The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutResolution No. 2022-C18City of Azusa Pedestrian Plan Approved March 7, 2022 per Resolution No. 2022-C18 ii City of Azusa City Council Robert Gonzales, Mayor Jesse Avila, Jr., Mayor Pro-tem Edward J. Alvarez, Councilmember Andrew N. Mendez Councilmember Dennis Beckwith, Councilmember City of Azusa Planning Commission Robert Donnelson, Chair Elizabeth Ramirez, Vice Chair Mercedes Castro, Commissioner Charles Frank Allen, Commissioner Brittany Martinez, Commissioner City of Azusa Economic & Community Development Department Matt Marquez, Director Manuel Muñoz, Planning Manager Carina Campos, Economic Development Specialist / Azusa Walks Project Manager Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Hannah Brunelle, Senior Regional Planner Consultant Team Toole Design Active San Gabriel Valley KOA Corporation Acknowledgements February 2022 | Azusa Pedestrian Plan Funded by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). NOTE: Information contained in this document is for planning purposes and should not be used for final design of any project. All results, analysis, recommendations, and commentary contained herein are based on limited data and information and on existing conditions that are subject to change. Existing conditions have not been field-verified. Further analysis and engineering design are necessary prior to implementing any of the recommendations contained herein. City of Azusa Public Works Department Robert Delgadillo, Director / City Engineer Miguel Cabanas, Principal Civil Engineer Azusa Walks Advisory Committee Members Elizabeth Ramirez, Azusa Planning Commission Mercedes Castro, Azusa Planning Commission Mitchell Loera, Azusa Parks & Recreation Commission Christell Hutchinson, Azusa Senior Advisory Committee Anjelica Juarez, Azusa Unified School District Maureen Taylor, Azusa Pacific University Yolanda Rodriguez-Peña, Azusa Unified School District Board of Education Member iii Contents About the Plan ��2 Background & Purpose ��2 Azusa Today ��6 Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure ��6 Land Use ��10 Azusa Demographics & Socioeconomic Factors 10 Commuting Patterns ��12 Crash Analysis ��15 Pedestrian Trip Potential ��19 Walk Audits ��22 Policy & Planning Framework ��26 Opportunities & Challenges ��27 Community & Stakeholder Engagement 30 Project Survey ��34 Focus Groups ��36 Meetings ��37 Stakeholder Workshops ��38 Community Pop-ups ��38 Community & Stakeholder Engagement Takeaways 40 Prioritization & Implementation 42 Local Priorities��42 Regional Priorities ��44 Pedestrian Treatment Toolkit ��48 Pedestrian Infrastructure Recommendations 59 Implementation ��67 Funding Sources ��69 Appendices ��75 Appendix A – Existing Conditions Memo Appendix B – Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis Appendix C – Prioritization Analysis & Framework Appendix D – Proposed Recommendations Appendix E – Proposed Recommendations (Cost Estimates) iv THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. Azusa Pedestrian Plan About the Plan Introduction 1 2 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | ABOUT THE PLAN About the Plan Background & Purpose Azusa Walks is the City’s 2022 Pedestrian Master Plan that prioritizes and guides investments to create a safer and more walkable Azusa. Most importantly, it works towards the City’s mobility vision where: “By putting people first, Azusa will become a pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented community.” This vision, laid out in the City’s 2004 General Plan, relies on the goal to provide a connected, balanced, and integrated transportation system that enable Azusans to walk, bike, and take transit —rather than using their car. At some point of getting to and from a destination, everyone walks; every trip in a car, on a bus, or by bike starts and ends with a walking trip. As a result, improving walkability and pedestrian infrastructure is one of the most critical elements to enhancing overall mobility and transportation options for any community. Walkability refers to how friendly a place is for walking. It means providing spaces where people feel safe walking, supporting opportunities to make meaningful and active trips by foot, and creating an environment where people choose to walk because it is convenient and enjoyable. Creating more walkable places can lead to significant improvements in the social fabric, health, and economic well-being of a community. Walkability also implies accessibility—the ability of people of various abilities and ages to safely navigate the pedestrian network. Everyone in Azusa is a pedestrian. This includes people walking, running, or using a wheelchair or other mobility device. It includes people going to work and school, jogging, shopping, catching the bus, or walking to their car. The term “walking” – as used in this document – includes all these forms of travel, for all purposes, and by all people. 3 ABOUT THE PLAN | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN PLAN GOALS Azusa Walks aims to make walking in the City safer, more comfortable, convenient and accessible for pedestrians of all ages and abilities. More specifically, this document and future project implementation efforts as a part of this Plan looks to: • Transform Azusa into a more livable community Improving walking conditions improves everyday life for Azusa residents. Throughout the planning process, residents indicated specific locations and factors that currently make walking difficult. This plan provides recommendations to improve walking conditions to create a more livable Azusa. • Educate the community on the benefits of walkable communities Throughout this process, residents, businesses, and key stakeholders shall learn about the types of walking improvements recommended and the benefits associated with improving pedestrian infrastructure. This can support future street safety projects and build long-term community support. • Address mobility as population and congestion grows One approach in the development of this Plan is to eventually replace driving trips with walking trips, especially for short distances. Paired with residents who take transit service, this strategy can help reduce the environmental impacts of people who drive and help reduce congestion for a rapidly growing Azusa. • Increase pedestrian access to key destinations A more walkable Azusa can improve resident’s ability to access key community destinations such as schools and parks and promote social interactions, leading to more pedestrian activity in the City. • Create more walkable communities alongside new transit and economic development investments Identifying deficiencies in the pedestrian network near future development and transit sites can set precedent for improvement projects and gain support for funding and implementation. 4 PLANNING PROCESS As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact life for many residents and replace daily commutes with work from home days, the need to access safe and convenient spaces for physical activity are more important than ever. This Plan identifies opportunities to make Azusa’s streets safer and more active. More specifically, through detailed analyses and community input, the Pedestrian Plan outlines key opportunity corridors and recommendations that can have the most impact towards improving connectivity, access, safety, and equity. The City and project team conducted a robust community outreach effort and engaged with the Azusa community during each phase of the Plan development. This included strategic input from the City and project’s Advisory Committee, as well as feedback from the community-at- large. Public outreach and engagement efforts, detailed in Chapter 3, provided opportunities for the Azusa community to provide feedback on specific locations and issues of concern and preferred pedestrian improvements. Table 1: Planning Process & Phases 5 Azusa Pedestrian Plan Azusa Today Existing Conditions 2 6 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Azusa Today This chapter provides an overview of the existing conditions for walking in Azusa and current pedestrian policies and programs relevant to the City. It also includes an analysis of recent collisions as well as a walking trip potential analysis. Existing Pedestrian Infrastructure SIDEWALK NETWORK Primarily made up of sidewalks and some shared-use paths, Azusa’s current pedestrian network connects its grid of neighborhoods to Metro Gold (L) Line stations and commercial corridors like Downtown. While it is relatively well-connected and paved, the pedestrian network still includes several gaps, including streets with missing sidewalks. At the time of this study, comprehensive sidewalk data, such as locations without paved sidewalks or a pedestrian curb ramp inventory, was not available for analysis. As the City moves towards improving pedestrian infrastructure and implementing priority projects in the future, additional data on Azusa’s sidewalk network and conditions can provide insight into the quality of the citywide pedestrian network and where to prioritize sidewalk improvements. 7 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Paved off-street walkways provide connections and routes through community parks, recreation centers, and neighborhoods like Rosedale. The existing sidewalks in commercial districts like Downtown Azusa are well-paved, wide, and are furnished with pedestrian amenities. The sidewalk pavement in some locations consists of pavers to improve the overall aesthetics of the pedestrian realm. The existing sidewalks in residential areas are typically paved along both sides of the street. Sidewalk widths vary, but are typically between 4-5 feet wide on more constrained roadways and wider along major arterials, commercial areas, or more residential communities. Some sidewalks contain utility obstructions as well; making it difficult for people to navigate at pinch points. Azusa has a few trails or shared- use paths within city limits. In the northwest region, a small path off of Sierra Madre Avenue connects to the San Gabriel River Trail which runs north all the way to the trail’s terminus. Towards the northeast, also off Sierra Madre Avenue, trails offer local hiking routes. 8 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY CONNECTIVITY AND CROSSWALKS Whether walking is for commuting, recreation, or getting to transit, connectivity is key to creating direct routes for pedestrian travel. A connected transportation network is one with a high number of intersections, short distances between street crossing opportunities, and few dead-end streets or cul-de-sacs. When connectivity improves, travel distances between destinations decrease and more direct routes increase. This in turn creates more route options and increases the likelihood that people will walk. The presence and quality of crosswalks are important components of connectivity. At the time of this study, crosswalk data was not available for analysis. While this Plan reviewed crossing improvement needs along key project corridors as part of the Plan recommendations, additional crosswalk data in the future can help provide the City strategic insight into where crossings may be stressful for people walking and where to focus improvements at. Despite the lack of crosswalk data, the Project Team conducted three walking audits of high priority streets based off specific indices that create both difficult walking conditions and dynamic land use (more is described further in this chapter). The walk audits provided granular data for understanding typical crosswalk types and the types of roadway markings and signs associated with them. The walk audits also helped inventory locations with missing curb ramps or intersections with missing crosswalk legs. 9 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN ROADWAYS The 2004 General Plan includes three roadway classifications (see Table 2 for list of streets): Principal Arterials have four lanes with two through lanes in each direction. Pedestrian infrastructure should be prioritized on Principal Arterials, as these large roads have longer crossing distances and higher speed limits (between 35-40 mph) which can reduce pedestrian visibility and increase risk of collisions with severe injuries or fatalities. Secondary Arterials range from two to four lanes, though four lanes are most common. This large street width makes pedestrian infrastructure particularly important to increasing pedestrian comfort and safety. Like Principal Arterials, speed limits on these streets range from 35 to 45 mph; these high speeds increase risk to pedestrians. Collectors are typically between two and four lanes, though two lanes are most common. Collectors have speed limits ranging from 25 to 30 mph. Reduced speeds and fewer lanes makes collectors more comfortable for pedestrians than more heavily traveled, wider roads. Other streets in Azusa are not classified in the General Plan and are considered local streets with a higher density of residences. SIGNALS Traffic signals in Azusa are mainly located on Primary and Secondary Arterials, with some