclists Shared Use Paths are for the exclusive use from high speed and/ or high density areas of pedestrians, bicyclists and other active transportation users. They are separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open (not to preclude other opportunities such as rails to trails and/or where opportunities exist off-road) space, barrier, curb, or exist in an independent corridor.
Protected Bike Lanes are an exclusive bicycle facility within or adjacent to the roadway but separated from motor vehicle traffic by a physical barrier or change in elevation. Also known as “Cycle Tracks”.
Neighborhood Greenways are low speed, low volume local streets that prioritize pedestrian and bicycle travel with traffic calming treatments and improving arterial crossings. These often parallel nearby arterials and typically include a combination of treatments and aesthetics. Neighborhood Greenways are also known as Bike Boulevards.
Bike Lanes are a portion of the roadway designated for preferential use by bicyclists. Bike lanes include pavement markings indicating one-way bike use.
Appropriate on most facilities. Higher speed recommend protected roadways should include lane when volume more durable separation exceeds 35,000 such as a landscape buffer, vehicles per day parking or raised median/ raised cycle track.
recommended on roadways with less 85th percentile speeds at than 1,500 vehicles per 25mph or less (20mph day, up to 3,000 preferred) allowed
recommended where volumes meet or exceed 3,000 vehicles per day
Recommended at speeds less than 35mph
Shared Lane Markings are pavement markings, or “sharrows,” which are used to indicate roadways that have a shared lane recommended where Not appropriate on streets environment for bicycles and automobiles. volumes do not exceed with speed limit above SLMs reinforce the legitimacy of bicycle 3,000 vehicles per day 30mph traffic on the street and recommend proper bicyclist positioning.
Bicyclist Comfort Rating
• Width is t o Comm o Sepa • Typically w • In constra way sidepat o Sidew • Must mee • Bridges or • Intersecti • Lighting a
• A Protecte o Phys o If pa • Width: Th o oneo two• Pavement • Intersecti conventiona • Two-way • Other imp
• Low volum • Clear rout • Signs and • Speed and movements • Green Infr • Intersecti o Mino cyclists to re o Unsi extensions, o Majo
• Bike lanes category inc • Pavement • Intersecti • Bike lanes o conv o buffe a 7 foot bike o 5 ft m • Buffered b • Gutter sea • Additiona
The shared warranted o wayfinding
*minimum and recommended strategies from NACTO Urban Bike Guide - http://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/ †minimum and recommended strategies from AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. No online link, book must be purchased. A copy is available in the PSRC library for use in-house.
Typical App o Used o Alon o On a o On s o With o Alon o To d o In th
Guide for Bicycle Facilities
Comfort ng
Implementation Elements
• Width is the primary design consideration and should be based on context, volume, and mix of users. Typical widths range from 10 to 14 feet. o Commonly designed for two-way cyclist and pedestrian travel. o Separation of pedestrians and bicyclists is appropriate in high volume areas. • Typically within own right-of-way • In constrained conditions, sidepaths adjacent to roadway can function for short segments or longer segments if there are limited driveways and street-crossings but not recommended as twoway sidepaths have operational challenges. o Sidewalks are not considered sidepaths and are undesirable as shared use paths • Must meet all ADA guidelines. • Bridges or underpasses may be needed to provide continuity • Intersection treatments should address both cross-traffic movements and turning movements of people entering and exiting the path • Lighting and signage strongly recommended
• A Protected Bike Lane (also referred to as a cycle track) is physically separated from motor traffic and distinct from the sidewalk o Physical separation from vehicles is required, which can be accomplished via flex-posts, plantings, curb, parking etc. o If parking is used as the physical separation then a 3ft buffer must be placed between the bicycle way and the on street parking • Width: The minimum width of cycle track is 5ft with greater widths desired, particularly uphill o one-way – minimum width is 5 feet, desirable width is 7ft to allow passing o two-way – minimum width is 8ft, desirable width is 12ft • Pavement markings span at frequent intervals such as a bike symbol • Intersection Treatments: Additional treatments at intersections and driveways are important considerations which can be addressed via bicycle signals, intersection crossing markings, conventional bike lane through the intersection, bike box, combined bike lane/turn lane that indicates the pathway through the shared left turn lane, sight distance considerations and signage. • Two-way cycle tracks are often used on streets where there is not enough room for a one-way cycle track on both sides of the street • Other important comfort and safety considerations include using a colored lane or a raised cycle track, wrapping the lane behind transit stop zones where appropriate.
