The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRES 4366 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 4366 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AN UPDATED RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN AND MAP. WHEREAS, Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill (ESSB) 5186, passed by the Washington State Legislature in April 2005, and effective July 24, 2005, made two amendments to Washington State's Growth Management Act (GMA) mandating the incorporation of bicycle and pedestrian planning into each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, as well as the consideration of approaches that promote physical activity; and WHEREAS, the updated Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan and Map is a comprehensive update of the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, adopted in 2009. It represents a collaborative effort between the Transportation and Parks Divisions, and reflects the desire to create an interconnected trails, and non-motorized transportation network to accommodate both recreational and commuting uses, from pedestrians to cyclists; and WHEREAS, the updated Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan and Map creates and fosters opportunity within Renton and neighboring communities for people to move through the city and to access multiple local and regional destinations including schools, parks, businesses and residential areas; and WHEREAS,the updated Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan and Map was duly referred to the Planning Commission for investigation and study, and the matter was considered by the Planning Commission; and 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4366 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 5, 2018, considered all relevant matters, and heard all parties in support or opposition, and subsequently forwarded a recommendation to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered all relevant matters, and heard all parties in support or opposition; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The City Council does hereby adopt the updated Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan and Map, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference, and asks that the Administration draw up a work program to begin implementing the plan. The updated Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan and Map shall remain in full force and effect until further revised, amended, or modified as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 28th day of January , 2019. Jaso A. Seth, Ci lerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 28th day of Januar 2019. J L,u44' C Denis Law, Mayor 2 RESOLUTION NO. 4366 Approved as to form: 0 " ' �►n,9'*„ „.i.:A ce Ali Shane Moloney, City Attorney A RES:1798:1/18/19:scr '1.��'�' i,,,, -RATED St', 3 RESOLUTION NO. 4366 EXHIBIT "A" RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN AND MAP 4 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN January 2019 Adopted January 28, 2019 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Executive Mayor Denis Law Chief Administrative Officer Robert Harrison City Council Members Don Persson, Council President Carol Ann Witschi, Council President Pro-tem Randy Corman Ryan Mclrvin Armondo Pavone Ruth Perez Ed Prince Parks Commission Cynthia Burns Al Dieckman Larry Reymann Tim Searing Shun Takano Troy Wigestrand Marlene Winter Planning Commission Angelina Benedetti, Commission Chair Jamian Smith, Commission Vice Chair Charles Seil, Commission Secretary Mara Fiksdal David Fleetwood Shannon Matson Michael O'Halloran Kevin Poole Robert Reeder Technical Advisory Committee Vicky Clarke, Cascade Bike Club Bob Elliot, Member, Renton Trails Advisory Committee Robert Foxworthy, King County Parks, Regional Trails Coordinator Rhubydee Laurencio, Youth advocate Pete Maas, Member, Renton Trails Advisory Committee Tim Moore, City of Renton, GIS Manager Dai'Jana Perry, Youth advocate Mike Ullmer, King County Parks, Program/Project Manager Brian VanHouten, Renton Trails, Non -Profit Jean White, King County Parks, Regional Trails Program Manager Project Team Vangie Garcia, Transportation Planning Manager Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director Angie Mathias, Long Range Planning Manager Aaron Raymond, GIS Analyst Consultants 2018-2019: BERK Consulting 2017: MacLeod Reckord, Fehr & Peers YOUR IDEAS — CONNECTING US TO OUR BEST FUTURE A special thank you to the many Renton community members who provided their time and thoughtful ideas to inspire this 2079 Trails and Bicycle Master Plan. TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i Introduction i Why Plan? i Benefits of Walking & Bicycling ii Relationship to Other Plans iii Plan Organization iii Plan Approval Process iv Trail & Bicycle Master Plan iv 1 Vision, Goals, & Objectives 3 Introduction 3 Vision — Renton Connection 3 Goals & Objectives 4 2 Existing Conditions 11 Trails & Bicycle System Characteristics 1 1 Citywide Context 13 Planning Area Profiles 14 3 Community Involvement 47 Engagement Activities 47 Open Houses 54 Themes 56 4 Demand & Needs Analysis 61 Gaps & Opportunities 75 Benchmarks 80 Level of Service 81 5 Trail & Bicycle System Plan 87 Guiding Principles 87 Network Recommendations 88 Trail & Bicycle Facility Characteristics 93 Shared Use Path 96 Protected Bike Lane 97 Buffered Bike Lane 98 Striped Bike Lane 99 Neighborhood Greenway 100 Signed Shared Roadway 101 Pedestrian Trails 102 Facility Design Guidelines 103 Projects & Priorities 1 1 0 6 Implementation Strategies 121 Monitoring 121 Phasing 121 Partnership & Funding Opportunities 122 Requirements & Incentives 124 Community Education & Promotion 126 Future Recommendations 127 7 References 133 APPENDICES A. Community Engagement B. Regional Trail Design and Intersections C. Project Sheets D. Project Prioritization Documentation E. Adopting Resolution TABLE OF EXHIBITS Exhibit ES 1. Levels of Traffic Stress vii Exhibit ES 2. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network ix Exhibit ES 3. Level of Traffic Stress and Proposed Network x Exhibit ES 4. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles xi Exhibit ES 5. Proposed Increases in Regional and Local Trail Miles xi Exhibit ES 6. Proposed Regional and Local System Map xii Exhibit ES 7. Prioritization Process xiii Exhibit ES 8. Existing & Proposed Network and Project Map xv Exhibit 2-1. Existing Trail Network Miles 1 1 Exhibit 2-2. Existing Trail Network 12 Exhibit 2-3. Citywide Demographic Characteristics 13 Exhibit 2-4. Existing and Proposed Network Miles by Community Planning Area 15 Exhibit 2-5. Community Planning Areas 16 Exhibit 2-6. Benson Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 17 Exhibit 2-7. Benson Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics 18 Exhibit 2-8. Benson Hill Planning Area Community Input 19 Exhibit 2-9. Cedar River Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 20 Exhibit 2-10. Cedar River Community Plan Area Characteristics 21 Exhibit 2-1 1. Cedar River Planning Area Community Input 22 Exhibit 2-12. City Center Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 23 Exhibit 2-1 3. City Center Community Plan Area Characteristics 24 Exhibit 2-14. City Center Planning Area Community Input 25 Exhibit 2-15. East Plateau Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 26 Exhibit 2-1 6. East Plateau Community Plan Area Characteristics 27 Exhibit 2-17. East Plateau Planning Area Community Input 28 Exhibit 2-1 8. Highlands Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 29 Exhibit 2-19. Highlands Community Plan Area Characteristics 30 Exhibit 2-20. Highlands Planning Area Community Input 31 Exhibit 2-21. Kennydale Demographic Characteristics 32 Exhibit 2-22. Kennydale Community Plan Area Characteristics 33 Exhibit 2-23. Kennydale Community Planning Area Community Input 34 Exhibit 2-24. Talbot Demographic Characteristics 35 Exhibit 2-25. Talbot Community Plan Area Characteristics 36 Exhibit 2-26. Talbot Planning Area Community Input 37 Exhibit 2-27. Valley Demographic Characteristics 38 Exhibit 2-28. Valley Community Plan Area Characteristics 39 Exhibit 2-29. Valley Planning Area Community Input 40 Exhibit 2-30. West Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 41 Exhibit 2-31. West Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics 42 Exhibit 2-32. West Hill Community Planning Area Community Input 43 Exhibit 3-1. Walking Problems 49 Exhibit 3-2. Community Input Walking 51 Exhibit 3-3. Biking Problem Spots 52 Exhibit 3-4. Community Input Biking 53 Exhibit 3-5. Outreach Themes Table 56 Exhibit 4-1. Questionnaire 2017 Walking and Biking Frequency 61 Exhibit 4-2. Population Density and Existing Network 63 Exhibit 4-3. Job Density and Existing Network 64 Exhibit 4-4. Existing Trail Access to High -Density Residential and Job Nodes 65 Exhibit 4-5. Level of Traffic Stress Continuum 66 Exhibit 4-6. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network 67 Exhibit 4-7. Parks and Recreation and Existing Network 69 Exhibit 4-8. Low Income Census Tracts and Existing Network 71 Exhibit 4-9. PSRC Opportunity Index and Existing Network 73 Exhibit 4-10. Population Density and Proposed Network 76 Exhibit 4-1 1. Job Density and Proposed Network 77 Exhibit 4-12. Level of Traffic Stress with 1/4 Mile Service Area and Proposed Network 1/4 Mile Service Area LTS 1 & 2 78 Exhibit 4-13. PSRC Opportunity Index and Proposed Network 79 Exhibit 4-14. Miles of Trails per 1,000 Population - Renton and Peers 80 Exhibit 4-15. Miles of Trails per 1,000 (2018 - 2035) 81 Exhibit 4-16. Change LTS 1 &2 Trail Miles 82 Exhibit 4-17. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles by Community Planning Area 82 Exhibit 4-18. Percentage of Renton Residents within a Quarter Mile Service Area of LTS 1 & 2 Facilities 83 Exhibit 5-1. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles 88 Exhibit 5-2. Regional and Local System Map 89 Exhibit 5-3. Existing and Proposed Regional Trail Miles 90 Exhibit 5-4. Regional Trail Alternatives 91 Exhibit 5-5. Regional and Local Trail Miles — Existing and Proposed 92 Exhibit 5-6. Regional and Local Trail Miles — Total Proposed Network 92 Exhibit 5-7. Facility Options by Roadway Characteristics 93 Exhibit 5-8. Existing and Proposed Network by Facility Type (Miles and Percent) 94 Exhibit 5-9. Existing and Proposed Trails by LTS Rating (Miles and Percent) 95 Exhibit 5-10. Shared -Use Path 96 Exhibit 5-1 1. Protected Bike Lane 97 Exhibit 5-12. Buffered Bike Lane 98 Exhibit 5-13. Striped Bike Lane 99 Exhibit 5-14. Neighborhood Greenway 100 Exhibit 5-15. Signed Shared Roadway 101 Exhibit 5-16. Pedestrian Trails 102 Exhibit 5-17. Renton Downtown Civic Core Wayfinding System 105 Exhibit 5-18. Bicycle Leaning Rail 107 Exhibit 5-19. Existing & Proposed Network and Project Map ill Exhibit 5-20. Prioritization Criteria and Indicators 1 1 3 Exhibit 5-21. Prioritization Process 114 Exhibit 5-22. Facility Types by Project Tiers (Miles) 115 Exhibit 5-23. Project Ranking 116 Exhibit 6-1. Potential Monitoring Measures and Targets 121 Id:IFlLTr]41 PSI Zkd4ZkdIs] ►El4walCAi"41M 1 I s G v 41 1; PIA ,'l,d� 71 � ' t' l EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The City of Renton manages over 30 miles of regional and local trails and bicycle facilities. Most residents walk or bike in Renton in their neighborhoods. Yet existing trail and bicycle facilities serve only about one-third of Renton's population and about two thirds of employees. Many neighborhoods have limited and disconnected facilities. The City of Renton prepared a Trails and Bicycle Master Plan in 2009, one of few municipalities in Washington State addressing both pedestrian and bicycle modes in one plan. The 2009 plan steered several trail and bicycle lane extensions, and acquisitions for future extensions. (See sidebar.) Building on the prior plan, this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan will guide Renton's Trails and Bicycle system for the 2019-2025 timeframe. With the Plan, the City can seek funding and partnerships to invest in its historic neighborhoods as well as newer communities annexed with little trail and bicycle facility investments. Extensive community outreach has inspired this plan. By 2025 and beyond, this plan seeks to create one connected diverse system to support Renton's growing population and thriving economy. The system will increase comfort and encourage all ages and abilities to find destinations, recreate, and commute throughout Renton and the region. WHY PLAN? Eligibility for State Funding An update to this Plan is required every six years to maintain eligibility for grants administered by the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO). RCO requires jurisdictional applicants to have a plan as a criterion for grant applications. This Plan is intended to comply with all RCO requirements. This plan can also serve as a foundation to seek other JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Renton, alone and in partnership, implemented projects guided by the 2009 Trails and Bicycle Master Plan. Improvements ■ Cedar River Trail Turnback ■ Eastside Rail Corridor rail removal (King County lead) ■ Logan Ave Shared Use Trail ■ May Creek Trail construction (WRPA Trail and Outdoor Access Award 2015) ■ Springbrook Trail Boardwalk (WRPA Best Trail Project Award 2010) ■ Bike Lanes, e.g. NE 4th St and Duvall Ave ■ Signed Shared Roadways, e.g. Taylor Ave Acquisition & Funding ■ Lake to Sound Trail: interlocal agreement, construct segment along Black River Riparian Forest to Green River Trail in Tukwila ■ May Creek Trail Acquisitions: 6 parcels, 14.7 acres ■ May Creek Trail Property Donations: 4 parcels, 8.4 acres ■ Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail: Southport Easement, 4 of 4 ■ Tiffany/Cascade Connector acquisition: 1 parcel ■ Local grants totaling $1,624,500 ■ State Legislative Direct Appropriation: May Creek Trail, $500,000 ❑O RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON w�+ Current System The current system (yellow) serves the City Center, Cedar River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek, Honey Creek, and major arterials but does not cover most of the Renton's higher density population centers (blue). M regional, state, and federal funding opportunities for non -motorized transportation improvements. Articulates a Vision that Directs Practices This plan includes a Vision for an accessible, diverse, and safe trail and bike system that offers places for active recreation, community connection, and equitable access to destinations and opportunities. This Vision is based on community input and inspired proposed projects intended to increase user comfort and reduce traffic stress to encourage walking and biking throughout the community. Efficiently Manages System This Plan is designed to efficiently manage the trail and bike system by: ■ Building on the existing regional and local system, ■ Providing a variety of facility types and phasing to maintain flexibility to respond to different route conditions and funding resources, ■ Connecting residents and employees with job centers, shopping, recreation, and services to advance economic and community development, and ■ Serving a diverse and growing population and addressing increased demands on the system. BENEFITS OF WALKING & BICYCLING Well -designed communities with recreation facilities can help Renton residents to lead more active lifestyles benefiting their health and well- being. The built environment can severely constrain routine avenues of physical activity. It is less attractive to walk or bike in areas with no facilities, high traffic, or long distances between origins and destinations. Communities designed for exercise can prevent 90 percent of type 2 diabetes, as well as 50% of heart disease, stroke, and site -specific cancers. There is a 50% increased likelihood that people who live near trails meet physical activity guidelines. (University of Minnesota. August 2007; Journal of Applied Physiology and Public Health Institute in Urban Land Institute 201 3) JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Those participating in Renton's online questionnaires in 2017 participate in walking at a rate of about 85%, similar to state survey information. Improving facilities can help reinforce interest and participation. Parks and recreation facilities like trails, and access to centers and open spaces, provide economic value to a community by increasing property values, attracting long-term residents and employers, and supporting tourism. (American Planning Association 2001; Trust for Public Land, 2011 ) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS This Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan is designed to implement Renton's Comprehensive Plan Land Use; Parks, Recreation, Natural Areas and Trails; and Transportation Elements. This Plan establishes the framework for future improvements and is a source of non -motorized project improvements for the City's Capital Facilities Plan Element, Six -year Capital Investment Program, and the Transportation Improvement Program. This Plan is a companion system plan to the Renton's Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan. This Plan is designed to be consistent with and leverage community plans such as the City Center Community Plan, Benson Hill Community Plan, and the Downtown Renton Civic Core Vision and Action Plan, and to implement the City Council's Policy Agenda. PLAN ORGANIZATION This plan is organized in seven sections building from a Vision to a Demand and Needs Analysis to a System Plan with prioritized projects. Community engagement and input informed each component of the plan. Implementation strategies complete the plan and identify monitoring and next steps. 1. Vision, Goals & Objectives 2. Existing Conditions 3. Community Involvement 4. Demand and Needs Analysis 5. Trail & Bicycle System Plan 6. Implementation Strategies 7. References 8. Appendices JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ❑0 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 0 PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS Following extensive community and stakeholder outreach in 2017 where questionnaires and workshops were conducted, this Plan was reviewed and shaped by the Renton Parks Commission, Renton Planning Commission, and Renton City Council in 2018 and 2019. .71•Project M •Plan El TRAIL & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN This section highlights major elements of this Plan including the Vision and Goals, Community Involvement, Demand and Need, Level of Service, Network Recommendations, Projects and Priorities, and Implementation Strategies. For details see related Chapters. JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Vision & Goals The Plan Vision and Goals and Objectives directed the development of the proposed network and projects included in this Master Plan and will continue to guide planning, funding, and implementing actions in the future. The Plan Vision describes Renton's ideal future Trails and Bicycle system: The Trails and Bicycle Master Plan fosters an integrated trail and bicycle system that connects the City's neighborhoods, community, and region. Residents, employees, and visitors can access a diverse system in urban and natural settings that are safe and comfortable for users of all ages and abilities. People can recreate, exercise, andlor commute for an active, healthy lifestyle. Reflecting the Vision, Goals describe desired results of this Plan: • Improving safety • Creating an accessible and connected system • Promoting physical and environmental health • Achieving equity • Enhancing the economy and community Community Involvement The City conducted an extensive public outreach and engagement process in 2017 to help form this Plan, including: ■ An online questionnaire with 340 full and partial responses ■ An interactive online mapping activity attracting 1,380-page views and 342 data points ■ Three in -person community open houses JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON ■ Three Technical Advisory Committee meetings, and with regional stakeholders ■ Two Interagency Regional Trails planning meetings with King County ■ Project briefings with the Parks Commission, Planning Commission, and the Renton City Council Based on outreach and engagement results, key findings include: 1 . Recreation -based walking and biking is still a primary purpose. 2. Respondents preferred to walk shorter distances. 3. Respondents reported longer and more frequent bicycle trips. 4. Respondents preferred to walk and bike on formal facilities, as opposed to street shoulders. 5. The Cedar River Trail is the most heavily used trail. 6. Addressing pedestrian and bicyclist comfort is necessary to encouraging more travel and recreation by foot or bike. 7. Connection to transit is an important need. 8. Mountain biking and other more unique forms of bicycling are popular along lakes, streams, and rivers. 9. Equestrian use was not an identified need. See Chapter 3 and Appendix A for Community Engagement details. Demand & Needs for Trails and Bicycle Facilities To meet state requirements for planning, the City needs to define community needs and demand for trail and bicycle facilities. By understanding gaps and trends, the City can develop solutions like projects and actions. Particular needs and demands are highlighted below. Discontinuous Trail and Bicycle Network: Renton's current trail and bike routes serve several of the highest population and job density areas, though there are gaps particularly in the northeast and southeast parts of the city. Increased Growth and Demand: By 2035, the City has planned to add 16,700 housing units and over 31,000 jobs per the Renton Comprehensive Plan. The new residents and employees would increase the demand for all modes of travel including walking and biking. JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Limited Low Traffic Stress Routes for Bicycles: Bicycle systems that provide low traffic stress and high connectivity attract wider usage. Bicycle routes can be rated based on the level of traffic stress (LTS) a user experiences. (Mineta Transportation Institute, 201 2) Exhibit ES 1 illustrates that lower LTS facilities serve a broader group of users because of increased comfort and safety. Renton has some LTS 1 & 2 routes, which are in Kennydale, Cedar River, and the Valley. Most of the community is not served by LTS 1 & 2 routes that offer off -road trails or dedicated and separated bicycle lanes. Exhibit ES 1. Levels of Traffic Stress Acceptable to ENTHUSED A CONFIDENT cyclists Increasing level of comfort, safety, and interest in bicycling for transportation Lwi r' Source: City of Renton, 201 8; BERK, 2018. Discontinuous Access to Destinations: Schools, parks, and employment centers are partially linked by trails and bicycle routes. There are missing links and gaps that deter non -motorized travel. Limited Access to Opportunities: The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has evaluated areas in terms of access to opportunities — education, economic, housing, transportation, and health/environment. The trail and bicycle network can increase opportunities by providing access for areas of lesser opportunity. The existing network is sparser in a few of the Community Planning Areas of Benson, Highlands, and West Hill (see sidebar and Chapter 2). JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Community Planning Areas The City of Renton has defined 10 Community Planning Areas. Each have different characteristics and needs. See Chapter 2. Level of Service A "level of service" (LOS) refers to the amount and quality of trails and bicycle facilities that are necessary to meet current and future needs. A LOS helps establish a capital facility program. Costs and revenue can then be matched, and projects phased to help achieve the planned LOS. The City has developed a three-part LOS addressing quantity, quality, and distribution. 1. Quantity: Increase the miles of trails per 1,000 persons. 2. Quality: Increase the extent of LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities to increase user comfort and participation. 3. Connectivity and Extent (Distribution): a. Reduce gaps and increase the coverage of facilities within all Renton community planning areas. b. Increase the share of residents and employees within a quarter mile of facilities. By implementing these levels of service, the City can close gaps and meet demands. For example, population and jobs in proximity to LTS 1 & 2 network shows nearly all areas of the community would have improved access. See Exhibit ES 2 and Exhibit ES 3. JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit ES 2. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network I 40 Q�0s V 18I1 Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) LTS (1 & 2) LTS (3 & 4) Quarter Mile Service Area LTS (1 & 2) U Community Center eJ Library 0 o.s Mies � Potential Transit Hub Source. City of Renton, 2018 ® School JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit ES 3. Level of Traffic Stress and Proposed Network JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Network Recommendations Renton's Trail and Bicycle System is an integrated system that will be expanded from about 30 miles to 127 miles within the city limits. This includes approximately 4 miles of existing trail facilities being upgraded or converted to different facility types. Another 8 miles of new, proposed trails are planned in areas immediately outside of Renton's city limits for an overall plan total of 135 miles. See Exhibit ES 4. Exhibit ES 4. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles Existing 30.20 30.20 Proposed 101.94 109.46 TOTAL 127.81 135.32 Source: City of Renton, 2018. The Trail and Bicycle System features a regional hub where the Cedar River trail, Lake to Sound Trail and the connection to the Eastside Rail Corridor connect in the City Center, and an expanded local network of trails. Regional trails connect Renton to other cities and regional destinations that lie to the north, east, south, and west. Local Connector routes tie together multiple Renton neighborhoods to one another and carry more non -motorized trips. Local Neighborhood routes connect destinations within the same neighborhood. See Exhibit ES 5 and Exhibit ES 6. Exhibit ES 5. Proposed Increases in Regional and Local Trail Miles 41 2' 1 06' REGIONAL TRAIL LOCAL CONNECTOR Source: City of Renton, 201 8; BERK, 2018. 475% LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD JANUARY 2019 - - - - - _ _ _ 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit ES 6. Proposed Regional and Local System Map j Vier I u 67 0 1 A Miles Source: c", er.en, 2018 'i 1 j1.♦1----- 1 1 `1 1 ♦♦1 1 1 : 1 I d 9()q Trail Hierarchy Regional Local Connector Local Neighborhood - Existing Trails Proposed Trail OCommunity Center AA Library OPotential Transit Hub ® School - Parks & Open Space p JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Projects & Priorities Responding to gaps, needs, and community input, this plan promotes trail and bicycle facilities of all types across all Community Planning Areas. ■ Eighty proposed projects were identified and scored with the following Prioritization Criteria developed from Vision and Goals: Connectivity and Accessibility, Safety and Trail Experience, Equity, Economy and Community, Construction and Implementation. In addition, the City used two qualitative criteria to develop the Highest Priority Projects list (Tier 1): Partnership Commitments and Geographic equity. Since all proposed projects are important to the City, Tier 2 (High Priority) and Tier 3 (Medium) Priority were developed to distinguish the rest of the projects. See Exhibit ES 7 for the overall process. Exhibit ES 7. Prioritization Process :3Define &Score � Rank Projects � Partnerships & ElIndicators Geographic Source: BERK, 2018. Once scored, three tiers of projects were developed with Tier 1 identifying the top priority projects for the City. The other two tiers spanned the natural breaks in the scores. Since some projects had identical scores, there were 27 projects in Tier 1, 26 projects in Tier 2, and 27 projects in Tier 3. These proposed projects added 101 .9 miles to the Trails and Bicycle network via multiple facilities types. JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY cD EW - 3 r o� Newcastle Way cet�o Newcas�le�C/ub Rd z1 r _ o n rrey` ' F i I � 1 , Cougar y Cr Rec reenway ildlc Lake Washington r "o''e �1911 Lakeridge Park m y r N N ova a ' « 90 00Skyway u Park r S 1 24thS m s • S �2gthst S 133rd St S 132nd St t 7r rm _ M 11 M N 301h S' Future SW Athletic r♦ ® Complex •-f ♦ ♦ a e d 1 ~ J - May 1 1 1 1 r 1 eek NS 24�h,S_ • 1 1 Mc 'll-i ♦ 1 y.VL2.3;d PI 1 o- W �•• 1 1 ; 1 Honey Creek m Z 1 1 ,-1 Greenway ♦ a�a 1 -y. 1 ♦ ' 1 ♦� , �UEJ91�St1�.r a 1 Gene Coulon >1 Memorial Beach 21 �%, �� t 6 May Park 1 1 , 1 41. r-0� 1 :Valley County 900 rr� `�•a•�_i_ Zt�514}--i ' 1 Park �� ♦ '�?!�r ' 41,11 t ♦ 1 ♦ 1♦ 410Y t/ i 1lk 1 {♦ �� 1 �4C{�193hS1i_�__L�EL4th�StJ plleyRd ♦ Cll ■ tea+ 1 c 1 Z Ia v� !�1'Z. Z ; , N Sr cy 1 r 1 E 1� L > ♦�3.wC 4Io o' ' - 0- c 1 a, = a1 IQ Coaltfigld w 1 vl yJ}_'� •a ♦:��-. i___rYark 1. E, r1 10 1 a 7 1 1 St -6 S�•►,ti' @ttLSI l ■taf� ._�•___ It N�St N3rd St " f ys 1 1--- If ;'ter SE 128th St Cedar Riverlo ® 1 > h ' a Lake S ThishLF.2.Li$$1 1 o, Ave Srili�r�Vt'.© h >v r-•• 1 1.- �C73 1 r _a > � Cedar �P CL' •-----�1 v ��• , * River I r 0 el • * 3 'a , � �•. Park l � Maplewood 1 QI Foster rr O e 1 GL7. 1 ) 1 Community Park 1 «I r Golf Course N Black River ,♦ 1 /fi{ 4ofLvO Propert 1 h� Riparian • ��' j , 2 1 ^I Forest •�rrrre• ■ 4T3 Riverview Park I Maplewood -- ��-•-•� �J ....._._+_ HeightsPark •o w f S nth �t _MetrC51 ate.... ® Maplewood s• Wat I ♦ S 7th Sty Golf Course 7-1= ; 1 Wat work � ♦ � ©-• / 6 Par Spri brook 1401 ♦ (W ♦S r CH Fort Dent Trail way S Grady IM 1 BP • I� 5 Grad _Y IN oo♦ ♦'>i 0 w Imo 0'� Ron Regis 4, Park ; / 1 j ♦� ♦ Iyk. ♦ GV r �y� SouthQenter Bl�a 1 1 1 m ♦N 1 � e,Oc 1 ,�, ,��♦ Soos ,�� 1 3 •♦ 1 1 p ; �e�o' O �, \ Creek and �ryy Tukwila Pkwy N > `!' ♦ tit--r , ..,--�. Trail a LL4♦iii/// 3 Pan11her Creek 1 ; a♦ ' �.rJ �,1�,, ' a � w Wetlands T! __•�.� ♦ ♦...+JAQi 4 ..Js-----, - 1 1 w ¢ ; 'r ♦ ♦ r ; *1 Cascade ;ark ♦ 1 a � . _ _ 1 1-a ; r �.. � : _ .. �Frl�illl� _ _ { � ..��].�.4FjL�S,•iI 1 SW 271h St 1�•• 1° ♦ 1 ---©- 1 1 1 1 m 10 ♦ �O 1 11 j 1 1 12 Renton---------F r 1 ;> ♦ ♦ SE 168ffi St R' e ail Wetlands 1 1 � is ♦ ,y A.N; r Replf Park SW thSt fIW Iw AA 1 �. j Edlund r•-�+�� 11 &t19Yltgy.". ._.r•r '■.Yr SW 41 st St , Property *ric\ ' ' S 18 h.St A�.r.-.._r._.._.6-----_ ,r� S 0 , 1 � V. ' 1 w 3j 1 j Fn i .. SF.1 H4tIL§L r a o0e 1¢ ' Ic 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / 1 1 ' SE 192nd St Cleveland / 1 Richardson j Property / Springbrook Watershed N r I > • N , > 1 , c 1 W 0 0.5 1 Miles0 i I i 11 167 Cedar River Trail Park N° 1m 1~ 1� 1 IZ 1 1 r... Y. a « N SE 183rd St N a Q SE 3ones Rd Cavanaugh Pond T Existing Trails Shared Use Path Striped Bike Lane Signed Shared Roadway Pedestrian Trail Proposed Trails •--- Shared Use Path •---• Protected Bike Lane Striped Bike Lane ---• Neighborhood Greenway Signed Shared Roadway Pedestrian Trail Parks & Open Space OCommunity Center Library O Potential Transit Hub r School Proposed Project Number, Name 17, Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway = 51, Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail 68, South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 1, 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 18, Highlands Hillclimb 35, May Valley Trail 52, Panther Creek Trail 69, Springbrook Trail 2, 1 28th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 19, Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway 36, Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 53, Powerline Trail 70, Springbrook Trail Extension 3, 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 20Honey Creek Trail Extensions 37, Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes 54, Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway 71, Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb 4, Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Pathji: Houser Way and Factory Avenue N 4th Street Connector 55, Renton Connector 72, SW 16th Street Shared Use Path 5, Benson Neighborhood Greenway , Houser Way N Shared Use Path 39, N 6th Street Bike Lanes 56, Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway 73, SW 27th Street Connector 6, Benson Road/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes 23, Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes 40, N 8th Street Shared Use Path 57, S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lan 74, Talbot Road S Bike Lanes Wascade Waterline Spur Trail ' 24, Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway 41, Naches Avenue Shared U�lllll 58, S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway 75, Thunder Creek Trail 8, Cedar to Sammamish Trail 25, Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway 42, NE 3rd Street 59, S/SW 7th Street Transit Connector 76, Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail 9, Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lan 26, Kenyon -Dobson Trail and Trailhead 43, NE 4th Street Bike Lanes 60, Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail 77, Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway 10, East Valley Road Shared Use Path , Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment 44, NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes 61, SE 168Th Street Protected Bike Lanes 78, Tukwila Station Trail 11, Eastside Rail Corridor 28, Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment 45, NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway 62, SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway 79, Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes 12, Edmonds Avenue Connector 29, Lake Washington Loop Trail 46, NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path 63, SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path 80, Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 13, Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path 30, Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb 47, Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes 64, Seattle Waterline Spur Trail 14, Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway _ 31, Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path 48, North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 65, Seattle Waterline Trail Highest Priorty Project 15, Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway 32, Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway 49, North Southport Drive Shared Use Path 66, Shattuck to Airport Connector 16, Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path 33, May Creek Hillclimb 50, Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes Soos Creek Trail CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Implementation Strategies A plan is meaningful when it is implemented. This Master Plan identifies several strategies and future recommendations to develop a unified trail and bicycle system for the Renton community. Monitoring: The City will track its performance periodically to determine progress on plan implementation and to adaptively manage its resources. The Performance measures can potentially include: ■ Percentage of bicycle facility network completed in gaps, to schools, to parks. ■ Percentage increase in LTS 1 or 2 network. ■ Percentage of households within 114 mile of network. Percentage increase in network serving children, elderly, households in poverty. ■ Percentage increase in access to high density residential or commercial zones, transit, or services. Percentage progress on Tier 1 Projects. ■ Projects programed and completed in six -year CIP. Phasing and Fee in Lieu: Renton may phase improvements and consider alternative trail and bicycle facility types and cross sections. The City could implement development requirements for trail or bicycle facilities or a fee in lieu. Partnerships: Continue existing and seek new partnerships to advance funding for design and construction of priority projects. Current and Future Funding: Continue existing funding sources and pursue other funding sources that would be dedicated to the provision of trails and bicycle facilities. Requirements: Update city regulations to reference this plan and adopt new regulations that require trail easements for areas where key local or regional trails have been identified in this plan. Eastside Rail Corridor in Renton, ceremonial spike -pulling event, Renton Reporter, October 2017 Incentives: Continue incentive programs, like Commute Trip Reduction programs by large employers develop incentives for developers when amenities for transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians are included in their plans. JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 9 Events & Promotion: Promote community engagement and healthy lifestyles by: ■ Promoting awareness of the trail and bicycle system by advertising its system, ■ Marketing recreation and community events in association with trails and bicycle facilities including fun runs, races, and other activities, ■ Supporting guided walking and biking tours, and ■ Working in partnership with King County Metro on expanding its transit to trail program. Safety & Awareness: Develop traffic safety materials and pursue implementing design standards that help enforce safe and responsible for all traffic modes. Future Policy Explorations: There are many policies and trends the City can further explore, including but not limited to: ■ Multimodal transportation levels of service for use in transportation concurrency standards and mitigation fees. ■ Sidewalk plan integration with this Trails and Bicycle Plan to coordinate planning and implementation of its non -motorized system. ■ Whether and how to implement a Vision Zero program that sets a goal of zero traffic deaths or severe injuries through holistic, integrated action strategies. Renton will determine the best combination of monitoring and implementation strategies based on available resources and needs. JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN JANUARY 2019 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 1 VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES INTRODUCTION The Plan Vision, Goals, and Objectives describes the future the community aspires to achieve and how the City will act to achieve the Vision. The Vision articulates the ideal future the Plan wishes to achieve. Goals address outcomes encapsulated in the Vision. Objectives define specific actions that, if completed, will accomplish a certain goal. The Vision, Goals, and Objectives together provide a road map for the City to achieve Renton's best Trails and Bicycle facilities system. VISION - RENTON CONNECTION The Trails and Bicycle Master Plan fosters an integrated trail and bicycle system that connects the City's neighborhoods, community, and region. Residents, employees, and visitors can access a diverse system in urban and natural settings that are safe and comfortable for users of all ages and abilities. People can recreate, exercise, and/or commute for an active, healthy lifestyle. Source: City of Renton 3 JANUARY 2019 VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON GOALS & OBJECTIVES Five goals and related objectives are stated in the following pages. Goal A: Improving safety Improve safety for non -motorized use and facilities. Objective A.1: Invest in the development and maintenance of high quality walking and bicycling infrastructure. Objective A.2: Promote bicycling and pedestrian safety through educational programs and community outreach. Objective A.3: Minimize obstructions and conflicts along high speed, high traffic streets that restrict the movement of non -motorized users. Objective AA Provide safe and convenient storage and parking facilities for non -motorized users. Objective A.5: Promote design and maintenance practices that deter crime including appropriate visibility and comfort through lighting, proper placement of plantings, access control, and other techniques. VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Goal B: Creating an accessible and connected system Develop an inter -connected trail network. Objective B.1: Enhance non -motorized connections between neighborhoods, schools, public transit, recreation facilities and other community destinations. Objective B.2: Complete the connections between the regional trails within Renton. Objective B.3: Continue to connect to non -motorized networks in adjacent jurisdictions. Objective BA Mitigate barriers in the non -motorized network, including freeways, busy intersections, steep slopes, railways, and waterways. Objective B.5: Fill in gaps and missing links. Objective B.b: Identify easily accessible trail head and access points throughout the network. Objective B.7: Coordinate with citywide planning efforts. Objective B.8: Balance new acquisition and development with the sustained maintenance of existing facilities. Objective B.9: Ensure Renton's codes and standards advance the implementation of the Trails and Bicycle Plan cross sections through appropriate requirements, phasing, and incentives. ,a1Cc WIWI IT }` `r JANUARY 2019 VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES 0 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Goal C: Promoting physical and environmental health Improve the health of the community through sustainable design and increase the rates of walking, running, and bicycling. Objective C.1: Increase access to the recreational and non -motorized trail network. Objective C.2: Promote non -motorized travel as a viable means of transportation and as an important method for maintaining overall health and fitness. Objective C.3: Provide facilities that accommodate users of all ages and abilities. Objective CA Utilize Complete Streets to provide increased opportunities for non -motorized access and use and promote improved air and water quality. Objective C.5: Increase awareness of the non -motorized and recreational trail network. Objective C.b: Support education and appreciation of the natural environment while protecting wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and cultural resources. Objective C.7: Minimize impacts to the environment by employing best management practices. VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Goal D: Achieving equity Ensure that all members of the community have equitable access to walking and bicycling facilities. Objective D.1: Employ strategies to include underserved populations in community outreach. Objective D.2 Invest in non -motorized facilities across the Renton community. Objective D.3: Develop the network to enable a diverse range of experiences and activities in natural and urban settings. Objective D.3: Support, encourage and promote active transportation for users across a wide range of age, income, and physical abilities. Objective DA Ensure signage and informational materials are accessible and comprehensible by a wide range of users. Objective D.5: Plan for land use densities and mixed -use development patterns that encourage walking, hiking, biking and other non -motorized uses and connectivity. Objective D.5: Implement a multimodal level of service that maximizes mobility. r smile i1i � � � � � � W � M '1 JANUARY 2019 VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES 0 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Goal E: Enhancing the economy and community Enhance the economy and vibrancy of the community by increasing walking and bicycling. Objective E.1: Support and promote a non -motorized transportation culture to attract more businesses and residents. Objective E.2: Leverage Renton's position at the convergence of regional trails to promote the economic vitality of the city. Objective E.3: Capitalize on the natural area trail systems to promote outdoor nature activities. Objective EA Implement improvements to promote Renton as a walkable community. Objective E.5: Provide secure bicycle parking at community destinations and incentivize provision of bicycle facilities in private development. Objective E.6: Continue to develop and nurture partnerships to leverage resources and implement projects, programs and activities that increase the reach and effectiveness of the bicycle and trail network. Objective E.7: Identify and secure a wide variety of funding sources. Cedar River Trail, City of Renton VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN JANUARY 2019 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS TRAILS & BICYCLE SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS The City currently has approximately 30 miles of trails of different types — shared use paths that accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, dedicated bike lanes, and dedicated pedestrian trails. See Exhibit 2-1. Trails are located chiefly along water bodies and major routes but are not fully connected and there are major population centers that are not currently being served. See Exhibit 2-2. Exhibit 2-1. Existing Trail Network Miles Shared Use Path 7.67 Protected Bike Lane - Protected Bike Lane - Two -Way Protected Bike Lane - Striped Bike Lane 9.70 Striped Bike Lane 9.70 Buffered Bike Lane - Neighborhood Greenway - Signed Shared Roadway 2.47 Pedestrian Trail 10.36 Boardwalk 0.26 Hard Surface Trail 6.32 Soft Surface Trail 3.79 TOTAL 30.20 Source: City of Renton, 2018. tt JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 2-2. Existing Trail Network JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN CITYWIDE CONTEXT The City of Renton has seen growth and change in the past three decades Population increased from 50,052 in 2000 to 104,100 in 2018, partly through annexations. The City added jobs in the same period, with employment growing from 55,519 jobs in 2000 to 61,920 in 2018. Median household income has risen to $66,050 today. As the City has grown the proportion of older and younger residents remained relatively constant, hovering at roughly 10% and 23% respectively. Rates of vehicle ownership have also remained steady citywide, with 90-95% of city households having access to a car. However, mirroring regional and national trends, the city has become more racially diverse. The proportion of non -white residents increased from 35% in 2000 to 54% in 2018. Exhibit 2-3. Citywide Demographic Characteristics Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 NMI22% 55,519 54,050 P Under 65 and 18 over 2000 2010 2018 2000 Median Household Income Race (2018) Two or More $61,819 $66,050 Races, 6% $45,820 Native Hawaiian E and Other Pacific••., Islander, 2% 2000 2070 2078 Households with Vehicle 23% 23% 10% 10% Under0 Under 0 18 18 2070 2078 Hispanic or Latino, 12% .White, 46% Asian, 230/d 91% 94% 93% W = a Black or African 2000 2070 2018 American, 10% Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON PLANNING AREA PROFILES The City of Renton and its Potential Annexation Areas are comprised of many distinct communities, each with their own unique districts and neighborhoods. Given the need to plan effectively for this diverse set of communities, the City of Renton and its Potential Annexation Areas are divided into ten geographically distinct Community Planning Areas as shown in Exhibit 2-5. Community Planning Areas share community identity, schools, existing infrastructure, and physical features. Through the Community Planning process, residents, businesses, and other stakeholders develop a local vision and establish policies that address issues of growth, quality of life, design, and capital improvements in their respective planning area. Thus far, Community Plans have been adopted for two Community Planning Areas (City Center and Benson Hill) while others are planned for the future. Overall, existing trail miles in the city limits indicate a concentration of facilities in the City Center which includes a hub of regional trails like the Cedar River Trail, Lake to Sound Trail, connection to the Eastside Rail Corridor, and waterfront park pedestrian trails and bike lanes. An additional concentration of existing facilities is situated in the Valley where the Springbrook Trail is located. See Exhibit 2-4. Recognizing the need for geographic equity, and to address the County's limited historical investment in large annexation areas such as Benson Hill, this Trails and Bicycle Plan will increase trail miles in all Community Planning Areas. The greatest increases are planned in Benson Hill and Highlands Community Plan Areas — two areas that are currently largely underserved. The following section summarizes demographic and Community Planning Area Characteristics of nine Community Planning Areas within the City and places it in the context of the City as whole. Demographic data shown reflects only those portions of the respective Community Planning Areas that are located within Renton's city limits. As a result, the Fairwood planning area is excluded as it resides entirely outside the City. is JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-4. Existing and Proposed Network Miles by Community Planning Area BENSON CEDAR RIVER CITY CENTER EAST PLATEAU HIGHLANDS • KENNYDALE • TALBOT VALLEY WEST HILL E ■ Existing Network ■ Proposed Network Source: City of Renton, 2018. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 2-5. Community Planning Areas —IF IIN U11 �,, ��...\ — � �% {�i1, •�' lip—�r1� �. i � � II lion Cib/ ML (\16j y ■ 169 r 111N sis Renton City Limit Community Planning Areas Benson • • Cedar River +_#BIU "� . City Center East Plateau ■ Fairwood 1 Ito] Highlands -Highlands Kennydale Talbot 0 0.s 1 A � Valley M1` 661 - Source: City of Renton, 2018 West Hill JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Benson Hill Community Plan Area The Benson Hill Community Plan area is a predominantly residential area over four square miles in size. Population for the entire Community Planning Area is 25,140 people as of 2018. Benson Hill houses 24% of Renton's population, and 27% of its households. Exhibit 2-6 summarizes selected demographic characteristics of Benson Hill and places it in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-7. summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics that influence travel patterns and mobility. Exhibit 2-6. Benson Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 23% W 2,350 Under 18 , Renton Benson Renton Median Household Income Race $66,050 $62,907 Renton Benson Two or More Races, 7% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific-.... Islander, 2% 10% Hispanic or Latino, 14% 22 % Benson 11% -White, 45% Households with Vehicle Asian, 20%•••''• 93% 95% IF Black or African Renton Benson American, 11 Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 2-7. Benson Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics ' vmh� Assets and destinations include: `\ ■ Tiffany Park, Cascade Park, and Renton Park (King County) provide walking trails, children's play areas, and recreational opportunities to area residents. Philip Arnold Park is immediately north of this planning area and is accessible to Benson residents via an unpaved road right - Neighborhood of -way owned by Seattle Public Utilities. The Cedar River Natural Area Assets and is along the northern boundary of the area. To the east, the Soos Creek Destinations Corridor (King County) and Boulevard Lane Park (King County park) offer large natural areas. ■ There is a future Family First Community Center on 1 16'h. ■ The commercial areas, including Cascade Village are key destinations. ■ The Renton School District operates seven schools in the area. ■ Several major utility corridors cross the area, providing informal trails, recreation links, and views. 1 16th Avenue SE is the central spine of Benson Hill, connecting neighbors to Cascade Village, Cascade and Benson Hill Elementary Schools, and several informal trail networks. 140th Ave SE (existing bike lanes), Benson Road South, and Talbot Road South are used for biking. Puget Drive SE and hiking/walking trails in Existing Cedar River Natural Zone, are heavily used routes. In addition, the City of Travel Routes Seattle water pipeline corridors provide walking routes in the area. Major transit routes are along 108th Ave SE, 1 16th Ave SE, Puget Drive SE, SE 168th Street, SE Carr Road, SR 169 Renton -Maple Valley Road, 40 and Talbot Road South. Buses 169, 148, 102, and Dart 906 serve the area. Transit Routes Community input identified the need for walking improvements at the following problem spots for walking: 1 16rh Ave, SE 181 It St, SE 182"d St, IM0 near Soos Creek Park and trail, areas south of 108rh Ave SE south of SE Carr Road, and near Thunder Hill Creek Trail. Locations identified as bicycling problem spots include: Benson Road S, SE 192"d St, 108'h Ave SE. Finishing the Soos Creek Trail was also identified as a need. An area Community Input west of Benson Way S was identified as a popular location for mountain biking. See Exhibit 2-8. ,8 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-8. Benson Hill Planning Area Community Input 169 515 • o g 0 b a 1 o - Q 1 � I SE 16811i St v Q � N 0 O N Q a N - N �O ^ SE Petrovitsky Rd 1� ` 0 1 SE Carr Rd O 1 a 1 r� 1 Benson Hill Planning • O �` w Area • O Existing Trails O v Q O Locations of Community o Feedback —` Community Center AA Library • ® School Parks & Open Space O Renton City Limit • v 0 0.25 0.5 11 5 Miles 5ource. Gty of Reinon, 2018 1 19 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Cedar River Community Planning Area The Cedar River Community Planning area is a predominantly residential area with a population of 4,210 people as of 2018. This is 4% of Renton's population, and 16% of its households. Exhibit 2-9 summarizes selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-1 0 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns, and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-9. Cedar River Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 23% 23% i 13% 10% MW W 380 Under 18 65 and over Under 18 65 and over Renton Cedar River Renton Cedar River Median Household Income Race $83,459 $66,050 0 Renton Cedar River Households with Vehicle 93% 96% Two or More Races, 8% Asian, 23o/cr— Hispanic or Latino, 7% Aim •White, 54% Black or African Renton Cedar River American, 8% Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-10. Cedar River Community Plan Area Characteristics ' Assets and destinations include: `\ ■ Maplewood Golf Course ■Ron Regis Park Cedar River Park (includes a non -motorized boat launch as well as other picnic and park facilities). Neighborhood ■ Renton Community Center Assets and ■ Henry Moses Aquatic Center Destinations ■ Carco Theatre The Cedar River Trail (CRT) follows the Cedar River from where it enters Lake Washington in the City of Renton upriver to Landsburg, the boundary of the City of Seattle's Cedar River Watershed. The trail follows a historic G�V railroad route along State Route 169, and passes through the City of Renton, City of Maple Valley, and unincorporated King County. It offers views and access to Lake Washington, downtown Renton, Cedar River Park, Existing Travel Maplewood Golf Course, Ron Regis Park, Cedar Grove Park (King County Routes park), and Maple Valley. The CRT is popular with pedestrians, runners, bicyclists, and skaters and provides both recreational and non -motorized commuting opportunities. Maple Valley Highway is a bus route for Metro Transit 143, 102, and Dart 907. Transit Routes limoCommunity input identified the following locations as a walking problem spots: 154rh PI SE and unofficial dirt trails in the Cedar River Natural Zone. The following location was identified as a bicycling problem spot: 1 361h Ave SE. An additional three locations along Maple Valley Highway were identified as walking and bicycling destinations. See Exhibit 2-1 1. Community Input 21 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON H Exhibit 2-1 1. Cedar River Planning Area Community Input 90 `I I v v NE 1/7 St o z Q Q w > o a Q a -o N 4th St o w NE 411i St --� N 3rd St SE 7 281h St �E gfd Ss ! °Ibq I —I 1�-----I L� 1 L—.i 16 1 1 I 1 p` ` • SE Jones Rd S Puget pr w m 0 1 A 1 r N -Cedar River Planning I a Area 68th St Lj Existing Trails w O Locations of Community a' #r Feedback Z 1 Community Center I1■ Library — SF Petro 0 Potential Transit Hub I kyR a School I ` Parks & Open Space ; Renton City Limit 40 SE 183rd St i- 0 /- 0.25 0.5 i A 515 —�TI—; Miles ' Source. City of Reixon, 2018 1 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN City Center Community Planning Area The City Center Community Planning Area includes a population of 13,030 people as of 2018. This is roughly 13% of Renton's population, and 16% of its households. City Center is a major employment center for Renton with 27,850 jobs or roughly 45% of the city's employment. Exhibit 2-1 2 summarizes selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-1 3 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns, and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-12. City Center Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 23% 18% 27,850 no Renton City Center Median Household Income $66,050 $57,299 E 0 Renton City Center Households with Vehicle 10% Renfon City Center Race Two or More Hispanic or Lafino, 9% Races, 5% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific........... . 40 Islander, 2°/a Asian, 16%- 14% -White, 55% 93 % B9% Black crAfrican Renton City Center American, 13% Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 — — — — — EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 0 Exhibit 2-13. City Center Community Plan Area Characteristics 'Downtown Renton with a traditional retail "main street" on S 3rd Street. `\ ■ The Downtown Library, Senior Center, Renton Pavilion Event Center and •�, Piazza Park are popular community gathering places. ■ A regional commercial cluster is located primarily in the southern portion �� of the City Center and serves as a retail hub. ■ Parks and destinations include Burnett Linear Park, Cedar River Trail, Neighborhood Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, Jones Park, Kiwanis Bicentennial Air Assets and Park, Liberty Park, Philip Arnold Park, Piazza Park, Downtown Park, Destinations Skate Park, Tonkin Park, Veterans Memorial Park, and the Renton Memorial Stadium. ■ Historic Renton High School and STEM -focused Sartori Elementary School are important to community identity. ■ The northern portion of this community planning area includes Renton Boeing manufacturing facilities, and mixed -use communities of the Landing and Southport. Major existing travel routes include: ■ Cedar River Trail Lake Washington Blvd. ■ Logan Ave N. ■ Rainier Ave N. Existing Travel Routes Currently, the Renton Transit Center existing in the center of downtown, but Wthe South Grady Park and Ride will become the city's major transit center Ewith future Sound Transit and WSDOT improvements. Metro Transit bus routes 101, 105, 106, 107 143, 148, 153, 167, 169, 240, 342, 907, 908, Sound Transit routes 560, 566, and Rapid Ride F route serves the area. There is also a Park & Ride at Fred Meyer. Transit Routes Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: S 7th St, Houser Way S, near Logan Street bridge, Logan Avenue liio N, Lake Washington Blvd, and Burnett Avenue N. A connection from the Cedar River Boathouse to Coulon Park was also identified as a need. The following locations were identified as bicycling problem spots: SW 7rh St, Rainier Ave S, Houser Way S, Logan Ave N, N 6'h St, Lake Washington Community Input Blvd., and N Park Dr. A Boeing/Airport bypass trail connecting Coulon Park with Perimeter Road/Rainier and bike racks near stores in the Landing were identified ideas for the future. See Exhibit 2-14. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-14. City Center Planning Area Community Input 3 t � • P� 9�e S • • • • N O 0! • \ O O n CO Z N Q a NE 1t/� St o (^-• Vv > > m Q • o � E ,0 w N 41h St LP Z v Q ` N 3rd St S 133rd St 5 132nd ki • O 3 ,ta 5' NE ♦ � O '90% City Center Planning O O1� Area O v a Existing Trails • O Locations of Community O O Feedback Community Center 0� @t 0`•jJ O CZ O A/ Library ♦ Potential Transit Hub Way • S �tady N0 O School y Parks & Open Space • Renton City Limit 3 �1 67' `1 61h St > N Q S � o 1.21 o.s 7 J I' I. Sourc' City of Renton, 2018 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON East Plateau Community Planning Area The East Plateau Community Planning Area includes a population of 9,770 people as of 2018. This is roughly 9% of Renton's population, and 9% of its households. Exhibit 2-15 summarizes selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-16 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-15. East Plateau Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 26% 23% �nn Renton East Plateau Median Household Income $99,977 $66,050 Renton East Plateau Households with Vehicle 10% Under 18 - Renton Race Two or More• Races, 6% Asian, 259/v•••.. 11% Under 18 - East Plateau Hispanic or Latino, 8% 98% American Indian 93% and Alaska•........ Native, 1% Black or African Renton East Plateau American, 4% Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. 0 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-16. East Plateau Community Plan Area Characteristics Schools in the Planning Area include Hazen High School, Apollo Elementary, Maplewood Heights Elementary, Liberty High School, Maywood Middle School, and Briarwood Elementary. ■ The one -acre Maplewood Park (King County park), Coalfield Park (King �OW County park), and the Hazen Community Pool are other neighborhood assets and destinations. Neighborhood ■ NE 41h St and Duvall have active commercial areas. Assets and Destinations NE 4th Street, May Valley Road, and SR 900/Sunset Blvd are major travel corridors. 156rh Ave SE/154rh PI SE is important connector to SR 169 and Cedar River Trail. c:'tu Existing Travel Routes NE 4th Street is a major bus route. King County Metro bus routes 1 1 1 and Dart 908 serve the area. Transit Routes 40 Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: along Hoquiam Ave NE, Nile Ave NE, along NE 2nd St, along Jericho Ave SE, along NE 4th St, along Duvall Ave NE, along 144rh Ave SE and along 156th Ave SE. The following locations were identified as problem spots for bicycling: Hoquiam Ave NE, NE 4th St and near 154rh PI SE. See Exhibit 2-17. Community Input JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS 9 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 0 Exhibit 2-17. East Plateau Planning Area Community Input `rF �4 Z • yL m 4�j Q � a a 0 • z • Q • sF o : MoY Volley Rd • • � voo _ � N • c • (�.�� • • ■ • • Sri, s, East Plateau Planning . Area • • Existing Trails O Locations of Community Feedback " n School �� ^ 1 • Parks & Open Space Renton City Limit es o.s Rd Miles Source. Gty of Renton, 2018 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Highlands Community Planning Area The Highlands Community Planning Area includes a population of 29,800 people as of 2018. This is roughly 29% of Renton's population, and 30% of its households. Exhibit 2-18 summarize selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-1 9 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns, and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-18. Highlands Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 4,180 Renton Highlands Median Household Income $66,050 $67,927 W E Renton Highlands Households with Vehicle 93% 95% Renton Highlands 23% 10% Under IS Renton Race Hispanic or Latino, 18% Two or More Races, 5% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific ....... Islander, 19/6 Asian, 23%•• 22% n er 8 Highlands 9% Black or African American, 7% • •White, 46% Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. 29 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 2-19. Highlands Community Plan Area Characteristics Schools in the Planning Area include McKnight Middle School, Highlands Elementary, Sierra Heights Elementary School, Meadowcrest Early •�, Learning Center, Rainier Christian School, and Honeydew Elementary School. Open space and park assets include Honey Creek and May �� Creek Natural Areas, Sierra Heights King County), North Highlands and Meadowcrest Playground, and Glencoe Parks. Phase I of Sunset Park Neighborhood recently opened, Phase II will be completed in 2020. Community centers Assets and are also located on both sides of SR 900 at Highlands and North Destinations Highlands Parks. ■ The Renton Technical College, Kennydale Memorial Hall, and the Renton Highlands Library. ■ The Renton Sunset mixed -use neighborhood. ■ Sunset Blvd/SR 900 and NE 3rd St/NE 4'h St are main east -west routes �j ■ Union Avenue NE and Edmonds Ave NE are key north -south routes. ■ Trails near Honey Creek connect to May Creek Natural Area c:'tu Existing Travel Routes Sunset Blvd. and Duvall Ave NE are major transit routes King County Metro routes 240, 105, 1 1 1, and Dart 908 serve the area. _ Park & Rides are at St. Matthew's Lutheran Church and Renton Bible Church. Transit Routes Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: SE 1 brh St, NE 20rh ST, SE 95rh Way, and an area near SE 104rh St. The following locations were identified as bicycling problem spots: NE 3rd St, Sunset Blvd, and Duvall Ave N. Connections from Honey Creek to Lake Washington and to Union Ave were identified as ideas for the future. See Exhibit 2-20. Community Input JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-20. Highlands Planning Area Community Input r T a N 3rd St I - I .� 1 J 1 1 L� 16 1 1 1 I 1 _ Highlands Planning Area Existing Trails O Locations of Community Feedback OCommunity Center Library School Parks &Open Space I�L7j Renton City Limit N 0 0.25 0.5 Miles Source City of Renton, 2018 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Kennydale Community Planning Area The Kennydale Community Planning Area is a predominantly residential area that includes a population of 7,570 people as of 2018. This is roughly 7% of Renton's population, and 8% of its households. Exhibit 2-21 summarizes selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-22 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-21. Kennydale Demographic Characteristics Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 23% i 10% qqw 1,010 Under 18 65 and over Renton Kennydale Renton Median Household Income Race $84,973 Two or More $66,050 Races, 6% Renton Kennydale Asian, 20% Households with Vehicle 18% 12% Under 18 65 and over Kennydale Hispanic or Latino, 8% White, 61 % 93% 94% _ Black or African American, 5% Renton Kennydale Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-22. Kennydale Community Plan Area Characteristics ' 01b Assets and destinations include: `\ ■ The Kennydale Elementary School ■ Kennydale Beach Park `=_ ■ Kennydale Lions Park ■ May Creek Natural Area and Trail Neighborhood ' Eastside Rail Corridor Assets and ' Lake Washington Loop Trail Destinations ' Virginia Mason Athletic Center? (VMAC)/Seattle Seahawks Headquarters ■ Commercial area on NE 44rh St, just east of 1-405 0 Lake Washington Blvd., Park Ave. N, NE 30rh St, and NE 27rh St are major 0 travel routes. Existing Travel Routes Interstate 405 is a major transit route that serves King County Metro bus routes 1 11, 167, 342, 952, 567, and Sound Transit routes 560 and 566. A Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) station is planned for the NE 44rh St exit and there is an existing Park & Ride at Kennydale United Methodist Church. Transit Routes Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: along N 30th St, N 33rd St, along Aberdeen Ave NE, and along 40 Jones Ave NE. Locations along Lake Washington Blvd, along Lincoln Ave NE and along NE 27rh St were identified as bicycling problem spots. See Exhibit 2-23. The Eastside Rail Corridor will be the location of a new regional trail, and preferred alignments were discussed at public open Community Input houses and with King County. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 2-23. Kennydale Community Planning Area Community Input Newcastle 1 � 1 I U 1 1 1 1 Kennydale Planning Area Existing Trails O Locations of Community Feedback Library C' Potential Transit Hub CSchool Parks & Open Space Renton City Limit A - Miles S..— Gty .f R..t. 2018 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Talbot Community Planning Area The Talbot Community Planning Area includes a population of 10,060 people as of 2015. This is roughly 10% of Renton's population, and 10% of its households. Exhibit 2-24 summarizes selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-25 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-24. Talbot Demographic Characteristics Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 23% i 10% 5,100 Under 18 65 and over Renton Talbot Renton Median Household Income Race 23% qF 12% Under 18 65 and over Talbot Two or More Hispanic or Latino, 5% Races, 7% $66,050 $75,719 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific— . Islander, 5% 4 Renton Talbot Households with Vehicle 97% Asian, 29% 93 American Indian and Alaska," Renton Talbot Native, 1 % Source: American Community Survey, 2015. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS Black or African American, 13% -White, 41 % RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 2-25. Talbot Community Plan Area Characteristics ' 01b Assets and destinations include: `\ ■ The Talbot Hill Elementary School. ■ Developed park assets include the 10-acre Thomas Teasdale Park and VA the public tennis and pickleball courts located at Talbot Hill Reservoir Park. Neighborhood ' Panther Creek Wetlands Assets and ' Valley Medical Center and surrounding area is major medical hub. Destinations Benson Drive South (SR 515) and SE Carr Road are major travel routes for this area. c:'tu Existing Travel Routes King County Metro bus route 169 runs along Talbot Road S. and 108'h Ave SE. Metro Dart route 906 serves east -west to the Valley. Transit Routes Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: the hill between SE Carr Rd and SE 200'h St. SE 200'h was also 40 identified as a bicycling problem spot. Connecting City -owned park property to Panther Creek Wetlands, connecting Panther Creek Wetlands to the Springbrook Trail, and connecting to Strander Blvd in Tukwila on SW 27rh St were identified as ideas for the future. See Exhibit 2-26. Community Input JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-26. Talbot Planning Area Community Input G1adY way S WG SW 1 6th St 3 3 N N N W > a a m a a v w SW 27th St a O SW 34th St SW 41 st St � , 1 Oa ' O � 1 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS r-artft.— SE 168th St m Q ,o SE Petrovitsky Rd Talbot Planning Area Existing Trails O Locations of Community Feedback �* Community Center School Parks & Open Space Renton City Limit N 0 0.25 0.5 Miles \67 Sovrce. Oty of Renton, 2018 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Valley Community Planning Area The Valley Community Planning Area is a major employment center with 20,350 or roughly 33% of the city's jobs. The Valley Medical Center is located in this Planning Area. This is the least populated planning area with only a population of 180 people as of 2018. Exhibit 2-27 summarizes selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-28 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-27. Valley Demographic Characteristics Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 23% 10% 20,350 qqw I M Under 18 65 and over Renton Valley Renton Median Household Income Race $66,050 $75,719 Two or More Races, 8% Renton Talbot Households with Vehicle 24 % 1 Hispanic or Latino, 1 3% Under 18 65 and over Valley -White, 28% o 9_ 9- Asian, 23°/u.... Black or African Renton Valley American, 27% Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-28. Valley Community Plan Area Characteristics '■ There are no schools in this Community Planning Area. `\ Open space assets include the Black River Riparian Forest and the •�, Springbrook Valley Wetlands. ■ Lake to Sound Trail �� ■ There are multiple commercial/employment providers in this area, including IKEA, Providence Health & Services, Boeing, and Kaiser Neighborhood Permanente. Assets and Destinations ■ Black River Trail and the Springbrook Trail. ■ Lake to Sound Trail will connect to the Interurban and Green River Trails A in 2020. Existing Travel Routes SW Grady Way and SR 167 are main transit routes. King County Metro route 153 and Rapid Ride F route serves the area. Metro routes 952, and Sound Transit routes 566 and 567 run along 1-167. The Tukwila Sounder Station is a key origin/destination for transit users in this area. Transit Routes Community input identified locations along SW 43rd St as problem spots for walking and biking. Specific locations identified along the street as problem spots for bicycling include: S 180rh St, SW Grady Way, Oakesdale Ave SW and SW 7'h St. A better connection between the Lake to Sound Trail and Interurban Trail and addressing gaps in trails due to (W private property (Springbrook Trail) were also identified as ideas for the Community Input future. See Exhibit 2-29. s 39 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 2-29. Valley Planning Area Community Input S 133rd St S 132nd `` Renton Ave 5 10 � � oft� 0 a o N� S O t o • S4 7rh Sr 4 Grady `Nov • • __ SW 16th St I : Southceitet • Tukwila Pkwy S 180th St v a v 3 � N a v O a' a SW 271h StJ I SW 34th St • _ S W 41 st St. 1 SW 43rd St a A 0 a- N QValley Planning Area Existing Trails O Locations of Community Feedback Community Center Library Potential Transit Hub School Parks & Open Space Renton City Limit 1 0 0.25 0.5 A Miles Source. Oty of Renton, 2018 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN West Hill Community Planning Area The West Hill Community Planning Area is a predominantly residential area with a population of 4,340 people as of 2018. This is roughly 4% of Renton's population, and 4% of its households. Exhibit 2-30 summarize selected demographic characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-31 summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel patterns and overall mobility. Exhibit 2-30. West Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) Jobs Population Under 18 & 65 and Over 61,920 23% 10% W 310 Under 18 , Renton West Hill Renton Median Household Income Race 24 % 4 10% 0�0 West Hill Hispanic or Latina, I I% $66,050 $53,361 Two or More Races, 7% Renton West Hill Households with Vehicle • -White, 25% Asian, 26°/o. 93 % 91 °/a INV Black or African Renton West Hill American, 30% Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 0 Exhibit 2-31. West Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics Schools in the Planning Area include Campbell Hill Elementary, Dimmitt Middle School, Bryn Mawr Elementary, Albert Talley High School and •�/ Lakeridge Elementary School ■ Park assets and destinations include Earlington Park, Skyway Park (King �Ow, County park), Lakeridge Park (King County park). ■ Skyway Library is a key destination and asset. Neighborhood Assets and Destinations Rainier Avenue South along Lake Washington is a main travel corridor for Wthe area. Renton Ave South runs through the heart of West Hill. SR 900, west of Rainier Ave S. is major city gateway from 1-5. Existing Travel Routes Renton Avenue South and SR 900 are bus routes. King County Metro bus routes 106, 107, 101, 102, and 143X serve the area. There is an existing Park & Ride at City View Church. Transit Routes Community input identified bicycling problem spots at the following locations: along S Sunnycrest Rd, and south of Sunset Blvd. A safe bicycling 40 route connecting to Skyway and West Hill, along SW Langston Rd, was identified as an idea for the future. See Exhibit 2-32. Community Input JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 2-32. West Hill Community Planning Area Community Input West Hill Planning Area Existing Trails O Locations of Community Feedback Community Centel - Library OPotential Transit Hub School Parks & Open Space Renton City Limit 0 0,25 0.5 Nvles 5—ce Gty of Renton, 2018 JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS ,a00 CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN JANUARY 2019 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 3 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES The City conducted an extensive public outreach process, with an online questionnaire, an interactive mapping activity, and three in -person community open houses. Three meetings were organized with a Technical Advisory Committee. The City also met with regional stakeholders. Project briefings were presented to the Parks Commission, Planning Commission, and the Renton City Council. Results are summarized in this Chapter with more detailed information in Appendix A. Top Takeaways Based on the outreach the key takeaways include: 1. Recreation -based walking and biking is still a primary purpose. Commuting by bike and on foot is also occurring and could be encouraged more. 2. Respondents preferred to walk shorter distances, around their neighborhoods, mainly for recreation. Walking was not seen as a primary mode of transportation. 3. Respondents reported longer and more frequent bicycle trips. Bicyclists bike within and beyond their neighborhood to trails, work places or school, or civic or recreation facilities. 4. Respondents preferred to walk and bike on formal facilities such as sidewalks, streets, or paved trails. 5. The Cedar River Trail is the most heavily used trail. Not surprisingly, given its central location within the city and its length, respondents cited the Cedar River Trail as the most used non -motorized trail. Trails along other riparian corridors, such as the Springbrook Creek, Honey Creek, and May Creek were less frequently used. 6. Addressing pedestrian and bicyclist comfort is necessary to encourage more travel and recreation by foot or bike. Discontinuous or missing sidewalks, walking on roads with fast moving traffic, and difficulty crossing came up as top barriers to walking. Barriers to biking focused on the absence of biking facilities (e.g. paved JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 9 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON shoulders, bike lanes, shared use paths), dangerous crossings and streets with fast moving cars. The lack of wayfinding was also cited as a potential barrier. 7. Connection to transit is an important need. Transit is often accessed by walking and biking and connections to current and future transit is a key link. 8. Mountain biking and other more unique forms of bicycling are pursued by about a quarter of questionnaire respondents, who enjoy riding along lakes, streams, and rivers. 9. Equestrian use was not an identified need. The questionnaire included questions on horseback riding, but no respondents offered input. Questionnaire The City issued a questionnaire in summer 2017 for nearly three months and received 340 responses (131 full and 209 partial). Respondents are more able-bodied than Census reports for the city. The share of questionnaire respondents with children is similar to Census reports for Renton. Questionnaire respondents are more likely to commute by walking or bicycling than the city as a whole. Results showed: ■ Purpose of Walking/Biking: Walking, running, and biking activities tend to be more for recreation purposes rather than for transportation. ■ Frequency: Most respondents walk at least 2 times per week or more, and bike 1 day per week or less. ■ Destinations: Most respondents walk or bike around their neighborhood or to a public facility. In the case of bicyclists, they also frequently use trails. While respondents visited a wide number of Renton park, recreation, and civic facilities, the most well visited ones were along Lake Washington and the Cedar River. ■ Traffic Stress: Renton questionnaire respondents indicated that 25% were confident on any road, about 50% were comfortable with roads having some traffic but prefer those with wide shoulders or lanes or trails, and over 20% were concerned about traffic and other factors. ■ Barriers & Incentives — Walking or Running: Top barriers to running or walking included street crossings, traffic, discontinuous sidewalks, or locations along roads. Top improvements to encouraging walking or ae JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN running, include more curb ramps, sidewalks, more shared -use trails, maintenance, and enforcement of traffic laws and biking. ■ Barriers & Incentives — Biking: Top barriers to biking include motor vehicle speed, lack of bicycle facilities, too many cars, and routes that are stressful or dangerous. Top improvements include safer intersections, wider shoulders on roads, more shared use trails, and street calming measures in residential areas. Interactive Maps An interactive online map was open to public input from June 10, 2017 to August 31, 2017. The interactive map site had 1,380-page views and 342 data points. Participants could identify areas where they walked or biked, and problem areas. Maps and summaries of comments follow. Walking Based on input received, walk problems included lack of sidewalks and connections as well as traffic, speeding, and other dangerous conditions. Most pedestrian problem spots were identified in the East Plateau, North Highlands, and mid-Kennydale Planning Areas. See Exhibit 3-1 and Exhibit 3-2. Exhibit 3-1. Walking Problems ave better bike .:bridge ,z,busy cars -, cedar Connection continuous,;, corner, creek ,cross,;; crosswalks .,, dangerous drivers end foot forced help hill honey , lack _,lotr,marked missing. narrow needs , . , park,-, pc'lfh river safe 21 shoulder .,, sidewalk ,,, significant signs ,_, speeding stop 5, street traffic- trai typically 2, unsafe,., Source: Tag Word Cloud. 49 JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON The range of comments included: ■ Nice walk, but would feel much safer with sidewalk (Kennydale area). ■ No sidewalk for most of this very busy road (Sunset area). ■ Need signage and wayfinding to connect to Cedar River trail. ■ Missing ADA ramp. ■ There is no way to get up and down the hill safely between Carr Rd. and SE 200th St.... That's a 1.25-mile sidewalk desert. Destinations included the Cedar River Trail and May Creek Trail. Many respondents reported walking in neighborhoods on the Renton plateau (East Plateau Community Planning Area), as well as in the valley near Springbrook Trail and Black River Trail (Valley Community Planning Area). so JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 3-2. Community Input Walking D 4o Qo �e 3 e 1P Bb o� 4a J S y?9th Si S 133rd St S 132, coed. Woy m Nowcostlo Go/f Ctub Ry \ Z + r a 0 0 40 '900� Q 1 2 II!T! Z NE 7tb St a I /NE 41h S, N 4th St w N3rdSr tlEgcdSt •� © ��. Atl S;y S:v 7th St Jet J v ;N e a s 180th 181� C o SW16th Sr ` H 05 a S Puger pr Q+ a o S W 7th St Y v O m i H SE 168th St SW 4th St j W (51 S W 41 st St sR6 S� Lor i f 0 0', 1 A1 1 1Ahles '.I c- Source Oty of Pernoo, 2018 JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT SE 192nd St © Walking Destination Walking Problem Spot Route that I Walk 001 Difficult Walking Route sE - Existing Trails RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 0 Biking Community comments on biking problem spots were similar to comments about walking. Biking problems related to concerns about travel lanes and trails, and traffic and safety conditions. Based on comments, most bike problem spots follow future alignments of the regional trail system. See Exhibit 3-3 and Exhibit 3-4. Exhibit 3-3. Biking Problem Spots L)oeing bridge . Cars . connect - crossing dangerous end : going lane light nb ; needs north pavement . renton river, . road. track: traffic trail, lrai I ,, ,, : west - Source: Tag Word Cloud. Destinations included the Cedar River Trail, Green River Trail, Lake Washington Loop Trail, and other neighborhood locations. Comments addressed different connections or safety concerns such as: ■ Add bike trail between Cedar & Green river trails. ■ Need a safe bike route connecting to Skyway and West Hill. ■ Sunset Blvd provides the best grade for connectivity with Highlands, needs bike lanes. ■ Best bike route up Benson Hill is not clear. Probably old Benson Rd, but need bike lanes to continue. Consider road diet south of Puget. ■ Very narrow shoulder, difficult connection to Jones Road from Cedar River Trail. ■ Cars using wrong lane, conflicting with NB left turning bikes and cars. (Renton/Kent border) ■ 1 ride around this area as the bridge is too narrow and unsafe, I have nearly crashed many times on this bridge. (Renton/Tukwila Border) JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 3-4. Community Input Biking B ° ,9•0 s ©S 2?9m Sr • S 133rd Si S 1?. costle WOY m Nows°sfle Goff C/uSp ,C 3 tl ti oho oro oro, oro 0% Aoho of oS`o b O 2 G 6% ob g ,fo ora 00 i 0 p o� SOo'he°nr°r BI•d 3 3 S Puecr Or y e � ° c � • 6 0 S W 2 St i SE 165-1 (\ SW 4th5t j 3 515; W Sw 41sr Sr S 1801h s a _ a a 0 0.5 1 A1 ---- Amles ' 167, Source City of Renton, 2018 SE 208th JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT w h Sp PO'rO•rrr4 Y Rtl v f SE 192nd 51 Biking Destination Biking Problem Spot Route that I Bike 100,,rlot - Difficult Biking Route Se - Existing Trails RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON OPEN HOUSES Three open houses were held in 2017. Input at the community open houses included neighborhood specific feedback on needed improvements, as well as preferred connections and routes. No input on equestrian facilities was received. • 35 persons • Preferred routes and facility types •Thoughts on potential routes • Problem spots •Wish list projects •Projects to complete •General concerns and ideas • 26 persons •Regional Trail options • Preferences on network •Questions about facility designation •Plan Priorities •30 persons •Regional Trail preferences •Final Network options •Facility type discussion •Prioritization and project preferences Needed improvements included: ■ Intersection improvements along the Cedar River Trail downtown, Houser Way and Lake Washington Boulevard, and the NE 6th and NE 8th at Logan Avenue N. ■ Improvements for SW 7th to make it more bike -friendly ■ Sidewalk improvements across neighborhoods Preferred Connections and Routes included: ■ Completion of the proposed Sam Chastain trail segment and the Soos Creek Trail north of 1 92nd St. (King County responsibility) ■ Completion of Burnett Linear Park, South and North in Civic Core ■ Houser Way was cited by many as the preferred alignment of the Eastside Rail Corridor 54 JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN King County Meetings Coordination with King County Parks and Recreation Division, Capital Projects Program, and Governmental Relations was essential to plan development with the convergence of four regional trails within Renton's Urban Growth Area: The Cedar River Trail (CR), Eastside Rail Corridor (ERC), Lake to Sound Trail (L2S), and the Lake Washington Loop Trail. The purpose of the meetings was to collaborate with King County representatives on possible and preferred routing for the regional trails through the City of Renton, discuss alternative facility types for these corridors, update on the status of the Civic Core planning effort and review proposed cross sections for the corridors in that plan, and review the status of other regional trails/routes. Two meetings were held to identify and agree upon the alignment and facility designations) for the regional trails. Detailed meeting summaries, route concepts, and cross -sections are included in Appendix B of this plan. Technical Advisory Committee Community members volunteered to participate in the Technical Advisory Committee for this plan which included additional background and educational discussions to provide feedback for plan development. Important considerations included: ■ The importance of connecting regional trails ■ The importance of the transit center as a destination ■ Recognition that trail users are not as aware of traffic control devices like Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) or C-curbs; this lack of awareness should be addressed in design options ■ Cost considerations, and related "low hanging fruit" or easy wins are important to elevate as criteria The following trouble spots were identified primarily about bicycling except where noted: ■ Near Dimmitt Middle School the location of a pedestrian -vehicle crash ■ Crossing Sunset Blvd. near Harrington ■ NE Park Drive Freeway ramps ■ Gate on Houser Way at Kenworth 55 JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON ■ NE 3rd street for bikes • Connection on Factory Ave. ■ Rainier Ave. and Hardy Ave. The following barriers were identified: ■ Lack of comfort in high speed/volume conditions ■ Lack of wayfinding TAC members were in agreement with the projects identified in the preliminary list and the conceptual plans for intersections. (See Appendix B of this plan.) THEMES Key themes emerged from the broad input received through outreach activities. The key themes and representative quotes are shown in the Exhibit 3-5. Exhibit 3-5. Outreach Themes Table Safety Safety is a high priority theme that benefits users across the board and encourages less experienced riders to use the trail network. The network should be designed to minimize intermodal conflicts, street crossings, and travel along high speed, high traffic streets. In addition to design features, education and enforcement can improve safety. "I am not willing to walk or ride a bike on the shoulder of a busy or slightly