on Collectors (see Figure 5). When there is a significant distance between signals on a heavily traveled road, people must walk significantly further to get to their destination or cross at a non-signalized point, which greatly increases risk of collisions. Signals in Azusa can be located very far apart - there is approximately half a mile between signals on Arrow Highway (about an 8-10 minute walk), and segments of Gladstone Street and Citrus Avenue also lack frequent signals. Street Classification Streets Principal Arterial • Azusa Avenue (CA-39) between Arrow Highway and the Foothill Freeway (I-210) • Citrus Avenue between Arrow Highway and Alosta Avenue • Foothill Boulevard • Alosta Avenue • Irwindale Avenue Secondary Arterial • Azusa Avenue (CA-39) north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210) • Cerritos Avenue south of I-210 • Citrus Avenue north of Alosta Avenue • Vincent Avenue south of Gladstone Street • Sierra Madre Avenue west of Vosburg Drive • Baseline Road • Todd Avenue • Gladstone Street Collector • Vernon Avenue • Alameda Avenue • Cerritos Avenue north of Baseline Road • San Gabriel Avenue • 5th Street • 9th Street Table 2: Azusa Roadway Classifications & Streets (source: City of Azusa GIS data) 10 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Land Use Land uses in Azusa are mostly separated into distinct geographies within the City. The western border below Sierra Madre Avenue holds industrial uses, while the northern areas of the City are open space. The eastern portion of Azusa (east of Vernon Avenue) is primarily residential. Commercial and mixed-use corridors are concentrated along Azusa and San Gabriel Avenues, Foothill Boulevard, and Arrow Highway. These land uses influence the way people use the street - people are probably more likely to walk in the commercial core as it contains many key destinations, while industrial areas are less likely to attract pedestrian traffic. Map 1 shows land use in the City of Azusa. Azusa Demographics & Socioeconomic Factors POPULATION DENSITY The City of Azusa has a population density of approximately 5,200 people per square mile, which is denser than nearby cities of Glendora (2,600/square mile) and Duarte (3,200/square mile). The densest census blocks fall on the southern border of Azusa (south of Gladstone Street) and on the eastern border of Azusa along the Foothill Boulevard corridor near Azusa Pacific University. The areas with the lowest population density overlap with Azusa’s industrial and open space land uses, falling on the northern and western borders of Azusa. MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME The median household income for the City of Azusa is approximately $60,200, slightly lower than the county’s median household income of $68,044 (ACS 2019). Census block groups with the highest median household income are concentrated in the northeastern and southeastern areas of Azusa. Areas with lower density, which are located in the northern and western areas of Azusa, correspond with higher median household incomes. COMMUNITY CONDITIONS & HEALTH OUTCOMES Azusa has above average park access, supermarket access, and retail density as compared to the rest of California, according to specific indicators of the California Healthy Places Index (HPI). The HPI measures community conditions that impact health outcomes across all California census tracts. Azusa’s average of all census tracts that are within City limits, scores in the scores in the 30th percentile, meaning that 70% of other California census tracts have healthier conditions than Azusa. HPI is also an indice of disadvantaged communities based on Caltrans’ Active Transportation Program (ATP) Guidelines. Census tracts with scores that fall within the 25th percentile represent the most disadvantaged communities in the state. In Azusa, these areas include: 1) west of Downtown, between the I-210 freeway, Foothill Boulevard, and San Gabriel Avenue, 2) north of Foothill Boulevard, west of Azusa Avenue, and bordering Vernon Avenue and 11th Street, and 3) east of Cerritos Avenue, south of Alosta Avenue, and north of Baseline Road. 11 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Land Use Mixed Use Industrial Commercial Residential Open Space Library City Hall Gold School Azusa GIS Data, jprado, 2021 Figure 3 Downtown Land Use Mixed Use Industrial Commercial Residential Open Space Library City Hall Gold School Azusa GIS Data, jprado, 2021 Figure 3 Downtown Map 1: Land Use Metro L (Gold) Line Station 12 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Commuting Patterns A large majority of Azusa residents commute to work by private vehicle – 76% of workers drive alone, and 11% carpool. Driving to work alone is most common for commuters who live directly north of Downtown, in the areas surrounded by the Foothill Freeway (I-210) and Azusa’s southern border, as well as Azusa Avenue and Azusa’s eastern border. Carpooling is most common in the northmost areas of Azusa and in the southwest part of the city, near the Azusa Quarry. Far fewer Azusa residents commute via walking or transit – around 9% of Azusa residents commute to work by walking, and 3% use transit. There is a high density of walking commuters concentrated near Azusa Pacific University (APU) (see Map 2). The highest concentration of transit commuters is between Azusa Avenue and Cerritos Avenue near Slauson Park and the Soldano Senior Village, as well as in the southeast corner of Azusa Avenue and Citrus Avenue near Gladstone Street Elementary School between Citrus Avenue and Galanto Avenue. Map 3 shows percent of transit commuters by block group. Credit: Active San Gabriel Valley 13 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Walking Commute (% of Workers 16 and Over) by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 1 Walking Commute (% of Workers 16 and Over) by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 1 Map 2: Walking Commuters Metro L (Gold) Line Station 14 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Public Transit Commute (% of Workers 16 and Over) by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 2 Public Transit Commute (% of Workers 16 and Over) by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 2 Map 3: Transit Commuters Metro L (Gold) Line Station 15 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Crash Analysis Improving conditions for people walking also means understanding pedestrian safety needs. Crash data is critical to evaluating traffic safety and identifying where safety improvements may be needed. While many parts of Azusa are highly accessible and provide a safe and comfortable pedestrian environment, even locations with sidewalks and crosswalks experience pedestrian collisions. To better understand the collision history in Azusa, crash data from the last five years of available data from the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) (2015 to 2019) were reviewed. Data for the year 2020 was still provisional at the time of this analysis. The following section provides a summary of a pedestrian collision analysis conducted for the City of Azusa. For additional details on the analysis methodology, data source used, and other trends, refer to Appendix A. Between 2015 and 2019, there were 1,331 total traffic collisions in the City of Azusa, or an average of 266 a year. Eight of these collisions were fatal, and 69 resulted in severe injury. SEVERITY & MODE Although only 6% of the total collisions between 2015 and 2019 involved pedestrians, they represented 19% of killed or seriously injured (KSI) collisions (see Table 3 ), which highlights the disproportionate risk faced by people walking. Downtown Azusa saw a disproportionate share (33%) of overall pedestrian collisions – Map 5 shows the location of KSI collisions. BY LOCATION The highest density of pedestrian collisions occurred at or near the intersection of Cerritos Avenue and Arrow Highway, which has two to three lanes in each direction on both corridors. Map 4 provides a heat map of pedestrian collision locations. TIME OF DAY Pedestrian collisions occurred most often (24%) between the hours of 6:00 PM and 8:59 PM, which points to greater risk for pedestrians in dusk and dark conditions. PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORS The most common primary collision factors for pedestrian collisions were failure of motorists to yield to pedestrian right-of-way (39%), pedestrian violation of right-of-way (35%), and improper turning (4%). Primary collision factors for KSI collisions were pedestrian violation of right-of-way (69%), failure of motorist or active transportation user to properly observe right-of-way (16%) and failure of motorists to yield to pedestrian right-of-way (13%). These factors suggest that pedestrian violation/error is more risky than motorist violation/error. This is likely due to increased vulnerability of pedestrians during crossings and conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles with higher speeds. 16 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Traffic speed directly impacts the chances of surviving a crash. While this is true for all modes, pedestrians are especially vulnerable and have a high chance of being seriously injured or killed when speeds reach moderate levels. A pedestrian involved in a crash with a vehicle traveling 20 mph has a 5 percent chance of suffering a serious injury or being killed, while at 40 mph the risk is 85 percent, as illustrated in Figure 1. Higher speeds also increase the likelihood of a crash as stopping distances are greater at higher speed. As a result, speed reduction is a critical element in reducing pedestrian injuries. Mode # of Crashes % of Crashes # of Killed or Seriously Injured % of Killed or Seriously Injured Automobile 1,047 79%35 46% Pedestrian 85 6%15 19% Bicyclist 92 7%12 16% Motorcycle 107 8%15 19% Total 1,331 100%77 100% Table 3: Crashes by Mode (source: 2015-2019 TIMS) Figure 1: Speed and Severity of Impact (Source: National Traffic Safety Board. Reducing Speed- Related Crashes Involving Passenger Vehicles. 2017 and Smart Growth America. Dangerous by Design. 2021.) 17 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Map 4: Pedestrian Collision Hot Spots Metro L (Gold) Line Station 18 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Pedestrian KSI Collisions Highest Level of InjuryKilledSeverely Injured <all other values> Library City Hall Gold School SWITRS, 2015-2019 Collisions Figure 9 Pedestrian KSI Collisions Highest Level of InjuryKilledSeverely Injured <all other values> Library City Hall Gold School SWITRS, 2015-2019 Collisions Figure 9 Map 5: Pedestrian Collisions (KSI Locations) Metro L (Gold) Line Station 19 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Pedestrian Trip Potential The project team conducted a pedestrian trip potential analysis to determine where people would be most likely to walk in Azusa if pedestrian infrastructure was improved. When a person walks or uses a mobility aid device to get from one destination to another, it is considered a pedestrian trip. Map 6 shows the locations in Azusa where people would most likely walk if it were convenient and comfortable to do so. Although counts of existing walking trips can provide relatively good insight, however, these existing trips already account for the impacts of existing infrastructure for walking. As such, the pedestrian trip potential analysis is calculated independent of existing facilities and rather, highlights areas where improving pedestrian conditions would have the greatest potential to increase walking. HIGH POTENTIAL Areas with high walking trip potential can attract a greater rate of pedestrian travel and should be prioritized in active transportation infrastructure investments. Map 6 shows pedestrian trip potential score by block group. Pedestrian trip potential is highest near Downtown Azusa and to the south of Azusa Pacific University, areas that have relatively high population density and are close to local- serving retail destinations. The areas between Azusa Avenue and Cerritos Avenue and Mason Street and Arrow Highway also show high pedestrian trip potential likely due to their proximity to local serving retail, schools, and lower-income households. FACTORS To estimate pedestrian trip potential, seven factors were used to create a composite pedestrian trip potential score. The individual inputs and their descriptions can be found in Table 4 and further detailed in Appendix B. 20 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Variable Description Workers that commute by walking The percentage of total workers 16 and over who commute by foot. People who commute by walking make consistent and reliable pedestrian trips. Because American Community Survey commuting trips make up only 15% of all trips, this factor is weighted half of others. Population Density The number of people per square mile. Population density is another major determinant for both walking and biking trips - the more people in an area, the more people will be walking. Population Below the Poverty Line The percentage of the block group population that falls below the federal