• Low volume streets: Neighborhood Greenways are on non-arterial neighborhood streets and/ or local roads with preferred speeds less than 25mph • Clear route planning that takes into consideration destinations being served, other connected bicycle facilities and where safe crossings of arterials can be implemented. • Signs and Pavement Markings should be easy to follow and large enough to be visible by all road users. Wayfinding should also be considered that includes direction arrows and destinations. • Speed and Volume Reduction can be accomplished via posted reduced speed limits, speed humps or cushions, curb extensions or bulb-outs, traffic circles, etc. as well as restricting turn movements for automobiles and turning stop-signs to intersecting roadways. • Green Infrastructure includes storm-water treatment such as bioswales or raingardens, community gardening, landscaping and additional trees. • Intersection Treatments are a key component of neighborhood greenways. They include traffic control and/or geometric design elements at all intersections to reduce conflicts such as: o Minor street crossings: reorient stop signs towards intersecting local streets (goal: unimpeded travel along the neighborhood greenway) or roundabouts with pavement markings for cyclists to reduce conflicts. o Unsignalized crossing of major streets: improve visibility and reduce delay for bicyclists and pedestrians via enhanced crosswalks, advanced warning, median refuge islands and curb extensions, warning signs/markings/beacons, actuated warning beacons o Major/ Signalized intersections: separate bicycle signal, prohibiting through movements for volume management, bike lane type markings through the intersection, bike boxes
use.
• Bike lanes are facilities within the roadway for the exclusive use of bicyclists. They are set between a solid line or buffered by hatched lines and a curb, parking lane or landscaping. This category includes a variety of implementation strategies such as buffered bike lanes, contra-flow bike lanes, colored bike lanes and bike passing lanes. • Pavement Markings must be included periodically along each segment to differentiate a bike lane from a paved shoulder • Intersection treatments are a primary consideration both at turn lanes and through intersections. Projects that do not implement intersection treatments should get a low score for safety. • Bike lanes should also have wider than minimum widths wherever possible o conventional bike lanes: minimum widths are 3ft, desirable widths are 5-6ft with a solid white line of 4 inches o buffered bike lanes: buffer shall be marked with 2 solid white lines 18inches – 3ft. A lane can be narrower if buffered - a 3 foot buffer and 4 foot bike lane next to a curb can be considered a 7 foot bike lane. o 5 ft minimum width is recommended next to a parking lane to reduce door conflicts • Buffered bike lanes on streets with high travel speeds/ volumes (above 30mph) are preferred • Gutter seams, drainage inlets, and utility covers should be flush with the ground • Additional information for contra-flow and left-side bike lanes as well as buffered and conventional can be found using the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide. The shared lane marking is not a facility type and should not be considered a substitute for bike lanes, cycle tracks, or other separation treatments where these types of facilities are otherwise warranted or space permits. Shared lane markings reinforce the legitimacy of bicycle traffic on the street, recommend proper bicyclist positioning, and may be configured to offer directional and wayfinding guidance. Typical Applications: o Used to indicate a proper path for bicyclists through difficult or hazardous situations (such as railroad crossings) o Along Neighborhood Greenways o On a downhill slope, preferably paired with an uphill bike lane o On streets where the traffic signals are timed for a bicycling travel speed of 12 to 15 miles per hour o Within single or multi-lane roundabouts o Along front-in angled parking, where a bike lane is undesirable o To direct bicyclists along circuitous routes o In the street alongside separated bikeway facilities such as cycle tracks, to permit continued use of the street by bicyclists who prefer to ride in the street
E: Resource Guide for Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
Resource Guide for Pede Defintion
Pedestrian Facilities
Sidewalks/ Pedestrian o Corridors
Leading Pedestrian Intervalo
Pedestrian Comfort Rating
A sidewalk Pedestrian Corridors are places separate from adjacent to a motor vehicle traffic that allow people safe and roadway is a less comfortable access to destinations where they can comfortable move with ease and without obstruction along facility without corridors and across roadways. enhancements in the curb zone.
A Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) typically gives pedestrians a head start when entering an intersection with a corresponding green signal in the same direction of travel.
There are fou 1. Frontage Z structure and 2. Pedestrian residential se 3. Street Furn utility poles, t 4. The Enhan features, park
Leading Pede the visibility o
Increases safety and comfort at LPIs should gi intersections high or the cr
To increase th
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon / HAWK Signal
These crossing treatments Increase safety and comfort at intersections.
Rectangular R pedestrian cr
RRFBs use an
Pedestrian Ac
Curb extensions, bulb-outs, chokers and chicaneso
Narrowing th encourage slo Curb Extensions are the horizontal extension of the temporary cu sidewalk into the street which visually and Curb extensio Increases safety physically narrow the roadway creating safer and • Midblock cu and comfort at shorter crossings for pedestrians while increasing • Curb extens intersections the available space for street furniture, benches, • Offset curb plantings and street trees. • Curb extens traffic after b • Convention
Pedestrian Refuge/ o Safety Islands
A pedestrian safety island (also referred to as a “refuge island”) reduces the exposure time experienced by a pedestrian in the intersection by allowing pedestrians an opportunity to cross one half of the roadway, with a safe place to stop before crossing the second half of the roadway. This increases safety while reducing the time a pedestrian must wait for an adequate gap in the traffic stream if at an unsignalized crossing.
Midblock Crosswalks, Paths & o “Cut-throughs”
o
Pedestrian activated lights and signs alert drivers and improve pedestrian crossings. They can be activated by pedestrians manually by a push button or passively by a pedestrian detection system, and should be unlit when not activated.
• Generally a • They are typ • Pedestrian Increases safety nothing. The and comfort at • The cut--thr intersections • All medians • Safety islan • It is prefera and a 5--foot
Midblock Cro • Vertical ele • Daylighting extension. • Stop lines a Midblock crosswalks facilitate crossings that are not • Stripe the c well served by the existing traffic network that • Medians or make for unsafe situations for both pedestrians and Increases safety • At key acce vehicles.. These pedestrian crossings are most and comfort at environment commonly needed at schools, parks, civic centers intersections • Where an u and other destinations with high rates of activity behind the bu and fairly long distances between controlled intersections. Shortcuts pat and pleasant long. These a
minimum and recommended strategies from NACTO Urban Street Design Guide - http://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/
Guide for Pedestrian Facilities
rian Rating
Implementation Elements
k oa s a less ble hout ments in one.
There are four main elements to the pedestrian corridor – the Frontage Zone, Pedestrian Through Zone, Street Furniture/ Curb Zone and the Enhancement/ Buffer Zone: 1. Frontage Zone: The section of the sidewalk that functions as access to buildings and businesses, whether through entryways and doors or sidewalk cafes. The frontage zone consists of both the structure and the facade of the building fronting the street, as well as the space immediately adjacent to the building. 2. Pedestrian Through Zone is the primary, accessible pathway that ensures that pedestrians have a safe and adequate place to walk parallel to the street. This zone should be 5–7 feet wide in residential settings and 8–12 feet wide in downtown or commercial areas. 3. Street Furniture/Curb Zone is defined as the section of the sidewalk between the curb and the through zone in which street furniture and amenities such as lighting, benches, newspaper kiosks, utility poles, tree pits and bicycle parking are provided. The street furniture zone may also consist of green infrastructure elements, such as rain gardens or flow-through planters. 4. The Enhancement/Buffer Zone is the space immediately next to the sidewalk that may consist of a variety of different elements such as curb extensions, parklets, stormwater management features, parking, bike racks, bike share stations and curbside bike lanes or cycle tracks.
Leading Pedestrian Intervals are critical at intersections where heavy right or left turning volumes create consistent conflicts and safety concerns between vehicles and pedestrians. They enhance the visibility of pedestrians in the intersection and reinforce their pathway over turning vehicles, especially in locations with a history of conflict.
safety ort at LPIs should give pedestrians a minimum head start of 3–7 seconds, depending on the overall crossing distance. Intervals of up to 10 seconds may be appropriate where pedestrian volumes are high or the crossing distance is long. ons
ssing s safety ort at ons.