busy road, regardless of whether or not the shoulder is paved, because it is extremely dangerous due to vehicle driver distractions (talking and texting on phone)." "Major intersections can be nerve-racking for bicyclists." JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Connectivity "There is a lack of bike paths on the major roads that lead Connectivity to regional and to the most popular destinations. I prefer to bike, but it takes local destinations such as job longer than necessary because I find myself having to take centers, entertainment centers roundabout ways in order to stay safe." and transit, as well within "I would love to see our bike trails connect all around Seattle neighborhoods, is an important like the Sammamish Trail which connects to the Burke - feature of the network. Gilman, then down and around to the waterfront, to Alki, then back to Renton." "It is too difficult, and dangerous, to bicycle through Renton to connect to major trails leading north, south, and east (Lake Washington Trail, Rainer Ave, Green River Trail, Cedar River Trail." "The bike trail connection isn't the greatest when riding around Lake Washington and along 405. With the amount of hotels shopping parks in the area in North Renton it would be great to improve those connections to existing trails to the north for daily and recreational use." Continuity "I love the Cedar River Trail and ride it often from Continuity in the network downtown Renton to Maple Valley. However wish it were enables longer trips that are paved beyond Maple Valley - a road bike doesn't navigate useful for commuting or active well on gravel." recreation and a fluid "I commute from the Highlands to Kirkland. I'm an advanced experience. and confident road rider. Some wonderful improvements have been made to signage and other aspects of driving, but there is no safe way to go up to the Highlands from down in the valley by bike. I tend to go all the way around to Kennydale and climb that big hill to come back to the Highlands rather than risk Sunset." Comfort and Inclusivity "I think that all trails, walkways, paths, etc. should be This refers to the diversity of accessible to ALL." experiences the network will "I walk for health. I sold my bicycle a few years ago, and enable, reaching across a have never felt a need to get another one. I am retired, so broad range of activities, ages, do not need daily transportation." and abilities. "I want to bike and walk ... my car trips kill me literally and keep me isolated. I want an outdoor vibrant community." JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Well -Maintained Trails wear out with time and need sufficient resources to conduct regular maintenance to offer a predictable, consistent experience for all users. Wayfinding and Awareness A comprehensive network of wayfinding signage elements tailored for walking and bicycling allows residents to easily navigate the network and make non -motorized and multi - modal trips. Innovative and Flexible Trail design optimizes for successful sharing of the network. Soft surface trails are a desired alternative to paved trails. "Surface maintenance is a MUST! Most importantly, keeping the shoulders /trails clear of debris." "Safe, shared use is possible if ALL users are aware of and follow trail rules." "There needs to be better signage at all entrance points to the park and along walkways." "Make 2-person soft surface on both sides of national standard width trails so folks can run together." JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN JANUARY 2019 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 4 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS This Chapter reviews needs and trends including: ■ Walking and biking activities participation ■ Future growth and change ■ Level of traffic stress ■ Destinations such as transit, schools, and parks ■ Connection to the community's center and region Based on the needs and trends, gaps and opportunities are identified. The current and proposed system that closes gaps and addresses needs is benchmarked to peer communities. Level of service concepts are explored. Participation Walking and biking are important to Renton residents and visitors, and Renton's local activities match the similarly high participation in the region and state. Renton Mobility & Recreation Use & Performance Indicators Renton's parks and trail system attracts up to 2.5 million visitors each year. In the questionnaire for this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, most respondents walk at least 2 times per week or more, and bike 1 day per week or less. At least 80% of the respondents walked or biked around the neighborhood, over two thirds walked on a trail and over three quarters biked on a trail. See Exhibit 4-1 and Appendix A. Exhibit 4-1. Questionnaire 2017 Walking and Biking Frequency Walking 65.6% Biking 38.7% Running 44% Source: City of Renton, 2017, BERK, 2018 61 JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 0 Renton monitors mobility and recreation performance indicators in its budget, and the 2017-2018 budget reported: ■ Increasing satisfaction with connectivity to local and regional centers via transit, sidewalks and trails from 52% in 2011 to 56% in 2015. ■ Relatively high but variable satisfaction with the level of trail connectivity and access at 74% to 83% during the 2012-2014 period. ■ Overall customer satisfaction ratings of good to excellent in cleanliness and appearance of Trail System, with 84%-93% satisfaction variably over the 201 2-2015 period. State Trails Plan In 2017 a statistically valid participation rate survey across Washington found the top activity of all respondents consisted of walking in a park or trail setting at 84%. Participation equaled 89% considering the Seattle - King region alone. Walking was also the top activity at over 90% for families with or without children. State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning The 2017 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP) document considers participation in recreation activities across the state and in different regions. The report found the participation rates for walking was 94% statewide. Rates were 28% for biking mostly on streets and roads, and 23% for running (many locations). Across different ages, races, or incomes, the top recreation activity was consistently walking in a park or trail setting. About 89% of participants in the Seattle -King region participated in walking in a park or trail setting. Most participation locations occurred in a person's yard or neighborhood. Future Growth & Change Renton's current trail and bike routes serve several of the highest population and job density areas though there are gaps particularly in the northeast and southeast geographies. See Exhibit 4-2 and Exhibit 4-3 Dense population and job centers are associated with high -density residential and commercial/industrial zones. Over a 20-year planning period concluding in 2035, over 16,700 housing units and 31,000 jobs would be added per the Renton Comprehensive Plan. New residents and employees would increase demand for walking and biking. Much of the growth would occur in the high -density residential and commercial zones identified in Exhibit 4-4, particularly in the City Center. JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-2. Population Density and Existing Network JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 4-3. Job Density and Existing Network t I • Mum 1 lip.405 5 •W 2,sw 515 ® , 1& Existing Trails Job Density Lower Job Density 0 0.5 1- A1-1 1 1� Miles - Sour<e. City of Renton, 2018; US Census 2015 -Higher Job Density JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-4. Existing Trail Access to High -Density Residential and Job Nodes .1 40 110 j�C�l. ��1r�✓� 9 -i Ap lur :W� f .'S 1 5J 181 , Existing Trails Quarter Mile Service Area LTS (1 & 2) 0 0.s High Density Residential Sour<e. City of Renton, 2018 Commercial JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON FOUR LEVELS OF TRAFFIC STRESS Level of Traffic Stress Bicycle systems that provide low traffic stress and high connectivity attract wider usage: ...a bicycling network to attract the widest possible segment of the population, its most fundamental attribute should be low -stress connectivity, that is, providing routes between people's origins and destinations that do not require cyclists to use links that exceed their tolerance for traffic stress, and that do not involve an undue level of detour. (Mineta Transportation Institute, 20 7 2) Renton has some low stress routes usable by most adults and children. These are in Kennydale, Cedar River, and the Valley. Most of the community does not have low stress facilities within 1/4 mile. See Exhibit 4-5 and Exhibit 4-6. Exhibit 4-5. Level of Traffic Stress Continuum ON Acceptable to ENTHUSED A CONFIDENT cycllSts Increasing level of comfort, safety, and interest in bicycling for transportation >> IL Source: City of Renton, 2018: BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-6. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Schools Renton is served by the Renton School District, Issaquah School District, and Kent School District. There are numerous private school throughout the City. The Renton School District serves most of the Renton city limits. The district has 15 elementary schools, 4 middle schools, and 4 high schools. Renton's 2017 Trails and Bicycle Questionnaire found that children walk to a large list of local schools (1 2 schools), and to a lesser extent bike to them (6 schools). See Appendix A. Renton has a sidewalk rehabilitation and replacement program targeting places where curb, gutter, sidewalks, and curb ramps are needed. Many of the schools in the district identify "walk to school" route options, and improvements within those areas would benefit children and families. Parks & Recreation Facilities Renton's parks and recreation facilities include 32 developed public parks, 965 acres of public open space, an 1 8-hole public golf course, two lake- front beaches and a public boat launch. Many parks and recreation facilities are accessed along the Cedar River Trail and Springbrook Trail, as well as bike lanes and shared roadways. Pedestrian trails also connect to and through parks and recreation facilities. However, parks and recreation facilities are not fully connected by the trails and bicycle system. See Exhibit 4-7. 5a JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-7. Parks and Recreation and Existing Network 69 JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Transit Dependent Populations Renton's City Center and Valley planning areas have the most frequent bus service. The Highlands and Benson neighborhoods have a few all -day routes. Other areas have less frequent service and sparser coverage of transit. The trail and bicycle network to transit facilities is discontinuous in areas outside the City Center. Areas with larger proportions of the elderly, the young, low-income individuals, and households without access to a car are often considered transit dependent. The first and last mile problem, one of the most complex challenges for public transit, refers to the beginning and end of a trip primarily made by public transit. Renton's Trails and Bicycle Questionnaire responses indicate that Renton residents use bicycles or walk to make short, local trips typically associated with the first and last mile problem. See Appendix A. Improving walking and biking infrastructure to appeal to a broad and diverse range of people — elderly, young, low income — can potentially help solve the first and last mile problem and thereby make it easier for more people to access transit. This would benefit one-third of the community that are younger than 18 and older than 65 years. See Exhibit 2-3 in Chapter 2. Those earning less than or equal to 80% of the area median income are concentrated in the City Center, Valley, Benson, and Highlands areas. See Exhibit 4-8. �o JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON ♦ RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-8. Low Income Census Tracts and Existing Network �t 10 900 405 00 +� 167 \. 1515 I8J Existing Trails Low Income Tracts - (< 80% Metro Area Median Income) 0 0.5 = Non -Low Income Tracts Hale: (> 80% Metro Area Source . City of Renton, 2018; US Census, 2016 Median Income) JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Equity — Puget Sound Regional Council Opportunity Index The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has evaluated areas that provide access to opportunities — education, economic, housing, transportation, and health/environment. The current trail and bicycle network contribute to opportunities and access for persons of color, and diverse age groups in the City Center, Valley, and a few other Community Planning Areas. The existing network is sparser in areas of lesser opportunity in Benson, Highlands, and West Hill. Opportunity maps illustrate where opportunity -rich communities exist, assess who has access to those neighborhoods, and help to understand what needs to be remedied in opportunity -poor neighborhoods. Exhibit 4-9 displays the current trail and bicycle network against the latest PSRC Opportunity Index map. This map is a graphical representation of how this plan analyzed demand and need with an equity lens. JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-9. PSRC Opportunity Index and Existing Network JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON City Center and Regional Trails City Center Plan, Makers 2011 9 City Center Renton's City Center Planning Area contains the historic core of the community. It is a regional center for manufacturing and service jobs, and increasingly a mixed -use residential neighborhood offering cultural and commercial amenities. Many roads and regional trails converge in this hub. The Renton Library, City Hall, and other government facilities serve the community. Regional parks and trails provide gathering places and access to the Cedar River and other open spaces. Renton adopted a City Center Community Plan to guide the future growth and direction of the center. City Center Community Plan goals include increasing transportation connections for multiple modes, improving trail connections and reaching more destinations, and making civic amenities more accessible. Since the City Center is a multimodal crossroads to other neighborhoods, meeting City Center goals will also advance this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan. Goal 5: Provide better regional transportation connections for a range of transportation modes to improve access to and from the City Center. Goal 6: Provide better internal connections between areas within the City Center, especially Coulon ParklLake Washington, The Landing, North Renton neighborhood, Downtown, and the South Renton neighborhood. Goal 7: Connect regional trails in the City Center and build on these key connections as an economic development strategy. Goal 8: Protect and enhance the natural features and open space in the City Center and improve public access to and connections between the Lake Washington shoreline, the Cedar River, and the variety of parks and open spaces throughout the City Center. The City Center is designated in part a Regional Growth Center and is also slated to take most of Renton's residential and commercial growth in the next 20 years. Today, single -occupancy vehicles comprise 82% of trips in the City Center. The City's goal is to decrease drive alone work trips to below 75%. Improving opportunities to bike and walk to and through the City Center will help meet the needs of residents and employees across the Renton planning area. JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Regional Trails Regional trails in Renton include the Cedar River Trail, Soos Creek Trail, Lake to Sound Trail, and soon the Eastside Rail Corridor and the Lake to Sound Trail. When complete the Eastside Rail Corridor will provide 16.7 miles of new trail that will connect the cities of Renton, Bellevue, Kirkland, Redmond, and Woodinville. The Lake to Sound Trail, when completed by King County, will be a continuous 16-mile non -motorized, multi -use recreational trail from the south end of Lake Washington in Renton to the Puget Sound in Des Moines, connecting the cities of Renton, Tukwila, Sea-Tac, Burien, and Des Moines. King County has also planned other regional trail extensions with the Soos Creek Trail with the future goal of connection to the Cedar River Trail. See Chapter 5 for additional information on increases in Regional Trail miles. GAPS & OPPORTUNITIES Renton considered the gap analysis and community comments to identify opportunities to create a more connected system with capacity for current and future use. This plan encourages higher participation rates in walking and biking by better connecting users to destinations, reducing traffic stress, and anticipating greater demand from new housing and job growth: ■ The network increases the extent of facilities in both high population and high job density. See Exhibit 4-10 and Exhibit 4-1 1. ■ Nearly every gap is filled with a connecting route meeting LTS 1 or 2 criteria. See Exhibit 4-1 2. ■ The future network knits together all Community Planning Areas including those of low opportunity. See Exhibit 4-1 3. �s JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 0 Exhibit 4-10. Population Density and Proposed Network 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 J I •+--- -ram _�_— 1 �; 1 ,� 1 Z Z 1 ••• 1 1 a a i E 1 o III ---y NE 4th5 a hlSt • 1 1 1 _. _ rd I r + 1 1 1 11 1 L.. .� 1 r 1 1 � i } 1 �'Pv S 168t S 16 x515 .a .. 181 Existing Trails Proposed Trails Populcifion per Acre SW 41st St � f — SW 43rtl 1 1 1 1. • • / • • : JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-1 1. Job Density and Proposed Network 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 / � 11�• 1 � � � 7tA^ial 1 1 to � Wdeg 1 900 1 1. 1 � 1 1 1 v,oV 1 Good 1 1 / SW 161h S1 If• 1 1 3 j1 ,11 1 3 11 1 \ 11 1 1 1 pl SW %ih St � 6 1 1 1 1 1 Existing Trails Proposed Trails Job 1 1 1 1 � SW 4th St o� 1 Ian � I I 1 1 \` DensityLower b Density s s Density Source City of Renton, s2015 JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 4-12. Level of Traffic Stress with '/a Mile Service Area and Proposed Network '/a Mile Service Area LTS 1 & 2 o os 1 ail Miles S..— City of PeM-, 2018 0 A N d r — �r 1� Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) LTS (1 & 2 ) LTS (3 & 4) Quarter Mile Service Area LTS (1 & 2) Community Center Library OPotential Transit Hub ® School JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-13. PSRC Opportunity Index and Proposed Network d Z a' a o' � I r a al a a N 4ih6t o N 3rd a � r \ o i = SW 7th St /S 7th St / S� GO W SW 16th St 3 a G SW 34 -■ , SW 41st St I SW 43rd St i r r r 79 JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON BENCHMARKS Benchmarking compares Renton's trail miles to other agencies to assess Renton's performance relative to peer communities. Renton has the lowest miles per 1,000 population compared to surrounding communities and other major cities in south and east King County. See Exhibit 4-14. If only implementing the Highest Priority projects (Tier 1) in Chapter 5, the City's network will be in the middle of benchmark communities and increase its system length by over 65%. Exhibit 4-14. Miles of Trails per 1,000 Population — Renton and Peers 1.20 1.00 0.80 0.60 • 0.40 • 0.20 0.00 Renton Kent Seattle Tukwila Bellevue Issaquah Source: City of Renton, 2018. 00 JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN LEVEL OF SERVICE A "level of service" (LOS) refers to the amount and quality of trails and bicycle facilities that are necessary to meet current and future needs. A LOS helps establish a capital facility program. Costs and revenue can then be matched, and projects phased to help achieve the planned LOS. LOS policies or standards are locally established and up to each community to set. Levels of service are often related to a unit of population, e.g. miles of trail per 1,000 population. In addition to quantity -based LOS measures, communities often consider quality and extent (distribution). This Plan is designed to meet the following three LOS criteria: 1. Level of Service — Quantity: Increase the miles of trails per 1,000 persons. See Exhibit 4-15. Exhibit 4-15. Miles of Trails per 1,000 (2018 — 2035) The Plan will increase miles of trails per 1,000 residents in Renton from its current level of 0.29 miles/1,000 residents in 2018 to 0.44 miles/1,000 residents with the implementation of all highest priority projects and to 0.95 miles/1,000 residents with the implementation of all proposed projects by 2035. Existing (2018) Highest Priority Projects All Proposed Projects (2035) (2035) Source: City of Renton, 2018. JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON 2. Level of Service — Quality: Increase the extent of LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities to increase user comfort and participation. See Exhibit 4-16. Exhibit 4-16. Change LTS 1 &2 Trail Miles The Plan will increase the total LTS 1 & 2 trail miles in Renton from 23.3 in 2018 to 113 in 2035 by adding 92.8 miles of new LTS 1 & 2 trails. 23.3 42. ■ Existing Proposed Source: City of Renton, BERK, 2018. 3. Level of Service — Connectivity and Extent (Distribution): a. Reduce gaps and increase the coverage of facilities across all Renton community planning areas. See Exhibit 4-17. b. Increase the share of residents and employees within a quarter mile service area of LTS 1 & 2 facilities. See Exhibit 4-18. Exhibit 4-17. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles by Community Planning Area BENSON CEDAR RIVER CITY CENTER EAST PLATEAU HIGHLANDS KENNYDALE TALBOT VALLEY WEST HILL Source: City of Renton, BERK, 2018. 0 I Existing Proposed JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 4-18. Percentage of Renton Residents within a Quarter Mile Service Area of LTS 1 & 2 Facilities 96 % 690/ 99% POPULATION Existing Source: City of Renton, BERK, 2018. JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS Proposed JOBS RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS .: � � �•-�4a� BYW I CHAPTER 5 '"W TRAIL &BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN GUIDING PRINCIPLES Based on Chapter 1 Goals and Objectives, Chapter 3 Community Involvement results, and Chapter 4 Demand and Needs Analysis, following are guiding principles of the Trail and Bicycle System. The Guiding Principles are ideas that influenced the proposed network recommendations, design guidelines, and projects and priorities. Characteristics Renton's Trail and Bicycle System will be: 1. Accessible, Connected to Destinations, and Continuous 2. Safe, Comfortable, and Inclusive 3. Easy to Navigate 4. Innovative and Flexible Benefits An improved Trail and Bicycle System will have positive effects for Renton's community by: 1. Achieving Equity 2. Increasing Awareness 3. Promoting Physical and Environmental Health 4. Enhancing the Economy and Community JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN 9 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON NETWORK RECOMMENDATIONS Renton's Trail and Bicycle System is one integrated system that will be expanded from about 30 miles to 127 miles within the city limits. This includes approximately 4 miles of existing trail facilities being upgraded or converted to different facility types. See Exhibit 5-1. Another 8 miles of new, proposed trails are planned in areas immediately outside of Renton's city limits for an overall plan total of 135 miles. Exhibit 5-1. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles M 49MME Existing Proposed Source: City of Renton, 201 8; BERK, 2018. The Trail and Bicycle System features a regional hub connecting in the Downtown Urban Center, and an expanded local network. Regional trails connect Renton to other cities and regional destinations that lie to the north, east, south, and west. Local Connector routes tie together multiple Renton neighborhoods to one another and carry more non -motorized trips. Local Neighborhood routes connect destinations within the same neighborhood. nn JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 5-2. Regional and Local System Map ------ 1 1 1 `1 1 ♦♦1 1 1 : 1 I j Vier I u 67 0 1 A Miles Source: c", er.en, 2018 d 909 Trail Hierarchy Regional Local Connector Local Neighborhood - Existing Trails Proposed Trail OCommunity Center Library OPotential Transit Hub ® School - Parks & Open Space JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN 89 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Regional With the proposed network, regional trail miles will double in Renton under the Plan from approximately 9.2 miles today to 19.1 by 2035. Exhibit 5-3. Existing and Proposed Regional Trail Miles 9.3 9.8 Existing ' Proposed Source: City of Renton, 2018, BERK, 2018 Renton's Downtown Urban Center will become a hub where several regional trail connections that come together all linked to the Cedar River Trail. ■ The Eastside Rail Corridor will connect from the Cedar River Trail via the Renton Connector or Houser Way Bypass north towards Bellevue. ■ The Lake to Sound Trail will connect to the Cedar River Trail to the east and to the Green River Trail to the west. ■ The Lake Washington Loop Trail would connect from the Cedar River northwest along Lake Washington Blvd to Seattle. A series of trail alternatives were reviewed with King County and the City of Renton staff. See Exhibit 5-4. Based on the meetings with King County, concepts were developed for Preferred Lake to Sound and Eastside Rail Corridor routes. See Appendix B for preferred concepts and intersection improvements. Other regional trail improvements include the 1.2-mile Soos Creek Trail extension from SE 1 92nd St to Petrovitsky Road, considered a high priority programmed project in the King County Regional Trails Need Report and the 2014 - 2019 Capital Improvement Program. Other segments including the Petrovitsky Crossing, Renton Park Segment, and the Lindberg to Cedar River Trail, are considered programmed and identified as a Tier 3 priority. (King County, 2016) ep JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Exhibit 5-4. Regional Trail Alternatives Regional Trail Alternatives - Overall Network LEGEND walMmu R r'• imdTnA la(preterred) r;.t`i �•-�•••�---� Pla Fe J,Itle AOP Curritlerr �i A �...•.....� R.Wnrtl Ll Wrn�Jr. Trill • (kNSf Aau eomdor.hored r. d, _ „ use has or rail v:11r nn:l(� .:• n f....... ..... i Ahnrune Trd O P.dwrrl..<INy hail g lb 4........ a rulix,yW •!'! Fvaldde [oil Corridor. ' C,I15rd LrWi.xtlwr • ¢norea u.e frod Irt lnYe 1 Walhingbe 81vd IPOIYF r 4 N. 3 b • �• reddde Rail [arAdv: .Li ... •r C g-Avenue N." �t r 1L :haxtl ou nJxl �� 3a fashlde Rel +rh.—rGarvlh .teraa. rart daredu,e Waal - r .v + d d4 - •� 4........ ••.. :eddrddeen PAollCu.KadlSW.P elh dd.+alla) • Ca A—. • Irm.r,Kxax Burnett Trail -T (preferred) Take fe leund rraP: Se pm• m 0 Lah+ fa la-d rmR: ,Rml•wifn•hax in ANSR Ro" 9epmenl •'Rlvnnetl 42. Q+ • +� eke to semd Raft #+ cti•�RrVa, i/ �, � lNarwr war 57r e nkrf ,�� ,•�aket::::n� T":r� ...........r......V2*.......... ....'�.....•'�Jb�fasaen k. Lak. fa Saaed rW j6u MA CITY OF RENTON A.L5 d erGTGlt ixn' Source: MacLeod Reckord, 2017; City of Renton, 2017. 0015000 91 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Local Connector & Local Neighborhood Community outreach results showed high participation in walking and biking in and around neighborhoods, and a desire to connect to the broader trail and bicycle network. The proposed network focuses on increasing and expanding the local network. Completing all proposed projects in the plan will increase Local Neighborhood miles by 475% and Local Connector miles by 41 2% and better connect local neighborhoods to the Regional trail network. See Exhibit 5-5 and Exhibit 5-6. Exhibit 5-5. Regional and Local Trail Miles — Existing and Proposed REGIONAL TRAIL LOCAL CONNECTOR LOCAL NEIGHBORHDDD ■ Existing ■ Proposed Source: City of Renton, 2018, BERK, 2018 Exhibit 5-6. Regional and Local Trail Miles — Total Proposed Network 475% 412, 106% REGIONAL TRAIL LOCAL CONNECTOR LOCAL NEIGHBORHOOD Source: City of Renton, 2018, BERK, 2018 92 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN TRAIL & BICYCLE FACILITY CHARACTERISTICS Roadway Characterisitcs & Trail & Bicycle Options Renton's unified trail system is made up of different facilities meant to reduce level of stress given traffic volumes, speed, and number of lanes in each direction. Shared Use Paths are separated from roadways and have the most flexible use and are often implemented with Regional or Local - Connector facilities. Bicycle lanes may be protected, buffered, or striped on Local -Connector facilities. Local Neighborhood routes feature lower volume traffic and a range of Shared Roadways, Buffered Lanes, Neighborhood Greenways, or Soft Surface Trails. See Exhibit 5-7. Exhibit 5-7. Facility Options by Roadway Characteristics ROADWAY DESCRIPTION. LIMIT (MPH) LANES PER DIRECTION FACILITY OPTIONS No vehicle traffic Low -volume, residential, local street Mixed use, medium volume collector iarterial , Soft Surface Trail Shared Use Path 25 I 1 Neighborhood Greenway Shared Roadway I 2-3 Shared Roadway Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane 30 1 Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane I 2-3 I Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane Protected Bike Lane* 35 2 Bike Lane I Shared Use Path High volume, high intensity, major arterial I 3+ Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane 40 I 2+ I Protected Bike Lane Shared Use Path LTS 1 LTS 2 VN LTS 3 * LTS 2 maybe achieved with protected bike lanes if traffic volumes are less than 10,000-15,000. Source: City of Renton, 2018. JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON This Trails and Bicycle Plan will increase the miles of each trail type with an emphasis on Shared Use Paths that offer the most comfort and safety for all non -motorized modes. All other trail types will increase from present numbers. See Exhibit 5-8. Each trail and bicycle facility type is described in the following section with typical features and design considerations. Exhibit 5-8. Existing and Proposed Network by Facility Type (Miles and Percent) Shared Use Path 7.67 40.03 25% 31 % Protected Bike Lane - 3.05 - 2% Protected Bike Lane - 0.39 - < 1 % Two -Way Protected Bike Lane - 2.66 - 2% Striped Bike Lane 9.70 32.03 32% 25% Striped Bike Lane 9.70 31.24 32% 24% Buffered Bike Lane - 0.79 - 1 % Neighborhood Greenway - 22.82 - 18% Signed Shared Roadway 2.47 10.31 8% 8% Pedestrian Trail 10.36 19.58 34% 15% Boardwalk 0.26 3.96 1 % 3% Hard Surface Trail 6.32 5.62 21 % 4% Soft Surface Trail 3.79 9.99 13% 8% TOTAL 30.20 127.81 100% 100% Notes: Proposed trails include conversion of 4.34 miles of existing facilities to new facility types. Source: City of Renton, 2018. 94 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Low -Stress Network The City of Renton can select the facility type that most increases user comfort where feasible with local conditions. By increasing comfort and offering more buffered or protected facilities, there could be increased non -motorized facility usage. The Trails and Bicycle Plan increases the miles of trail and bicycle facilities that are suited for all or most users — LTS 1 and LTS 2. See Exhibit 5-9. These include facilities such as separated Shared Use Paths, Protected and Buffered Bike Lanes, and others. For a variety of reasons —physical conditions, design considerations, partner requirements, funding, and others — LTS 1 and 2 facilities are not feasible everywhere. When fully implemented, the plan increases LTS 1 & 2 facility miles from 23.34 to 1 12.97 miles, an increase of 398%. Additionally, the plan increases LTS 3 & 4 facility miles from 6.86 to 14.84 miles, an increase of 1 33%. Overall, the plan increases the ratio of LTS 1 & 2 miles to LTS 3 & 4. See Exhibit 5-9. Exhibit 5-9. Existing and Proposed Trails by LTS Rating (Miles and Percent) Existing Proposed Source: City of Renton, 2018. 30.20 23.34 6.86 77% 23% 127.81 112.97 14.84 88% 12% JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN 95 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON SHARED USE PATH A shared -use path is physically separated from traffic by open space or a barrier and allows for two-way travel. A shared -use path can be used by bicyclists, pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers, and other non - motorized users. Some common locations for shared -use paths are along rivers, streams, utility rights of way, and abandoned railroad rights of way and between parks as well as within existing roadway corridors. Example: Cedar River Trail. For the purposes of this plan, the Shared -Use Path standard measurements were used. Physical and financial cost constraints may lead to considering Side Paths, which separation and width would not be ideal. Regional Shared Use Paths, like the Cedar River Trail, were the most used by bicyclists and second -most used locations by walkers per questionnaire results. Route locations along natural areas and separated routes were particularly used and desired by off -road bicycle users such as mountain bikers, BMX users, and Cyclocross users as preferred locations in the questionnaire. See Chapter 3. The Washington State Department of Transportation's Design Manual suggests: When designing shared -use paths, the bicyclist may not be the critical design user for every element of design. For example, the crossing speeds of most intersections between roads and pathways should be designed for pedestrians, as they are the slowest users. Accommodate all intended users and minimize conflicts. Exhibit 5-10. Shared -Use Path Shared Use Path ■ Facility physically separated from traffic by open space or a barrier. ■ May be in the right-of-way or independent right-of- way. ■ 2-way travel. ■ May be used by bicyclists, pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers, and other non -motorized users. ■ Width: 0 10' minimum 0 1 2' preferred + 2' shoulder on each side = 14' or 16' total ■ 5' minimum separated from roadway. ■ Surfacing varies. Renton, 2009; WSDOT Manual Chapter 1515 96 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN PROTECTED BIKE LANE A protected bike lane combines the user experience of a multi -use trail with a conventional bike lane. They provide space that is used for bicycles and are separated from motor vehicle travel lanes, parking lanes and sidewalks. Two-way protected bike lanes are physically separated cycle tracks that allow bicycle movement in both directions on one side of the road. This facility type will be newly implemented in the city and planning area. Exhibit 5-1 1. Protected Bike Lane ■ Configured as a protected cycle track —at street level with a parking lane or other barrier between the cycle track and o P the motor vehicle travel lane —and/or as a raised cycle track to provide vertical separation from the adjacent motor vehicle lane. I ■ Require additional considerations at driveway and side- z street crossings. ■ One-way lane width varies from 5-8 feet exclusive of the Two -Way Protected Bike Lane barrier. WSDOT Design Manual Exhibit 1520-1 1 AASHTO Bike Guide 97 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON BUFFERED BIKE LANE Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. The City does not yet have an example of a buffered bike lane. Exhibit 5-12. Buffered Bike Lane ■ Separated buffered bike lanes are at grade with the roadway, and they include a bike lane and a buffer area. ■ Buffer: Consider a 3-foot buffer strip whenever possible. Minimum width is 2 feet. ■ Bike Lane Width: 3 feet to 7 feet. o Minimum: 3 feet. o Recommended: 5 feet to enable passing maneuvers between cyclists o Increased: High cyclist volume locations should consider more width to facilitate mobility performance for this mode. WSDOT Design Manual: 1520.02(3) Buffered Bike Lane JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN STRIPED BIKE LANE The striped bicycle lane accommodates cyclists in a designated striped lane that is typically 5-feet wide. Example: Duvall Avenue NE, north of NE 4th Street Exhibit 5-13. Striped Bike Lane Bike Lane Shared Lane DownlBike Lane Up ■ 1-way facilities traveling in the direction of traffic, usually on both sides of roadway. ■ Exclusive use by bicyclists. ■ Width: 5' minimum to curb face or guardrail, 4' minimum without curb and gutter. ■ Lane and Parking Area Combined Width: 13 feet without curb face. 14 feet with a curb face. ■ Paved surface denoted with pavement markings: 0 4" or 6" solid white line demarcating bike lane, bicycle lane symbol. 0 4" solid white line demarcating parking area Bike lane symbol (6' high) and directional arrows should be painted on the far side of each intersection. Renton, 2009 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN 99 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAY Neighborhood greenways are safer, calm residential streets. Neighborhood greenways are a large component of added trail and bicycle miles in the City Planning Areas, though no examples exist presently. Exhibit 5-14. Neighborhood Greenway ■ Typically, residential streets that parallel an arterial route providing a "lower stress" option.Low vehicle volumes and speeds through traffic calming treatments. ■ Safe and convenient crossings of arterial streets. ■ Signs and pavement markings. ■ Could include storm water facilities (low -impact development facilities). Neighborhood Greenway JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN SIGNED SHARED ROADWAY When right-of-way widths and existing roadway conditions prohibit the addition of dedicated bicycle facilities, a roadway can be designated for shared use by motorists and bicyclists. Typically, this design solution is used on roadways with low traffic speeds and low levels of traffic or with wide curb lanes (i.e. 14 feet minimum). Signed shared roadways may provide a safer alternative to travel on busier parallel routes; direct cyclists toward particular destinations, such as parks, schools, shopping areas; or may serve as a link between discontinuous segments of dedicated bicycle facilities. Because signed shared roadways are often local streets, they may not necessarily be the most direct route. Ideally, signed shared roadways give bicyclists more priority in traffic maneuvers. Example: 1 16th Ave SE Exhibit 5-15. Signed Shared Roadway Signed Shared Roadway JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN ■ Bicyclists share roadway with motorists for safety, wayfinding, or other purposes ■ No change to roadway configuration required, though routes are often designated with signage and other measures to give bicyclists priority or enhance their safety and comfort • Usually on lower volume, speed roadways/local streets. ■ Signage: every t/A mile, or at every turn Renton, 2009 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON PEDESTRIAN TRAILS Pedestrian trails are dedicated facilities made of a variety of surfaces depending on environmental sensitivity and usage levels. Hard -surface trails can require less maintenance and accommodate more frequent use but are more expensive to construct and may not be sited where there are critical areas. Soft -surface trails can cost less when constructed but are typically not suited for heavy use and may require more maintenance. Boardwalks may be appropriate in wetlands or over water bodies. Exhibit 5-16. Pedestrian Trails Boardwalk Z:L Hard Surface Trail Soft Surface Trail N Boardwalks Boardwalks are used to span unavoidable wet areas or depressions. It allows adequate drainage and impacts the fragile ecosystem less than other surface types. Example: Springbrook Trail south of SW 27th Street Hard Surface Trails Trails surfaced with asphalt, concrete, crushed stone, soil cement, or other pervious materials. Example: Thomas Teasdale to Cascade Park Trail Soft Surface Trail Trails surfaced with earth, woodchips, or other similar natural and pervious materials. Example: May Creek Trail JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN FACILITY DESIGN GUIDELINES Bike Box A bike box is a Intersection & Trail Crossing Guidelines designated area at the head of a traffic lane at a Well -designed intersections and trail crossings are essential in creating a signalized intersection that continuous trail and bicycle system that encourages walking and biking. provides bicyclists with a visible way to There are limited pedestrian bridges and pedestrians must cross lanes of get ahead safe and visisi queuing travel at intersections; bicyclists are often in the flow of vehicular travel traffic during the red between and at intersections. Separated trails like shared use paths may signal phase. cross streets. See guidelines for different types of crossings below. Pedestrians at Intersections - These intersections, where the paths of people and vehicles come together, can be the most challenging part of negotiating a pedestrian network. If pedestrians cannot cross the street safely, Crossing Markings then mobility is severely limited, access is denied, and walking as Intersection crossing a mode of travel is discouraged. (FHWA, Undated) markings guide bicyclists on a safe and direct path Ensuring pedestrian safety and comfort follows these design principles: through intersections, including driveways and ■ Make pedestrians as visible as possible. ramps. ■ Make pedestrian actions as predictable as possible. ■ Slow vehicular traffic, particularly in central business districts or i similar areas. (FHWA, Undated) _ ----- Treatments at intersections include curb bulbs, curb ramps, signalization, crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands. Through Bicycle Lane Bicyclists Allows bicyclists an The principle objective when designing intersections for bicycle opportunity to position themselves to avoid mobility and safety performance is to provide a visible, distinct, conflicts with turning predictable, and clearly designated path leading to and through vehicles at an intersection. the intersection while managing potential conflicts between all other users and cyclists. (WSDOT Design Manual 2075) al The National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) suggests several methods for increasing bicyclists' comfort and reducing �® the risk of crashes: Source: NACTO JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON ■ Designs should heighten the level of visibility, denoting a clear right - Transit as part of a Mobility Ecosystem of -way, and facilitating eye contact and awareness with competing King County Metro customers modes. will soon be able to use new ■ Intersection treatments can resolve both queuing and merging mobile apps to hail an on - demand shuttle to and from maneuvers for bicyclists and are often coordinated with timed or transit hubs throughout the specialized signals. region, starting at the county's largest park -and- ■ The configuration of a safe intersection for bicyclists may include ride.... Metro is creating a elements such as color, signage, medians, signal detection, and mobility ecosystem with pavement markings. transit at the center, moving large numbers of people See the sidebar for several design options. More options and details over longer distances and can be found in the WSDOT Design Manual 2015 and the NACTO along the busiest corridors in King County. (King County Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Second Edition, 2014, and others. Metro, October 2018) Trail Crossings Transit Integration Clearly define who has the right of way and provide sight Prioritizing bicycle routes to distance for all users at shared use path and roadway transit stops and stations, reducing traffic, and intersections. (WSDOT Design Manual 20 7 5) improving bicycle and transit integration (bike parking, Two types of trail crossings are common: bikes on -board capacity) is essential to getting transit . Mid -block — preferably placed perpendicular to a road and with customers out of their cars traffic right of way assignments; traffic control devices; sight distances and on a bicycle for the first for both bicyclists and motor vehicle operators; refuge island use; or last mile of travel. access control; and pavement markings (American Public Transportation Association, ■ Adjacent Path Crossing — at an intersection where the trail crossing is September 2018) placed within public intersection crosswalks Bike Sharing In addition to standards in the WSDOT Design Manual for trail Bike share stations can be crossings, the City can consult standards and specifications developed co -located with transit stops by the National Park Service Handbook for Trail Design and Construction to form mobility hubs. and Maintenance, and US Forest Service Standard Trail Plans and Specifications. Wayfinding Bicycle wayfinding signage Transit Stop Integration should be used to guide bicyclists to transit stops, The first and last mile problem, one of the most complex challenges for especially for rapid services and other transit lines with public transit, refers to the beginning and end of a trip primarily made significance for long trips. by public transit. Renton's questionnaire responses summarized in NACTO Chapter 3 and Appendix A indicate that residents use bicycles or walk JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN to make short, local trips typically associated with the first and last mile to or from the destination. Improving walking and biking infrastructure to appeal to a broad and diverse range of people can help address the first and last mile problem and thereby make it easier for more people to access transit. This plan includes proposed projects that will improve access to high density residential or commercial zones, transit, or services. Likewise, there are many things that transit agencies can do to make transit use more convenient, including: ■ Allowing bikes on board ■ Providing bicycle parking at transit centers or stops ■ Providing for bike sharing ■ Wayfinding along bike routes ■ Ride sharing to transit hubs in low transit service areas ■ Avoid requiring assigned bike spaces Signage This plan promotes a connected system to take trail and bicycle facility users to everyday destinations. A wayfinding plan for signage can help them find their destination or discover a new one. The Renton Downtown Civic Core Vision and Action Plan provides a wayfinding system to link pedestrians and cyclists to parks, trails, and places in the Downtown. The wayfinding system advances the design and character of Downtown. The City anticipates a similar wayfinding approach citywide with variations unique to each neighborhood. Exhibit 5-17. Renton Downtown Civic Core Wayfinding System Source: City of Renton, 2018. 9JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON The City may develop route -specific signage and/or pavement markings to guide pedestrians and bicyclists to their destinations along preferred routes. Route designation and guide signs would be installed based on regional standards. Sign spacings may depend on the regional, neighborhood, and local destinations on the route. Bike route signs may be mounted to freestanding posts or to existing utility poles or light standards. In addition to wayfinding guidelines, this plan addresses roadway caution signage and pavement markings. Roadside caution signs and pavement markings follow the standards and guidelines of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the AASHTO Guidelines for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. King County promotes regional trail wayfinding elements through a general policy in its King County Open Space Plan: Parks, Trails, and Natural Areas: CIP-757 King County should/shall provide up-to-date mapping and consistent wayfinding throughout the regional trails network to enhance user navigation and travel. Trail wayfinding programs should be consistent with the USDOT MUTCD and regionally -accepted wayfinding programs. King County has also created a King County Regional Trails System (RTS) Arts Master Plan calling for improved signage standards consistent between the County and cities: The RTS needs an appropriate wayfinding approach to signage; this standard should be included in the RTS Design Guidelines. Consider improved signage standards consistent among King County and other jurisdictions, with an eye toward unifying alignments. For the Cedar River Tail in King County, the Art Master Plan calls for Gateway/Trailhead Wayfinding Projects, Elements, and Signage. Site Amenities Bike Parking Guidelines Bicyclists will seek to park as close as possible to their final destination. Per ASHTO guidance, bicycle racks should be located so that they: Are easily accessed from the street and protected from motor vehicles. 106 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN ■ Are visible to passers-by to promote usage and enhance security. ■ Do not impede or interfere with pedestrian traffic or routine maintenance activities. ■ Allow reasonable clearance for opening of passenger -side doors of parked cars. ■ Are covered, if possible, where users will leave their bikes for a longer amount of time. Performance criteria for bike parking racks have been developed by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, September 2015, in the Essentials of Bike Parking. Bike racks should be designed to: ■ Support bikes upright without putting stress on wheels ■ Accommodate a variety of bicycles and attachments ■ Allow locking of frame and at least one wheel with a U-lock ■ Be intuitive to use Bicycle Lean Rails The City of Renton may install bicycle lean rails at intersections allowing bicyclists to rest their arms and feet when waiting at intersections. They have been installed in Seattle along the Burke -Gilman Trail, together with a push button at the intersection to initiate a crossing phase. Exhibit 5-18. Bicycle Leaning Rail Source: City of Seattle. Trailheads and Amenities Trailheads serve as the designated entryways into trails and have clear signage. Features also include vehicle or bicycle parking, information ion JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON stations, informal recreation areas, seating and picnic areas, plazas or gathering spaces, and restrooms. For maintenance and emergency vehicle access, trailheads would be allowed occasional vehicle access. Trailheads may offer various levels of amenities depending on location, need, and expected user groups. Access should be provided and controlled so that ad hoc trails do not occur on private land or on public lands where access is not desired, e.g. environmentally sensitive areas. The following guidelines relate to the development and placement of trailheads and access points. ■ Trailhead Location: Trailheads should be placed at each terminus of a trail corridor, and any place where a large concentration of trail users is expected, such as at major parks along the trail. ■ Trailhead Features: Trailheads should at least include parking and a trail map. Trailheads may also include restrooms, drinking water, picnic facilities, benches, optional lighting, bike racks, and other recreational amenities. Site specific designs can also create or enhance neighborhood identity, incorporate public art, and/or provide cultural or environmental interpretation opportunities. ■ Trailhead Special Parking Designs: Trailheads associated with off - road biking trails or equestrians should provide parking and turn- around space for trailers. ■ Trailhead Accessibility: An accessible pathway should be developed that connects parking and other accessible elements to the trailhead. ADA access should be provided to as many site features as possible based on site conditions ■ Trail Access Points: Trail access points should be placed wherever trail access is expected, such as at schools, commercial areas, and parks. Trail access points should include signage identifying the trail and may include a map and drinking water. These access points serve to encourage neighborhood and local pedestrian and bicycle access to the trail system. They provide minimal amenities, most importantly trail system signs. They should be located at approximately one quarter - mile intervals along corridors, particularly along regional trail routes or other routes with large concentrations of uses. Entry nodes typically do not include parking facilities but could have a few standard size spaces depending on needs and circumstances. ioe JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN ■ Landscaping: Typical landscape elements will include grass and trees or shrubs to buffer parking areas from the street. Trees may provide shade relief and accentuate amenities within the trailhead location, and alert trail users to the presence of a trailhead. Informal landscaped areas may offer recreation potential. ■ Signs: Signs should include general and interpretive signs, location map, and rules/notices. Additional Design Guidance Resources AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities This manual of design standards is recognized nationally as the "industry standard for development of bicycle facilities." All of the design guidelines included in the recommendations section of this plan will meet the minimum standards articulated in the AASHTO document. WSDOT Local Agency Guidelines This manual identifies specific design standards related to bicycle and pedestrian facility installations. These standards are referenced in the design guidelines. King County Regional Trails Guidelines King County Regional trail guidelines are closely aligned with the AASHTO guidelines but are intended to create and unify the regional network by standardizing regional trail design elements, based on the concerns of safety, convenience, aesthetic experience, and economical maintenance. Some King County regional trails see as many as 2,000 users a day. As such, the regional trail standards are designed to accommodating a large number and variety of users in a safe, efficient, and enjoyable manner. Other The City may also consult standards and specifications developed by the National Park Service Handbook for Trail Design and Construction and Maintenance, US Forest Service Standard Trail Plans and Specifications, or the United States Access Board, A Summary of Accessibility Standards for Federal Outdoor Developed Areas. 109 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON PROJECTS & PRIORITIES Projects Responding to gaps and needs and community input, and Guiding Principles, this plan promotes trail and bicycle facilities of all types across all Community Planning Areas. Eighty projects have been identified. Shared Use Path Pedestrian Trail Striped Bike Lane Protected Bike Lane JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN cD EW - 3 r o� Newcastle Way cet�o Newcas�le�C/ub Rd z1 r _ o n rrey` ' F i I � 1 , Cougar y Cr Rec reenway ildlc Lake Washington r "o''e �1911 Lakeridge Park m y r N N ova a ' « 90 00Skyway u Park r S 1 24thS m s • S �2gthst S 133rd St S 132nd St t 7r rm _ M 11 M N 301h S' Future SW Athletic r♦ ® Complex •-f ♦ ♦ a e d 1 ~ J - May 1 1 1 1 r 1 eek NS 24�h,S_ • 1 1 Mc 'll-i ♦ 1 y.VL2.3;d PI 1 o- W �•• 1 1 ; 1 Honey Creek m Z 1 1 ,-1 Greenway ♦ a�a 1 -y. 1 ♦ ' 1 ♦� , �UEJ91�St1�.r a 1 Gene Coulon >1 Memorial Beach 21 �%, �� t 6 May Park 1 1 , 1 41. r-0� 1 :Valley County 900 rr� `�•a•�_i_ Zt�514}--i ' 1 Park �� ♦ '�?!�r ' 41,11 t ♦ 1 ♦ 1♦ 410Y t/ i 1lk 1 {♦ �� 1 �4C{�193hS1i_�__L�EL4th�StJ plleyRd ♦ Cll ■ tea+ 1 c 1 Z Ia v� !�1'Z. Z ; , N Sr cy 1 r 1 E 1� L > ♦�3.wC 4Io o' ' - 0- c 1 a, = a1 IQ Coaltfigld w 1 vl yJ}_'� •a ♦:��-. i___rYark 1. E, r1 10 1 a 7 1 1 St -6 S�•►,ti' @ttLSI l ■taf� ._�•___ It N�St N3rd St " f ys 1 1--- If ;'ter SE 128th St Cedar Riverlo ® 1 > h ' a Lake S ThishLF.2.Li$$1 1 o, Ave Srili�r�Vt'.© h >v r-•• 1 1.- �C73 1 r _a > � Cedar �P CL' •-----�1 v ��• , * River I r 0 el • * 3 'a , � �•. Park l � Maplewood 1 QI Foster rr O e 1 GL7. 1 ) 1 Community Park 1 «I r Golf Course N Black River ,♦ 1 /fi{ 4ofLvO Propert 1 h� Riparian • ��' j , 2 1 ^I Forest •�rrrre• ■ 4T3 Riverview Park I Maplewood -- ��-•-•� �J ....._._+_ HeightsPark •o w f S nth �t _MetrC51 ate.... ® Maplewood s• Wat I ♦ S 7th Sty Golf Course 7-1= ; 1 Wat work � ♦ � ©-• / 6 Par Spri brook 1401 ♦ (W ♦S r CH Fort Dent Trail way S Grady IM 1 BP • I� 5 Grad _Y IN oo♦ ♦'>i 0 w Imo 0'� Ron Regis 4, Park ; / 1 j ♦� ♦ Iyk. ♦ GV r �y� SouthQenter Bl�a 1 1 1 m ♦N 1 � e,Oc 1 ,�, ,��♦ Soos ,�� 1 3 •♦ 1 1 p ; �e�o' O �, \ Creek and �ryy Tukwila Pkwy N > `!' ♦ tit--r , ..,--�. Trail a LL4♦iii/// 3 Pan11her Creek 1 ; a♦ ' �.rJ �,1�,, ' a � w Wetlands T! __•�.� ♦ ♦...+JAQi 4 ..Js-----, - 1 1 w ¢ ; 'r ♦ ♦ r ; *1 Cascade ;ark ♦ 1 a � . _ _ 1 1-a ; r �.. � : _ .. �Frl�illl� _ _ { � ..��].�.4FjL�S,•iI 1 SW 271h St 1�•• 1° ♦ 1 ---©- 1 1 1 1 m 10 ♦ �O 1 11 j 1 1 12 Renton---------F r 1 ;> ♦ ♦ SE 168ffi St R' e ail Wetlands 1 1 � is ♦ ,y A.N; r Replf Park SW thSt fIW Iw AA 1 �. j Edlund r•-�+�� 11 &t19Yltgy.". ._.r•r '■.Yr SW 41 st St , Property *ric\ ' ' S 18 h.St A�.r.-.._r._.._.6-----_ ,r� S 0 , 1 � V. ' 1 w 3j 1 j Fn i .. SF.1 H4tIL§L r a o0e 1¢ ' Ic 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 / 1 1 ' SE 192nd St Cleveland / 1 Richardson j Property / Springbrook Watershed N r I > • N , > 1 , c 1 W 0 0.5 1 Miles0 i I i 11 167 Cedar River Trail Park N° 1m 1~ 1� 1 IZ 1 1 r... Y. a « N SE 183rd St N a Q SE 3ones Rd Cavanaugh Pond T Existing Trails Shared Use Path Striped Bike Lane Signed Shared Roadway Pedestrian Trail Proposed Trails •--- Shared Use Path •---• Protected Bike Lane Striped Bike Lane ---• Neighborhood Greenway Signed Shared Roadway Pedestrian Trail Parks & Open Space OCommunity Center Library O Potential Transit Hub r School Proposed Project Number, Name 17, Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway = 51, Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail 68, South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 1, 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 18, Highlands Hillclimb 35, May Valley Trail 52, Panther Creek Trail 69, Springbrook Trail 2, 1 28th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 19, Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway 36, Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 53, Powerline Trail 70, Springbrook Trail Extension 3, 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 20Honey Creek Trail Extensions 37, Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes 54, Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway 71, Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb 4, Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Pathji: Houser Way and Factory Avenue N 4th Street Connector 55, Renton Connector 72, SW 16th Street Shared Use Path 5, Benson Neighborhood Greenway , Houser Way N Shared Use Path 39, N 6th Street Bike Lanes 56, Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway 73, SW 27th Street Connector 6, Benson Road/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes 23, Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes 40, N 8th Street Shared Use Path 57, S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lan 74, Talbot Road S Bike Lanes Wascade Waterline Spur Trail ' 24, Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway 41, Naches Avenue Shared U�lllll 58, S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway 75, Thunder Creek Trail 8, Cedar to Sammamish Trail 25, Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway 42, NE 3rd Street 59, S/SW 7th Street Transit Connector 76, Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail 9, Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lan 26, Kenyon -Dobson Trail and Trailhead 43, NE 4th Street Bike Lanes 60, Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail 77, Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway 10, East Valley Road Shared Use Path , Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment 44, NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes 61, SE 168Th Street Protected Bike Lanes 78, Tukwila Station Trail 11, Eastside Rail Corridor 28, Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment 45, NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway 62, SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway 79, Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes 12, Edmonds Avenue Connector 29, Lake Washington Loop Trail 46, NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path 63, SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path 80, Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 13, Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path 30, Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb 47, Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes 64, Seattle Waterline Spur Trail 14, Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway _ 31, Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path 48, North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 65, Seattle Waterline Trail Highest Priorty Project 15, Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway 32, Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway 49, North Southport Drive Shared Use Path 66, Shattuck to Airport Connector 16, Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path 33, May Creek Hillclimb 50, Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes Soos Creek Trail CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Project Prioritization Methodology Eighty projects were scored with prioritization criteria addressing five categories: Connectivity and Accessibility, Safety and Trail Experience, Equity, Economy and Community, and Construction and Implementation. Each category was weighted with Connectivity and Accessibility and Safety and Trail Experience weighted more highly, Equity weighted moderately, and Economy and Community and Construction and Implementation weighted lower. For each category, indicators or variables were developed. For each indicator, project evaluation criteria were developed, and each rated on either a 3-part high, medium, or low range or a 5-part high, medium -high, medium, medium -low, and low range. See Exhibit 5-20 and Appendix D for detailed information. Exhibit 5-20. Prioritization Criteria and Indicators Connectivity and Does the project: Accessibility ■ Fill a gap between existing facilities, or Weight: 30% ■ Fill gap in area with no/few facilities, or ■ Remove pedestrian and/or bicycle barriers? To what extent does this project improve pedestrian/bike access to schools? Does this project offer connections to parks, recreation, or natural areas? Safety and Trail Does the project increase the extent of the low stress (LTS 1 or 2) network? Experience Does the project enhance the natural environment experience? Weight: 30% Does the project address a known issue regarding user experience (intersections, slope/terrain, lighting, wayfinding, formalize informal trail, etc.)? Equity Does the project reach a large number of people and jobs? Weight: 20% Does the project improve bicycle or pedestrian access for users older than Age 64 and/or users younger than Age 1 8? Does the project improve bicycle or pedestrian access for the city's Households in Poverty? 113 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Economy and Does the project leverage plans or priorities? Community Does the project improve access to high density residential or commercial Weight: 1 0% zones, transit, or services? Does the project reflect public feedback? Construction and Is the project a strong candidate for possible grants? Implementation To what extent can the project be implemented with future construction? Weight: 10% Is the project reasonably attainable? Is the cost reasonably balanced with potential benefits? Source: City of Renton, 201 8; BERK, 2018. Tiers & Results Once scored, three tiers of projects were developed: Highest Priority, High Priority, and Medium Priority. The City used two qualitative criteria in addition to prioritization scores to develop the Highest Priority projects list (Tier 1 ): partnership commitments and geographic equity. Thus, the top scoring projects include the highest scoring projects, plus projects with known commitments, and projects that are opportunistic, feasible in the near term, enhance connectivity across planning areas, or assist with geographic equity. Since some projects had identical scores, there were 27 projects in Tier 1, 26 projects in Tier 2, and 27 projects in Tier 3. The process is illustrated in Exhibit 5-21. Exhibit 5-21. Prioritization Process Define & Weight Priorities Source: BERK, 2018. Define & Score Indicators Rank Projects Consider Develop Tier Partnerships 1, Tier 2, & and Tier 3 Geographic List Equity JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Project tiers are nearly equal in length, but Tier 1 projects emphasize Shared Use Paths, and complete all Protected Bike Lanes. Striped Bike Lanes are also increased. Implementation of Neighborhood Greenways is initiated but is a smaller share than in later phases. Tier 2 continues to advance Shared Use Paths, adds Striped Bike Lanes, and adds Neighborhood Greenways, plus implements most Pedestrian Trails. Tier 3 completes the network with the emphasis on Neighborhood Greenways, as well as Striped Bike Lanes, and Shared Use Paths. See Exhibit 5-22. Exhibit 5-22. Facility Types by Project Tiers (Miles) Shared Use Path 32.4 16.5 9.5 6.4 Protected Bike Lane 3.0 3.0 - - Protected Bike Lane 0.4 0.4 - - Two -Way Protected Bike Lane 2.7 2.7 - - Striped Bike Lane 24.2 7.0 9.0 8.2 Striped Bike Lane 23.4 7.0 9.0 7.5 Buffered Bike Lane 0.8 - - 0.8 Neighborhood Greenway 22.8 1.4 7.0 14.4 Signed Shared Roadway 8.6 1.6 1.8 5.2 Pedestrian Trail 10.9 3.0 7.4 0.5 Boardwalk 3.7 0.2 3.5 - Hard SurfaceTraiI - - - - Soft SurfaceTrail 7.2 2.9 3.8 0.5 Total Miles 101.9 32.5 34.7 34.7 Note: Numbers are in miles and are rounded. Source: City of Renton, 201 8; BERK, 2018. The project list is provided in Exhibit 5-23. Project cut sheets are included in Appendix C. Details of the ranking process are provided in Appendix D. 115 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Exhibit 5-23. Project Ranking Tier 1 — HIGHEST PRIORITY 1 55 Renton Connector 1 28 Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment 0 0 0 0 4 3 57 S 2nd St Protected Bike Lanes 4 69 Springbrook Trail 5 1 1 Eastside Rail Corridor J 5 7 Cascade Waterline Spur Trail 0 0 4 J 1 7 29 Lake Washington Loop Trail 7 73 SW 27th St Connector V 7 27 Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment 44 10 60 Sam Chastain Water Trail J 10 46 NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path 10 12 Edmonds Ave Connector 10 67 Soos Creek Trail 0 0J 14 20 Honey Creek Trail Extension 14 34 May Creek Trail 14 9 Duvall Ave NE Bike Lanes 14 80 Wells Ave S Signed Shared Roadway (10 0 14 43 NE 4th St Bike Lanes ( 4 0 4 19 21 Houser Way & Factory Avenue 0 4 19 22 Houser Way N Shared Use Path 4 0 4 19 13 Garden Ave N Shared Use Path 0 4 4 22 17 Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway 22 61 SE 168th St Protected Bike Lanes 24 1 1 16th Ave SE Bike Lanes 24 59 S/SW 7th St Transit Corridor 24 38 N 4th St Connector 24 41 Naches Ave Shared Use Path JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Tier 2 — HIGH PRIORITY 28 63 SE Petrovitsky Rd Shared Use Path 28 64 Seattle Waterline Spur Trail 28 65 Seattle Waterline Trail 28 70 Springbrook Trail Extension 32 49 N Southport Dr Shared Use Path 32 53 Powerline Trail 32 76 Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail 35 31 Logan Ave N Shared Use Path 35 6 Benson Rd/Main Ave S Bike Lanes 37 79 Union Ave NE Bike Lanes 37 78 Tukwila Station Trail 37 39 N 6th St Bike Lanes 37 8 Cedar to Sammamish Trail 41 26 Kenyon -Dobson Trail & Trailhead 41 51 Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail 41 74 Talbot Rd S Bike Lanes 44 50 Oakesdale Ave Bike Lanes 44 66 Shattuck to Airport Connector 44 5 Benson Neighborhood Greenway 47 48 North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 47 19 Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway 47 36 Mill Ave S Signed Shared Roadway 50 75 Thunder Creek Trail 50 37 Monroe Ave NE Bike Lanes 50 72 SW 16th St Shared Use Path 50 52 Panther Creek Trail a • O 4 O 0 4 4 0 4 a • O 4 JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Tier 3 — MEDIUM PRIORITY 54 40 N 8th St Shared Use Path (11 4 4 55 16 Hardie Ave Bike Lane & Shared Use Path 0 4 4 55 30 Langston Rd/SW 134th St Hillclimb 57 4 Benson Drive S/108th Ave SE Shared Use 0 Q1 4 c Path 57 42 NE 3rd St (11 C 59 56 Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway 0 4 C 59 18 Highlands Hillclimb () () � 0 59 58 S 3rd St Signed Shared Roadway 0 4 62 10 East Valley Rd Shared Use Path () 0 (:� 0 62 2 128th Ave SE Bike Lanes C) (10 0 62 68 South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 0 62 77 Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway 0 0 66 44 NE 12th St Bike Lanes 0 4 4 66 45 NE 16th St Signed Shared Roadway 0 0 66 35 May Valley Trail 4 0 69 71 Sunset Blvd Hillclimb 0 4 70 33 May Creek Hillclimb 0 0 70 23 Jericho Ave NE Bike Lanes 0 0 0 72 62 SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood 0 0 4 Greenway 73 15 Grant Ave Neighborhood Greenway 0 74 32 Maplewood Heights Neighborhood 0 C) 0 0 C) Greenway 75 54 Puget Dr Bike Lanes & Signed Shared 0 Roadway 75 24 Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway 0 0 0 77 14 Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway 0 0 0 0 77 25 Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway 0 0 0 79 47 Nile Ave NE Bike Lanes 0 0 0 0 80 3 156th Ave SE Bike Lanes 0 0 0 „n JANUARY 2019 - - TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN cat TP CHAPTER 6 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 6 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES This chapter identifies actions the City can take to optimally implement the goals, objectives, and projects of this plan. It also identifies topics meant for further exploration. MONITORING The City intends to track its performance periodically to determine progress on implementation of this plan. Potential monitoring strategies are listed in Exhibit 6-1. Monitoring is recommended biennially in association with updates to the City budget and capital improvement program. Performance measurement is a useful strategy in requesting additional funding and resources. Exhibit 6-1. Potential Monitoring Measures and Targets PRIORITY PERFORMANCE Connectivity & Accessibility Percentage of bicycle facility network completed within quarter mile of schools and parks. Safety & Trail Experience Percentage increase in LTS 1 or 2 network. Equity Percentage of households within '/a mile of network Percentage increase in network serving children, elderly, households in poverty. Economy & Community Percentage increase in access to high density residential or commercial zones, transit, or services. Percentage progress on Tier 1 Projects. Construction & Implementation Projects programed and completed in six -year CIP. Source: City of Renton, 2018. PHASING Given local conditions on each route and available funding, Renton may phase improvements and consider alternative trail and bicycle facility types and cross sections. At the project design level, each project will be reassessed to determine the appropriateness of the suggested 121 JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON improvements, and to determine the available right-of-way, etc. When a project is in the development phase, a topographic and right-of-way survey will provide the first clear picture of the actual conditions of the route, and it may be necessary to implement a different design solution or combination of design solutions than are shown in this plan. In addition, there may be development of other capital projects or changes in funding strategies that dictate a different cross section or facility classification than the one currently identified. PARTNERSHIP & FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES Partnerships The City's trail and bicycle system is an integral part of the county and state transportation and park system. Key regional and state partners include: ■ Cities of Newcastle, Issaquah, Kent, Tukwila, and others ■ King County Parks ■ King County Metro ■ Renton, Issaquah, and Kent School Districts ■ Sound Transit ■ Washington State Department of Transportation The City has planned in partnership with these agencies to develop this plan, and these partners can advance implementation of this system through joint design, funding, and coordination. The City seeks to work with additional partners, such as Seattle -King County Public Health which is advancing a healthy communities program, and the Puget Sound Regional Council with a Regional Open Space Strategy. Funding The City of Renton includes non -motorized capital investments in the annual Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP is adopted annually by the City Council. The 2019-2024 TIP has programmed funding JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN to implement some of the projects identified in the Trail and Bicycle Master Plan: ■ $1,450,000 Walkway program. ■ $1,850,000 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program. ■ Project level implementation of pedestrian and bicycle routes per this plan (e.g. Lake Washington Loop Trail). The funding can be used for planning, design, and construction phases of the projects as well as for local matches for state and federal grants. Although it may not be the primary purpose of a particular project or program, many TIP projects have the potential to assist in implementing projects within the Trails and Bicycle Master Plan. The Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) provides matching grants for trail acquisition and development and is open to local and state agencies. Grant applications are received on even calendar years. Many funds require a comprehensive plan, such as this master plan. Funds that are open to local agencies include: ■ Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account (ALEA) - Provides funding to buy, protect, and restore aquatic lands habitat and to provide public access to the waterfront. Projects must be associated with navigable waters of the state. ■ Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) - State Program. Provides funding to buy or develop public outdoor recreation areas and facilities. Grants support both acquisition and development of active and passive recreation areas and conservation lands. Public use is required. ■ Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) - Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership Program. Provides funding to buy or develop public outdoor recreation areas and facilities in, or serving, urban areas with 50,000 or more people. Grants support both acquisition and development of active and passive recreation areas and conservation lands. Public use is required. ■ Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program, Trails Category (WWRP) - Provides funding to acquire, develop, or renovate pedestrian, equestrian, bicycle, or cross-country ski trails. Program is for non -motorized trails that provide connections to neighborhoods, communities, or regional trails. 123 JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON In 2007, King County voters approved Proposition 2, which included expanding the regional trail system over a six -year period, with the last distribution to cities ending in 2013. In 2013, King County voters approved a second, six -year levy (Proposition 1) which provides for trail acquisition and development; the last distribution will be in 2019. King County is considering placing a third levy on the ballot for voters to approve in 2019 which could also be used for trail acquisition and development. REQUIREMENTS & INCENTIVES Implementing Standards at Time of Development The City has enacted ordinances that give it authority to require developers to implement the trail and bicycle cross sections and projects in this plan. ■ Street Frontage and Off -site Street Improvements (RMC 4-6-060): To implement trail and bicycle standards, the City can require that facilities that are within the right of way are implemented with street frontage improvements consistent with the standards in this plan and the City's development regulations pertaining to streets. When offsite improvements are required to support new development, the City can require implementation of pedestrian and bicycle improvements as part of its street standards. ■ Shoreline Public Access Requirements (RMC 4-3-090): The Shoreline Master Program also requires shoreline public access when demand is created and is another regulatory program that can advance trails in shoreline jurisdiction. In the near -term, the City can amend its environmental review procedures (RMC 4-9-070) to include this plan in its SEPA Substantive Authority, and development that would impact the trail and bicycle system could be conditioned to mitigate impacts, such as implementing improvements that serve as mitigation. The City already adopts its Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Improvement Program, and Parks, Recreational, Natural Areas (PRNA) Plan, and this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan can be similarly included. The City can also adopt regulations that require trail easements when a development is located within an area identified for a local or regional trail system in this plan. i2a JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN Incentives There are two types of incentives relevant to this plan: ■ Incentives for Individuals: The City can continue to require commute trip reduction programs by large employers, who can incentivize their employees to use non -motorized forms of commuting or transit. The City can also support and encourage federal and state tax incentives or subsidies to encourage bike and transit commuting. ■ The City can provide development incentives when amenities for transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians are included and being implemented. Where improvements are not required for new development, but extension of trail or bike facilities is planned, the City could incentivize voluntary trail and bicycle project implementation such as through density or height bonuses for new development or allowing onsite density transfer from trail corridors to other developable parts of the site. Fee in Lieu The City could allow or require development to provide trail or bicycle facility improvements or pay a fee in lieu when it is not in the City's interest to have the improvement installed at the time of permit. This may occur when the expected improvement is a short segment of a longer trail improvement and the work should be done all at once. The City allows a fee in lieu of required street improvements in RMC 4-9-060. E-bike & Motorized Foot Scooters Electric bikes and motorized foot scooters are finding popularity in major cities across the country. These types of vehicles increase more use of trails and bicycle facilities because they assist with speed and sloped terrain. The State regulates motorized foot scooters and local communities may pass their own regulations. A motorized foot scooter is a device with no more than two 7 fl- inch or smaller diameter wheels that has handlebars, is designed to be stood or sat upon by the operator, and is powered by an internal combustion engine or electric motor that is capable of propelling the device with or without human propulsion. 125 JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON The City restricts motorized foot scooters in any park, trail, or sidewalk, or on streets with a maximum speed limit of 25 miles per hour, or any corridor marked "No non -motorized vehicles." Recently, the State passed SB 6434 in 2018 regulating different types of electric bikes and where they may be allowed on bike lanes or trails. Similar to Motorized Foot Scooters, the City could determine how to regulate E-Bikes as allowed under State law. COMMUNITY EDUCATION & PROMOTION Events & Promotion Renton can promote awareness of the trail and bicycle system by advertising its system in its recreation program, city newsletter, online, and elsewhere. The City can also continue providing online or print maps and other materials. The City could increase recreation and community events in association with trails and bicycle facilities including fun runs, races, and other activities to promote awareness and use of the system and promote health and fitness. The City could also support guided walking and biking tours illustrating key routes and how to access key destinations. Guides could be volunteers. The City can work in partnership with King County Metro on expanding its transit to trail program that was launched in the Issaquah Alps area. Safety & Awareness Trail and bicycle safety has many facets. Potential actions to increase safety include: ■ The City can provide user safety and etiquette tips and rules on how pedestrians and bicyclists share facilities. ■ The City can advertise and support other entities who are providing safety and awareness programs such as the School District. ■ The City can implement design standards that promote crime prevention through environmental design that influence landscaping, lighting, and location of facilities. JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN ■ Code enforcement officers and police officers can enforce City laws and reduce civil and criminal infractions. ■ Continue to expand Renton's Trail Ranger Program. FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS Incorporate Trails and Bicycle Master Plan in Citywide Comprehensive Plan The City references the Trails and Bicycle Master Plan in the Transportation Element. The Comprehensive Plan could be updated to reflect the 2019 plan vision, goals, and policies. Explorations in Multimodal Transportation Levels of Service The City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element identifies a multimodal level of service addressing person trips by motor vehicles, transit, and non -motorized (bicycle and pedestrian) modes. Person trips are the number of persons making the same trip in the same mode of travel. Using person trips provides a common metric for use in concurrency and also impact or mitigation fees. Policy T-48: A. Citywide Person Trips: Based on the City's land use and growth strategy, establish a citywide level of person trips by mode, and support each mode with capital improvements and programs. The general mode categories include: motor vehicle trips, transit trips, and non -motorized trips. The City has established a person trip bank for motor vehicle trips. The City could establish a bank of non -motorized person trips and link it to capital improvements. Utilize Prioritization Criteria for Sidewalk Plan The City completed a Comprehensive Walkway Study in 2008 that prioritized needed sidewalk projects. Feedback through the community outreach included an emphasis on sidewalks and walkways. The City could incorporate the prioritization methods used in this plan in updating the Comprehensive Walkway Study for complete network integration. iv JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON Vision Zero Started in Sweden in the 1990s, Vision Zero is an approach to traffic safety for all users that sets a goal of zero traffic deaths or severe injuries through holistic, integrated action strategies. As an approach, Vision Zero includes several fundamental principles that differentiate it from traditional approaches to road safety. The City can consider whether and how to implement a Vision Zero program. Implementing Vision Zero typically involves the following practices: ■ Build and sustain leadership, collaboration, and accountability: In addition to strong and visible commitment from the Mayor and Council, large-scale, cross -sector collaboration that includes transportation, public health, law enforcement, policy makers, elected officials, and community members is key to successful implementation. ■ Collect, analyze, and use data: Data should drive all stages of Vision Zero planning, from strategy development, to ongoing management, evaluation, and predictive planning. Collecting, analyzing, and using data will need coordination across city departments. Local knowledge and community input are also important to supplement quantitative data. ■ Prioritize equity and engagement. Vision Zero planning should include effective, meaningful community dialogue to gather input from diverse voices on the issue of road safety. ■ Lead with roadway design that prioritizes safety. ■ Manage speed to safe levels. This is a central tenet of Vision Zero and includes strategies such as designing roads for lower speeds, setting and communicating safe speed limits, and enforcing these limits. ■ Maximize technology advances, but don't overlook low -tech solutions. Over the longer term, innovation in automated vehicles and other technologies offer opportunities for improvements in safety. In the shorter term, relatively inexpensive, low -tech improvements such as the addition of side guards, cameras, and mirrors on large vehicles and trucks (since large vehicles are disproportionately involved in crashes) can save lives. JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN A foundational element to implement the Vision Zero approach is the creation of a Vision Zero Action Plan that operationalizes these principles. The Action Plan includes broad community input and lays out specific measurable action steps, priorities, with clear timelines for implementation. Increase Local Funding for Non -Motorized Facilities The City could pursue other funding sources dedicated to the provision of trails and bicycle facilities. One such source is to collect mitigation fees from new development that creates a demand for service, requiring mitigation to reduce adverse impacts on the built environment. The City could condition development if it has identified impacts in environmental documents prepared under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Impacts could be determined by measuring the number of person trips that development generates on bicycle and pedestrian facilities. To implement the SEPA mitigation fee, the City could develop and publish a study of expected demand and person trip rates, and then apply it to development subject to SEPA. Fees that are collected must be expended within 5 years of receipt. 129 JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN JANUARY 2019 RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK CITY OF RENTON • RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 7 REFERENCES American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). (201 2) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. See: https://www.transportation.org/. City of Renton. (2015, June 22; amended November 2017). Comprehensive Plan. Available: https://rentonwa.gov/city_hall/community_and_economic_develop ment/long_range_planning. City of Renton. (201 1). Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan. E .><i[•971 https://rentonwa.gov/city—hall/community—services/parks—plannin g_and_deve lopment/parks_recreation_and_natural_areas_pIan King County (2016). King County Open Space Plan: Parks, Trails, and Natural Areas 2016 Update. Available: https://www.kingcounty.gov/services/parks- recreation/parks/about/open-space-plan.aspx. King County. (2016, November 22). Technical Appendix C2: Regional Trails Needs Report. Retrieved from kingcounty.gov: https://ww.kingcounty.gov/—/media/depts/executive/performanc e-strategy-budget/regional- planning/2016CompPlanUpdate/2016Adopted -KCCP/Appendix- C2-RegTrailsNeedsReport-2016KCCP-ADO-1 1 2216.ashx?la=en LaCivita, Leah. (2018, April 16). New Legislation Targets E-Bikes. Retrieved from Municipal Research and Services Center: http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/April- 2018/New-Legislation-Targets-E-Bikes.aspx. Mineta Transportation Institute. (2012, May). Low -Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity. Retrieved from transweb.sisu.edu: https://transweb.sisu.edu/research/low-stress-bicycling-and- network-connectivity. National Association of City Transportation Officials. (2014, March). Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Second Edition. See: https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/. 9JANUARY 2019 REFERENCES RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN • CITY OF RENTON National Park Service (NPS) Requirements. Civil (Site) & Environmental Engineering Standards: NPS Management Policies 2006 - The Guide to Managing the National Park System. Available: https://www.nps.gov/dscw/ds-civil-environmental.htm. United States Access Board (2014, May). Outdoor Developed Areas: A Summary of Accessibility Standards for Federal Outdoor Developed Areas. Available: https://www.access- board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/recreation-facilities/outdoor- developed-areas/a-summary-of-accessibility-standards-for- federal-outdoor-developed-areas. US Forest Service. (2014, November). Standard Trail Plans and Specifications. Retrieved from www.fs.fed.us: https://www.fs.fed.us/managing-land/trails/trail-management- tools/trailplans. Vision Zero Network, February 2017. Moving from Vision to Action. Available: https://visionzeronetwork.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/1 1 /VZN-Moving -from -Vision -to-Action.pdf. Vision Zero Network, December 2017. Vision, Strategies, Action: Guidelines for an Effective Vision Zero Action Plan. Available: https://visionzeronetwork.