poverty guidelines based on their household size (i.e. $12,490 for a household of one, $16,910 for a household of two). Poverty status increases the likelihood that an individual does not have access to a car, does not have the funds for the maintenance and operation of their car, or has other limitations to using vehicles, thus increasing their rate of walking. Proximity to Transit Stops The percentage of land area within a block group that falls within a quarter-mile radius around a Metro station or 500 feet of the intersection of two bus route stops. Transit is most accessible to those who live near transit. People accessing transit most often walk to the stop, generating walking trips when they do so. Proximity to Schools The percentage of land area within a block group that falls within a quarter-mile radius of a school or university. In California, 26% to 31% of students walk or bicycle to school. This generates consistent daily pedestrian trips. Proximity to Local-serving Commerical Businesses The percentage of land area within a block group that falls within a quarter-mile radius of a local-serving commercial use (e.g. market, salon, restaurant, or other services, which are not a big-block store or major chain). Local serving-retail is a destination that attracts pedestrian trips, as nearby residents can conveniently access goods and services. Excluding big-block stores and major chains accounts for the fact that these larger stores are more likely to be accessed by vehicle. Proximity to Parks The percentage of land area within a block group that falls within a quarter-mile radius of a park. Parks are a local destination to which people are more likely to walk as they aim to achieve either physical activity or time outdoors. Data sources: ACS 2019 (5-year estimates), City of Azusa GIS data Table 4: Pedestrian Walking Trip Potential Factors 21 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Map 6: Pedestrian Walking Trip Potential Metro L (Gold) Line Station 22 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Walk Audits As part of the engagement process and existing conditions analysis, the project team also developed walking routes around three key corridors to conduct “walk audits”. A walk audit is a short group walk on a predetermined route to observe and make note of safety concerns that create barriers to walking or use of a mobility device like a wheelchair. During what is typically the busiest part of the day, these took place between morning commute times to observe the way people drive, walk, and bike. The Azusa Walks project team met and walked with City staff, Advisory Committee members, stakeholders, and residents on routes along Arrow Highway, Alosta Avenue (near APU and Citrus College), and Foothill Boulevard (near Slauson Park). Based on the project’s prioritization criteria and analysis, these three locations were identified as opportunity corridors. At the time, these corridors were also frequently mentioned by the community as major roadways needing pedestrian improvements. As part of the California Walks project and Metro’s First/Last Mile Workshop, walk audits were already previously conducted around Downtown Azusa. To avoid duplicating efforts, that area was not included in these three routes. NEAR ALOSTA AVENUE Figure 2: Alosta Avenue Walk Audit Route Walking along Foothill Boulevard, Alosta Avenue, and Citrus Avenue, participants noted that pedestrian safety and comfort in the area is negatively impacted by a lack of trees and lighting, uneven and narrow sidewalks, and intersections with poor visibility or missing crosswalks (see locations marked “3” in Figure 2). Recommendations for improvements included pedestrian-scale lighting, additional trees, curb extensions, signal upgrades, and high-visibility crosswalks. Participants also noted conflicts between people riding bikes and people walking on Citrus Avenue, highlighting a potential need for a dedicated bicycle facility on the corridor. Speeding was a major concern on Palm Drive and Citrus Avenue, and participants suggested increased school signage and better speed enforcement. 23 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN 24 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY NEAR ARROW HIGHWAY Figure 3: Arrow Highway Walk Audit Route Along the route on Renwick Road, Newburgh Street, Cerritos Avenue, Arrow Highway, and Azusa Avenue, participants noted similar pedestrian comfort concerns as those observed on the Alosta Avenue audit, calling out uneven or disconnected sidewalks, a lack of trees and lighting, and intersections with missing crosswalks/stop signs/curb ramps or inadequate signal timing (see locations marked “2” in Figure 3). Recommended improvements included curb extensions, high- visibility crosswalks, and midblock crossings. Speeding was observed on Arrow Highway, Azusa Avenue, Cerritos Avenue, and Renwick Road – participants recommended speed enforcement and traffic calming infrastructure where appropriate. Other observations included a lack of signage, crossings, and crossing guards around Murray Elementary School, as well as the need for bus stop improvements along Arrow Highway. 25 AZUSA TODAY | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN NEAR SLAUSON PARK Figure 4: Slauson Park Walk Audit Route Along the route that included the area around Slauson Park which took them along Foothill Boulevard, Cerritos Avenue, 5th Street, and Pasadena Avenue, uneven sidewalks and a lack of trees and lighting were noted multiple times, especially along Foothill Boulevard and Cerritos Avenue. Some crossings (marked with “2” in Figure 4) were noted as missing curb ramps, lacking crosswalks, having limited visibility, or not providing adequate time for people to cross the street. Participants recommended curb extensions and high-visibility crosswalks. Lee Elementary School is located near the walk audit, and participants noted a need for a midblock crossing on Cerritos Avenue to accommodate the families walking to school who cross the street from Slauson Park. 26 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | AZUSA TODAY Policy & Planning Framework Pedestrian plans that are aligned with other local and regional plans and follow established and researched best practices are better prepared to compete for implementation funding. This Plan builds upon the goals of previous planning efforts in the City and the wider region – the Plan team reviewed the following plans to identify best practices and strategies for this planning effort. Key themes and best practices that emerged from the review and were considered during plan development are included below: • Sustainability and climate resilience • Multimodal transportation and promoting active modes over driving • Healthy communities • Elevating equity • Promoting a vibrant economy • Calming traffic to enhance safety for people walking, rolling, biking, and driving Connect SoCal: This Plan embodies a collective vision for the region’s future, building a planning foundation for how to accommodate growth and direct future transportation investments. It details regional challenges, specifies shared transportation and land use goals, and identifies strategies to realize a more sustainable region. Azusa General Plan (2004): California law requires that each city adopt a General Plan, which is meant to guide future growth and development. The General Plan’s vision focuses on nature, neighborhoods, commerce, mobility, families, learning, history, and participation. There are three areas within the General Plan: Azusa General Plan (citywide goals, policies, and implementation programs), Azusa Development Code (rules governing building, renovations, uses, and neighborhood/district standards), and Compendium (studies and plans prepared in the development of and for implementation of the General Plan). Azusa Transit-Oriented Development Specific Plan (TOD Specific Plan): The TOD Specific Plan is a comprehensive document that will implement the vision for the City’s Specific Plan Area, which includes 350 acres of land and two transit areas. The TOD Specific Plan establishes land use regulations and development guidelines for the Specific Plan Area. California Walks Pedestrian Safety Report: In 2019, The City of Azusa, California Walks, and UC Berkeley SafeTREC facilitated a Community Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Training. The workshop focused on Downtown Azusa, and participants developed the following three recommendations: install pedestrian safety improvements around the Metro Transit Center, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Foothill Boulevard, and adopt an equity lens in the development of the Pedestrian Master Plan. Metro’s First/Last Mile Workshop: The Azusa Downtown Station was the focus of a First/Last Mile workshop. Walk audits were conducted to develop the access barriers and strengths map and the recommended improvements. 27 Opportunities & Challenges Azusa, a community nestled right along the San Gabriel Mountains, has many advantages and opportunities for people getting around by foot. However, the community also faces several barriers when it comes to creating safer and more comfortable conditions for people walking. The following list highlights key strengths and challenges that informed the development of recommendations as part of this Pedestrian Plan. STRENGTHS Sidewalk Network: As a suburban, foothill community, Azusa has a relatively complete pedestrian network and facilities are well- connected between residential areas and commercial corridors. Walking Trip Potential: With a high density of intersections, proximity to transit, commercial destinations, and other uses, several areas of Azusa, including the Downtown core and areas near APU / Citrus College have high walking trip potential. With pedestrian improvements, these areas may have a high likelihood of helping replace short driving trips with walking trips. Community Support for Pedestrian Improvements: The community engagement efforts in Azusa have encouraged many residents, businesses, and other key stakeholders to get involved with the project and overall support pedestrian improvements. Community buy-in, especially for more challenging projects such as DR A F T road reconfigurations, is often the most challenging part of project delivery. This plan can set the framework for continuing community support and increase walking. Art as a Tool for Safety: The need for public art was mentioned throughout the community engagement process and Azusa has already set precedent with artistic elements along Azusa Avenue in the Downtown core. Pairing art and pedestrian safety is a key opportunity to get stakeholders excited about safety and beautification. 28 CHALLENGES High Crosswalk Stress & Busy Arterials: Although residential streets often see low traffic volumes, Azusa’s main arterials carry higher speed traffic creating stressful conditions for people walking, especially at busy intersections. Long Blocks Without Crossings: Some of Azusa’s main streets consist of long blocks with infrequent opportunities for people to safely cross the street, especially on high-speed and multi-laned roadways like San Gabriel Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard. Lack of Shaded Sidewalks and Bus Shelters: During the summer months, the lack of mature street trees or shade canopy from nearby buildings makes walking unpleasant, especially during the summer months. Many bus stops also lack shade canopies which may discourage walking and transit trips. ADA Access: Many of Azusa’s intersection corners or crosswalks need to be upgraded to meet accessible design standards. Curb ramps should include detectable warning surfaces and also should align directionally with where people are crossing. Missing Sidewalks: In some of Azusa’s neighborhoods there is a lack of sidewalks. PLANNED PROJECTS & FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS: The City has already been planning, designing, or implementing a number of projects that aim to make walking in Azusa safer and more comfortable. These projects include: • Upgraded school crosswalks to high-visibility crosswalks • Replaced non-compliant street signs with signs compliant with MUTCD retro-reflectivity standards. • Construct raised medians on Arrow Hwy to improve traffic flow and improve overall motorist and pedestrian safety. • Pavement rehabilitation and high visibility crosswalks on Foothill Boulevard While existing and planned projects help further improve walking conditions for Azusa, it is clear that more comprehensive recommendations for a safer and more walkable Azusa must leverage identified opportunities, constraints, and feedback from the community. Azusa Pedestrian Plan Community & Stakeholder Engagement 3 30 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Community & Stakeholder Engagement Given the uncertainty around the COVID-19 pandemic at the time of the project, a variety of outreach and engagement strategies were needed to help minimize barriers to participation and obtain the broadest possible community input. Outreach relied on close ties to the local community, formed in part by Active San Gabriel Valley’s presence in Azusa, but also diligence in utilizing both print and digital mediums to promote engagement opportunities. To ensure robust participation and address the challenges of the pandemic, the project team conducted both virtual and in-person (socially-distant) activities throughout the project development process. Project Engagement Goals Throughout the project, outreach and engagement focused on: • Raising project awareness and knowledge of what a “Pedestrian Plan” is and how Azusa residents and stakeholders can participate in its development. • Identifying and regularly updating residents wishing to participate in the planning process about upcoming opportunities to weigh in during community decision-making processes. • Educating the community about evidence-based strategies to improve walkability and pedestrian safety. Who was Involved? The public and stakeholder engagement process invited residents from diverse communities and backgrounds to participate in the Plan’s development and to remain informed as the project progressed. These included: • Azusa residents, students, community members, and key stakeholders • Azusa visitors and guests to the Downtown area • Azusa residents who are at higher risk to pedestrian injuries 1 1 2 3 2 3 31 COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN 32 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT TOOLKIT Project Survey Focus Groups Advisory Committee Meetings Community Meetings Stakeholder Workshops Pop-ups Walk Audits Printed & Digital Flyers, Posters, Community Newsletters, etc. 1� Raising awareness and knowledge on Pedestrian Plans 2� Engaging residents in the planning and decision- making processes. 