To increase the effectiveness of a LPI and improve visibility of pedestrians at high-conflict intersections, install a curb extension at the intersection.
Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) and other lighted crossings can enhance safety by reducing crashes between vehicles and pedestrians at unsignalized intersections and mid-block pedestrian crossings by increasing driver awareness of potential pedestrian conflicts. RRFBs use an irregular flash pattern that is similar to emergency flashers on police vehicles and can be installed on either two-lane or multi-lane roadways. Pedestrian Actuated Crossing Treatments typically receive power by standalone solar panel units, but may also be wired to a traditional power source.
Narrowing the street through curb extensions create more time for preferential treatments such as leading pedestrian interval and transit signal priority, tighten intersection curb radii and encourage slower turning speeds. Curb extensions can be implemented using low-cost, interim materials. In such cases, curb extensions should be demarcated from the existing road- bed using temporary curbs, bollards, planters, or striping. Curb extension is an umbrella term that encompasses several different treatments and applications and may be segmented into various sub-categories: safety • Midblock curb extensions, known as pinchpoints or chokers, which may include cut-throughs for bicyclists. ort at • Curb extensions used as gateways to minor streets known as neckdowns. ons • Offset curb extensions that force vehicles to move laterally, known as chicanes. • Curb extensions at bus (or transit) stops, also known as bus bulbs. Used as a bus bulb, curb extensions may improve bus travel times by reducing the amount of time a bus takes to merge with traffic after boarding. Bus bulbs also help to prevent motorists from double parking in the bus stop. • Conventional curb extensions are a recommended feature where there is on-street parking.
• Generally applied at locations where speeds and volumes make crossings prohibitive, or where three or more lanes of traffic make pedestrians feel exposed or unsafe in the intersection. • They are typically constructed at marked crosswalks either at a midblock location or at an intersection. • Pedestrian safety islands should be at least 6 feet wide, but have a preferred width of 8–10 feet. Where a 6--foot wide median cannot be attained, a narrower raised median is still preferable to safety nothing. The minimum protected width is 6 feet, based on the length of a bicycle or a person pushing a stroller. The refuge is ideally 40 feet long. ort at • The cut--through or ramp width should equal the width of the crosswalk. Where this cannot be achieved, cross-walks should be striped wider than the cut--through area. • All medians at intersections should have a “nose” which extends past the crosswalk. The nose protects people waiting on the median and slows turning drivers. ons • Safety islands should include curbs, bollards, or other features to protect people waiting. • It is preferable to have the crosswalk “cut--through” the median. Where the median is wider than 17 feet, ramps are preferred. This dimension is based on a 6--inch- high curb, two 1:12 ramps, and a 5--foot--wide level landing in the center.
Midblock Crosswalks: • Vertical elements such as trees, land- scaping, and overhead signage help to identify crosswalks and islands to drivers. • Daylighting in advance of a crosswalk makes pedestrians more visible to motorists and cars more visible to pedestrians. This may be accomplished by restricting parking and/or installing a curb extension. • Stop lines at midblock crossings should be set back 20–50 feet. This ensures that a person crossing the street is visible to the second driver when the first driver is stopped at the stop line. • Stripe the crosswalk, regardless of the paving pattern or material. Otherwise, drivers are not likely to see it, especially at night. • Medians or safety islands create a 2-stage crossing for pedestrians, which is easier and safer. safety • At key access points to parks, schools, and waterfronts, and at intersections with local streets, raised crossings increase visibility, yielding behavior, and create a safer pedestrian crossing ort at environment. ons • Where an unsignalized crossing exists at a transit stop, enhanced crossing treatments or actuated signals should be added. Transit stops should ideally be located so that pedestrians cross behind the bus or transit vehicle. Shortcuts paths and 'cut-thoughs' can provide an alternate to the street network and can help people overcome barriers to walking by facilitating neighborhood connections that are both safe and pleasant when properly lighted and maintained. They can be particularly useful in cul-de-sac neighborhoods or with large block sizes where walking distances along the roadway network are long. These are particularly useful when connecting schools, parks and food access to neighborhoods.