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/12/VZN_ActionPlan_FINAL.pdf. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). (2018, July) Design Manual. Available: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Publications/Manuals/M22- 01.htm#Individualchapters. 9JANUARY 2019 REFERENCES 0 A D A. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY Public Outreach Results & Themes Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan I January 2019 Introduction........................................................................................................................................... 2 TopOutreach Takeaways..................................................................................................................... 2 PotentialThemes...................................................................................................................................2 OutreachResults................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Questionnaire......................................................................................................................................................4 2. Mapping Results...............................................................................................................................................10 3. Community Open Houses................................................................................................................................15 4. King County Meetings.....................................................................................................................................15 5. Technical Advisory Committee Meetings.....................................................................................................16 Community Walking and Biking Potential........................................................................................... 17 Introduction Plan development included an extensive outreach process, with an online survey, an interactive mapping activity, and three in -person community open houses. Additional meetings were organized with a technical advisory committee, and with regional stakeholders. A broad range of input was gathered from these engagement activities. Comments from citizens and stakeholders are organized below. Clear themes relevant to the vision emerged from this feedback and are synthesized below as well. Top Outreach Takeaways 1. Recreation -based walking and biking is still a primary purpose. Commuting by bike and on foot is also occurring and could be encouraged more. 2. Respondents preferred to walk shorter distances, around their neighborhoods, mainly for recreation. Walking was not seen as a primary mode of transportation. I Respondents reported longer and more frequent bicycle trips. Bicyclists bike within and beyond their neighborhood to trails, work places or school, or civic or recreation facilities. 4. Respondents preferred to walk and bike on formal facilities such as sidewalks, streets, or paved trails. 5. The Cedar River Trail is the most heavily used trail. Not surprisingly, given its central location within the city and its length, respondents cited the Cedar River Trail as the most used non -motorized trail. Trails along other riparian corridors, such as the Springbrook Creek, Honey Creek, and May Creek trails were less frequently used. b. Addressing pedestrian and bicyclist comfort is necessary to encourage more travel and recreation by foot or bike Discontinuous or missing sidewalks, walking on roads with fast moving traffic, and difficulty crossing came up as top barriers to walking. Barriers to biking focused on the absence of biking facilities (e.g. paved shoulders, bike lanes, shared use paths), dangerous crossings and streets with fast moving cars. The lack of wayfinding was also cited as a potential barrier. 7. Connection to transit is an important need. Transit is often accessed by walking and biking and connections to current and future transit is a key link. 8. Mountain biking and other more unique forms of bicycling are pursued by about a quarter of survey respondents, who enjoy riding along lakes, streams, and rivers. 9. Equestrian use was not an identified need. The survey included questions on horseback riding, but no respondents offered input. Potential Themes Key themes emerged from the broad input received through outreach activities. Themes and representative quotes are shown in the following matrix: 11 January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 2 Exhibit 1. Outreach Themes Table Theme Representative Quote Safety. ........................ Safety is a high priority theme that benefits users across the board and encourages less experienced riders to use the trail network. The network should be designed to minimize intermodal conflicts, street crossings, and travel along high speed, high traffic streets. In addition to design features, education and enforcement can improve safety. Connectivity Connectivity to regional and local destinations such as job centers, entertainment centers and transit, as well within neighborhoods, is an important feature of the network. Continuity Continuity in the network enables longer trips that are useful for commuting or active recreation and a fluid experience. Comfort and Inclusivity This refers to the diversity of experiences the network will enable, reaching across a broad range of activities, ages, and abilities. "I am not willing to walk or ride a bike on the shoulder of a busy or slightly busy road, regardless of whether or not the shoulder is paved, because it is extremely dangerous due to vehicle driver distractions (talking and texting on phone)." "Major intersections can be nerve-racking for bicyclists." "There is a lack of bike paths on the major roads that lead to the most popular destinations. I prefer to bike, but it takes longer than necessary because I find myself having to take roundabout ways in order to stay safe." "I would love to see our bike trails connect all around Seattle like the Sammamish Trail which connects to the Burke -Gilman, then down and around to the waterfront, to Alki, then back to Renton." "It is too difficult, and dangerous, to bicycle through Renton to connect to major trails leading north, south, and east (Lake Washington Trail, Rainer Ave, Green River Trail, Cedar River Trail." "The bike trail connection isn't the greatest when riding around Lake Washington and along 405.With the amount of hotels Ishopping 1parks in the area in North Renton it would be great to improve those connections to existing trails to the north for daily and recreational use." "I love the Cedar River Trail and ride it often from downtown Renton to Maple Valley. However wish it were paved beyond Maple Valley - a road bike doesn't navigate well on gravel." "1 commute from the Highlands to Kirkland. I'm an advanced and confident road rider. Some wonderful improvements have been made to signage and other aspects of driving, but there is no safe way to go up to the Highlands from down in the valley by bike. I tend to go all the way around to Kennydale and climb that big hill to come back to the Highlands rather than risk Sunset." "1 think that all trails, walkways, paths, etc. should be accessible to ALL." "1 walk for health. I sold my bicycle a few years ago, and have never felt a need to get another one. I am retired, so do not need daily transportation." "I want to bike and walk ... my car trips kill me literally and keep me isolated. I want an outdoor vibrant community." :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes Theme Representative Quote Well -Maintained Trails wear out with time and need sufficient resources to conduct regular maintenance to offer a predictable, consistent experience for all users. Wayfinding and Awareness A comprehensive network of wayfinding signage elements tailored for walking and bicycling allows residents to easily navigate the network and make non -motorized and multi -modal trips. Innovative and Flexible Trail design optimizes for successful sharing of the network. Soft surface trails are a desired alternative to paved trails. Outreach Results 1. QUESTIONNAIRE Participants: 340 (131 full, 209 partial) Questionnaire High Points Demographics "Surface maintenance is a MUST! Most importantly, keeping the shoulders Itrails clear of debris." "Safe, shared use is possible if ALL users are aware of and follow trail rules." "There needs to be better signage at all entrance points to the park and along walkways." "Make 2-person soft surface on both sides of national standard width trails so folks can run together." Date: Advertisements: June 10 to August 31, 2017 Fliers, open house, emails, website Respondents are more able-bodied than Census reports for the city. The share of Questionnaire respondents with children is similar to Census reports for Renton. ■ Questionnaire respondents' percentage with limited mobility 4%, less than Census reports for city residents identifying an ambulatory disability at 6% (ACS 1 -Year 2016). ■ Households with children under 18 years that walk: 55 of 181 respondents or about 30%. Most respondents' children walk around the neighborhood (87.9%), to or along a trail (60.3%), to a park/library/public place (48.3%), and to school (24.5%), or other destinations (12.1 %). ■ The share of respondents with children that walk is similar to the share of City households with one or more persons under 18 at 29.6% (ACS 1-Year 2016) though the Census does not track how many children walk. Purpose and Frequency Walking, running, and biking activities tend to be more for recreation purposes rather than for transportation. Most respondents walk at least 2 times per week or more, and bike 1 day per week or less. :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 4 Exhibit 2. Recreation Frequency: Walking and Biking Mode Respondents 2-7 days per week 1 day per Never week or less Walking 269 ........................................................ 65.6% 28.9% 5.60% Biking 269 38.7% 60.4% 0.9% Running 57 44% 56% -- Questionnaire respondents are more likely to commute by walking or bicycling than the city as a whole. ■ Questionnaire commuters that walk daily 1 1.1 %, greater than Census reports for city residents at 2.4%. ■ Questionnaire commuters that bike daily 9%, greater than Census reports for city residents at 0.1 %. WherelDestinations Most respondents walk or bike around their neighborhood or to a public facility. In the case of bicyclists, they also frequently use trails. Exhibit 3. Where do you walk or bike? Location Walk Bike Around the neighborhood 88.50% 80.20% Along a trail 67.80% 81.10% To a park, library or other public facility 50.30% 43.40% To transit 21.90% 20.80% To work (or school) 20.20% 40.60% Other destinations) 14.20% 22.60% Total respondents not known. Greatest number responding to a single option: 162 Walk, 86 Bike. As shown above in Exhibit 3, 88.5% of the Renton Questionnaire respondents walk around the neighborhood. This is consistent with findings in the 2017 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP) document. The SCORP considers participation in recreation activities across the state and in different regions. The report found the participation rates for walking was 94% statewide. Across different ages, races, or incomes, the top recreation activity was consistently walking in a park or trail setting. About 89% of participants in the Seattle -King region participated in walking in a park or trail setting. Most participation locations occurred in a person's yard or neighborhood. Renton's Questionnaire respondents have a higher rate of biking with up to 81.1 % biking on a trail and 80.2% biking around the neighborhood. In the SCORP, rates were 28% for biking mostly on streets and roads. The first and last mile problem, one of the most complex challenges for public transit, refers to the beginning and end of a trip primarily made by public transit. Questionnaire responses indicate that :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 5 residents use bicycles or walk to make short, local trips typically associated with the first and last mile to or from the destination. Improving walking and biking infrastructure to appeal to a broad and diverse range of people can help address the first and last mile problem and thereby make it easier for more people to access transit. Areas with larger proportions of the elderly, the young, low-income individuals, and households without access to a car also benefit from improvements to non -motorized travel, since these population groups are often considered transit dependent. Facilities Used While respondents visited a wide number of Renton park, recreation, and civic facilities, the most well visited ones were along Lake Washington and the Cedar River. Exhibit 4. Which parks libraries or other public facilities cloyou walk or bike to? Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Cedar River Trail Park Cedar River Park Renton Public Library Walk Bike 58.90% 53.30% 55.60% 62.20% 50.00% 64.40% 46.70% 37.80% Total respondents not known. Greatest number responding to a single option: 53 Walk, 29 Bike. Most respondents use the Cedar River Trail (82.6%, 100, Walk; 97.6% of Bicyclists, 81), and to a lesser extent May Creek and Springbrook Trails. Children walk to a large list of local schools (1 2 schools), and to a lesser extent bike to them (6 schools). The School District identifies a walkshed for each school. Children also walk to a similar list of parks and facilities as for adults overall, and to shopping and other locations. The City's 2008 Sidewalk Assessment and approach to Safe Routes to Schools should be considered. Traffic Stress A May 2012 study by Mekuria and Furth, Mineta Transportation Institute', found that "[f]or a bicycling network to attract the widest possible segment of the population, its most fundamental attribute should be low -stress connectivity, that is, providing routes between people's origins and destinations that do not require cyclists to use links that exceed their tolerance for traffic stress, and that do not involve an undue level of detour." Renton Questionnaire respondents found nearly 25% were confident on any road, about 50% were comfortable with roads having some traffic but prefer those with wide shoulders or lanes or trails, and over 20% were concerned about traffic and other factors. ' See https://transweb.sisu.edu/research/low-stress-bicycling-and-network-connectivity. 11 January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 6 This level of comfort or discomfort of Renton respondents based on traffic and road conditions is similar to a study of physiological reactions to different road conditions in Portland, Oregon: Results show that on the same route: (a) stress levels during peak -hour traffic are higher than during off-peak traffic; (b) signalized intersections are hotspots for cyclists' stress; and (c) average stress levels on on -street facilities are higher than on off-street facilities. Statistical tests clearly show that separated facilities are associated with lower stress levels than other types of facilities. (Caviedes, 2016) Exhibit 5. When you bicycle on the road, which of the following best describes you? Description Percentage Respondents I am very confident riding in mixed traffic on any type of road 23.1 % 24 I am comfortable riding on roads with some traffic, but prefer 50.0% 52 to ride on roads with wide shoulders or bike lanes, or on paved trails I ride occasionally or would like to ride, but am concerned 21.2% 22 about traffic, hills, distances and the weather I do not bicycle on the road and probably never will 5.8% 6 N=104 The results together with geospatial analysis will inform the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan about where and how to reduce traffic stress. Barriers & Incentives Exhibit 6. Walking or Running Barriers & Incentives Top Barriers Top Improvements or Programs to Encourage (Extreme or Moderate 50%+ Respondents) Walking or Running (Essential or Very Important 50%+Respondents) ■ Crossing the street is dangerous or difficult ■ Too much car traffic ■ Sidewalks are discontinuous or missing ■ 1 have to walk or run along a road N=269 ■ More curb ramps ■ More sidewalks ■ More paved shared -use trails, such as the Cedar River Trail ■ Maintenance of sidewalks or trail surfaces, vegetation, debris ■ Better enforcement of laws related to people driving and biking :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 7 Exhibit 7. Bicycling Barriers & Incentives Top Barriers (Extreme or Moderate 50%+ Respondents) ■ Motor vehicles travel too fast ■ No bicycle facilities (e.g. paved shoulders, bike lanes, shared use paths) ■ Too many motor vehicles ■ Parts of my route are too stressful or dangerous lam-I•J Unique Bicycle Users Top Improvements or Programs to Encourage Biking (Essential or Very Important 50%+Respondents) ■ Safer street intersections ■ Wide paved shoulders on roads ■ Off-street paved shared use paths, such as the Cedar River Trail ■ Calm residential streets that are designated and designed for biking (called "greenways" or "bicycle boulevards") ■ Safer trail crossings at streets ■ Shared roadway treatments, such as "share the road" signs and shared lane markings ■ Convenient and secure bike parking ■ Signs identifying bicycle routes and nearby amenities ■ Maintenance of sidewalks or trail surfaces, vegetation, debris ■ Bicycle route maps and information ■ Better enforcement of laws related to people driving and biking ■ Promotion of bicycling for transportation ■ Employer incentives for bicycling to work In terms of types of bicycling Questionnaire participants pursued in Renton: ■ 100% cycle on roads or paved trails ■ 23.6% pursue mountain biking ■ 16.4% cyclocross using a mix of on and off -road facilities ■ 0.9% use BMX or pump track vehicles Those who are interested in riding a mountain bike, cyclocross or BMX bike indicated they were most interested in riding on gravel, along lakes, rivers, and streams. Currently, their off-street locations include various natural areas and trails. :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 8 Exhibit 8. At what off-street locations do you ride a mountain, cyclocross or BMX bike in Renton? wormlines takeyoungs philipereekl,l ip�lhill ip .arn0odtape river powerra honey „,,,�,g,,gcedar tils 11 January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 9 2. MAPPING RESULTS An interactive online map was open to public input from June 10, 2017 to August 31, 2017. The interactive map site had 1,380-page views and 342 data points. Participants could identify areas where they walked or biked, and problem areas. Maps and summaries of comments follow. Walking Based on input walk problems included lack of sidewalks and connections as well as traffic, speeding, and other dangerous conditions. Most pedestrian problem spots were identified in the East Plateau, North Highlands, and mid-Kennydale Planning Areas. Exhibit 9. Walking Problems Word Cloud acre 1_, better ;2; bike �3j boa thnulze .t)bridge 0 busy ::� carr (1? cars cedar 4, connection continuous t2)corner,2jcoulon(i.1creek. cross crosswalks dangerous,; drivers end i4, foot ;2) forced -, help ;Z hill honey Iack (3; Ipss (ij 10t (3) marked (, m issing Sul narrow needs i) park i2.1 path -, _ river safe 2i shoulder r;sidewalk significant signs Speeding stop street traffic trail typically ,,.: unsafe �I orli les 11? Source: Tag Word Cloud The range of comments included: • Nice walk, but would feel much safer with sidewalk (Kennydale area). • No sidewalk for most of this very busy road (Sunset area). • Need signage and wayfinding to connect to Cedar River trail. ■ Missing ADA ramp. ■ There is no way to get up and down the hill safely between Carr Rd. and SE 200th St.... That's a 1 .25-mile sidewalk desert. 11 January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes II 10 Destinations included the Cedar River Trail and May Creek Trail. Many respondents reported walking in neighborhoods on the Renton plateau (East Plateau Community Planning Area), as well as in the valley near Springbrook Trail and Black River Trail (Valley Community Planning Area). Exhibit 10. Community Input Walking Newcastle Wny c„ Newcus ut SE - tle colt qob Ry h-,ye o-ea -,er cc Oy DO O O 900 Z � Z m o m NE 7th St a b o a D f v . z W NE 4th St J y?9th St N 4th St � 5133 rd St 5132 t N3rd St� NE3 dst 0 4 5 180th :E+ 900 SW 7th 5t ® 169 N4a'I SW 16th St � Qa \a� 3 S Puget D' 1 ° W ( m n 7" a SW 7th St SE 168th St SW 4th St j f 515 W SW 4To St R6 SfPQ �o OJ O P a e 0 0.5 1 w Miles Source: City of Renton, 2018 SE 192nd St a SE Pones Rd © Walking Destination © Walking Problem Spot a - Route that I Walk ! o� Difficult Walking Route Seti°Aa - Existing Trails 208th St �71� January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 1 1 Source: City of Renton 2018 Biking Community comments on biking problem spots were similar to comments about walking. Biking problems related to concerns about travel lanes and trails, and traffic and safety conditions. Based on comments, most bike problem spots follow future alignments of the regional trail system. Exhibit 11. Biking Problem Spots along (4) ave (3j boeing bridge cars (g) catch (4) cedar (4j change t4j clear (4) c o n n e L .11) couian (2) • (10 currently 41 crossing � 3 C � , Cyclist � � dangerous (7j difficult 3j easl 3j end (G) going (5j hit t<: lane,,4) ll l � � l light �7j merge i;37 narrnvv i3j nb reeds north .1n} parr t4j path pavement (7j people t4j plark t3j paint (4) re n Lo I 1 restrlping (2) i ide 3, river,,.) road i13j rOUte (4) ;b (_,} se�,,,� cl-1r�g Iror :ay street (4) surtace (3) tracks i5j ■ traffic t ra 22) Ullever, (4) vehicle (3) west (5) Source: Tag Cloud Comments addressed different connections or safety concerns such as: ■ Add bike trail between Cedar & Green river trails. ■ Need a safe bike route connecting to Skyway and West Hill. ■ Sunset Blvd provides the best grade for connectivity with Highlands, needs bike lanes. ■ Best bike route up Benson Hill is not clear. Probably old Benson Rd, but need bike lanes to continue. Consider road diet south of Puget. ■ Very narrow shoulder, difficult connection to Jones Road from Cedar River Trail. ■ Cars using wrong lane, conflicting with NB left turning bikes and cars. (Renton/Kent border) ■ 1 ride around this area as the bridge is too narrow and unsafe, I have nearly crashed many times on this bridge. (Renton/Tukwila Border) 11 January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes II 12 Destinations included the Cedar River Trail, Green River Trail, Lake Washington Loop Trail, and other neighborhood locations. Exhibit 12. Community Input Biking o �Mof raj �n oy '° 9L 9 es e o"9ef v � (S �z9th S1 S 133rd St 5 132 t 909w ® I Newca:Ne 4 Way ur SE Newm:tle G.If C116 Rtl B 1.1 oro� OSO °r °too �r °r NE 4th St Otp OSp Ol0 a Ljh`enter BIvA 3 a' S Puget D,. 11F v p SW2 St oa. _ SW 4th St > _ SW41etSt s 1 HOth St m ® c = a N 0 0.5 Miles ''�6 .®. Source: City of Renton, 2018 a SE 129th St Lra `n SE loner Rd % SE 168th St u, Sf h Pe}`ohr+k o y ky SE 192 nd St An Biking Destination Biking Problem Spot a Route that I Bike Difficult Biking Route SEti°Ate Existing Trails SE 208th St :111 January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 11 13 Other Ideas Other ideas addressed potential trail routes in Kennydale, the Valley, and Benson areas. Exhibit 13. Other Community Input i l9� 9P P S J` Poc o�J 9L Q PS n S /29th St S 133rd St S 132n t L6 ^ '9P — S i. IV N O S 180th a v � 0 0.5 1 m Miles 67 Source: City of Renton, 2018 Newcastle W.1, m UJ SE Newcastle Golf SE 192nd St a P N SF PeJrO�JJr�y Ry Q 0 v e a v �o SE 128th St C _h SE Jones Rd �71� January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes 14 These other ideas included additional connections or linkages. 3. COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSES Input at the community open houses included neighborhood specific feedback on needed improvements, as well as preferred connections and routes. No input on equestrian facilities was received. •35 persons •Preferred routes and facility types •Thoughts on potential routes •Problem spots •Wish list projects •Projects to complete •General concerns and ideas •26 persons •Regional Trail options •Preferences on network •Questions about facility designation •Plan Priorities •30 persons •Regional Trail preferences •Final Network options •Facility type discussion •Prioritization and project preferences Needed improvements included: ■ Intersection improvements along the Cedar River Trail downtown, Houser Way and Lake Washington Boulevard, and the NE 6th and NE 8th at Logan Avenue N. ■ Improvements for SW 7th to make it more bike -friendly • Sidewalk improvements across neighborhoods Preferred Connections and Routes included: ■ Completion of the proposed Sam Chastain trail segment and the Soos Creek Trail north of 192nd St. (King County responsibility) • Completion of Burnett Linear Park, South and North in Civic Core ■ Houser Way was cited by many as the preferred alignment of the Eastside Rail Corridor 4. KING COUNTY MEETINGS Coordination with King County Parks and Recreation Division, Capital Projects Program, and Governmental Relations was essential to plan development with the convergence of four regional trails within Renton's Urban Growth Area: The Cedar River Trail (CR), Eastside Rail Corridor (ERC), Lake to Sound Trail (M), and the Lake Washington Loop Trail. :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes II 15 The purpose of the meetings was to collaborate with King County representatives on possible and preferred routing for the (Eastside Rail Corridor, Lake To Sound, and Cedar River) regional trails through the City of Renton, discuss alternative facility types for these corridors, update on the status of the Civic Core planning effort and review proposed cross sections for the corridors in that plan, and review the status of other regional trails/routes (Soos Creek, Lake Washington Loop). Two meetings were held to identify and agree upon the alignment and facility designations) for the regional trails. Detailed meeting summaries, route concepts, and cross -sections are included as an appendix to the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan. Highlights are provided below. ■ King County representatives were supportive of strong connections among the regional trails in the downtown core. There was also support for the alternative facility standard of protected bike lanes and sidewalks. There was consensus among the City and King County representatives on the preferred alignment of the ERC, US, and CR trails through Renton. ■ King County representatives described the example of successful partnerships with the business community (Microsoft, Google, Swedish and others) and stakeholders along the ERC. Potential partners for the Plan include both employers and community organizations: El Eastside Greenway Alliance El Boeing El Paccar El Hyatt El Small technology companies new to the city El Rotary Club Chamber of Commerce ■ Ferry (foot service) across Lake Washington was discussed as a potential complement to non - motorized connections. ■ King County continues to work on the challenges along the BNSF rail corridor pertinent securing to leases from BNSF for the Lake to Sound Trail and extending the ERC adjacent to Coulon Park within BNSF right of way. ■ King County representatives emphasized the importance of identifying and enhancing the connection from regional trails to the new Transit Center on Grady Way. King County representatives encouraged connecting the Burnett Trail to the relocated Transit Center. ■ King County representatives were in general agreement with the projects identified in the preliminary list. 5. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS Community members volunteered to participate in the Technical Advisory Committee for this plan which included additional background and educational discussions to provide feedback for plan development. ■ Important considerations included: 11 The importance of connecting regional trails :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes II 16 ° The importance of the transit center as a destination Recognition that trail users are not as aware of traffic control devices like Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) or C-curbs; this lack of awareness should be addressed in design options Cost considerations, and related "low hanging fruit" or easy wins are important to elevate as criteria ■ The following trouble spots were identified primarily about bicycling except where noted: Near Dimmitt Middle School the location of a pedestrian -vehicle crash Crossing Sunset Blvd. near Harrington NE Park Drive Freeway ramps Gate on Houser Way at Kenworth NE 3rd street for bikes Connection on Factory Ave. Rainier Ave. and Hardy Ave. ■ The following barriers were identified: 11 Lack of comfort in high speed/volume conditions 11 Lack of wayfinding ■ Questions focused on: Alignment with regional plans and comparison of the proposed network with other agency and city plans from entities such as the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), King County, Seattle, Kent, Tukwila, and Newcastle. 11 Connection of Honey Creek path alignment to Sunset Blvd. and May Creek Trail 11 Connection of Thunder Hills Creek Trail to Cedar Avenue S. and Grant Avenue S. Opportunities for public to provide input on an ongoing basis after the planning process is complete ■ TAC members were in agreement with the projects identified in the preliminary list and the conceptual plans for intersections. Community Walking and Biking Potential A nationwide survey of sports and leisure preferences was conducted by GfK MRI in a nationally representative survey of U.S. households, and ESRI, a geospatial products company, has developed an analysis tool that compares the demographics of a community (e.g. City of Renton) to the relative likelihood that that community would have a greater likelihood to participate in the activity compared to the national average. A market potential index (MPI) of greater than 100 shows a greater likelihood than average to participate and an index of less than 100 shows a lesser likelihood. :III January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes II 17 Results show that Renton households (HH) or adults are more likely than the national average to walk, run/jog, or bike. Exhibit 14. City of Renton Sports and Leisure Market Potential 2017 Product/Consumer Behavior Number of Percent MPI Adults/HHs Participated in bicycling (mountain) in last 12 months 3,774 4.7% 115 ........ ......... ......... ......... .........._......................................................................... Participated in bicycling (road) in last 12 months 8,896 1 1.2% 109 ......... ......... .......... .................................................................................... Participated in jogging/running in last 12 months 12,956 16.3% 121 Participated in walking for exercise in last 12 months 21,860 27.4% 102 Renton Demographic Summary 2017 Population 104,157 Population 18+ 79,702 Households 40,306 Median Household Income $69,810 Data Note: An MPI (Market Potential Index) measures the relative likelihood of the adults or households in the specified trade area to exhibit certain consumer behavior or purchasing patterns compared to the U.S. An MPI of 100 represents the U.S. average. Source: These data are based upon national propensities to use various products and services, applied to local demographic composition. Usage data were collected by GfK MRI in a nationally representative survey of U.S. households. Esri forecasts for 2017. :111 January 2019 Renton I Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Public Outreach Results & Themes II 18 B. REGIONAL TRAIL DESIGN & INTERSECTIONS CITY OF RENT TRAILS & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 000090 Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Update King County/City of Renton Regional Trail Discussion #1 September 22, 2017 11:00amto2:00pm Renton City Hall Meeting Summary Participants King County Parks (KC) Kevin Brown, Director, Parks and Recreation Division Jean White, Government Relations Administrator Sujata Goel, Government Relations Administrator Frank Overton, Capital Projects Managing Supervisor Tri Ong, Capital Project Manager— Parks Engineer, PE Mike Ullmer, Project/Program Manager Jason Rich, Capital Project Manager City of Renton (COR) Vicki Grover, Transportation Planning & Programming Manager Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director Angie Mathias, Long Range Planner Kelly Beymer, Community Services Administrator Jim Seitz, Transportation Systems Director Cailin Hunsaker, Parks and Golf Director Consultant Team (MR) Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord (MR) David Saxen, MacLeod Reckord (MR) Aaron Gooze, Fehr and Peers (FP) Purpose The purpose of this meeting was to collaborate with King County representatives on possible and preferred routing for the (Eastside Rail Corridor, Lake To Sound, and Cedar River) regional trails through the City of Renton, discuss alternative facility types for these corridors, update on the status of the Civic Core planning effort and review proposed cross sections for the corridors in that plan, and review the status of other regional trails/routes (Soos Creek, Lake Washington Loop). This is the first of two planned meetings, with the expectation there will be resolution on the alignment and facility designation for the regional trails by the end of the second meeting. Discussion DESIGN CONCEPT • After introductions, and statement of purpose and goals, MacLeod Reckord presented the preferred and alternative alignments for the Eastside Rail Corridor (ERC), Lake to Sound (LTS), and Cedar River (CR) Trails through the City. Rationale was given for selection of the preferred route and there was general consensus on those routes early in the meeting. • The range of facility types for regional trails was presented by MacLeod Reckord and discussed. It was noted the KC standard of shared use path with gravel shoulders would not be appropriate in the urban segments of the corridors, and alternative standards showing a protected bike lane and sidewalk were discussed. • KC representatives stated support not only for making strong connections through the downtown core with the regional trail alignment, but also for alternative facility standards such as the protected bike lane and sidewalk cross section. SUPPORT FOR THE VISION • KC described the very successful partnerships that are being established with the business community and stakeholders along the ERC (Microsoft, REI, Google, Swedish named) through Redmond, Kirkland, Bellevue, and encouraged Renton to engage with the Eastside Greenway Alliance to work with third parties who could provide additional support for development of these trail corridors. KC offered to provide points of contact. Renton businesses mentioned as being important stakeholders in these discussions included Boeing, Paccar, Hyatt, and numerous smaller (new) tech companies (5300jobs) coming into the area. • The Rotary Club and the Chamber of Commerce were identified as potential stakeholders who could provide plan support and engage with businesses. • Ferry (foot) service to Lake Washington is in discussion and would be another benefit supporting improvements to the non -motorized system in the vicinity of the lake. • KC recommended the Redmond Central Connector powerpoint presentation as a good visual and marketing tool for promoting and securing businesses/stakeholders to support the concept of trail construction through the business core. • Pop-up events, simulations, visuals can be more compelling than simple identification of 'projects'. The prospect of a fuselage chugging through town on a flatbed was noted as highly unique and extraordinary by visitors (less so by locals); the idea of locating bleachers and posting schedules for its arrival was kicked around and not dismissed entirely. The overall message in this conversation was these are examples of some of the unique aspects of Renton that should be embraced, marketed, and displayed. 2 BOEING • Boeing has developed segments of trail along the future proposed ERC corridor but the segments are private "behind the fence". Some opportunities to engage with Boeing to encourage them to collaborate with King County and the City of Renton on a public trail were identified: o There are employee groups (trail advocates) that are supportive of public/regional trail connections through this segment — identify and engage them. o Boeing likely has trip reduction requirements that need to be met as well as a regional trail facility in immediate proximity to their facility. • City of Renton clarified that Boeing's requirement for providing public trail access on their property is only a condition in the EIS once they are at full expansion. BNSF • The challenges along the BNSF corridor were discussed. KC had some success at one point getting BNSF to talk about the option of extending the ERC trail in the BNSF corridor adjacent to Coulon Park, but discussions ceased; since then there has been no response from the railroad. The City of Renton has had similar challenges. • In addition, KC has not yet obtained leases from BNSF for the Lake to Sound Trail connecting Tukwila to Renton. It would be desirable to extend the Lake to Sound Trail along the BNSF corridor to the east toward Rainier Avenue. Options discussed included approaching the private property owners to the south of the BNSF ROW (many have loading zones, parking areas in this area) to see if there is potential for a narrow area of acquisition. It was noted that there are several sidings that the adjacent property owners don't want to lose because they represent value or potential value to tenants. • The City of Renton confirmed that railroad use is on the average of one train per day for Boeing; Rabanco also uses the line as far as Hardie/Shattuck. WSDOT, SOUND TRANSIT, OTHER • There was discussion about the current status of the Transit Center funding, and the importance of identifying and enhancing connections from the regional trail to the new location at Grady Way. • KC noted that Sound Transit is (fiscally) supportive with projects providing access within mile of the station. • KC cited working in partnership with Redmond to lobby Sound Transit on particular issues related to ERC development/access. KC agreed to work with the City of Renton regarding Sound Transit project advancement. • The City of Renton noted that Sound Transit projects are opening up in 2024; future projects included Bus Rapid Transit implementation and (WSDOT) Bellevue to Renton Bus Rapid Transit development. • KC noted the ERC to Ripley Lane connection will happen in conjunction with WSDOT widening. KC will provide information to the City of Renton. 