3� Educating the community on evidence-based strategies to improve walkability and pedestrian safety PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT GOALS 1� Azusa residents, students, community members, and key stakeholders 2� Azusa visitors and guests to the Downtown area 3� Azusa residents who are at higher risk to pedestrian injuries WHO WAS INVOLVED? 33 COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN 34 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Project Survey As part of project’s initial outreach and engagement phase, a project survey was developed for the Azusa community to provide input on walking conditions and priorities in the City. The survey was conducted primarily online, but with a paper version of the survey that was also made available. Both the online and in-person surveys were available in English and Spanish. Overall, 820 people took the online survey (543 complete responses, and 277 partially complete responses), which was available online from February to May 2021. The survey asked respondents to choose places that most needed walking improvements, as well as challenges to walking in Azusa. PEOPLE THAT WALK With over three-quarters (77.4%) of respondents walking for enjoyment or exercise at least once a week or more, most survey participants are recreational walkers. On the other hand, 39.5% also walk to reach destinations like work, school, transportation, or errands at least once per week. However, there is still a portion of the Azusa community (27.7%) who stated they never walk for those reasons. CHALLENGES TO WALKING Respondents noted that the biggest challenges to walking in Azusa (ranked as “biggest barriers”) were people driving too fast on busy streets (41.1%), people driving too fast on residential streets (39.7%), feeling unsafe due to risk of crime or threats to personal safety (39.7%), and drivers not stopping for people crossing the street (32.4%). These responses point toward the need to focus City efforts on projects and programs that implement traffic calming measures, improved lighting, and crime prevention. PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES While most options in the survey were considered important places to improve walking conditions, the places that were noted as top priorities for pedestrian improvements (ranked as “extremely important”) were streets where people walking have been killed or injured (62.1%), streets connecting people to schools (52.8%), and areas that serve people who rely on walking the most, like senior residents or residents who are low-income or do not own cars (51.8%). Multiple respondents also suggested better upkeep of sidewalks as a way to improve Azusa’s current walking conditions. These priorities highlight respondents’ desire to mitigate risks that lead to collisions, improve pedestrian access to local schools, and focus on vulnerable users of the street. DEMOGRAPHICS Most of the survey respondents lived (82.4%) or worked (13.9%) in Azusa. The majority of respondents were aged 25-54 (69.8%), and almost two-thirds of respondents were female (65.8%). 90.6% had completed at least some college, and the racial distribution of respondents was relatively aligned with Azusa’s population. Additional outreach via focus groups helped to supplement any groups that may have been underrepresented in the survey (people under 24 years old and people with lower educational attainment). 35 COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Biggest Challenges People Face Walking in Azusa • People driving too fast on busy streets • People driving too fast on residential streets • Feeling unsafe due to risk of crime or threats to personal safety • Drivers not stopping for people crossing the street 1 3 2 4 Places Most Important to Improve Walking Conditions in Azusa • Streets with the most pedestrian injuries and crashes • Streets connecting people to schools • Areas that serve people who rely on walking the most • Along and across busy streets 1 3 2 4 Survey Participants Employed by a business in the City 708 total responses Resident Business Owner 13 �9 % 82�4% 2%2 �9 % 6 �1 %Visitor Student at a local college or university How Often People Walk in Azusa For recreation (enjoyment or exercise) To get to a destination (work, school, train, bus, shopping, etc.) Every day At least once per week At least once per month Every few months A few times a year Never 38�8% 14 �2 % 38�6% 25�3% 6�4% 10�3 % 3�5% 7�4 % 6�2% 15 % 6�5% 27�7 % 36 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Focus Groups Equity and inclusive representation were pillars in the development of this Plan. Although the project survey provides an overarching view of walking concerns and priorities for Azusa, an additional four virtual focus sessions were held between March and April 2021 with specific community groups in Azusa to learn about their walking experiences. The sessions provided an opportunity to have a more in-depth discussion around key issues and needs, especially with Azusa’s youth community. Focus groups included: • Sierra High School Students • Foothill Middle School / Dalton Elementary School Parents • Azusa High School Students • American Legion & Rotary Club WHAT WE HEARD: Most focus groups ranged in size from six to twelve participants. While discussions were initially focused on topics specific to each group, it often became more wide-ranging as each discussion progressed. Key takeaways from these sessions included: • High visibility crosswalks are needed around schools and at 6th St/Azusa Ave • Crosswalks are needed on Gladstone St between Azusa Ave and Cerritos Ave • 6th St at San Gabriel Ave and Azusa Ave feel unsafe to walk along • Cars travel at high speeds on Cerritos Ave and 1st St; more visible crosswalks • Better lit, artistic crosswalks 1 3 2 4 5 37 COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Meetings In addition to the project survey and focus group sesions, the Azusa Walks project team hosted several meetings throughout the Plan development process. ADVISORY COMMITTEE The Advisory Committee was made up of representatives from a variety of Azusa organizations, groups, and stakeholders. The goal of the committee was to provide local knowledge and input on pedestrian needs, gather feedback for direction of the project, and help ensure robust community participation in the development of the Plan. Advisory Committee Meeting 1 (February 2021): The Project team introduced the project and shared information on the scope and timeline, as well as upcoming public engagement opportunities. Advisory Committee Meeting 2 (May 2021): The Advisory Committee and Project team reviewed community engagement and planning efforts, project survey results, and initial outcomes of technical analyses. Advisory Committee Meeting 3 (September 2021): The Advisory Committee and the project team discussed preliminary locations for prioritization and project features most applicable to challenges residents faced on streets and sidewalks. Advisory Committee Meeting 4 (December 2021): The last Advisory Committee meeting included reviewing recommendation types after considering community feedback at the end of the public engagement period. The meeting was also used to discuss next steps for the review of the draft plan. THE AZUSA COMMUNITY Three community-wide meetings were held during key stages of the project to both update the Azusa community on ongoing efforts and provide interactive opportunities for public input and feedback. Community Meeting 1 (June 2021): The Azusa Walks project team highlighted key findings from the project survey, provided engagement updates, and reviewed the walking trip potential map and crosswalk analysis alongside community participants. Community Meeting 2 (September 2021): A draft map and list of 10 opportunity corridors selected using the project’s prioritization criteria were presented to the community for additional input and feedback. Community Meeting 3 (January 2022): During the public’s draft plan review process, the Azusa Walks project team presented project recommendation types and priority corridors based on all the feedback received and considered and outlined how to best provide feedback on the draft plan. 38 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Stakeholder Workshops In June 2021, the Azusa Walks project team also organized and met virtually with three of City’s key stakeholder groups, all part of the business and community service community. One workshop included local Downtown businesses, another with the Azusa Rotary Club, and last, one with the Azusa Chamber of Commerce. WHAT WE HEARD: • In Downtown, reducing the street from four to two lanes with parking, trees, and a green belt would help slow down traffic • More trees are needed on streets (also honors our tree city name) • Local buses, city buses should have routes that incorporate and connect the old town/downtown • Embedded flashing LED lights adds visibility at the pedestrian crossings • Zebra crossings are highly effective and should be in every intersection • Concerns about personal safety 1 3 2 4 5 6 Community Pop-ups While the project survey, focus groups, and community meetings were all largely conducted online or through virtual platforms, community pop-up tabling events provided a safe and interactive way for the project team to engage in-person with the Azusa community. Through the project development process, the Azusa Walks project team hosted pop- ups at community events to gather feedback on pedestrian improvement types and potential project corridors, and encourage review and feedback on the draft plan. Pop- ups included: • (August 2021) National Night Out • (September 2021) Hispanic Heritage Fiesta • (October 2021) Fall Fesitval • (January 2022) Azusa Pacers Event • (January 2022) Azusa Walks Storytime 39 COMMUNITY & STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN 40 Community & Stakeholder Engagement Takeaways The community engagement efforts for this plan covered a wide-range of existing challenges to walking and also developed high-level priorities to be included as project recommendations are developed. The following engagement takeaways shall help develop project recommendations: Promote High-quality Sidewalk Conditions and Accessible Curb Ramps: Considering the project team did not have a full inventory of sidewalk conditions, the qualitative nature of the community engagement events highlighted the need for sidewalks and curb ramps to be in good repair, present, and accessible for all users. This plan focuses on high priority streets, but the development of an ADA Transition Plan or another inventory could support these efforts at a detailed, citywide level. Control Speeding Along Busy Arterials: Speeding along busy streets is a primary concern for Azusa residents, according to the citywide survey, and participants at the walk audits experienced similar concerns, especially along wide arterial streets. Establishing a rhythm of stop controls or developing road reconfigurations can help slow down traffic to encourage more walking trips. Improve Pedestrian Crossings: Participants during walk audits noted the lack of marked crossing opportunities along Azusa streets. Many residents know that pedestrians who have desire to cross outside of a marked crosswalk will do so. Establishing more frequent marked crosswalks can help decrease pedestrian collisions and establish safe, recommended locations to cross. Ensure Shade and Pedestrian-scaled Lighting: Shade during the peak summer months and lighting at night are oftentimes concerns that are difficult to capture for pedestrian plans. Through ongoing conversations with community organizations, these concerns were brought to forefront and highlight a common need to feel comfortable and safe when walking in Azusa. Improve Access to Schools and Transit: Creating seamless pedestrian connections to local schools and regional transit is important for the Azusa community. Not only should students be able to easily start their trips on foot, the level of comfort, especially at local bus stops and near Metro L Line (Gold) stations, should encourage more walking trips as a way to commute on foot and decrease needless single- occupancy vehicle trips. DR A F T Azusa Pedestrian Plan Prioritization & Implementation 4 42 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Prioritization & Implementation This chapter identifies priorities for addressing pedestrian safety and access across the City. It highlights local and regional focuses, priority corridors for improvement, shares guidance and resources for implementation. Local Priorities As the City continues to improve walking conditions and experiences in Azusa, local priorities should guide future pedestrian projects and improvements. These priorities were determined from both the analysis conducted for this Plan and the needs echoed by the Azusa community. Complete Streets and Multimodal Improvements: Pedestrian infrastructure can deliver multiple benefits across all transportation modes, particularly when they are designed in conjunction with other multimodal improvements. Implementation efforts should consider ways to integrate the pedestrian recommendations and priorities identified in this Plan within future multimodal, streetscape enhancement, and Complete Streets projects in Azusa. A Complete Streets design approach balances the needs of all roadway users by increasing access and connectivity for all modes and people of all ages and abilities. This helps to create healthy, active, and welcoming communities that are people- oriented by design. Intersections & Crossing Opportunities: Intersections with traffic signals are often the most obvious places for pedestrians to cross streets. However, implementing controlled mid-block crosswalks and improving existing uncontrolled crossings are also important in creating safer opportunities for pedestrians. Roadway design and signal timing should be adapted to improve safety, visibility, and comfort for people of all ages and abilities. This is especially important near destinations like parks, schools, and the Downtown area where there is often a high volume of pedestrians. Where feasible, pedestrian crossings should include high-visibility markings, traffic control devices, and curb extensions to improve visibility and minimize crossing distances. Sidewalk Connectivity & Pedestrian Amenities: Sidewalks are the backbone to every city’s network of pedestrian facilities and as a result, are critical in providing access and connectivity to all places in Azusa. Where there is missing sidewalk, the City should prioritize closing these gaps and designing wider sidewalks to help create a continuous and accessible pedestrian network. Amenities along sidewalks are also important elements that provide comfort and convenience for pedestrians. A high-quality pedestrian environment includes amenities like street furniture, pedestrian-scaled lighting, 43 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN landscaping, tree canopy, tree grates, and bus shelters. Slowing Traffic Speeds: An effective strategy for improving the safety of people walking is to reduce motor vehicle speeds. This can be accomplished through traffic calming treatments, and through changes to the posted speed. Posted speed limit reductions should be considered citywide through default or prima facie policy changes and along specific corridors with special speed zones or engineering and traffic surveys, per California regulations. Traffic Safety Education & Programming: While street improvements help physically slow traffic speeds and create more pedestrian visibility, programs that teach traffic safety and incentivizes people to walk more are also important in creating safer and more active streets. The City should continue utilizing resources like the Go Human Campaign and seeking ways to complement projects with programming activities. In addition, traffic safety education, as well as encouragement programs, represent key opportunities to continue engaging with the Azusa community on future implementation projects. Data & Inventory: Data on walking, pedestrian safety, and existing facilities are critical in continuing to inform future pedestrian projects. This data should include geospatial inventory of sidewalks conditions, crosswalks, pedestrian treatments, curb ramps, issues reported by the community, ADA needs, tree canopy, pedestrian-scaled lighting, traffic speeds, and other data associated with the pedestrian network. Additional data through counts, walk audits, community engagement, and crash analyses should be collected or evaluated to consistently assess both community needs and impact of implemented projects. Rapid Implementation Projects: Most pedestrian safety enhancements can take years to design, fund, and construct. However, many projects can be tested on a temporary basis by using more cost-effective materials to construct (e.g. paint and flexible delineators). Quicker to install, rapid implementation provides opportunities to change the design or location before moving towards more permanent facilities. In evaluating future pedestrian improvements, opportunities for a rapid to permanent phased approach should be considered to test treatments and street design more effectively. Changes to California Speed Limit Legislation Beginning July 30, 2024, Assembly Bill (AB) 43 will provide municipalities in California with new opportunities to reduce posted speeds. This law, approved on October 8, 2021, grants local jurisdictions the flexibility to prioritize safety and set speed limits based on the context of their own communities. AB 43 gives local agencies the authority to reduce speed limits by five miles per hour in areas found to have the highest number of serious injuries and fatalities based on collision data or where there are high concentrations of “bicyclists or pedestrians, especially those from vulnerable groups such as children, seniors, persons with disabilites, and the unhoused” among other factors1. To read the full bill, visit: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/ faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_ id=202120220AB43 44 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Regional Priorities In addition to more local priorities, pedestrian projects and corridors that provide benefits to the regional transportation system are also critical for the City to consider in the next steps towards implementation. Metro L Line (Gold) Station Area Improvements: The Metro L Line (Gold) is an anchor to the regional transportation system that connects San Gabriel Valley communities like Azusa to each other and towards Downtown and East Los Angeles. As a result, the Azusa Downtown and APU/Citrus stations represent key focal points for improving pedestrian access and connectivity. Examining additional needs based on feedback received and analysis conducted as part of this Plan will be important in future project considerations near both stations. Major Arterials Connecting to Neighboring Cities: Azusa offers a wide range of local destinations for its residents but is also home to a Downtown area, APU, Citrus College, and many large retailers like Target and Costco. Cities that neighbor Azusa are connected through major arterials (e.g. Foothill Boulevard, Alosta Avenue, Azusa Avenue, and Arrow Highway) that provide a way for people to access these attractors. In turn, these streets help boost local economies and community culture. As the City looks towards implementation, larger multimodal efforts that include pedestrian improvements should focus on benefiting both local and regional connectors. Pedestrian Priority Locations PRIORITIZATION ANALYSIS & METHODOLOGY Understanding where improvements can have the greatest impact is critical when cities are often faced with limited available resources or timing. To identify where these location opportunities are, the Project Team conducted a prioritization analysis for both intersections and streets across the City. Using equity, safety, connectivity and access as prioritization criteria (see Table 5 and Table 6 ), corridors were then identified by reviewing high-scoring locations along with input from the public and City staff. This process aims to help the City prioritize investments along these corridors in the coming years and is meant to be flexible. The City may implement recommendations as funding mechanisms arise through grant opportunities, new private developments, and capital improvement projects. Additional details on the analysis and methodology used to identify priority corridors can be found in Appendix C. 45 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Criteria Measure Description Weight Safety Pedestrian Crash History Intersections with the greatest density of crashes involving pedestrians. Crashes that resulted in fatal or severe injury (KSI) are weighted higher than non- KSI crashes. Data: SWITRS/TIMS 2015-2019 High Access Pedestrian Trip Potential Score Intersections in block groups that had high pedestrian trip potential. Data: see Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis Medium Connectivity Distance from signalized intersection Intersections that are furthest from signalized intersections, making them a more critical for pedestrian crossing improvements. Data: City of Azusa High Equity Vehicle Access Intersections in block groups with lowest vehicle access. Data: ACS 2019 (5-year estimates)Medium Median Household Income Intersections in block groups with the lowest median household income. Data: ACS 2019 (5-year estimates) Medium Criteria Measure Description Weight Safety Pedestrian Crash History Roadways with the greatest density of crashes involving pedestrians. Crashes that resulted in fatal or severe injury (KSI) are weighted higher than non-KSI crashes. Data: SWITRS/TIMS 2015-2019 Highest Access Pedestrian Trip Potential Score Roadways in block groups with the highest pedestrian trip potential. Data: see Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis Medium Connectivity Street Classification Roadways that are classified as primary throughways in Azusa, such as Principal Arterial, Secondary Arterial, or Collector. Primary Arterials, having more destinations and traffic density, on average, are weighted the highest, followed by Secondary Arterial, and then Collector. Data: City of Azusa High Equity Vehicle Access Roadways in block groups with lowest vehicle access. Data: ACS 2019 (5-year estimates)Medium Median Household Income Roadways in block groups with the lowest median income. Data: ACS 2019 (5-year estimates)Medium Table 5: Prioritization Criteria for Intersection Crossings Table 6: Prioritization Criteria for Street Segments 46 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION PEDESTRIAN PRIORITY CORRIDORS & INTERSECTIONS Based on the prioritization analysis and input from City staff, AC members, and the Azusa community, the following streets and intersections represent the top 10 priority corridors and intersections for pedestrian improvements. These are meant to guide opportunities for implementing potential treatments and highlight locations that can have the greatest impact when considering equity, safety, connectivity, and access altogether. While these identified corriders help focus improvements on priority segments and intersections, they are not a way of excluding projects on other streets within Azusa. Improving walking conditions across the entire pedestrian network is a priority and the City will continue to implement smaller standalone projects and larger multimodal improvements as funding allows and as opportunities arise to address community needs and priorities. Corridors: • 1st St / Baseline Road (Vernon Ave to Citrus Ave) • 9th Street (San Gabriel Ave to Pasadena Ave) • Alosta Avenue (Foothill Blvd to Barranca Ave) • Arrow Highway (Azusa Ave to Citrus Ave) • Azusa Avenue (11th St to 4th St) • Azusa Avenue (I-210 to Arrow Hwy) • Cerritos Avenue (Gladstone St to Arrow Hwy) • Citrus Avenue (Foothill Blvd to Mauna Loa Ave) • Foothill Boulevard (Coney Ave to Citrus Ave) • San Gabriel Avenue (9th St to 2nd St) Intersections: • 5th Street and Alosta Avenue • 6th Street and Azusa Avenue • 9th Street and Azusa Avenue • Alosta Avenue and Citrus Avenue • Alosta Avenue and Powell Avenue • Arrow Highway and Armel Drive • Arrow Highway and Cerritos Avenue • Arrow Highway and Citrus Avenue • Foothill Boulevard and San Gabriel Avenue • Foothill Boulevard and Stein Way 47 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Map 7: Pedestrian Priority Corridors Priority segments represent corridors that have the greatest impact towards equity, safety connectivity, and access factors if improved. Priority intesrections represent locations that have the greatest impact towards equity, safety connectivity, and access factors if improved. Priority corridors and intersections were determined based on prioritization analysis (data sources: ACS, SWITRS/TIMS, City of Azusa, LA Metro, aerial imagery) and public, stakeholder, and City input. 