3 CIVIC CORE • Fehr and Peers provided background and input on the status of the Civic Core project, specifically focusing on the corridors identified for regional trail connections. The Civic Core process is moving ahead of the Trails Plan schedule, so it is imperative there is resolution on these issues and agreement between the two plans. • There was considerable discussion about the merits of the various cross sections and alternative configurations along the "Burnett Trail" segment. Specifically where, and whether transit and parking were to be provided; where the best location for raingardens and tree planting would occur; sidewalk, parking, and travel lane widths. • King County encouraged Renton to connect the Burnett Trail to the relocated Transit Center at Grady Way. • The City of Renton will provide Fehr and Peers with traffic count information in order to more fully evaluate Burnett Avenue north of Second Avenue and south of Third Avenue to 5t" Street. OTHER TRAIL CORRIDOR DESIGN ISSUES • Some design concepts that will be considered along the Burnett Trail include: o Reduction of travel lanes to 11'. o Possible elimination of center turn lane between Second and Third. o Configuring protected bike lane in a way that provides greater separation from travel lanes. o Ensuring walkway does not become 'cluttered', with effective width being constrained, with utility poles, mailboxes, light poles, benches/amenities, hydrants, etc. Provide adequate width and create pockets for these amenities/infrastructure. o Relocation of play area to accommodate trail through park. • Review opportunities for enhancing/celebrating the 3 nodes/points of the triangle where trails converge. • Identify and address other big challenge areas, one named in particular was the Logan and Burnett intersection. • The City of Renton noted there is potential for vacating parking on the south side of Houser — it has been discussed at Council level. • Be sure to include alternative alignments in preferred plan, as those routes may be used as interim routes. • The City of Renton will provide information being generated by Otak on the design of the Logan and Airport Way intersection. OTHER ISSUES • King County noted that the Soos Creek Trail connections are not off the table, just lower on the priority list for now. • The City of Renton noted that the one Trail the public desires the most is completing the Soos Creek Trail north of 192nd. 4 Next Steps: The next meeting will include: o Formalizing the preferred option for connecting the ERC, Lake to Sound, and Cedar River Trail. o Identifying alternative routes for each of the three regional trails. o Identifying trail cross sections for varying segments of both the preferred and alternative routes. o Providing conceptual cross sections noting ROW width at strategic locations along the alignment, for purposes of identifying critical challenges that may be to be addressed by multiple parties. o Identifying how both the Trails plan and the Civic Core plan will show corresponding project improvements through the corridors identified for the regional trails. The second coordination meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 24, 2017, from 9:OOam to 11:OOam at Renton City Hall. 5 CITY OF RENT TRAILS & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN 0004090 Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Update Renton/King County Regional Trail Discussion #2 October 24, 2017 9:00 am to 11:00 am Renton City Hall Meeting Summary Participants King County Parks (KC) Kevin Brown, Director, Parks and Recreation Division Jean White, Government Relations Administrator, DNRP/Parks, Capital Planning and Land Management Sujata Goel, Government Relations Administrator Tri Ong, Capital Project Manager— Parks Engineer, PE Mike Ullmer, Project/Program Manager Jason Rich, Capital Project Manager City of Renton (COR) Vicki Grover, Transportation Planning & Programming Manager Jim Seitz, Transportation Systems Director Kelly Beymer, Community Services Administrator Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director Angie Mathias, Long Range Planning Manager Cailin Hunsaker, Parks & Golf Course Director Consultant Team (MR) Connie Reckord, MacLeod Reckord (MR) David Saxen, MacLeod Reckord (MR) Aaron Gooze, Fehr and Peers (FP) Purpose The purpose of this meeting was to reconvene with King County representatives to discuss and resolve preferred routing for the (Eastside Rail Corridor, Lake to Sound, and Cedar River) regional trails through the City of Renton, identify the most likely facility type for each of the corridors identified in the route, discuss strategies for implementation, and provide an update on the status of the Civic Core planning effort. This is the second of two planned meetings and is expected to result in decisions that will be carried forward in the final recommendations presented in the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Update. Discussion INTRODUCTION AND RECAP • After introductions, MacLeod Reckord provided an overview of what had been discussed and decided in the first meeting, held on September 22, 2017. Some discussion ensued regarding the schedule for review/approval and adoption of the Civic Core Plan and the importance of resolving solutions that would be consistent for both planning efforts. Currently the three regional trails do not connect and stop at or near the downtown core area. • MacLeod Reckord provided an explanation of the Regional Trail alignment graphics, noting the plan and sections identify two of the regional trail corridors — Lake to Sound Trail and Eastside Rail Corridor. The network shows connection to the existing Cedar River Trail but no extension of the Cedar River Trail was proposed. • The graphics also show alternative alignments, but without corresponding sections illustrating proposed facility types along those routes, the rationale being that the range of possible options was so great as to be difficult to determine the best facility type for the entire corridor (e.g.: was the alternative route a short-term or long-term option; would this be an interim route or the final route; what would the funding source be; what other likely development scenarios along the route would impact facility design; etc.) • The trail alignments include sections defined by distinctive attributes. Each section provides one or more options representing slightly different trail locations or optional facility types. See the boards (attached) for additional information on challenges and benefits of each option. LAKE TO SOUND TRAIL • SECTION 1—The western segment extending from the planned end of trail near Naches Ave SW to Hardie Ave SW. The recommended alignment is on the south side of the rail lines, with options to locate the trail high on the embankment (same elevation at the tracks and between the main and spur lines), or low on the embankment (removing the spur line). An optional alignment on the north side of the mainline is described. Major points of discussion among the group: o Whether the spur could in fact be vacated (need to coordinate with BNSF); understanding the volume/frequency of use of spur line; whether Rabanco still uses this line; and whether property acquisition (south) is possible if spur line cannot be vacated. o All options (n/s, high/low) may need to be put forth to BNSF for discussion and will be included as a record of the process (appendix items). o The new BNSF contact may be more receptive to discussion of a joint use of corridor. There was a recommendation to convene a meeting with local BNSF 2 representative(s); King County would be the lead). A multi -jurisdictional approach may be more effective with an appeal to changing community needs — more non - motorized connectivity and increased rail/trail development nationwide. o Businesses in this corridor include an auto dealership, a strip mall, light industrial, a county health building, and office buildings. Security will continue to be a concern as there are transients. King County indicated there may be a possibility of an easement acquisition if businesses are willing. o The option showing the trail between the main line and spur line was determined most undesirable, as it would require numerous acute approaches to rail crossings and would be well inside the set back/clearance zone defined by BNSF for both the main and spur lines. • SECTION 2 —The middle -west segment located between Hardie Ave SW and Rainier Ave S. Recommended alignment is on the south side of the rail lines, again with options high on the embankment or low on the embankment. Optional north side of mainline was also considered. Major points of discussion included: o Show all options (n/s, high/low) when in discussion with BNSF; Hardie Ave crossing can be at grade; Rainier Ave S crossing would be better above grade. • SECTION 3 —The middle east segment located between Rainier Ave Sand Burnett Ave S. Recommended alignment is on the south side with options high on the embankment or located in the Houser Way ROW as a shared street. Major points of discussion included: o High bank is preferred to maintain continuity to the west, especially if BNSF has approved high bank alignment further west. The Houser Way ROW shared street could be an inexpensive interim (or long term) solution. o A Woonerf concept was well received by the North Riverside Drive residents along the Cedar River Trail and may also be well received here. • SECTION 4 — The Houser Street corridor Recommended alignment is on the south side of the street, changing from shared use path to pedestrian/protected bike lanes configuration due to significant reduction in available space. Major points of discussion include: o North vs. south for non -motorized improvements will be an issue questioned by businesses along this segment and will require further evaluation of north vs south with pros/cons; state rationale for choice. o Some noted observations —south side leads directly to Cedar River Trail connection and Tonkin Park is on the south side. o There are concerns about the NACTO minimal width (8') shown for a 2-way protected bike lane; consider leaving a 6' walk and dedicating 10' (with lighting/amenities in this zone) for bikes. o There was considerable discussion and a variety of opinions about how and whether to delineate/separate uses to include providing a visual only barrier between pedestrians and bikes; providing no distinction between bikes and pedestrian users making it less like a bike facility; creating mixing zones at intersections; and providing some type of vertical separation between bikes and the rail. 3 o A second option might include elimination of parking/vehicular. Eliminating parking would need to be promoted by characterizing options for a more 'interesting and attractive' street. o The high crown of the street will impact the street cross section, curbs and drainage as the rail segment is higher than the finish floor elevation of the adjacent businesses. The current section as shown is not possible. o Options for a connection to the Cedar River Trail were discussed and will be further evaluated in the conceptual study for the intersections of the regional trails (in the main body of the Trails Plan). EAST SIDE RAIL CORRIDOR • SECTION 1— N 61" Street to Park Avenue N The recommended solution is unclear and dependent upon further discussions with Boeing and having a better understanding of future road widening efforts. Major points of discussion include: o Limited space requires either construction outside existing ROW onto Boeing property through acquisition or easements, or rechannelization of existing roadway to accommodate a side path. o If the trail is located outside the existing ROW high level discussions will be required between the City and Boeing and in the future may involve the mayor and other regional leaders to include King County. Renton will coordinate with King County regarding this approach. o Accommodating a facility inside the existing ROW is likely a non -starter, as City has plans for lane expansion of Logan through this segment. Note: the existing ROW width will not accommodate the lane expansion without additional ROW acquisition. • SECTION 2 — Park Ave N to Garden Ave N Recommended side path on west side, where adequate room exists without requiring acquisition or making changes to existing roadway channelization. Major points of discussion include: o Logan/Park is already a level F intersection. o Existing bike lanes on both sides of roadway could be eliminated with the addition of side path on west side; question asked how bikes would access the landing from the ERC — crossings would have to occur at Garden Ave N or Park Avenue N; it was suggested that additional roadway width captured from dropping bike lanes could go to boulevard planting. CIVIC CORE PROJECT There was some discussion about the proposals being considered for the Civic Core Project ("Burnett Trail" segment), with acknowledgement that there would be coordination on final recommendations between the two projects. Discussion included: o Burnett Trail connecting at Houser Way. o Burnett Trail as the link to the relocated South Renton Transit Center 4 o Burnett Trail extending north to the Cedar River Trail and crossing at Logan Avenue to the Lake Washington Loop Trail. PRODUCT FOR FINAL REPORT • Lake to Sound Trail Plan — show all discussed recommended alignments; redline alignment as currently shown, green line low bank, yellow line north side to make options clear. Show cross sections reflecting these options. Identify options that seem viable at this stage. • Eastside Rail Corridor — show connections through the Civic Core planning area, with reference to that planning effort. • Show alternative alignments on the plan so as not to eliminate them from consideration if preferred alignments cannot be achieved. • State pros/cons of all options. • These exhibits, including meeting notes, will be a standalone in the report appendix. Next Steps: • City/King County will continue to plan for discussions with BNSF and Boeing. • Plans will be coordinated with those being developed for the Civic Core project. • Cross sections will be further developed to reflect the additional options discussed for the segments noted above. These cross sections and revised plans will be included in the appendix of the final report. 5 3N any uoiuN 0 E y ya `o 0 'o Z w o ° v°c Uy a - Y^ O° y Q 3 j 0 uZ.° V W L 10 yarn m,o°xt " oc '� w = l • . • 3 u as ® o'a ♦ e to �i ♦ : ¢''u ♦ ' „a �♦ .. ♦♦ .' c ♦ x v7of a, vZ ♦♦��•••�•♦ � ♦ may. tc •� ♦ . 1 co£ �? It d G? 3 �° ~ m L -au' c a" r ° ° ~ W m v 4-J E o • o Q� m `w3 c% of a Z k-oop ail m° n9tpn m a¢♦ ic.F �� N� /L �'♦ aNr �■ v. O GJ ♦: C 1 L ; 4J a. W� l9 o:Qa� Lu oe W OH O�O� U�� •L a. H OW C Im Z im U� a as W d W HU Z QO WU 0-0 a0 6yV�i EXISTING Approx. Clearance required for train r Main Line Spur Line LOW BANK RAIL WITH TRAIL HIGH BANK RAIL WITH TRAIL 4,: 16' Wide Trail - - HIGH BANK RAIL WITH TRAIL, NORTH SIDE a, " 16' Wide Trail I , Shared Use Path • Requires removal of spur line • May be able to meet BNSF min. 30' setback from main line • No trail crossing of main line • Barrier fence on north side of trail • Less grading • Some retaining walls may be required • At -grade road crossings in three locations • Abandoned spurs could serve as access points be- tween the Naches Avenue connection and Burnett Avenue Shared Use Path • Proximity of trail to main line conflicts with BNSF's guidelines (min. 30' from track centerline) • Retains spur line • Pinch points between main line and spur line allow 12' to 13' for development • Requires crossing the spur line at an acute angle (or track removal at east end) • Retaining walls required • Barrier fence both sides of trail • No trail crossing of main line • Requires three new or retrofitted bridges • No access points between the Naches Ave connec- tion and Burnett Ave Shared Use Path • Proximity of trail to main line conflicts with BNSF's guidelines (min. 30' from track centerline) • High bank alignment until Shattuck Ave • Retains spur line • Requires crossing the main line • Wider and flatter grade at west end of segment • Barrier fence south side of trail i • Requires at least one new or retrofitted bridge • Possible access points at SW 5th Place (north side), Hardie Avenue, and Shattuck Avenue. LAKE TO SOUND TRAIL - SECTION 1 CITY OFRENTON ■ REGIONAL TRAIL ALTERNATIVES MAI L51lIC ClE MASfER0 EXISTING LOW BANK RAIL WITH TRAIL HIGH BANK RAIL WITH TRAIL 100' ROW Approx. Clearance required for train ------------ Shared Use Path 16' Wide Trail • Moderate fill or structure required • Barrier rail/fence both sides of trail (structure de- pendent) • Less grading but potentially more structure • May be able to meet BNSF min. 30' setback from main line • Bridges may need to be higher than trail elevation to meet clearance requirements (Hardie Ave and Rainier Ave) 16' Wide Trail HIGH BANK RAIL WITH TRAIL, NORTH SIDE 16' Wide Trail Shared Use Path • Proximity of trail to main line conflicts with BNSF's guidelines (min. 30' from track centerline) • Significant fill or structure required • Possible encroachment on adjacent property • Barrier fence on north side of trail • Bridges at same elevation as trail Shared Use Path • Proximity of trail to main line conflicts with BNSF's guidelines (min. 30' from track centerline) • High bank alignment until Shattuck Ave • Significant fill or structure required • Retains spur line • Requires crossing the main line • Wider and flatter grade at west end of segment • Barrier fence south side of trail Requires at least one new or retrofitted bridge • Possible access points at SW 5th Place (north side), Hardie Avenue, and Shattuck Avenue. LAKE TO SOUND TRAIL - SECTION 2 CITY OFRENTON ■ MAI L51lIC TClE MASfER REGIONAL TRAIL ALTERNATIVES 000090 EXISTING 55' ROW 25' ROW Approx. clearance required for train I HIGH BANK RAIL WITH TRAIL n 16' Wide Trail I AT -GRADE TRAIL �i - 16' Wide Trail I Shared Use Path • Proximity of trail to main line conflicts with BNSF's guidelines (min. 30' from track centerline) • Makes use of existing maintenance of way road within BNSF right of way • Retains current function of Houser Way • Minimal grading • Barrier fence on north side of trail • Proximity to Main Line more problematic for BNSF Shared Street • Requires "Shared Street" treatment of Houser Way • Impacts access for 2-3 property owners • Minimal grading • No barrier fence required • Meets BNSF min. 30' setback from mainline LAKE TO SOUND TRAIL - SECTION 3 REGIONAL TRAIL ALTERNATIVES CITY OF REIVTON ■ fi[I.I IS lIC 1`ClE MASTER PiRN 000090 EXISTING 50' ROW Approx. clearance required for train i i i TRAIL WITH SEPARATED MODES, SOUTH SIDE 81 B' Bike Walk i TRAIL WITH SEPARATED MODES, NORTH SIDE Shared Use Path - Separated Modes • Remove parking from the south side of Houser Way • Minimal buffer between trail envelope and trail • Maintain building access along sidewalk • Provide a two-way bicycle facility adjacent to the pe- destrian walkway/sidewalk • Separate bicycle and pedestrian traffic through pav- ing materials, a yellow tactile strip and/or a grade change • Separate the bike lanes and railroad tracks with some type of barrier, such as delineators, a curb or plant- ers, but provide locations where pedestrians can cross Houser Way freely • Intersections will require bicycle signals Shared Use Path - Separated Modes • Remove parking from the north side of Houser Way • Allows 2' buffer between trail envelope and trail • Maintain building access along sidewalk • Provide a two-way bicycle facility adjacent to the pe- destrian walkway/sidewalk • Separate bicycle and pedestrian traffic through pav- ing materials, a yellow tactile strip and/or a grade change • Separate the bike lanes and railroad tracks with some type of barrier, such as delineators, a curb or plant- ers, but provide locations where pedestrians can cross Houser Way freely • Intersections will require bicycle signals LAKE TO SOUND TRAIL - SECTION 4 REGIONAL TRAIL ALTERNATIVES CITY OF REiVTON ■ IkI.I L51 lIC 1`ClE MASTER PiRN 000090 EXISTING $ 56' ROW OUTSIDE CITY ROW WITHIN CITY ROW Side Path • Requires acquisition or easement from Boeing • Potential coordination with Boeing's trail • No change to Logan Ave travel lanes, turn lane or east side sidewalk Side Path • Entirely within the Logan Ave ROW • No impact to adjacent properties • Eliminates turn lane • No change to east side sidewalk EASTSIDE RAIL CORRIDOR TRAIL - SECTION 1 C:-IY OF RENTON REGIONAL TRAIL ALTERNATIVES 1 x n 11568-CYCLE M•�Sf. oascoo D EXISTING PROPOSED Side Path • No property acquisition required • Requires no change to travel lanes • Existing bike lanes remain EASTSIDE RAIL CORRIDOR TRAIL - SECTION 2 C�ITYOI RENTON REGIONAL TRAIL ALTERNATIVES p��Q� �., of T„ NYj 0 O L u QJ N C al L U O L m 3 1O vNi O 3 w ° - 0 O C Y u W Y O fa O N d O 0 m J toJ LL a) C -aj Y a) V C R >'n Y z al u h co -6 co O al Y Y w 3 O N L -° u Y b4 o m C a) oa C c — O Z a v m v o c o a, no o ° v m r � y O > O p uN p>o A 3 C Q a -V.o Ln 3 w 3oj E a`'cLg-o o '°' v E O i N 3 O O N ` c L - on Y ar a0 F3 m 2 H 2 � .0 o J✓ C J v) z= W ae 99 ! LLr� '.6 U.0 C O I Q O m L N N 3 O 2 C 3 C i 3 m .Mo GJ C O v a, N CL V Q 0 O r L c = L J c O y a) 3 p Q a"o c m � Y O m J O m m o O O m Y m L N Y E C„ m O N O O R N al Nm Y a Y O_ ar a3� Y to o O on m 6c aoam v to °o w �m o u°3 O N 00u cu y om cL °> ,a m m �^ a 3 >3o 3 V oL3 Coroo w m m m a 0 "� w 3 m r- O i N 3 a au 7 6 7 C SO E a) 2 F a) 0 3 V 0 3 o to ` C `l oL._ m rm x Hxv. s 'A u 3 O S any Pauan8 v 0 I a o� v Q i L O 4'cL T N U N c Y r_ n o ; c— o v C c U m O to u O 6 o Y 0 Y O co N N O N c O -(u 0 Ou b0 3 F Y F w d N c _ T 3 a d O` 7 m ' O '6 L d N O- N Y N t o 3 u C c °' Y+ o O d o O m u�'i Q c o v H F UO m vLi 'v o c O t u on a o J O N C c O O L C ` O L O CL bD L C d O 4 C m N v y O 6 C 'O O 'O U v > 1n V v cz 3 a v '3 '3 Y 0 •Q 3 o v W c-I a = W �a/nog h4��4 ySP 0 0 Z W r_ O t y pq m O J C C C N O C F s p v O• L O a L O_ O -O N WD O m O U1 7 '6 y 3 o a v o a v v > n u a16e f6 M m fa 3 w -0 -0 '3N O -a— 6 '3 .0 ONO ..3 0 w W e-I 10' = W zz c Vu� ` o _ 02 v `m H 62 U:o PF r_ O CL 0 ^L W O m a1 m r_ Q Q G .^M, W 0 3 ACL W V C 0 . 11 W. N � O O > 2 1 C N 1 Y 2 .• H y ` C O l� v � s v 'o �oa3ic � 3v y a I i u Y J In Y • ' a s oa Y f0 f0 �+ o a ca � O � 1111� � S "UaAV II!N PF N I j N Y H C O d C C N � m O Y 10 L CL u V L � M a lgu= ` o 4 zft M p q f0 J 1 N 000 C a �` rw C. PROJECT SHEETS C. PROJECT SHEETS INTRODUCTION The proposed trails and bicycle network comprises individual routes or segments that connect at intersections to form the low stress network. Most of the routes follow streets and are within the public right of way. Some existing and proposed segments are within private or quasi -public property, such as utility company property, and require agreements and/or easements to be im- plemented. Other network segments are within Renton Parks property. Projects are defined as contiguous segments of a route serving a neighborhood, connecting im- portant destinations, such as schools or transit stops, or completing gaps in regional trails. They are generally scaled to implementable in one or two phases. Most projects have one contiguous non -motorized facility type, but some have two or more facility types due to differing right of way characteristics or property constraints. The project sheets are arranged alphabetically. CONCEPTUAL COST ESTIMATES Project costs for bicycle and pedestrian facilities will vary greatly depending on right of way characteristics, cost of materials, the specific facility design and scope of the improvements. When available, an order of magnitude cost range is provided for each project. EXISTING CROSS-SECTION The existing cross-section description for each project includes the lane configuration, but not the dimensions of the lanes or curb -to -curb distance. The methodology employed in this plan uses the number of travel lanes as one of the factors that determines the level of traffic stress for a route. Travel lane width can affect vehicle speeds, and thus the bicycle level of traffic stress, but was not inventoried and is not documented on the project sheets. Cross-section information is for typical street segments and does not take into account turn lanes and additional through lanes that often occur at intersections. SPEED LIMIT Vehicle speeds are also one of the factors used to determine the existing level of traffic stress of a route. Where relevant, existing posted speed limits are provided for each project. FACILITY TYPES A range of facility types to achieve a low -stress trails and bicycle network are proposed in this plan. The facility types assigned to different projects are conceptual design guidelines and not specific to the exact dimensions and condition of each right of way or easement. In some cases, one or more alternate facility types are suggested that may provide more separation from traffic and result in a safer, more comfortable facility. Additional feasibility studies will be required to Q verify the suitability of each facility prior to project implementation. These studies may address property acquisition, roadway channelization or widening, and on -street parking modification, among other issues. Each facility type also has design variations that will need to be considered upon design devel- opment of the project. For example, protected bike lanes can have a range of treatments for the barrier separating the bicycle facility from the vehicle travel lanes, such as delineator posts, planter boxes, or concrete barriers. Selection of a variant will generally depend on the safety, cost, and return on investment of the project. LOCATION MAPS Each location map shows the proposed project segment or segments. "WAR, PROJECT SHEET INDEX 1) 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes....................................................................................................................... 1 2) 128th Avenue SE Bike Lanes.......................................................................................................................2 3) 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes.......................................................................................................................3 4) Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path...............................................................................4 5) Benson Neighborhood Greenway.............................................................................................................5 6) Benson Road S/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes..............................................................................................6 7) Cascade Waterline Spur Trail....................................................................................................................7 8) Cedar to Sammamish Trail..........................................................................................................................8 9) Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lanes......................................................................................................................9 10) East Valley Road Shared Use Path...................................................................................................... 10 1 1) Eastside Rail Corridor............................................................................................................................. 1 1 1 2) Edmonds Avenue Connector.................................................................................................................. 12 13) Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path.................................................................................................... 13 14) Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway..................................................................................................... 14 15) Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway........................................................................................... 15 1 6) Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path................................................................................... 16 17) Harrington Avenue NE Neighborhood Greenway............................................................................ 17 18) Highlands Hillclimb.................................................................................................................................. 18 1 9) Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway...................................................................................................... 19 20) Honey Creek Trail Extensions................................................................................................................ 20 21) Houser Way and Factory Avenue........................................................................................................ 21 22) Houser Way N Shared Use Path.......................................................................................................... 22 23) Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes............................................................................................................... 23 24) Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway................................................................................................. 24 25) Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway................................................................................................... 25 26) Kenyon -Dobson Trail and Trailhead.................................................................................................... 26 27) Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment....................................................................................................... 27 28) Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment..................................................................................................... 28 29) Lake Washington Loop Trail.................................................................................................................. 29 30) Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb........................................................................................ 30 31) Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path....................................................................................................... 31 32) Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway................................................................................ 32 33) May Creek Hillclimb............................................................................................................................... 33 34) May Creek Trail....................................................................................................................................... 34 35) May Valley Trail...................................................................................................................................... 35 ni PROJECT SHEET INDEX 36) Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway............................................................................................. 36 37) Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes.............................................................................................................. 37 38) N 4th Street Connector........................................................................................................................... 38 39) N 6th Street Bike Lanes.......................................................................................................................... 39 40) N 8th Street Shared Use Path............................................................................................................... 40 41) Naches Avenue Shared Use Path......................................................................................................... 41 42) NE 3rd Street........................................................................................................................................... 42 43) NE 4th Street Bike Lanes........................................................................................................................ 43 44) NE 12th Street Bike Lanes.....................................................................................................................44 45) NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway........................................................................................... 45 46) NE Sunset Boulevard Shared Use Path.............................................................................................. 46 47) Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes.................................................................................................................... 47 48) North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway.......................................................................................48 49) North Southport Drive Shared Use Path.............................................................................................49 50) Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes.............................................................................................................. 50 51) Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail........................................................................................................ 51 52) Panther Creek Trail................................................................................................................................. 52 53) Powerline Trail.......................................................................................................................................... 53 54) Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway........................................................................ 54 55) Renton Connector..................................................................................................................................... 55 56) Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway...............................................................................................56 57) S 2nd Street............................................................................................................................................. 57 58) S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway............................................................................................... 58 59) SSW 7th Street Transit Connector..................................................................................................... 59 60) Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail............................................................................................................. 60 61) SE 168th Street Protected Bike Lanes................................................................................................. 61 62) SE 182nd & SE 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway............................................................... 62 63) SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path................................................................................................. 63 64) Seattle Waterline Spur Trail................................................................................................................. 64 65) Seattle Waterline Trail........................................................................................................................... 65 66) Shattuck to Airport Connector............................................................................................................... 66 67) Soos Creek Trail....................................................................................................................................... 67 68) South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway.......................................................................................68 69) Springbrook Trail..................................................................................................................................... 69 70) Springbrook Trail Extension................................................................................................................... 70 iv PROJECT SHEET INDEX 71) Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb..................................................................................................................... 71 72) SW 16th Street Shared Use Path........................................................................................................ 72 73) SW 27th Street Connector.................................................................................................................... 73 74) Talbot Road S Bike Route....................................................................................................................... 74 75) Thunder Creek Trail................................................................................................................................. 75 76) Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail.......................................................................................................... 76 77) Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway..............................................................................................77 78) Tukwila Station Trail................................................................................................................................ 78 79) Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes................................................................................................................. 79 80) Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway.......................................................................................... 80 0 cD EW era �� o i -_ Newcastle Golf Club Rd 3 c m r �O eto � I ~ 1r s 1 Cougar Mount Cr Region re ay ildla 1 ture N 30th St Athletic •-\ Lake Washington ♦ CJ1 Complex ♦ a ey d 1 N.N'��+�t_► '_"' ,♦ May 1 1 eek 1 14i8 24th,S_ , 1 / Me 'II �iy.1:2.,3;d Pi •-� -i 'IyT'• ; Honey Creek m Z 1 1• Greenway Lakeridge Park 1 . ♦ IN \ 1 1 Gene Coulon 1 \ r---•► 1 Wd Memorial Beach 21 1 1 ♦►, ��'�t6 May A Park 1 I 1 I i.►�� I :Valley County 900 r.►♦ �;-�- - )--y 1 1 Park o 1, ♦' . 1 Iv 1 1 N \ ez Is f+�- Be i ♦ NLI 1 41 9a a) Skyway Cedar River > ; `�'.W rlo �.t► • o \ Trail Park i \ ♦ ZI ►r.,-r31 IZ \ I 1 v 1 Park r c I _ i \A of ° a' ' > h S 124tNS� \9. _ _ _ _ o ` I NE_6k.§ a \ \ ¢ 1 1 2I" I ol Io lE `2gthSt - IZ 4 St �� -..�a• ,..► 11@ttLSY��f� __�-- ;..NE SL e 5 1 N3rdSt4' ' 7 x 1 1 IZ mnn�'w- r j *� Cedar River�•1 S 133rd St S 32ndSi Pol a�i��r�� yo =il�/t� Oj �o Lakes }Rish� v Ifigid _ ark SE 128th St /� If o� Ave S W 1 " ; a) I ♦ - .. _ t1d _GLla.►- _ raid, 'tg© r m �� LssIr - • • 1 _a i Cedar 1 1� 1 �P CL' •-----1 v ' * River 1 �r Q `. * 3 •a{w el 900 •► ®° . Park Maplewood 1 LI Foster o r.r•♦O .� \ GL7 1 1 Community Park urse �, Black River ; \ /fi{ � 0 Propert I ♦ Riparian = 1 1 ^I 'Aa,xtj Forest ►►.►' rrrre• s go Riverview Park i Maplewood tD�-� ram! ►----r� �J......... a + Heights Park \ S 1 nth 1t S'th St 1 Cedar River Natural Area ♦ s Metr ►- It----W---•---••--, 515 S7thSi •�• ® Maplewood ; 1 ■' Wat work • ; Golf Course ♦� a_,©-. De Den �oathcenter 51,1 Tukwila Pkwy Par Spri brook 1401 \ rn Trail ay S Grady F G�J Iuy S� Grady W loAt IN eoco ' • O \ 1 Qy�At 1 1 \N 1 , eti 1 ♦♦ ♦mow, Soos / i 1 3 •� 1 p, 1 r�eJo' O ♦► \ Creek anc ' i ' ♦ tit__ 1-•'+•►rh- Trail Q ♦ 3 Panliher Creek I= _ _ 1 ; a♦ 1 GL� ��''l1'•�� ►♦♦ 1►►► 7 I o v Wetlands �T __.�.♦ ♦___+�Ei.��QZhtS __Ji______ ; 1� Q' ; ; r \ ♦ 1 r ; Cascade ;ark ♦ I -� SW 27th Sr ; ,o \ ,♦O 1 I 1 ' r Renton ; ;alllu� I 5-68_h_-_-_; Wetlands 1 >Yk1 I \ 1a ♦ ly ♦ N; r Rerpt4n Park [{j SW th StEL maw Iw w Al sr 1 1 I � � 1^ � nl ' I •• _ tr Edlund r.-}LE P&ti4Yltg4"IF_*-_____rrr y►YJ' SW 41 st St 1 Propertyi;Rd I 1 / 1 •---rF. O S 18 h St SW�3r�--- 1• � `� p 1 1 1 ,O IQ 1 K � 1 1 � 1 1 j 1 1 SE 192nd 1 7 Cleveland / Richardson I S Property I Springbrook Watershed N m Q 0.5 1 Miles 167 N \ 14 o'I AA I r _] Ron Regis T Park / SE Jones Rd 169 C a J�J� Existing Trails Shared Use Path Striped Bike Lane Signed Shared Roadway Pedestrian Trail Proposed Trails •• Shared Use Path •---• Protected Bike Lane E 183rd St Striped Bike Lane • Neighborhood Greenway Signed Shared Roadway Pedestrian Trail Parks & Open Space OCommunity Center Library N Q O Potential Transit Hub Q1 School Proposed Project Number, Name 17, Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway JF4, May Creek Trail A 51, Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail 68, South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 1, 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes L 18, Highlands Hillclimb 35, May Valley Trail 52, Panther Creek Trail �69, Springbrook Trail 2, 1 28th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 19, Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway 36, Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 53, Powerline Trail 70, Springbrook Trail Extension 3, 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 20, Honey Creek Trail Extensions 37, Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes 54, Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway 71, Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb 4, Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path 21, Houser Way and Factory Avenue 38, N 4th Street Connector Renton Connector 72, SW 16th Street Shared Use Path 5, Benson Neighborhood Greenway 62, Houser Way N Shared Use Path 39, N 6th Street Bike Lanes 56, Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway 73, SW 27th Street Connector 6, Benson Road/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes 23, Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes 40, N 8th Street Shared Use Path 57, S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lan 74, Talbot Road S Bike Lanes 7, Cascade Waterline Spur Trail 24, Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway 41, Neches Avenue Shared U 58, S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway 75, Thunder Creek Trail 8, Cedar to Sammamish Trail 25, Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway 42, NE 3rd Street 59, S/SW 7th Street Transit Connector 76, Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail 9, Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lan 26, Kenyon -Dobson Trail and Trailhead 43, NE 4th Street Bike Lanes _A 60, Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail 77, Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway 10, East Valley Road Shared Use Path , Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment 44, NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes 61, SE 168th Street Protected Bike Lanes 78, Tukwila Station Trail 11, Eastside Rail Corridor 28, Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment 45, NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway 62, SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway 79, Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes 12, Edmonds Avenue Connect 29, Lake Washington Loop Trail 46, NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path 11� 63, SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path 00, Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 13, Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path _ 30, Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb 47, Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes 64, Seattle Waterline Spur Trail 14, Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway 31, Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path 48, North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 65, Seattle Waterline Trail ■ Identified Priority Project 15, Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway 32, Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway 49, North Southport Drive Shared Use Path 66, Shattuck to Airport Connector 16, Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path 33, May Creek Hillclimb 50, Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes 67, Soos Creek Trail 1) 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes Project Description Build bike lanes along 1 16th Avenue SE. Consider buffered bike lanes where ROW width permits. Limits Puget Drive SE to SE 192nd Street (City Limits) (Start/End) Length 2.49 miles Destinations • Cascade Elementary School (North to South) I • Cascade Vista Athletic Club Ball Fields • Post Office • Benson Hill Elementary School • Family First Center (proposed) Connections I • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) (North to South) I • Puget Drive SE Bike Lanes (proposed #54) • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #77) • Cascade Waterline Spur Trail (proposed #7 ) • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) • SE 1 68th Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #61) • SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path (proposed #63) • SE 182 & 1 84th Streets Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #62) Cost I $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction, center turn lane where Section needed Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations Recommendation consistent with the Benson Hill Community Plan. Location Map Facility n Bike Lane Alternate Facility Buffered Bike Lane 0 2) 128th Avenue SE Bike Lanes Project Description Build bike lanes from SE 164th Street to SE Petrovitsky Road. Consider shared use path where sidewalks are missing. Limits SE 164th Street to SE Petrovitsky Road (Start/End) Length 0.71 miles Destinations • Lindbergh High School (North to South) • Renton Park Elementary School M Connections • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) (North to South) • SE 168th Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #61) • Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #56) • SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path (proposed #63) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations The segment from SE 169th Place to SE Petrovitsky Road currently has shoulders that function as walkways. Sidewalks would need to be constructed for exclusive bike lanes to be feasible. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility o n W Bike Lane Shared Use Path v 3) 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes Project Description Build bike lanes from NE 4th Street south along 156th Avenue SE to the intersection of SE 142nd Place and 154th Place SE (City Limits). Develop signed shared roadway on 156th Avenue SE and SE 144th Street to 160th Avenue SE (City Limits) Limits NE 4th Street and 155th Avenue SE to the intersec- (Start/End) tion of SE 142nd Place and 154th Place SE and the intersection of SE 144th Street and 160th Avenue SE. Length 1.46 miles (0.84 within Renton City Limits) Destinations Cedar River to Lake Sammamish Trail Site Park (North to South) Connections NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (existing and proposed (North to South) #43) • Cedar to Sammamish Trail (proposed #8) • Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway M (proposed #32) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction, center turn lane Section Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Location Map Facility , oF l G .. Bike Lane Alternate Facility a a o � o Signed Shared Roadway Signed Shared Roadway n 4) Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path Project Description Construct a shared use path on the west side of Benson Drive S from S Grady Way to SE Petrovitsky Road and on 108th Avenue SE from SE Petrovitsky Road to SE 1 92nd Street. Limits S Grady Way to SE 1 92nd Street (Start/End) Length 3.17 miles Destinations • City Hall (North to South) • Proposed Transit Center • Thomas Teasdale Park • Talbot Hill Elementary School Connections I • Renton Connector (proposed #55) (North to South) • SSW 7th Street Transit Connector (proposed #59) • Talbot Road S Bike Lanes (proposed #74) • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) • SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path (proposed #63) • SE 1 82nd & 1 84th Streets Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #62) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- Benson Drive: 2 lanes in each direction Section 108th Avenue SE: 2 lanes in each direction, center turn lane Speed Limit 40 MPH Considerations WSDOT jurisdiction (SR 515). Traffic volumes and speeds are too high and the roadway too con- strained for standard bike lanes. Location Map Facility r rdfij 7ini'LOWE Shared Use Path n 5) Benson Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway along S 23rd Street, S 27th Street, and SE 164th Street between Talbot Road S and the planned Soos Creek Trail. Limits Talbot Road S to 1 32nd Place SE (City Limits) (Start/End) Length 2.45 miles Destinations • Talbot Hill Elementary School (West to East) I • Thomas Teasdale Park • Renton Academy • Fred Nelsen Middle School • Cascade Elementary School • Cascade Park I• Lindbergh High School Connections Panther Creek Trail (proposed #52) (West to East) Talbot Road S Bike Lanes (proposed #74) • Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path (proposed #4) • Benson Road Bike Lanes (proposed #6) • 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #1) • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #77) • 1 28th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #2) • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) • Soos Creek Trail (proposed #67) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section I Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway n 6) Benson Road S/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes Project Description Complete gaps in bike lanes between Houser Way S along Main Avenue S and Benson Road S to Benson Drive S. Where possible, narrow vehicle travel lanes to accommodate buffered bike lanes. Use delineators at corners and intersections. Limits Houser Way S to SE 1 68th Street (Start/End) Length 1.90 miles Destinations • Downtown (North to South) • City Hall • Renton Academy • Fred Nelsen Middle School Connections S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway (proposed (North to South) #58) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (existing and proposed #27) • Powerline Trail (proposed #53) • Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #54) • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) • SE 1 68th Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #61 ) • Benson Drive S Shared Use Path (proposed #4) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction; 2 lanes each direction Section Puget Drive S to S 27th Street Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Narrowing travel lanes and/or the center turn lane along Benson Road S appears possible, which will both slow traffic and provide space for a buffer. With Benson Drive S remaining a high volume/speed parallel route, Benson Road S should be a slower speed route providing local access and bicycle accom- modation. One of only 3 to 4 possible routes crossing 1-405 and connecting to the City Center. Consider lowering speed limit to 25 MPH. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane n 7) Cascade Waterline Spur Trail Project Description Develop a paved or soft -surface shared use path along the Cascade Waterline corridor between Puget Drive SE and the Seattle Water Pipeline. Path extends through powerline ROW and road ROW (SE 160th Street). Limits Puget Drive SE to SPU Water Pipeline Corridor (Start/End) Length 1.47 miles Destinations Cascade Elementary School (West to East) Cascade Park Connections M Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (West to East) (proposed #15) • Puget Drive SE Bike Lanes (proposed #54) • 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #1) • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #77) • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 30-foot wide utility corridor Section M Speed Limit N/A Considerations Requires coordination with utilities to establish agreement for non -motorized easement and facility. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Shared Use Path Soft Surface Trail n 8) Cedar to Sammamish Trail Project Description Develop a shared use path between 164th Avenue SE and Coalfield Park to Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) along SE 128th Street, 152nd Avenue SE, SE 142nd Street, 154th Avenue SE, and 154th Place SE. Limits 164th Avenue SE to Maple Valley Highway (SR (Start/End) 169) Length 2.68 miles (0.79 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • Coalfield Park (North to South) M • Maplewood Park • Ron Regis Park • Cedar River Trail Connections • NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (existing and proposed (North to South) M #43) • 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #3) • Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #32) • Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #23) Cost King County is the lead agency Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction 154th Avenue SE to Maple Section Valley Highway (SR 169) Speed Limit 25 and 35 MPH Considerations Connects to Cedar River Trail to East Plateau area. King County is lead agency. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Shared Use Path Soft Surface Trail v 9) Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lanes Project Description Complete gaps in bike lanes between NE Sunset Boulevard and NE 7th Place and NE 4th Street and NE 2nd Street. Limits SE May Valley Road (City Limits) to NE 2nd Street (Start/End) Length 0.94 miles Destinations • City of Newcastle (North to South) • May Valley and May Creek Trail • May Creek Park (McAskill) • Hazen High School Connections • May Valley Trail (proposed #35) (North to South) • Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway (proposed M #14) • NE Sunset Boulevard Bike Lanes (proposed #46) • North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #48) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) • NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #43) • Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #32) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction, center turn lane Section M Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Where possible, narrow vehicle travel lanes to ac- commodate buffered bike lanes. Use delineators at corners and intersections. Location Map Facility Bike Lane Alternate Facility 0 Buffered Bike Lane v 10) East Valley Road Shared Use Path Project Description Construct a shared use path on the west side of East Valley Road from SW 16th Street to SW 43rd Street. Limits (Start/End) Length Destinations (North to South) Connections (North to South) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations SW 1 6th Street to SW 43rd Street 1.78 miles • Valley commercial area • SW 1 6th Street Shared Use Path (proposed I#72) • SW 27th Street Connector (proposed #73) • SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path (proposed #63) $$$$$ (Over $5M) 1 lane in each direction, center turn lane 1 35 MPH Portions of this route must be shared sidewalk due to existing mature trees. Location Map Facility r NO Shared Use Path IN 1 1) Eastside Rail Corridor Project Description Coordinate with King County Parks and BNSF on alignment and design of the Eastside Rail Corridor Trail between milepost 5 and Coulon Beach Park south entrance. Limits Milepost 5 (near Burnett Avenue N) to Lake (Start/End) Washington Blvd intersection) and Coulon Beach Park south entrance Length 16.70 miles (2.86 within Renton City Limits) Destinations I • Seahawks Training Facility (North to South) • Kennydale Beach Park • Kennydale Neighborhood • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park • The Landing I Connections Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and (North to South) proposed #28) • Houser Way N Shared Use Path (proposed #22) • Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path (existing and proposed #31) • Logan Ave N Bike Lanes (existing) • North Southport Drive Shared Use Path (proposed #49) Cost King County is the lead agency. Existing Cross- 100-foot wide railroad corridor Section Speed Limit N/A Considerations King County is the lead agency. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path n 12) Edmonds Avenue Connector Project Description Develop signed shared roadway on N 30th St from Park Ave N to 1-405. Transition to bike lanes on Kennewick PI NE/NE 27th St and continue southward on Edmonds Avenue NE to NE 3rd Street. M Limits Park Avenue N to NE 3rd Street (Start/End) Length 2.87 miles Destinations • Kennydale Neighborhood (North to South) • Kennydale Elementary School • Kennydale Lions Park • Honey Creek Trailhead • John McKnight Junior High School • Highlands Park and Neighborhood Center • Windsor Hills Park Connections Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #24) (North to South) M • Pacific Railroad Trailhead (proposed #51 ) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #19) • NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #44) • North Southport Drive Shared Use Path (proposed #49) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed # 68) • Highlands Hillclimb (proposed #18) • Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #25) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations Additional study needed for NE 30th St where facility crosses at 1-405. Use delineators at corners and intersections. Parking capacity likely to be reduced when bike lanes implemented. Neighborhood sensitivity exists about retaining on -street parking. Location Map Facility Bike Lane a a Signed Shared Roadway Alternate Facility ,r ��'+! tz r1� ''ems••, ,may Two -Way Protected Bike Lane 12 13) Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path Project Description Construct a shared use path on east side of Garden Avenue N from N 4th Street to Bronson Way N. Limits (Start/End) Length Destinations (North to South) Connections (North to South) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations N 4th Street to Bronson Way N 0.33 miles • The Landing • PACCAR • Liberty Park • Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path (existing) • N 4th Street Connector (proposed #38) $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) 1 lane in each direction 25 MPH Bronson Way N connection will be challenging. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path 15 14) Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway from 1 26th Avenue SE to Nile Avenue SE (City Limits) via NE 19th Street, Anacortes Avenue NE, NE 24th Street, and NE 25th Street. Limits 1 26th Avenue NE to 148th Avenue SE/Nile Avenue (Start/End) SE (City Limits) Length 1.61 miles Destinations • Glencoe Park (West to East) • May Creek Park (McAskill) Connections • Honey Creek Extensions (proposed #20) (West to East) • Union Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #79) • Duvall Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #9) • Nile Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #47) M Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) 1 lane in each direction 25 MPH Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway IS 15) Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway along Renton Avenue S and Grant Avenue S from I-405 to S Puget Drive. Limits Mill Avenue S to S Puget Drive (Start/End) Length 1.46 miles Destinations • Downtown (North to South) • Cedar River Trail M Connections • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (proposed (North to South) #27) • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) • Puget Drive SE Bike Lanes (proposed #54) • Cascade Waterline Spur Trail (proposed #7) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Requires easement for powerline property crossing and gate modification to allow pedestrian and bicycle access. Consider a two-way protected bike lane on the east side of Grant Avenue from the power line corridor to S Puget Drive, which would require consolidation of on -street parking on the west side of Grant Avenue. Parking on Grant Avenue appears to be under-utilized, but should be studied. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Neighborhood Greenway v Two -Way Protected Bike Lane 16) Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path Project Description Install bike lanes from SW Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) to SW 5th Place and a shared use path on the west side of Hardie Avenue between SW 5th Place and Rainier Avenue S. Limits SW Sunset Boulevard to Rainier Avenue S (SR 167) (Start/End) Length 0.55 miles Destinations • Fred Meyer Shopping Plaza (North to South) • Proposed Transit Hub M Connections • Hardie Avenue Shared Roadway (existing) (North to South) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (existing and proposed #27) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- North of SW 5th Place: 1 lane in each direction Section South of SW 5th Place: 1 lane in each direction and a center turn lane Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Coordinate with Sound Transit on connection between SW 7th Street and the proposed transit center. Location Map Facility Z41 Bike Lane 17) Harrington Avenue NE Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Route on Harrington Avenue NE that connects Meadow Crest Early Learning Center and Meadow Crest Accessible Playground, McKnight Middle School, Sunset Neighborhood Park, and Highlands Elementary School. Limits Harrington Circle NE to NE 7th St (Start/End) Length 1.39 miles Destinations • Meadow Crest Early Learning Center (North to South) • Meadow Crest Accessible Playground • McKnight Middle School • Sunset Neighborhood Park • Highlands Elementary School Connections • NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #44) (North to South) • NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway M (proposed #45) • NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path (proposed #46) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #19) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Routing around Sunset Neighborhood Park, no direct routing through park. Route to cross NE Sunset Blvd Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway IS 18) Highlands Hillclimb Project Description Establish a route from Sunset Boulevard NE to the intersection of NE 3rd and 4th Streets, comprising a shared roadway on Bronson Way NE and bike lanes on NE 4th Street (Uphill bike lane/downhill shared lane marking west of Edmonds Avenue NE and bike lanes both sides east of Edmonds Avenue NE.) Limits (Start/End) Length Destinations (West to East) Connections (West to East) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Sunset Boulevard NE to Jefferson Avenue NE 1.31 miles • North Renton • Renton Technical College • Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb (proposed #71) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #12) • NE 3rd Street Shared Use Path (proposed #42) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #19) $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) 1 lane in each direction N 25 MPH Considerations Study the feasibility of traffic calming measures, such as traffic circles at the Edmonds Avenue inter- section and the intersection of Bronson Way NE, Windsor Way NE and Grandey Way NE. Location Map Facility Bike Lane Alternate Facility a ; repo ov° off° Signed Shared Roadway Two -Way Protected Bike Lane is 19) Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway on NE 24th St from Jones Ave NE that connects to Kennydale Lions Park then crosses Edmonds Ave NE to connect to Meadow Crest Early Learning Center. The route would follow Kirkland Ave NE from NE 16th St southward to NE 4th St behind Renton Technical College. Limits Jones Avenue NE to NE 4th Street (Start/End) Length 2.72 miles Destinations • Kennydale Lions Park (North to South) • Meadow Crest Early Learning Center • Meadow Crest Accessible Playground • Renton Technical College Connections • Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #24) (North to South) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #1 2) • Harrington Avenue NE Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #17) • NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #45) • NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #44) • NE Sunset Boulevard Shared Use Path (proposed #46) • North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #48) M • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) • Highlands Hillclimb (proposed #18) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Consider a 2-way protected bike lane on the east side of Kirkland Ave from Sunset Blvd to NE 4th Street. Crossing NE Sunset Blvd/1-900 will need more study. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Neighborhood Greenway Two -Way Protected Bike Lane IS 20) Honey Creek Trail Extensions Project Description Develop a soft surface trail along the east side of Honey Creek that connects the proposed May Creek Trail to existing Honey Creek Trail. On south end of the Honey Creek Trail, construct new trailhead on city -owned property and develop a soft surface trail that connects to NE 19th Street and NE Sunset Boulevard. Limits Proposed May Creek Trail to Honey Creek Trail (Start/End) M Length 1.17 miles Destinations Honey Creek Greenway (North to South) M Connections • Pacific Railroad Trailhead (proposed #51) (North to South) • May Creek Trail (existing and proposed #34) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #12 • Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #14) • Honey Creek Trail • NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #45) • NE Sunset Boulevard Shared Use Path (proposed #46) Cost M $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- N/A Section Speed Limit N/A Considerations Property acquisitions or easements may be required to connect the May Creek Trail as well as a bridge over Honey Creek to connect trailhead at NE 21 st Street to NE 16th Street access. Connection to NE 19th Street requires property acquisition or easements. Connection to NE Sunset Boulevard is steep and constrained, but possible, and may require a small bridge across Honey Creek. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 21) Houser Way and Factory Avenue Project Description Provide protected bike lanes along Houser Way from Mill Avenue to Bronson Way N. Develop a signed, shared roadway on Factory Ave N from Bronson Way N to N 4th Street. Limits N 4th Street to Mill Avenue S (Start/End) Length 0.68 miles Destinations • Liberty Park (North to South) • Cedar River Park • Cedar River Trail • Renton Library • Downtown Connections N 4th Street Connector (proposed #38) (North to South) NE 3rd Street Shared Use Path (proposed #42) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (existing and proposed #27) • Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #15) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- Factory Avenue: 1 lane in each direction Section Houser Way N: 3-4 lanes northbound Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Requires new or retrofitted bridge over the Cedar River (not included in cost estimate). Location Map Facility a a Two -Way Protected Bike Lane Signed Shared Roadway 22) Houser Way N Shared Use Path Project Description Develop a shared use path along the east side of Houser Way N from the Lake Washington Boulevard N to the existing Shared Use Path on N 8th Street. Develop shared use path on the west side of Houser Way Bypass from N 8th St to Sunset Blvd N by converting existing walkway. Coordinate with King County for Eastside Rail Corridor. Limits Lake Washington Boulevard N to N 4th Street (Start/End) Length 1.10 miles Destinations • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park (North to South) • The Landing Connections M • Eastside Rail Corridor (existing and proposed (North to South) #1 1 ) • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and proposed #29) M • North Southport Drive Shared Use Path (proposed #49) • N 8th Street Shared Use Path (proposed #40) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Study the feasibility of modifying existing parking on east side of Houser Way. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path 23) Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes Project Description Construct bike lanes south on Jericho Avenue NE from NE 4th Court to SE 142nd Street and then east on SE 142nd Street to 152nd Avenue. If sidewalks are missing, install shared use path. Serves Maplewood Heights Elementary School and future King County Maplewood Park. Limits NE 4th Court to SE 1 36th Street (Start/End) Length 1.45 miles (0.60 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • Maplewood Heights Elementary School (North to South) • Maplewood Community Park Connections • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (North to South) M (proposed #68) • NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (existing and proposed M #43) • Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #32) • Cedar to Sammamish Trail (proposed #8) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations There is existing parking on east side within vicinity of Maplewood Heights Elementary School (NE 2nd Street to SE 2nd Place) that should remain. Requires a feasibility study for dropping a turn lane at the NE 4th Street intersection. Parking on the east side of 144th Avenue SE would need to be accommodated on the west side of the street. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Bike Lane Shared Use Path 24) Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway from Lake Washington Boulevard to Sunset Boulevard along N 40th Street, Park Avenue N, Jones Avenue NE, N 28th Street, NE 20th Street, Monterey Avenue NE, NE 1 2th Street and Aberdeen Avenue NE. Limits Lake Washington Boulevard N to Sunset Boulevard (Start/End) NE Length 2.58 miles Destinations • Kennydale Elementary School (North to South) Connections • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and (North to South) proposed #29) • Eastside Rail Corridor (proposed #1 1) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #1 2) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed M #19) • NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #44) • Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb (proposed #71) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Connection west to east across 1-405 via Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #12) Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway 25) Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway Project Description Create a signed shared roadway along Burnett Avenue N from the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard N and N 36th Street to the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard N and Burnett Avenue N. Create an additional path along N 30th St from Burnett Avenue N to Park Avenue N . Limits Lake Washington Boulevard N to Park Avenue N (Start/End) Length 0.80 miles Destinations • Kennydale Beach Park (North to South) • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Connections • Lake Washington Boulevard N Bike Lanes (North to South) • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and proposed #29) • Eastside Rail Corridor (proposed #1 1) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #12) • Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #24) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit Considerations 25 MPH Location Map Facility a a Signed Shared Roadway 26) Kenyon -Dobson Trail and Trailhead Project Description Develop a trailhead for Kenyon -Dobson Park and a trail connection to May Creek Trail in the City of Newcastle. Limits Kenyon -Dobson Park and the proposed City of (Start/End) Newcastle trail system Length 0.53 miles (0.24 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • City of Newcastle trail system (West to East) • Kenyon -Dobson Park • May Creek Trail Connections (West to East) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations • May Creek Hillclimb (proposed #33) $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) N/A I N/A Requires coordination with Newcastle and King County. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 27) Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment Project Description Develop a two-way protected bike lane along the north or south side of Houser Way between Burnett Avenue S and Mill Avenue S. Requires removal of parking on one side of Houser Way. Develop a shared roadway along the Cedar River Trail access road between Mill Avenue S and the Cedar River Trail trailhead. Limits Burnett Avenue S to the Cedar River Trailhead (Start/End) Length 0.45 miles Destinations • Renton Library (West to East) • Cedar River Trail • Narco Property • Cedar River Trail Connections • Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment (existing and (West to East) proposed #28) • Wells Avenue Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #79) • Renton Connector (proposed #54) • S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #57) • Benson Road S/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes (proposed #6) • Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #36) • Houser Way & Factory Avenue (proposed #21) • Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #15) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- • Houser Way S: 1 lane in southbound direction Section • Cedar River Access Rd: 1 lane in each direction Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations This segment is constrained where the Cedar River Trail access road abuts the 1-405 retaining wall with minimal clearance between the road and the BNSF RR tracks. Location Map Facility a a Two -Way Protected Bike Lane Signed Shared Roadway 28) Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment Project Description Coordinate with King County and BNSF to develop a regional shared use path along the railroad right of way between Naches Avenue SW and Burnett Avenue S. Limits Eastern terminus of planned Lake to Sound Trail and (Start/End) Burnett Avenue S Length 2.26 miles (2.21 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • Green River Trail (West to East) M • Fort Dent Park • Black River Riparian Forest • Proposed Transit Hub • Downtown Connections Shattuck to Airport Connector (proposed #66) (West to East) Renton Connector (proposed #55) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (existing and proposed #27) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 100-foot railroad right of way Section M Speed Limit N/A Considerations Alternate: Between Shattuck Avenue S and Burnett Avenue S, in lieu of a shared use path within the BNSF ROW, develop a shared roadway regional trail facility along Houser Way. Requires access study for parcels fronting Houser Way. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Shared Use Path �a Signed Shared Roadway 29) Lake Washington Loop Trail Project Description Provide a shared use path to connect the west side of Rainier Avenue N to the existing shared use path on the west side of Logan Avenue N along Airport Way. Coordinate with existing protected bike lanes on Airport Way and the Renton Airport Master Plan. Limits City Limits at Airport access road to Logan Avenue (Start/End) N Bridge Length 1.65 miles (1.34 within Renton City Limits) Destinations (North to South) Connections • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing) (North to South) • Shattuck to Airport Connector (proposed #66) • Renton Connector (proposed #55) • Logan Avenue Shares Use Path (existing and proposed #31) • Cedar River Trail M Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction with a center turn lane Section Speed Limit Considerations N 35 MPH Location Map Facility Alternate Facility 0 Shared Use Path Two -Way Protected Bike Lane 30) Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb Project Description South of S 1 32nd Street establish a signed shared roadway along S Langston Road, S 1 34th Street, and Stevens Avenue SW. Create bike lanes along SW Langston Road between Stevens Avenue SW and Hardie Avenue SW. Limits S 132nd Street to Hardie Avenue SW (Start/End) Length 0.79 miles Destinations • Renton Secondary Learning Center (West to East) • Eadington Park Connections • Hardie Avenue SW Signed Shared Roadway (West to East) (existing) • Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path (proposed #16) Cost $ (Under $100,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations On SW Langston Road, consider an uphill bike lane on the north side of the street and a downhill shared lane on the south side of the street. To accommo- date the bike lane, parking could be consolidated on the south side of the street. Location Map Facility Bike Lane Signed Shared Roadway IS 31) Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path Project Description Develop a shared use path on the west side of Logan Avenue N from N 6th Street to Garden Avenue N. Limits Garden Avenue N to N 6th Street (Start/End) Length 0.76 miles Destinations Coulon Memorial Beach Park (North to South) Southport • The Landing M Connections Houser Way N Shared Use Path (proposed #22) (North to South) Eastside Rail Corridor (proposed #1 1) • Lake Washington Boulevard N Bike Lanes • North Southport Drive Shared Use Path M (proposed #49) • N 8th Street Shared Use Path (proposed #40) • N 6th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #39) • Logan Avenue Shared Use Trail (existing) • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and proposed #29) M Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 1-2 lanes southbound and 1 lane north bound with Section a center turn lane M Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Requires coordination and easements with Boeing. Location Map Facility r rdfij 7imilkk HIM Shared Use Path IS 32) Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway along NE 2nd Street from Union Avenue NE to 156th Avenue SE (City Limits). Limits Union Avenue NE and 156th Avenue SE (Start/End) Length 1.64 miles (1.51 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • Heritage Park (West to East) • Maplewood Heights Elementary School Connections • Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #79) (West to East) • Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #9) • Jericho Ave NE Bike Lanes (proposed #23) • Cedar to Sammamish Trail (proposed #8) • 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed (#3) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) 1 lane in each direction 25 MPH Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway 33) May Creek Hillclimb Project Description Create a signed shared roadway on NE 44th Street, Lincoln Avenue NE and Monterey Place NE. Limits Lake Washington Boulevard N to SE 86th Place (Start/End) (City Limits) Length Destinations (North to South) 0.78 miles • Kenyon -Dobson Park Connections • Lake Washington Boulevard N Bike Lanes (North to South) • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and M proposed #29) • Eastside Rail Corridor (planned #1 1) • City of Newcastle proposed 11 2th Avenue Trail Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Consider constructing an uphill climbing lane. Coordinate with WSDOT for interchange design. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility Signed Shared Roadway �r r ��; 1�1 �,�, a#,=, i r; 'ared Lane DownJBike Lan 34) May Creek Trail Project Description Extend the May Creek Trail from the existing trail west of 1-405, under 1-405, and connect to the City of Newcastle's May Creek Trail. Limits May Creek Trail at 1-405 to May Creek Trail at the (Start/End) City of Newcastle City Limits Length 1.58 miles (1.50 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • May Creek Greenway (North to South) Connections • May Creek Trail at 1-405 (North to South) • Pacific Railroad Trailhead and Trail (proposed #51) • Honey Creek Trail Extensions (proposed #20) • May Creek Trail at the City of Newcastle City Limits M Cost Existing Cross - Section N $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) N/A Speed Limit N/A Considerations Interagency coordination with King County and City of Newcastle. Requires bridge at May Creek crossing and property acquisition and/or WSDOT easements. WSDOT will be making the trail con- nection under 1-405 in 2024. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail f r �l Boardwalk 35) May Valley Trail Project Description Develop a soft surface trail between Duvall Avenue NE and NE 26th Street through May Creek Park and the Langley Ridge easement. Limits Duvall Avenue NE to NE 26th Street (Start/End) Length 0.49 miles Destinations • Honey Creek Neighborhood Greenway (West to East) Connections • Duvall Ave NE Bike Lanes (existing and proposed (West to East) #9) • May Creek/McAskill Park • Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway (proposed M #13) Cost TBD Existing Cross- N/A Section M Speed Limit N/A Considerations Possible easements required. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 36) Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway Project Description Create a shared roadway on Mill Avenue S from Bronson Way N to Houser Way, extending along Bronson Way N bridge. This facility connects the N 2nd Street two-way protected bike lane with the Lake to Sound Trail and Cedar River Trail. Limits Houser Way S to Park Avenue N (Start/End) Length 0.19 miles Destinations • Liberty Park (North to South) • Renton Library M Connections Cedar River Trail (North to South) S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #57) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (proposed #27) • Houser Way and Factory Avenue (proposed #21) Cost $ (Under $100,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in south direction and 2 lanes in north Section direction Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations While a shared roadway is feasible on Mill Avenue, the transition to Bronson Way at the north end is problematic due to the higher traffic volumes and number of lanes. Most cyclists will not be confident turning onto or off of Bronson Way. The feasibility of a two-way protected bike lane on the east side of Mill Avenue and Bronson Way (across the bridge) should be studied. Location Map Facility Signed Shared Roadway 37) Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes Project Description Develop bike lanes on Monroe Ave NE from NE 1 2th Street to NE 4th Street. Partner with Renton Technical College to establish a pedestrian and bicycle entry at the corner of NE 7th Street and Monroe Ave NE. Limits NE 1 2th Street to NE 4th Street (Start/End) Length 1.00 miles Destinations • Renton Technical College (North to South) Connections • NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #44) (North to South) • North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #48) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) • NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (existing and proposed M #43) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction, parking both sides Section M Speed Limit 30 MPH & 35 MPH Considerations A connection/entry to parking lot of Renton Technical College is needed at Monroe and NE 7th St. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility t a Bike Lane Protected - Lane 38) N 4th Street Connector Project Description Construct a two-way protected bike lane on the north side of N 4th Street between Logan Avenue N and Houser Way N. Limits Logan Avenue N to Houser Way N (Start/End) Length 0.60 miles Destinations • Renton Memorial Stadium (West to East) • Sartori Elementary Connections • Logan Avenue Trail Shared Use Path (existing and (West to East) proposed #31 ) • Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path (existing and proposed #13) • Houser Way and Factory Avenue (proposed #21) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 4 lanes westbound one-way Section M Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations Requires dropping the northernmost of four vehicle travel lanes on N 4th Street. Location Map Facility =�� ; raj• -�' ITwo-Way Protected- Lane 39) N 6th Street Bike Lanes Project Description Establish bike lanes along N bth Street from Cedar River Trail Park to Garden Avenue N. Limits Cedar River Trail Park to Garden Avenue N (Start/End) Length 0.57 miles Destinations • Cedar River Trail Park (West to East) • Cedar River Trail Connections • Logan Avenue Trail Shared Use Path (existing (West to East) M and proposed #31) • Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path (existing and proposed #13) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction west of Logan Avenue N Section 2 lanes in each direction east of Logan Avenue N Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations May require additional right of way. Location Map Facility .0 Bike Lane 40) N 8th Street Shared Use Path Project Description Convert existing sidewalk on the south side to a shared use path on N 8th Street from Logan Avenue N to Garden Avenue N. Limits Logan Avenue N and Garden Avenue N (Start/End) Length 0.31 miles Destinations Boeing Plant (West to East) The Landing M Connections • Logan Avenue Trail Shared Use Path (existing (West to East) M and proposed #31) • Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path (existing and M proposed #13) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction with a center turn lane Section Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations May require additional right of way. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path 41) Naches Avenue Shared Use Path Project Description Construct a shared use path along the west side of Naches Avenue SW from the end of the Lake to Sound Trail to Oakesdale Avenue SW (via SW 7th St). Convert existing sidewalk to a shared use path. Limits North end of Naches Avenue SW to Oakesdale (Start/End) Avenue SW Length 0.34 miles Destinations Black River Riparian Forest (North to South) M Connections • Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment (existing and (North to South) proposed #28) • Black River Trail M Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- Naches Avenue SW: 1 lane in each direction, Section parking on both sides SW 7th Street: 2 lanes with a center turn lane Speed Limit 25 MPH on Naches Avenue SW 30 MPH on SW 7th Street Considerations Some portions of this alignment are constrained and default to sidewalks. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path 42) NE 3rd Street Project Description Establish a signed shared roadway on N Brooks Street and Houser Way N between Factory Avenue N and N 3rd Street. Construct a shared use path on uphill direction and a bike lane for downhill direction on NE 3rd Street from Sunset Boulevard N to Monroe Avenue NE. Limits Factory Avenue N and Monroe Avenue NE (Start/End) Length 0.98 miles Destinations (West to East) Connections Houser Way & Factory Avenue (proposed #21) (West to East) Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #1 2) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #19) • Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #37) • NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (existing and proposed #43) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction with a center turn lane in Section places M Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Portions of this alignment are constrained. The section at Sunset Boulevard and 1-405 will be limited to the existing sidewalk, and the portion immediately east of 1-405 has steep banks on both sides, which may make construction of a Shared Use Path prohibitive. Travel lanes are 1 2-feet wide and could be narrowed to 1 1-feet wide to gain space. Consistent with NE 3rd/4th Corridor Study (2005). Location Map Facility Shared Use Path Signed Shared Roadway 43) NE 4th Street Bike Lanes Project Description Complete bike lanes on NE 4th Street between Monroe Avenue NE and 156th Avenue SE. Limits Monroe Avenue NE to 156th Avenue SE (Start/End) Length 0.87 miles Destinations (West to East) Connections Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #37) (West to East) Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #78) M • Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #9) • Jericho Ave NE (proposed #23) • Nile Avenue Shared Roadway (proposed #47) • Cedar to Sammamish Trail (proposed #8) • 156th Avenue Se Bike Lanes (proposed #3) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction with a center turn lane Section M Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations This project completes a gap in the existing bike lanes, but does not meet a Level of Traffic Stress 2 standard. Consistent with NE 3rd Street/NE 4th Street Corridor Study (2005) Location Map Facility Bike Lane 44) NE 12th Street Bike Lanes Project Description Construct bike lanes along NE 1 2th Street between Edmonds Avenue NE and Union Ave NE. Limits Edmonds Avenue NE to Union Avenue NE (Start/End) Length 0.98 miles Destinations John McKnight Junior High School (West to East) Connections Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway (proposed (West to East) #24) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #1 2) • Harrington Avenue NE Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #17) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed 19#) • NE Sunset Boulevard Shared Use Path (proposed #46) • Monroe Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #37) • Union Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #79) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Construct a two-way protected bike lane on the north side of NE 12 Street between Sunset Boulevard and Edmonds Avenue, which would require removal of on -street parking on the north side of NE 12 Street between Sunset Boulevard and Edmonds Avenue NE. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility 1 r P Protected Bike Lane 45) NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway Project Description Develop a shared roadway along NE 16th Street between Edmonds Avenue and the Honey Creek Trail trailhead. Limits Edmonds Avenue NE to Kirkland Avenue NE (Start/End) Length 0.42 miles Destinations • John McKnight Junior High School (West to East) • Meadow Crest Early Learning Center • Meadow Crest Accessible Playground • North Highlands Neighborhood Center M Connections • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #12) (West to East) • Harrington Avenue NE Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #17) M • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #19) • Honey Creek Trail Extensions (proposed #20) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations The Honey Creek Trail trailhead is currently not accessible via public property, easements may be required. Location Map Facility Signed Shared Roadway 46) NE Sunset Boulevard Shared Use Path Project Description Create a shared us path along NE Sunset Blvd between Edmonds Ave NE and Duvall Ave NE. Limits Edmonds Ave NE and Duvall Ave NE (Start/End) Length 1.75 miles Destinations • Sunset Neighborhood Park (West to East) I • Highlands Library Connections • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #1 2) (West to East) 1 • Harrington Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #17) • North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 1 (Proposed #48) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed 1 #19) • NE 1 2th Street Bike Lanes (proposed #44) • Honey Creek Trail Extensions (proposed #20) • Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #79) • Duvall Ave NE Bike Lanes ( existing and proposed #9) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction Section Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Location Map Facility Alternate Facility o a e � o Shared Use Path Bike Lane n 47) Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes Project Description Construct bike lanes on 148th Avenue SE/Nile Avenue NE from SE May Valley Road to NE 4th Street. Coordinate with bridge replacement/ expansion. Limits SE May Valley Road to NE 4th Street (Start/End) Length 1.94 miles (1.17 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • May Valley Park (North to South) • Apollo Elementary School I Connections • SE May Valley Road Signed Shared Roadway (North to South) I • Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #14) • North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #48) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) • NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (existing and proposed #43) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section I Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Location Map Facility n l Bike Lane 48) North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway along NE 1 Oth Street from Sunset Neighborhood Park to Nile Avenue NE. Limits Sunset Neighborhood Park to Nile Avenue NE (City (Start/End) Limits) Length 1.85 miles Destinations • Sunset Neighborhood Park (West to East) I • Highlands Library • Kiwanis Park • Honey Dew Elementary School • Hazen High School I Connections Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed (West to East) #19) Monroe Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #37) • Union Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #79) • Duvall Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #9) • Nile Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #47) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section I Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway 49) North Southport Drive Shared Use Path Project Description Convert the existing paved shoulder along North Southport Dr into a shared use path and extend it from Garden Avenue N to Edmonds Avenue NE. Limits Garden Avenue N to Edmonds Avenue NE (Start/End) M Length 0.84 miles Destinations The Landing (West to East) Southport • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Connections M Logan Avenue Trail Shared Use Path (existing (West to East) and proposed #31) • Eastside Rail Corridor (proposed #1 1) • Houser Way N Shared Use Path (proposed #22) M• Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #24) • Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb (proposed #70) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #12) • NE Sunset Boulevard Shared Use Path (proposed #46) Cost M $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction Section M Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations WSDOT jurisdiction (SR 900). This route limited to sidewalk near to 1-405. Location Map Facility a oP° Q e Shared Use Path 50) Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes Project Description Limits (Start/End) Length Destinations (North to South) Connections (North to South) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations Complete bike lanes on Oakesdale Avenue SW from SW 27th Street and S 180th Street (City Limits). SW 27th Street to S 1 80th Street (City Limits) M 1.00 miles • Renton Wetlands • SW 27th Street Connector (proposed #70) • Springbrook Trail $$$$$ (Over $5M) 2 lanes in each direction with a center turn lane 35 MPH This project extends the existing bike lanes, but may not meet an Level of Traffic Stress 2 standard. Location Map Facility Bike Lane 51) Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail Project Description Construct a trailhead and trail from the end of NE 29th Street to the proposed May Creek Trail. Limits East end of NE 29th Street to the proposed May (Start/End) Creek Trail Length 0.30 miles Destinations • Kennydale Elementary School (West to East) Connections • Edmonds Ave Connector (proposed #1 2) (West to East) • May Creek Trail (proposed #34) Cost $ (Under $100,000) Existing Cross- N/A Section M Speed Limit N/A Considerations Property ownership has not been identified and will likely require going through reversionary rights process. Coordinate with King County. Trailhead parking may be limited to on -street parking along NE 29th Street and NE 29th Court. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 52) Panther Creek Trail Project Description Develop a boardwalk along the Panther Creek wetlands connecting to Lake Avenue S at the north end and S 192nd Street (via Auburn Easement) at the south end. Limits Lake Avenue S and S 15th Street intersection to S (Start/End) 192nd Street and Edlund Farm Length 3.52 miles Destinations • Panther Creek Wetlands (North to south) • Edlund Farm • Valley Medical Center Connections • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) (North to South) • Talbot Road S Bike Lanes (existing and proposed #74) • SW 27th Street Connector (proposed #73) • SE Petrovitsky Rd Shared Use Path (proposed #63) Cost Existing Cross - Section $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) N/A Speed Limit N/A Considerations Requires some property acquisition or easements. Likely to have sensitive areas impacts and environ- mental constraints. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail Boardwalk 53) Powerline Trail Project Description Limits (Start/End) Length Destinations (West to East) Connections (West to East) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations Improve existing soft surface trail along Puget Sound Energy powerlines that provides a connection to the Cedar River. Need to formalize and secure easements for use. Benson Road S to both the Cedar River Trail and SE Royal Hills Drive. 1.56 miles • Cedar River Natural Area • Benson Road/Main Ave S Bike Lanes (proposed #6) • Thunder Creek Trail (proposed #75) • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) • Cedar River Trail $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) N/A N/A Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 54) Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway Project Description Develop signed shared roadway on Puget Drive SE from Benson Road S to Grant Ave S. Construct buffered bike lanes from Rolling Hills Ave SE to 1 16th Avenue SE. Limits Benson Road S to 1 16th Avenue SE (Start/End) Length 0.99 miles Destinations (West to East) Connections • Benson Road/Main Ave S Bike Lanes (proposed (West to East) #6) • Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #15) • Cascade Waterline Spur Trail (proposed #7) • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) • 1 16th Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #1) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations A shared roadway is less desirable for lower Puget Drive, which is Level of Traffic Stress 3 and A. Buffered or protected bike lanes may be feasible on lower Puget Drive if a road diet is implement- ed from Benson Road S to Rolling Hills Avenue SE. Further study is required; consider narrowing vehicle travel lanes from 12' to 10' to accommodate buffered bike lanes. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility "h. Bike Lane Signed Shared Roadway • q e Shared Use Path 55) Renton Connector Project Description Develop a combination of shared use path and protected bike lanes along Burnett Avenue S and Burnett Place S in Downtown. Limits Airport Way to S 7th Street (Start/End) Length 0.59 miles Destinations • Memorial Stadium (North to South) • Cedar River Trail • Downtown • Renton High School • Piazza Park • Tonkin Park Connections Logan Avenue Trail Shared Use Path (existing (North to South) and proposed #31) • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and proposed #29) • S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #57) • S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #58) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (proposed #27) • SSW 7th Street Transit Connector (proposed #59) • Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use M Path (proposed #4) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations The Renton Connector is an facility consistent with the Civic Core Plan. This project creates a critical connection between regional trails serving Renton. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path a Two Way Protected Bike Lane 56) Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway south of SE 168th Street along SE 170th Place, SE 172nd Street and 1 30th Avenue SE to Renton Park where there are currently soft surface trails. Limits SE 1 68th Street to Renton Park (Start/End) Length 1.18 miles Destinations Renton Park (West to East) Renton Park Elementary Charles A Lindbergh High School Connections SE 1 68th Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed (West to East) #61 ) • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #77) • 1 28th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #2) • Soos Creek Trail (proposed #67) I Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section I Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations These streets already have some neighborhood greenway features, such as speed bumps. The proposed King County Soos Creek Shared Use Trail will likely be located through Renton Park. Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway IS 57) S 2nd Street Project Description Construct a two-way protected bike lane on the south side of N 2nd Street between Rainier Avenue S and Burnett Avenue S and create a signed shared roadway between Burnett Avenue S and Mill Avenue S. Limits Rainier Avenue S to Mill Avenue S (Start/End) Length 0.67 miles Destinations (West to East) Connections • Shattuck to Airport Connector (proposed #65) (West to East) • Renton High School • Renton Connector (proposed #54) • Piazza Park • Wells Avenue Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #79) • Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #35) • Renton Library Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in one direction (existing); Section 1 lane in each direction (proposed) Speed Limit M 25 MPH Considerations Study the feasibility constructing a shared use path through private property between Rainier Avenue S and Hardie Avenue SW to connect the S Second Street bike lanes to Hardie Avenue SW. Location Map Facility !b , 58) S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway Project Description As a short-term facility prior to constructing the proposed S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes, designate S 3rd Street as a signed shared roadway. Limits Rainier Avenue S to Main Avenue S (Start/End) Length 0.62 miles Destinations Renton High School (West to East) • Piazza Park • Renton History Museum • Veterans Memorial Park • Renton Library Connections Shattuck to Airport Connector (proposed #66) (West to East) Renton Connector (proposed #55) • Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #80) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (existing and proposed #27) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in one direction (existing); Section 1 lane in each direction (proposed) M Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations The intersection at Main Avenue and Houser Way needs further study. Location Map Facility Signed Shared Roadway 59) S/SW 7th Street Transit Connector Project Description Develop a shared use path along the north side of SW 7th Street between Naches Avenue SW and Burnett Avenue S. Limits Naches Avenue SW to Burnett Avenue S (Start/End) Length 1.18 miles Destinations • Proposed Transit Hub (West to East) Connections • Naches Avenue Shared Use Path (proposed #41) (West to East) • Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment (proposed #28) • Hardie Avenue Bike Lane and Shared Use Path (proposed #16) • Shattuck to Airport Connector (proposed #66) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (proposed #27) • Renton Connector (proposed #55) • Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path (proposed #4) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 2 lane in each direction (center turn lane near Section Rainier Ave S) Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations Coordinate with Sound Transit and King County to ensure safe access into and out of proposed transit center. Alternate route for the Lake to Sound Trail. Location Map Facility a Shared Use Path IS 60) Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail Project Description Construct the planned Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail from the end of the existing water walk at the Cedar River Boathouse to the existing paved path at the south end of Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park. Limits Cedar River Boathouse to Gene Coulon Memorial (Start/End) Beach Park Length 0.38 miles Destinations Cedar River Trail (West to East) Cedar River Boathouse • Lake Washington • Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Connections Existing Cedar River Trail (West to East) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- N/A Section Speed Limit N/A Considerations The trail transitions between an over water boardwalk to soft surface trail and ultimately to a paved trail and requires easements. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail Boardwalk 61) SE 168th Street Protected Bike Lanes Project Description Provide a 2-way protected bike lane on the south side of SE 168th Street from 108th Avenue SE to 1 28th Avenue SE. Serves Lindbergh High School and Renton Park Elementary School. Access to proposed Soos Creek Trail. Limits 108th Avenue SE to 1 28th Avenue SE (Start/End) Length 1.26 miles Destinations Renton Park Elementary School (West to East) Lindbergh High School Connections Benson Road/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes (West to East) (proposed #6) • 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #1) • Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #55) • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #77) • 1 28th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #2) • Soos Creek Trail (proposed #67) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations Study the feasibility of dropping a turn lane at the 1 16th Avenue SE and 108th Avenue SE intersections. Requires removal of three corner extensions and consolidation of parking on the north side of the street. Location Map Facility off° �J Two Way Protected Bike Lane 11 62) SE 182nd & SE 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway along SE 182nd Street and SE 184th Street. Limits 108th Avenue SE and the proposed Soos Creek (Start/End) Trail Length 1.12 miles Destinations (West to East) Connections Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use (West to East) Path (proposed #4) • 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #1) • Soos Creek Trail (proposed #67) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) 1 lane in each direction 25 MPH Location Map Facility a Neighborhood Greenway 63) SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path Project Description Develop a shared use path converting existing sidewalk on the north side of SW 43rd St/S Carr Road/SE Petrovitsky Road from Tukwila City Limits to 1 34th Ave SE (City Limits). Limits Talbot Road S and 1 34th Avenue SE (City Limits) (Start/End) Length 3.82 miles Destinations Valley Medical Center (West to East) Edlund Farm Soos Creek Park Connections I • Talbot Road S Bike Lanes (proposed #73) (West to East) Panther Creek Trail (proposed #52) • Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path (proposed #4) • 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #1) • 1 28th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #2) • Soos Creek Trail (proposed #66) I Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- 2 lanes in each direction and a center turn lane Section I Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Location Map Facility a ew> q� e Shared Use Path 64) Seattle Waterline Spur Trail Project Description Improve existing soft surface trail from the Seattle Waterline Trail that provides a connection to the Cedar River. Limits SE Royal Hills Road to both the Cedar River and to (Start/End) SE 160th Street Length 1.39 miles Destinations • Cedar River (North to South) Connections • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) (North to South) • Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail (proposed #76) • Cascade Waterline Spur Trail (proposed #7) Cost $ (Under $100,000) Existing Cross- Soft surface trail Section M Speed Limit N/A Considerations Need to formalize and secure easements for use. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 65) Seattle Waterline Trail Project Description Develop a signed shared roadway from S 7th St south via Beacon Way S to Puget Drive SE. Create a shared use path from Puget Drive SE to 132nd Place SE/the proposed Soos Creek Trail (City Limits). Limits S 7th Street to 132nd Place SE/Soos Creek Trail (Start/End) (City Limits) Length 2.06 miles Destinations Phillip Arnold Park (North to South) Tiffany Park Elementary School • Tiffany Park • Hazen High School Connections Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (North to South) (proposed #15) • Puget Drive SE Bike Lanes (proposed #54) • 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #1) • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #77) • Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail (proposed #76) • Cascade Waterline Spur Trail (proposed #7) • Soos Creek Trail (proposed #67) • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) M Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- Seattle Public Utilities corridor, varies from 60 to Section 100-feet wide Speed Limit N/A Considerations Requires coordination with Seattle Public Utilities to establish agreement for non -motorized easement and facility. The shared use path segment from 1 16th Avenue SE and the City Limits could be an improved soft surface trail. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path Alternate Facility Signed Shared Roadway Soft Surface Trail 66) Shattuck to Airport Connector Project Description Connect Airport Way to S 7th Street with a signed shared roadway along Shattuck Avenue S, S Tobin Street, and Lake Avenue S. Limits Airport Way to S 7th Street (Start/End) Length 0.90 miles Destinations • Renton High School (North to South) I • Proposed Transit Hub Connections • Lake Washington Loop Trail (existing and (North to South) I proposed #29) • S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #57) • S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #58) • Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment (proposed #28) • Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (proposed #27) • SSW 7th Street Transit Connector (proposed #58) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Crossing at the intersection of S 2nd Street and Lake Avenue S needs further study. Coordinate with Renton Airport Master Plan. Location Map Facility 0 Signed Shared Roadway IS 67) Soos Creek Trail Project Description Coordinate with King County Parks on final design and construction of the Soos Creek Trail. Limits SR 169 to SE 1 92nd Street (Start/End) Length 4.00 miles (2.05 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • Cedar River Trail (North to South) I • Soos Creek Park • Lindbergh High School • Renton Park Elementary School • Renton Park • Boulevard Lane Park I• Meeker Middle School Connections • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) (North to South) I • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) • Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #56) • SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path (proposed #63) • SE 1 82nd & 1 84th Streets Neighborhood Greenway (proposed # 62) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations King County is the lead agency N/A N/A Location Map Facility o ff° P p o Shared Use Path 68) South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway along NE 7th Street, NE 5th Place, NE 6th Street, from Kirkland Avenue NE to the City Limits. Limits Sunset Boulevard NE to Shadow Avenue NE (City (Start/End) Limits) Length 3.35 miles Destinations • Highlands Park and Community Center (West to East) • Highlands Elementary School • Renton Technical College • Kiwanis Park I Connections • Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb (proposed #71) (West to East) • Edmonds Avenue Connector (proposed #1 2) • Harrington Avenue NE Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #17) • Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #19) • Monroe Avenue Bike Lanes (proposed #37) • Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #79) • Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lanes (existing and proposed #9) • Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #23) • Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes (proposed #47) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations I Location Map Facility a Neighborhood Greenway 69) Springbrook Trail Project Description Complete the Springbrook Trail. Limits SW 19th to SW 23rd Streets to SW 41 st to SW (Start/End) 43rd Streets Length 0.46 miles Destinations • Renton Wetlands (North to South) Connections • SW 27th Street Connector (proposed #73) (North to South) • Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes (existing and proposed #50) I Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations Boardwalk, soft surface trail and hard surface trail N/A Location Map Facility Shared Use Path 70) Springbrook Trail Extension Project Description Connect Springbrook Trail to Lake to Sound Trail with a shared use path adjacent to the existing sidewalk along Oakesdale Ave SE/Monster Road SW. Limits Monster Road SW to Black River Trail (Start/End) Length 0.48 miles Destinations Springbrook Trail (West to East) Monster Road SW Bike Lanes • Black River Riparian Forest • Metro Waterworks Gardens Park M Connections Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment (existing and (West to East) proposed #28) • Riparian Forest Trail • Black River Trail Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) 2 lanes in each direction with a center turn lane 35 MPH Location Map Facility W _- Shared Use Path 71) Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb Project Description Install an uphill bike lane and downhill signed shared lane on Sunset Boulevard NE from N Southport Drive to 1-405. Limits NE Sunset Boulevard to 1-405 (Start/End) M Length 0.99 miles Destinations (North to South) Connections • North Southport Drive Shared Use Path (North to South) (proposed #49) M• Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #24) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) • Highlands Hillclimb (proposed #18) • Houser Way N Shared Use Path (proposed #22) Cost $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction with turn lanes at intersec- Section tions M Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations Accommodation of uphill bike lane may require dropping the turn lanes. Crossing of freeway on and off -ramps needs further study to ensure safety. Location Map Facility Signed Shared Lane DownlBike Lane Up 11 72) SW 16th Street Shared Use Path Project Description Construct a shared use path on the south side of SW 16th Street. North side west of Lind Avenue SW, south side east of Lind Avenue SW. Limits Oakesdale Avenue SW to East Valley Road (Start/End) Length 0.59 miles Destinations (West to East) Connections • Springbrook Trail (West to East) • Oakesdale Avenue SW Bike Lanes • East Valley Road Shared Use Path (proposed M #10) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction with a center turn lane Section M Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Portions of this route must be shared sidewalk due to existing mature trees. Location Map Facility W _- Shared Use Path 73) SW 27th Street Connector Project Description Develop a shared use path between Tukwila city limits and the proposed Panther Creek Trail as an east -west connection to Tukwila and Tukwila Sounder Station. Incorporate the existing shared use path on the south side of roadway between Naches Avenue SW and Oakesdale Avenue SW. Limits West City Limits to Panther Creek Trail (Start/End) Length 1.05 miles (0.94 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • Interurban Trail (West to East) • Tukwila Sounder Station • Renton Wetlands • Springbrook Trail M Connections • Tukwila Station Trail (proposed #78) (West to East) • Oakesdale Avenue SW Bike Lanes (existing and proposed #50) • Panther Creek Trail (proposed #52) Cost $$$$$ (Over $5M) Existing Cross- West of Lind Avenue SW: 2 lanes in each direction Section East of Lind Avenue SW: 1 lane in each direction with a center turn lane Speed Limit 35 MPH Considerations Shared use path construction adjacent to Renton Wetlands may be prohibitive due to potential wetland impacts. Crossing of SR 167 needs further study. Location Map Facility a Shared Use Path 74) Talbot Road S Bike Lanes Project Description Create bike lanes on Talbot Road S between Benson Drive S and S Carr Road. Continue bike lanes from S 1 92nd St southward to S 200th Street. Limits Benson Drive S to S 200th Street (Start/End) Length 2.07 miles Destinations • Talbot Hill Elementary School (North to South) I • Edlund Farm • Valley Medical Center • Cleveland -Richardson Park I Connections • Benson Drive S Shared Use Path (proposed #A) (North to South) I • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) • Panther Creek Trail (proposed #52) • SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path (proposed #63) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- North of Carr Road: 1 lane in each direction Section South of Carr Road: 1 lanes in each direction with a center turn lane Speed Limit 30 MPH Considerations Narrow shoulders in most locations north of Carr Road. Consider adding 2-foot wide buffers to the existing Talbot Road bike lanes from Carr Road to S 192nd Street by narrowing the vehicle travel lanes where possible. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility off° off° m Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane 75) Thunder Creek Trail Project Description Improve the surface of the Thunder Creek Trail. Extend the trail from the south end of Cedar Avenue S to the north end of the existing Thunder Creek Trail. Limits (Start/End) Length Destinations (North to South) Connections (North to South) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations Cedar Avenue S to the north end of the existing Thunder Creek Trail. 0.21 miles • Thunder Creek Trail • Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #15) $$ ($100,000 - $500,000) Soft surface N/A The extension to Cedar Avenue requires an easement across the Puget Sound Energy powerline corridor. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 76) Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail Project Description Formalize the soft surface trail connecting Tiffany and Cascade Parks. Limits Tiffany Park to SE 160th Street (Start/End) Length 0.14 miles Destinations • Tiffany Park (North to South) • Cascade Park Connections • Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) (North to South) • Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #77) • Cascade Waterline Trail Spur (proposed #6) M Cost $ (Under $100,000) Existing Cross- N/A Section Speed Limit N/A Considerations Requires easements across Cascade Waterline. Location Map Facility Soft Surface Trail 77) Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway Project Description Develop a neighborhood greenway connecting the Tiffany Park and Renton Park neighborhoods. Limits 1 16th Avenue SE to SE 172nd Street (Start/End) Length 1.61 miles Destinations • Tiffany Park Elementary School (North to South) I • Tiffany Park • Cascade Park I Connections 1 16th Avenue SE Bike Lanes (proposed #1) (North to South) Seattle Waterline Trail (proposed #65) Cascade Waterline Spur Trail (proposed #7) • Benson Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #5) • SE 1 68th Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #61) • Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #56) Cost $$$ ($500,000 - $1.5 M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section I Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Location Map Facility Neighborhood Greenway 78) Tukwila Station Trail Project Description Develop a paved shared use path south of SW 16th Street along the east side of the BNSF right of way (City Limits) and Tukwila Station. Limits Longacres Drive SW to SW 27th Street (Start/End) Length 0.58 miles Destinations • Tukwila Sounder Station (North to South) Connections • SW 16th Street Bike Lanes (North to South) • SW 27th Street Connector (proposed #72) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- L N/A Section Speed Limit N/A Considerations Negotiation with BNSF, Sound Transit and possibly Boeing required. Trail must integrate with station access improvements on the east side of the track. Location Map Facility Shared Use Path 79) Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes Project Description Construct bike lanes on Union Avenue NE. Limits NE 27th Place (City Limits) to SE 2nd Place (Start/End) Length 2.88 miles (2.43 within Renton City Limits) Destinations • May Creek Trail (North to South) I • Sierra Heights Elementary School • Honey Dew Elementary School • Kiwanis Park • Heritage Park Connections I • Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway (proposed (North to South) #1 4) • NE Sunset Boulevard Shared Use Path (proposed #46) • NE 12 Street Bike Lanes (proposed #44) • North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #48) • South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #68) • NE 4th Street Bike Lanes (existing and proposed #43) • Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway (proposed #32) Cost $$$$ ($1.5M - $5M) Existing Cross- 1 lane in each direction Section I Speed Limit 25 MPH Considerations Where possible, narrow vehicle travel lanes to ac- commodate buffered bike lanes. Alternate: 2-way protected bike lane on the east side of Union. Location Map Facility Alternate Facility off° off° m Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane 11 80) Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway Project Description Limits (Start/End) Length Destinations (North to South) Connections (North to South) Cost Existing Cross - Section Speed Limit Considerations Develop a signed shared roadway on Wells Avenue. Bronson Way N to Houser Way S 0.66 miles • Jones Park • S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes (proposed #57) • S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway (proposed #58) M• Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment (existing and proposed #27) $ (Under $100,000) 1 lane in each direction 25 MPH Location Map Facility Signed Shared Roadway 15 D. PROJECT PRIORITIZATION DOCUMENTATION Project Prioritization January 2019 j Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan As part of outreach in fall 2017, the City of Renton drafted prioritization criteria with the community: • Safety and Trail Experience • Connectivity and Accessibility ■ Equity • Economy and Community ■ Construction and Implementation Eighty projects were scored with prioritization criteria. Each category was weighted with Connectivity and Accessibility and Safety and Trail Experience weighted more highly, Equity weighted moderately, and Economy and Community and Construction and Implementation weighted lower. For each category, indicators or variables were developed. For each indicator, project evaluation criteria were developed, and each rated on either a 3-part high, medium, or low range or a 5-part high, medium -high, medium, medium -low, and low range. The table below addresses the indicators and variables. The Attachment provides more detail and definition of the scoring. Exhibit 1. Prioritization Criteria and Indicators Connectivity and Does the project: Accessibility ■ Fill a gap between existing facilities, or Weight: 30% ■ Fill gap in area with no/few facilities, or ■ Remove pedestrian and/or bicycle barriers? To what extent does this project improve pedestrian/bike access to schools? Does this project offer connections to parks, recreation, or natural areas? Safety and Trail Does the project increase the extent of the low stress (LTS 1 or 2) network? Experience Does the project enhance the natural environment experience? Weight: 30% Does the project address a known issue regarding user experience (intersections, slope/terrain, lighting, wayfinding, formalize informal trail, etc.)? Equity Does the project reach a large number of people and jobs? Weight: 20% Does the project improve bicycle or pedestrian access for users older than Age 64 and/or users younger than Age 1 8? Does the project improve bicycle or pedestrian access for the city's Households in Poverty? Economy and Community Does the project leverage plans or priorities? Weight: 10% Does the project improve access to high density residential or commercial zones, transit, or services? Does the project reflect public feedback? Construction and Is the project a strong candidate for possible grants? Implementation Weight: 1 0% To what extent can the project be implemented with future construction? Is the project reasonably attainable? Is the cost reasonably balanced with potential benefits? Source: City of Renton, 2018; BERK, 2018. Tiers & Results Once scored, three tiers of projects were developed: Highest Priority, High Priority, and Medium Priority. The City used two qualitative criteria in addition to prioritization scores to develop the Highest Priority projects list (Tier 1 ): partnership commitments and geographic equity. Thus, the top scoring projects include the highest scoring projects, plus projects with known commitments, and projects that are opportunistic, feasible in the near term, enhance connectivity across planning areas, or assist with geographic equity. Since some projects had identical scores, there were 27 projects in Tier 1, 26 projects in Tier 2, and 27 projects in Tier 3. Exhibit 2. Prioritization Process 0 Source: BERK, 2018. 10 10 10 Project tiers are nearly equal in length, but Tier 1 projects emphasize Shared Use Paths, and complete all Protected Bike Lanes. Striped Bike Lanes are also increased. Implementation of Neighborhood Greenways is initiated but is a smaller share than in later phases. Tier 2 continues to advance Shared Use Paths, adds Striped Bike Lanes, and adds Neighborhood Greenways, plus implements most Pedestrian Trails. Tier 3 completes the network with the emphasis on Neighborhood Greenways, as well as Striped Bike Lanes, and Shared Use Paths. 11 January 2019 City of Renton I Project Prioritization 2 Exhibit 3. Project Tiers by Project Type Shared Use Path 32.36 16.51 9.49 6.36 Protected Bike Lane 3.05 3.05 - - Protected Bike Lane 0.39 0.39 - - Two -Way Protected Bike Lane 2.66 2.66 - - Striped Bike Lane 24.20 6.99 8.97 8.24 Striped Bike Lane 23.41 6.99 8.97 7.45 Buffered Bike Lane 0.79 - - 0.79 Neighborhood Greenway 22.82 1.39 7.01 14.42 Signed Shared Roadway 8.62 1.56 1.82 5.24 Pedestrian Trail 10.90 3.05 7.36 0.49 Boardwalk 3.71 0.18 3.52 - Hard Surface Trail - - - - Soft Surface Trail 7.19 2.87 3.84 0.49 Total 101.94 32.54 34.65 34.75 Source: City of Renton, 201 8; BERK, 2018. ATTACHMENT: RATING KEY AND RATING RESULTS :111 January 2019 City of Renton I Project Prioritization 3 30% 30% 20% 10% 10% Crosses a significant barrier Improves crossings or Improves crossings or Improves crossings or Project does not meet Medium GIS Data: Community Input Does the project: (freeway, waterway) or fully intersections or removes other intersections or removes other intersections or removes other Low criteria (Walking and Biking) Y > Fill a gap between existing facilities connects two existing facilities barriers along high volume major barriers along medium volume barriers along low volume local > Fill gap in area with no/few facilities arterials, or partially fills gap collector arterial, or extends street, , or extends current facility -0 > Remove pedestrian and/or bicycle between two existing facilities current facility over 1 mile less than 1 mile 01 u barriers? u a r --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To what extent does this project Connections to 2 or more schools Connection to 1 school (within Improves more than 25% of Improves less than 25% of Project does not meet Medium GIS Data: LTS Service Area f0 improve ped/bike access to schools? (within 1/4 mile) 1/2 mile) barriers (sidewalk gaps or barriers within "walk to school" Low criteria (Existing and Proposed Trails) obstructions, missing curb ramps) route options within "walk to school" route u Does this project offer connections to Connections to 2 or more existing Connections to 2 or more existing Connections to 1 or more parks Fewer connections than Medium, Project does not meet Medium GIS Data: Existing and Proposed vparks, recreation or natural areas? developed parks or natural areas developed parks or existing (existing, undeveloped, proposed) or greater distances than Low criteria Trails (within 1/4 mile) natural areas (within 1/2 mile) or existing natural areas (within Medium, or connections to future 1/2 mile) parks and natural areas only w L Q. LU -0 a � N Does the project increase the extent of Project proposed is LTS 1 or 2 and the low stress (LTS 1 or 2) network? connects to an EXISTING LTS 1 or 2 facility ___ Does the project enhance the natural Project provides or has potential environment experience? to provide direct water access ----------------------------------------- Does the project address a known issue Intersects or connects to 2 or regarding user experience (intersections, more major/primary arterials OR slope/terrain, lighting, wayfinding, addresses > 2 known user formalize informal trail, etc.)? experience issues Intersects or connects to 1 or more major/primary arterials OR addresses 2 known user experience issues Project proposed is LTS 1 or 2 Project improves the user appreciation of the natural environment ---------------------------------------- Intersects or connects to 1 minor Addresses 1 known user arterial or collector and addresses experience within project limits 1 known user experience issue Project proposed is LTS 3 or 4 GIS Data: LTS Service Area (Existing and Proposed Trails) Project does not meet criteria for Internal Project Team High or Medium ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No known issues regarding user GIS Data and Parks Plan experience with the project limits Does the project reach a large number Project is within or connects Project is within or connects Project is within or connects Project is within or connects Project is within quarter mile of of people and jobs? within a quarter mile of census within a quarter mile of census within a quarter mile of census within a quarter mile of census census blocks or tracts with less tracts with greater than 15 tracts with greater than 15 tracts having 10-15 persons per tracts having 10-15 persons per than 10 persons per acre (existing GIS Data: Population Density persons per acre (existing or persons per acre (existing or acre (existing or planned) AND acre (existing or planned) OR or planned) and/or low job (Existing and Proposed Trails) planned) AND High Job Density planned) OR High Job Density Medium Job Density Medium Job Density density !r -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Does the project improve bicycle or Project connects 2 or more --------------------------------------- Project is within census tract or ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Project does not meet criteria for a pedestrian access for users older than census tracts with share of quarter mile of census tract with High or Medium W Age 64 and/or users younger than Age residents Age 64+ AND Age 18- g g share of residents Age 64+ OR g RCO Grant Application Data Tool 18? that is greater than city average Age 18- that is greater than city ---- __________________________________________________________________________________________L2iMP Does the project improve bicycle or Project is within or connects to 2 --------------- ________________ Project is within or connects to a _________________________________________ Project does not meet any of the pedestrian access for the city's or more low income census low income census tract. criteria for High or Medium. RCO Grant Application Data Tool Households in Poverty? tracts. Does the project leverage plans or Included in adopted Community Project aligns with community Project is not aligned with priorities? Plan, Subarea Plan, or Master priorities but requires community priorities Community Plans Plan, or City Council Goals or amendment of an adopted plan (Internal Project Team) other adopted plan or program 3 E ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Does the project improve access to high Project connects to location Project connects to location ---------------------------------------- Project connects to location Project connects to location ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Any employment location is more pdensity residential or commercial zones, within 1/4 mile, or connects to within 1/2 mile or to a Local within 3/4 mile within 1 mile than 1 mile from project. GIS Data: Trail Access (Existing U transit, or services? Regional Trail Primary Route and Proposed Trails) r Does the project reflect public Project received high number of Project received some Project did not receive particular Ofeedback? public requests/comments during requests/comments during plan stakeholder input � plan update, OR was update GIS Data: Community Input w recommended in a similar (Walking, Other Ideas or Issues) planning process, or was recommended by an Advisory Is the project a strong candidate for Potential for multiple grant High profile project if not high or medium possible grants? opportunities ---------------------------------------- ------ ------------------------------------------------------- Internal Project Team a - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To what extent can the project be Project is included in 6-year CIP Project is included in 6-year CIP Project is included in 7-20 year Project fits CIP criteria but Project is not included in current C implemented with future construction? with secured funding but with undetermined funding or project list requires CIP amendment CIP and cannot be implemented Cm can be implemented with other with other public or private Internal Project Team u W public or private development development N T Is the project reasonably attainable? Is Project is feasible and practicable. Requires acquisition but no Minor adjustment to Modest adjustment to Requires the purchase or C£ the cost reasonably balanced with It does not require property existing building structure or use improvement or use, and site improvement or use, and site negotiation of ROW and affects C1 — potential benefits? acquisition. will be affected. continues to conform to City use, continues to conform to City use, existing building structures or Internal Project Team parking, and road standards. Less parking, and road standards. Less access to existing building than 10% of project cost. than 20% of project cost. structures (incl. Criteria Evaluation Ranking Project Number Project Name: Score: Connectivity and Accessibility Evaluation Safety and Trail Experience Evaluation Equity Evaluation Economy and Community Evaluation Construction and Implementation Evaluation 1 55 Renton Connector Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment 98% Is * . I. QO 1 28 98% . . . 3 57 S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes 93% . . . . 4 69 Springbrook Trail 91% . . . 5 11 Eastside Rail Corridor Cascade Waterline Spur Trail 89% . . . 5 7 89% . . 3 7 29 Lake Washington Loop Trail 87% . . I. 7 73 SW 27th Street Connector Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment 87% . 7 27 87% 84% . . I. . QO QO 10 60 Sam Chastain Water Trail 10 46 NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path 84% . 0 QO 19 12 67 Edmonds Avenue Connector Soos Creek Trail 84% 0 3 10 84% , . O 4 I. 14 20 Honey Creek Trail Extension 76% . O . 3 14 34 May Creek Trail 73% . 3 14 9 Duvall Ave NE Bike Lanes 67% . O O 14 80 Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 58% 0 3 . 14 43 NE 4th Street Bike Lanes 53% O , 3 19 21 22 Houser Way and Factory Avenue Houser Way N Shared Use Path 82% . QO QO 19 82% . 3 i QO 19 13 Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path 82% . Q . O 22 17 Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway 80% QO . QO 22 61 SE 168th Street Protected Bike Lanes 80% . 3 QO 24 1 116th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 78% . . QO 24 59 S/SW 7TH Street Transit Corridor 78% 3 . . QO 24 38 N 4th Street Connector 78% Q . 3 3 24 41 Naches Avenue Shared Use Path 78% QO . 3 28 63 SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path 76% . . 3 28 64 Seattle Waterline Spur Trail 76% . QO O 28 65 Seattle Waterline Trail 76% . QO O 28 70 Springbrook Trail Extension 76% 3 32 49 North Southport Drive Shared Use Path 73% 3 32 53 Powerline Trail 73% QO O 32 76 Tiffany -Cascade Connector Trail 73% QO . O a 3 35 31 Logan Ave N Shared Use Path 71% 3 . 3 35 6 Benson Road/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes 71% . O 37 79 Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes 69% 69% . O . 3 . 3 3 37 78 Tukwila Station Trail 37 39 N 6th Street Bike Lanes 69% QO . O 37 8 Cedar to Sammamish Trail 69% . 0 QO 0 41 26 Kenyon -Dobson Trail and Trailhead 67% . 0 QO 3 41 51 Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail 67% 3 . 0 QO 3 41 74 Talbot Road S Bike Lanes 67% Is 0 QO . 44 50 Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes 64% QO O . 3 44 66 Shattuck to Airport Connector 64% QO ( . O 44 5 Benson Neighborhood Greenway 64% 62% 62% . QO QO ( ( 3 3 O 3 QO 0 3 0 47 48 North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 47 19 Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway 47 36 Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway 62% QO 0 . 3 50 75 Thunder Creek Trail 60% 3 3 3 O 50 37 Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes 60% ( Q O 50 72 SW 16th Street Shared Use Path 60% O 50 52 Panther Creek Trail 60% 0 54 40 N 8th Street Shared Use Path 56% O 3 Criteria Evaluation Ranking Project Number Project Name: Score: Connectivity and Accessibility Evaluation Safety and Trail Experience Evaluation Equity Evaluation Economy and Community Evaluation Construction and Implementation Evaluation 55 16 Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path 53% 0 QO 0 0 55 30 Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb 53% ( o 0 o 57 4 Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path 51% 0 a (10 o 57 42 NE 3rd Street Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway Highlands Hillclimb 51% 0 o 59 56 18 49% o QO O 59 49% 3 3 3 O 0 59 58 S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway 49% 0 Q . o 62 10 East Valley Road Shared Use Path 47% 62 2 128th Ave SE Bike Lanes 47% 0 0 3 62 68 South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 47% o 0 0 62 77 Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway 47% . 0 0 0 0 66 44 NE 12th Street Bike Lanes 44% o o (3 QO 3 66 45 NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway 44% 3 3 0 3 o 66 35 May Valley Trail 44% o 0 0 0 69 71 Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb 42% o o Q o 70 33 May Creek Hillclimb 38% 0 0 0 3 70 23 Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes 38% 0 0 0 0 72 62 SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway 33% o 3 0 0 0 73 15 Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway 31% o 0 0 0 0 74 32 Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway 29% 0 0 0 3 75 54 Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway 24% 0 0 (3 3 0 75 24 Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway 24% o 0 0 0 0 77 14 Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway 22% 0 0 0 0 3 77 25 Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway 22% 0 0 0 0 3 79 47 Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes 18% 0 0 0 0 0 so 3 156th Avenue SE Bike Lanes 16% 0 0 0 0 0 E. ADOPTING RESOLUTION