48 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Pedestrian Treatment Toolkit This section provides information on a series of treatments that improve pedestrian accomodations. The treatments featured here are not an extensive list of every available option to improve the pedestrian experience, but rather a tailored list of common tools that have a demonstrated history of improving pedestrian safety and access. Additional guidance and feasibility requirements for use of these treatments should referenced from national standards such as the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). The City of Azusa should consider both rapid implementation and permanent projects in their Pedestrian Treatment Toolkit. Rapid implementation projects can includes lower cost solutions and may be installed temporarily before a permanent or more costly solution is provided. Rapid implementation projects should include data collection on the effectiveness of the treatment to inform improvements as part of a permantent solution. The Pedestrian Treatments Toolkit can be grouped into the following categories: Crash Modification Factor (CMF): “A CMF estimates a safety countermeasure’s ability to reduce crashes and crash severity. Transportation professionals frequently use CMF values to identify countermeasures with the greatest safety benefit for a particular crash type or location.” For more information, see: http://www. cmfclearinghouse.org/ Proven Safety Countermeasures: Specific countermeasures are highlighted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for their safety effectiveness and benefits. For more information, see: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ provencountermeasures/ • Pedestrian Recall • Exclusive Pedestrian Phase • Pedestrian Scrambles • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) • Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) • Lane Reduction • Protected Intersections Pedestrian Amenities • Pedestrian-scaled Lighting • Tree Canopy / Shade • Street Furniture • Placemaking Pedestrian Safety Improvements • Sidewalks • High Visibility Crosswalks • Curb Ramps • Detectable Warning Surfaces • Pedestrian Refuge Islands • Curb Extensions • Raised Intersections & Crossings • Right-Turn Lane Redesign • Yield to Pedestrian Signs • Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) • Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) • Protected Left Turns • Right Turn Restrictions 49 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Sidewalks: Sidewalks provide space along a street for pedestrian travel and are the backbone of a city’s pedestrian network. For sidewalks to function, they must be kept clear of any obstacles and be wide enough to comfortably accommodate expected pedestrian volumes and different types of pedestrians, including those using mobility assistance devices like wheelchairs, pushing strollers, or pulling carts. Sidewalks are a Proven Safety Countermeasure with a 65% to 89% crash reduction involving pedestrians walking along streets2. High Visibility Crosswalks: A high visibility crosswalk uses bar, continental, ladder-style markings to increase the visibility of a pedestrian at a crossing. It is important to note that legal crosswalks exist at all locations where sidewalks meet the street, regardless of whether a crosswalk is marked or not. Motorists are legally required to yield to pedestrians at intersections with or without crosswalks, even where there is no marked crosswalk. However, providing high visibility crosswalks clearly communicates to drivers that pedestrians may be present and helps guide pedestrians to locations where it is best to cross the street. High visibility crosswalks may provide up to 48% reduction in pedestrian crashes3. 50 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Curb Ramps: The transition for pedestrians from the sidewalk to the street is provided by a curb ramp. The design of curb ramps are critical for all pedestrians, particularly for persons with disabilities. ADA standards require all pedestrian crossings be accessible by providing curb ramps at all locations where pedestrians can be expected to cross the street. In addition to people with disabilities, curb ramps also benefit people pushing strollers, grocery carts, suitcases, or bicycles. At intersections, directional curb ramps should be installed to orient pedestrians toward the desired line of travel. Detectable Warning Surfaces: Detectable warning surfaces are a hazard warning for pedestrians with low or no vision. Comprised of truncated domes and produced in colors that contrast the sidewalk or curb ramp in which they are placed, detectable warning surfaces function like a pedestrian stop line, alerting persons with vision disabilities to the presence of the street or other vehicular travel way. 51 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Pedestrian Refuge Islands: Pedestrian islands are raised medians placed in the middle of a street that provide a protected space for people trying to walk across the street. Pedestrian islands improve safety by reducing conflicts with motorists. They are particularly valuable when used at unsignalized crossings along multi-lane streets because they make it easier for pedestrians to find gaps in traffic and allow pedestrians to cross one direction of traffic at a time. Pedestrian islands are a FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasure with up to 56% pedestrian crash reduction4. Curb Extensions: Curb extensions, also known as bulb-outs, reduce the width of the street by extending the sidewalk at corners or mid-block. They help improve visibility, calm traffic, and provide extra space on sidewalks for walking and gathering. In addition to shortening crossing distances, curb extensions create more compact intersections, resulting in smaller corner radii and slower turns by people driving. 52 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Raised Intersections & Crosswalks: Raised intersections and crosswalks are created by raising the street to the same level as the sidewalk. These treatments provide many benefits, especially for people with mobility impairments, because there are no vertical transitions to navigate. They help to increase driver yielding, slow down vehicle speeds, and increase visibility for people walking and crossing the street. Raised crosswalks may reduce fatal and injury crashes by up to 36%5. Right-Turn Lane Redesign: Exclusive right-turn lanes might be desirable at busy intersections, but the design and control of these can have a significant impact on safety for pedestrians. Intersections with right-turns slip lanes (see illustration) are potential candidates for redesign. When slip lanes are eliminated, they reduce the overall crossing distance for pedestrians and slow the speeds of turning traffic which in turn improve pedestrian safety. 53 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Yield to Pedestrian Signs: In-street yield to pedestrian signs are placed in the street at crosswalks to alert motorists to yield to people crossing the street, increasing both awareness and visibility of pedestrian crossings. They are often used in commercial districts; at school crossings; locations with children, seniors, or persons with disabilities; or where high pedestrian volumes occur. Yield to pedestrian signs deployed in a gateway configuration have been shown to increase motorist yielding to pedestrians from less than 10 percent to over 90 percent, and to decrease traffic speeds between 4 and 10 miles per hour6. Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) initiate the pedestrian WALK signal three to seven seconds before motorists traveling in the same direction are given the green indication. This allows pedestrians to enter the intersection prior to turning motorists, increasing visibility between all modes. LPIs give pedestrians a 3-7 second head start to establish themselves in the intersection before the green phase. LPIs especially benefit slower pedestrians, including people with disabilities, seniors, and children. Leading Pedestrian Intervals are a Proven Safety Countermeasure with up to 60% pedestrian crash reduction7. 54 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS): APS and accessible detectors are devices that communicate information in non-visual formats about the pedestrian crossing to people with visual and/or hearing disabilities. They may include features such as audible tones, speech messages, detectable arrow indications, and/or vibrating surfaces. Protected Left Turns: A protected left turn provides a red arrow for left turning motorists while allow both on- coming traffic and pedestrians to cross to eliminate conflicts. It allow pedestrians to cross the intersection at the beginning of a signal cycle, reducing conflicts between pedestrians and motorists. Reduce all left-turn crashes up to 99%8. Right Turn on Red Restrictions: Right turn on red restrictions prevent motorists from turning right (or left on intersecting one-way streets) while the traffic signal is red. Restricting this movement eliminates conflicts with pedestrians crossing in front of turning motorists9. 55 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Pedestrian Recall: Pedestrian recall is when a signal is set to automatically allow pedestrians to cross the street without the need to push a button during a green interval. It causes the WALK signal to activate on every cycle of the intersection traffic signal. In areas and locations where pedestrian demand is high, pedestrian recall should be considered to minimize crossing delays and provide convenience and comfort for pedestrians. Exclusive Pedestrian Phase: An exclusive pedestrian phase stops all motor vehicles at the intersection to allow people to cross the street at every crosswalk. Pedestrian signal phasing is intended to minimize exposure of people walking and rolling to motor vehicles, minimize delay for people waiting to cross the street, and provide accessibility benefits to people with disabilities. Pedestrian Scrambles: Similar to exclusive pedestrian phasing, pedestrian scrambles stop all vehicle movements at the intersection to give priority to all pedestrians looking to cross the street. However, scrambles also provide diagonal crosswalks in the middle of the intersection to allow for more direct crossing movements and eliminating the need to cross two crosswalks to get to an opposite corner. 56 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFBs): RRFBs are pedestrian actuated beacons that use a rapid, irregular flash frequency. They increase driver yielding, increases pedestrian visibility, and slows down vehicle speeds. RRFBs should be installed on roadways with low to medium vehicle volumes and/ or roadways with posted speeds under 40mph10. RRFBs may reduce pedestrian crashes up to 47 percent. Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB): Also known as High- Intensity Activated Crosswalk (HAWK) signals, PHBs help pedestrians safely cross busy or higher-speed streets at midblock crossings and uncontrolled intersections. The beacon head consists of two red lights above a single yellow light. Once a pedestrian pushes the button to cross, the signal then initiates a yellow to red lighting sequence directing motorists to slow and come to a stop. The pedestrian signal then flashes a WALK display for the pedestrian to cross. Pedestrian hybrid beacons are a Proven Safety Countermeasure with up to 69% pedestrian crash reduction11. 57 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Lane Reduction (including Width Reduction or Lane Removal): Reducing the number of lanes, the width of lanes (lane width reductions), or both can help repurpose space for other roadway users. This treatment helps optimize available space for other multimodal infrastructure like bicycle lane, wider sidewalks, median islands, curb extensions, on-street parking, transit lane, landscaping, or other uses. Lane reductions are typically done on streets where traffic volumes do not support the need for additional motor vehicle lanes. Road diets are a Proven Safety Countermeasure with an overall crash reduction factor of 19% to 47% for all modes12. Protected Intersections: Protected intersections are a type of intersection design that improves safety by reducing the speed of turning traffic, improving sightlines, and designating space for all road users. Protected intersections reduce conflict points between drivers, sidewalk users, and bicyclists by separating all modes. The separation is achieved through corner islands that reduce vehicle turning speeds and provide an area for vehicles to wait while yielding to bicyclists and pedestrians in the crosswalk. Protected intersections eliminate the merging and weaving movements from vehicles typically found in conventional bike lanes and shared streets. By clearly defining pedestrian and bicyclist spaces and mitigating conflicts between vehicles and vulnerable users, protected intersections provide a safer environment for all modes. 58 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Pedestrian & Street Amenities: Pedestrian-scaled Lighting: Pedestrian-scale lighting is lighting directed toward the sidewalk and positioned lower than roadway lighting. It is a crucial element in providing a safe multimodal environment and ensures that a pedestrian environment is used frequently and safely, resulting in a safer and healthier community. Pedestrian- scale lighting should be installed along streets with existing or anticipated high volumes of pedestrian activity and at intersections and crossings. Tree Canopy / Shade: Street trees provide shade and visual softness to make the use of sidewalks feel more pleasant. Trees can also help reduce peak temperatures during summer months and mitigate air pollution. Placement will vary based on type of tree species and amount of space in the right-of- way, but should typically be used along sidewalks (with the addition of tree grates) and trails and in public plazas and parks. Street Furniture: Street furniture includes an array of elements, including benches, trash and recycling receptacles, bollards, transit stops and shelters, decorative planters, and more. Seating is an essential component to each street and includes temporary and permanent fixtures such as chairs, benches, seat walls, steps, public art, and raised planters. The location and type of seating element should respond to adjacent land uses, available shade from either structures or street trees, the presence of parallel parking buffering the seating area from traffic and the width of the amenity zone. Placemaking: Placemaking covers a range of ideas that create appealing places while also supporting communities and local businesses. Placemaking includes creative tactics such as parklets, decorative crosswalks, public art, street murals, traffic signal box artwork, as well as business- supportive “streateries” and sidewalk cafes. Public space can also be temporarily activated by communities with events, such as neighborhood block parties, play streets, adaptive streets, farmers markets or by taking advantage of a festival street. 59 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Pedestrian Infrastructure Recommendations Based on the identified priority locations and input from City staff, AC members, and the Azusa community, the following table represents proposed infrastructure recommendations at these key locations for improvement. Location Details Treatment 1st Add shade trees, south edge (Vernon Ave to Dalton Ave)Add Shade Trees 1st Add shade trees, north edge (San Gabriel Ave to Pasadena Ave)Add Shade Trees 1st 1st St, north and south edges (Orange Ave to Angeleno Ave)Add Pedestrian-Scale Lighting 1st Widen sidewalk, 1st St, north edge Widen Sidewalk 1st/Alameda North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Alameda SE Corner, add ped crossing or “stop ahead” sign as warning for fast traffic exiting the freeway Upgrade Signage 1st/Alameda LPI with increased walking time LPI 1st/Angeleno North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Cerritos All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Dalton North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Orange North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Orange South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Pasadena Across 1st, west leg of 1st St/Pasadena Ave Midblock Crossing (HAWK) 1st/Pasadena North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/San Gabriel North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Vernon All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1st/Vernon LPI with increase walking time LPI 9th 9th St (Soldano Ave to Pasadena Ave)Add Sidewalk 9th/Alameda All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 9th/Alameda NW corner 9th St/Alameda Ave, Into 9th St and Alameda Ave Curb Extension 9th/Alameda NE corner 9th St/Alameda Ave, Into Alameda Ave Curb Extension 9th/Azusa NE corner Azusa Ave/9th St, Into 9th St and Azusa Curb Extension 9th/Azusa All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 9th/Dalton All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 9th/Dalton SE corner 9th St/Dalton Ave, Into 9th St Curb Extension 9th/Dalton SW corner 9th St/Dalton Ave, Into Dalton Ave Curb Extension 9th/Pasadena All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 60 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION PENDING TABLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS Location Details Treatment 9th/Pasadena NE corner Pasadena Ave/9th St, Into 9th St and Pasadena Ave Curb Extension 9th/Pasadena SE corner Pasadena Ave/9th St, Into 9th St Curb Extension 9th/San Gabriel SE corner San Gabriel Ave/9th St, Into 9th St Curb Extension 9th/San Gabriel SE corner San Gabriel Ave/9th St, Into San Gabriel Ave and 9th St Curb Extension 9th/San Gabriel All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 9th/Soldano North and south legs High Visibility Crosswalks 9th/Soldano NE corner Soldano Ave/9th St Enhanced Intersection Lighting Alosta Widen sidewalk, currently ~5 ft, north side (Rockvale Ave to Wash)Widen Sidewalk Alosta Widen sidewalk, currently ~5 ft, south side (Wash to Fadi’s Flower Place)Widen Sidewalk Alosta Add shade trees, north side (Rockvale Ave to Wash)Add Shade Trees Alosta Add shade trees, north side (5th St to Raising Cane’s)Add Shade Trees Alosta Add shade trees, north side (Powell Ave to Barranca Ave)Add Shade Trees Alosta Along Alosta Ave (Foothill Blvd to Barranca Ave)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs Alosta/5th West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Alosta/5th Center median west leg Alosta Ave/5th Street Enhanced Intersection Lighting Alosta/Barranca All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Alosta/Barranca NW corner Alosta Ave/Barranca, Into Alosta Curb Extension Alosta/Calera South and East Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Alosta/Calera SW corner Alosta Ave/Calera Ave, add paint and bollards Tighten Turn Radius Alosta/Citrus LPI LPI Alosta/Fenimore South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Alosta/Powell South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Alosta/Rockvale South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Alosta/Rockvale SW Corner Alosta Ave/Citrus Ave, Into Rockvale Curb Extension Arrow Arrow Hwy (Azusa Ave to Citrus Ave)Pedestrian-Scale Lighting Arrow Along Arrow Hwy (Azusa Ave to Citrus Ave)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs Arrow/Azusa SE corner Azusa Ave/Arrow Hwy, Into Arrow Hwy Curb Extension 61 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Location Details Treatment Arrow/Cerritos NW corner Cerritos Ave/Arrow Hwy Curb Extension Azusa Azusa Ave (4th St to 11th St) Both sides, enhance shade Add Shade Trees Azusa Azusa Ave (4th St to 11th St)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs Azusa Add shade trees, east and west edges (CA-210 to Arrow Hwy)Add Shade Trees Azusa Improve sidewalk, not accessible due to poles (Russell Street to Arrow Hwy)Improve Sidewalk Azusa Midblock across Azusa Ave at Target egress High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa Midblock across Azusa Ave just south of Azusa Light & Water Department High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/10th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/10th NW corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension Azusa/10th NE corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension Azusa/10th SW corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension Azusa/10th SE corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension Azusa/11th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/11th NW corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension Azusa/11th NE corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension Azusa/11th SW corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension Azusa/11th SE corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension Azusa/1st LPI with increased walking time LPI Azusa/1st All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/4th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/4th NW Corner Azusa Ave/4th St into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension Azusa/4th NE Corner Azusa Ave/4th St, into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension Azusa/4th SW Corner Azusa Ave/4th St into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension Azusa/4th SE Corner Azusa Ave/4th St into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension Azusa/5th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/5th SW Corner Azusa Ave/5th Street into Azusa Curb Extension Azusa/Azusa East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/EB CA- 210 Off-ramp West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/EB CA- 210 On-ramp East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 62 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Location Details Treatment Azusa/EB CA- 210 On-ramp West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/Foothill All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/Foothill LPI LPI Azusa/Leton North median between Azusa Ave and Leton Ave Curb Ramp Azusa/Leton South median between Azusa Ave and Leton Ave Curb Ramp Azusa/Leton Between medians High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/ Newburgh All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/ Newburgh LPI with extra walking time LPI Azusa/ Paramount All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Azusa/ Paramount NE Corner Azusa Ave/Paramount St into Azusa Curb Extension Azusa/Roland Across Azusa Ave at the south leg of Azusa Ave/ Roland St Midblock Crossing and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon / HAWK Signal Azusa/Santa Fe East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Baseline Add shade trees, both sides (Rockvale Ave to Citrus Ave)Add Shade Trees Baseline/Citrus All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Baseline/Citrus NW Corner Baseline Rd/Citrus Ave Into Baseline Curb Extension Baseline/ Fenimore Add “Use Crosswalks” sign Upgrade Signage Baseline/ Fenimore North and West Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Baseline/ Rockvale North and east legs High Visibility Crosswalks Baseline/WB CA-210 On- ramp South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Cerritos Cerritos Ave (Gladstone St to Arrow Hwy), 4.3 road diet Road Diet Cerritos Add shade trees, east edge (Gladstone St to Arrow Hwy)Add Shade Trees Cerritos/ Gladstone South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Cerritos/ Gladstone North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 63 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Location Details Treatment Cerritos/ Gladstone All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Cerritos/ Gladstone NE Corner, add paint and bollards Tighten Turn Radius Cerritos/ Gladstone SW Corner, add paint and bollards Tighten Turn Radius Cerritos/ Gladstone Add Ped Crossing sign Upgrade Signage Cerritos/ Gladstone Consider closing NB and SB right-turn lanes to extend sidewalks Close Turn Lanes Cerritos/ Newburgh All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Cerritos/ Newburgh LPI with more walking time LPI Cerritos/ Woodcroft Across Cerritos, south leg of Cerritos Ave/ Woodcraft St Midblock Crossing and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon / HAWK Signal Citrus Add shade trees, east and west edges (Foothill Blvd to University Dr)Add Shade Trees Citrus Add shade trees, east and west edges (Clementine St to Arrow Hwy)Add Shade Trees Citrus Foothill Blvd to Arrow Hwy Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs Citrus/Armstead All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Citrus/Armstead NE Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension Citrus/Armstead NW Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension Citrus/Armstead SW Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension Citrus/Armstead SE Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension Citrus/Armstead SE Corner, potential relocation to NE corner Add Bus Shelter Citrus/Baseline NW Corner Add Bus Shelter Citrus/ Clementine Across Citrus Ave at north leg of Citrus Ave/ Clementine St to split large block and provide access to commercial uses Midblock Crossing and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon / HAWK Signal Citrus/EB CA- 210 Off-ramp All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Citrus/EB CA- 210 On-ramp West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Citrus/EB CA- 210 On-ramp East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Citrus/ Gladstone All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 64 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Location Details Treatment Citrus/ Gladstone NW corner Citrus Ave/Gladstone St into Gladstone Curb Extension Citrus/Laxford NE corner Add Bus Shelter Citrus/Laxford SW corner Add Bus Shelter Citrus/Mauna Loa All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Citrus/Mauna Loa SW Corner Add Bus Shelter Citrus/Mauna Loa SE Corner Add Bus Shelter Citrus/Nearfield South Leg, with ped refuge island Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon / HAWK Signal Citrus/University South and east legs High Visibility Crosswalks Crescent Dr (south of)Ped Path in old rail ROW Mult-use Trail Dalton Improve crosswalk at senior center High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Loren Ave to Vernon Ave)Add Shade Trees Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Orange Ave to San Gabriel Ave)Add Shade Trees Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Dalton Ave to Cerritos Ave)Add Shade Trees Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Alosta Ave to Citrus Ave)Add Shade Trees Foothill Foothill Blvd (Loren Ave to Citrus Ave)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs Foothill/ Alameda All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/ Angeleno South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/ Angeleno East Leg RRFB Foothill/ Between Rockvale Ave and Palm Dr Midblock across Foothill Blvd Midblock Crossing (HAWK) Foothill/Cerritos All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Cerritos SW corner Foothill Blvd/Cerritos Ave Into Foothill Curb Extension Foothill/Cerritos SE corner Foothill Blvd/Cerritos Ave Into Foothill Curb Extension Foothill/Citrus All Legs Pedestrian Scramble Foothill/Citrus SE corner Foothill Blvd/Citrus Ave into Foothill Curb Extension 65 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Location Details Treatment Foothill/Citrus NW corner Foothill Blvd/Citrus Ave Tighten Turn Radius Foothill/Coney NW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension Foothill/Coney SW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension Foothill/Coney Upgrade current crossing, midblock across Foothill Blvd Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon / HAWK Signal Foothill/Dalton All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Georgia North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Loren NW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension Foothill/Loren SW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension Foothill/Loren Upgrade current crossing, midblock across Foothill Blvd Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon / HAWK Signal Foothill/Miller North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Orange East, west, and south legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Palm East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/ Pasadena All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/ Pasadena NE corner Add Bus Shelter Foothill/ Rockvale South Leg Upgrade to Larger Stop Sign Foothill/Sago North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Sago North Leg Upgrade to Larger Stop Sign Foothill/San Gabriel NW Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension Foothill/San Gabriel NE Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension Foothill/San Gabriel SW Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension Foothill/San Gabriel SE Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension Foothill/San Gabriel All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Soldano North and South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Soldano East Leg RRFB Foothill/Soldano West Leg RRFB Foothill/Stein North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 66 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Location Details Treatment Foothill/Stein North Leg Upgrade to Larger Stop Sign Foothill/Sunset South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Sunset SW corner Foothill Blvd/Sunset Ave Into Sunset Curb Extension Foothill/Sunset SE corner Foothill Blvd/Sunset Ave Into Sunset Curb Extension Foothill/Sunset West Leg RRFB Foothill/Vernon North and East Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Foothill/Vernon SE corner at existing crosswalk Curb Ramp Foothill/Virginia East and South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks Renwick Rd (south of)Pedestrian Path in LADWP ROW Mult-use Trail San Gabriel San Gabriel Ave (9th St to 2nd St)Road Diet San Gabriel/2nd North Leg RRFB San Gabriel/2nd East and West Legs High Visibility Crosswalks San Gabriel/2nd NE corner San Gabriel/2nd Into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/2nd SE corner San Gabriel/2nd Into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/3rd All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks San Gabriel/3rd NW corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/3rd NE corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/3rd SW corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/3rd SE corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/4th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks San Gabriel/4th NW corner San Gabriel Ave/4th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/4th NE corner San Gabriel Ave/4th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/5th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks San Gabriel/5th NW corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/5th NE corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/5th SW corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/5th SE corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension San Gabriel/5th Add additional one way sign on westside lights, visible from east leg Upgrade Signage San Gabriel/6th NW corner San Gabriel Ave/6th St into San Gabriel and 6th Curb Extension San Gabriel/6th NE corner San Gabriel Ave/6th St into San Gabriel and 6th Curb Extension San Gabriel/6th East, West, and South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks San Gabriel/6th Increase size and lighting of one way sign Upgrade Signage 67 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Implementation Implementation progress is often iterative and nonlinear, and this Plan reflects that reality by using a prioritization process rooted in needs and intended outcomes rather than predetermined timelines. While the priority pedestrian corridors and intersections do not represent short-, medium-, or long-term priorities for implementation, they are intended to provide flexibility in addressing pedestrian needs in Azusa. The list of priority corridors and intersections should be used by City staff to determine where to invest additional staff resources in developing and implementing projects that have greatest likelihood of impact. This Plan identifies priority locations, local and regional priorities, proposed recommendations, and potential treatment types. However, future implementation will require additional engineering field work, feasibility analyses, warrant studies, and after construction adjustments to further assess applicability of improvements based on site conditions. Pedestrian recommendations should also be considered in the City’s future Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) to further evaluate improvements for effectiveness in improving safety, mobility and access. The City should pursue implementation of pedestrian improvements along the Plan’s identified priority corridors both when funding Additional Programs & Policies to Consider: Citywide Complete Streets Design Guidelines: As the City looks towards implementing future pedestrian and multimodal improvements, adopting a set of Complete Streets Design Guidelines can help standardize the approach and design guidance used. ADA Compliance & Sidewalk Repair Program: An annual ADA Compliance and Sidewalk Repair Program helps ensure safe and accessible sidewalks by defining when and how curb ramps (missing or non-ADA compliant) and damaged sidewalks are addressed. Crosswalk Policy: A Crosswalk Policy is often adopted by cities to provide standard guidance on the warrants and criteria needed for installing marked crosswalks at specific locations. Wayfinding Program: Wayfinding signage and strategies can help both guide pedestrians and improve pedestrian connectivity to popular places in the City or the Downtown area. Maps and street signs help individuals quickly orient themselves to the surrounding area. Planning Recommendations Feasibility Design Construction 1 2 3 4 68 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION opportunities are available and in alignment with other City investments and planned and programmed street improvements. Many pedestrian improvements can be implemented as a part of street projects, but others will require a dedicated funding source to install safety and traffic calming measures as independent projects. The City may choose to integrate them where multimodal projects are already lined up for implementation due to other capital investments, private developments, and specific area plans. Implementation of this Plan should primarily focus on the priority locations identified based on safety, access, connectivity, and equity factors. However, where possible, the City may also require new commercial development to provide for the construction of pedestrian rights of way to allow convenient and unimpeded circulation to, through, and within the property being developed. Pedestrian facilities themselves are typically a relatively small portion of a large roadway improvement project (e.g. restriping, resurfacing or reconstruction). As a result, while multimodal projects often take longer to design and implement, it can often be more cost effective to do so with limited local funding. In many cases, additional feasibility analyses, evaluation studies, and funding sources are required for further implementation progress. Recommendations for pedestrian improvements at priority locations are further organized into the following categories based on the feasibility of the City’s future implementation efforts: Category 1: Recommendation can be implemented in a near future City project. Category 2: Recommendation requires identifying a funding source and may be incorporated into a near future City project. Category 3: Recommendation will require additional feasibility studies, warrant analyses, and/or engineering design concepts and will need to identify a funding source for implementation. Implementing larger corridor-wide pedestrian or multimodal projects is a collaborative process that requires the involvement and support of City elected officials and staff, the public, community institutions and businesses, funding agencies, and others. The City of Azusa can lead implementation progress by undertaking further and ongoing public engagement to develop a deeper understanding of the specific needs that each priority corridor can address and the particularities of how specific treatments each can best be implemented to meet those needs. Most importantly, future outreach and engagement should reflect an equitable process (by prioritizing the input and participation of those least likely to be reached by traditional outreach processes) and reach for equitable outcomes (by prioritizing infrastructure and programs that meet the needs of people of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds). 69 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Urban Greening, California Natural Resources Agency Part of a statewide initiative to utilize cap-and-trade dollars to fund projects that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Eligibility: Projects that develop green infrastructure, including pedestrian facilities Current Status: The last round of funding was awarded in March 2020. No additional funding is available at this time, but interested applicants should check the website for updates: https://resources.ca.gov/grants/urban-greening/ Local Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), (managed by Caltrans Division of Local Assistance) The purpose of the HSIP program is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including non-State-owned public roads and roads on tribal land. Eligibility: In order to apply for the HSIP funds, an agency must have completed their a Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) or an equivalent of the LRSP, such as Systemic Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) or Vision Zero Action Plan. HSIP funds are eligible for work on any public road or publicly owned bicycle or pedestrian pathway or trail, or on tribal lands for general use of tribal members, that improves the safety for its users. Current Status: The last round (HSIP Cycle 10) of funding was awarded in March 2021. No additional funding is available at this time, but interested applicants should check the website for updates: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-assistance/fed-and-state- programs/highway-safety-improvement-program Funding Sources Numerous regional and state sources exist to fund the pedestrian-related projects recommended in this plan. Having an adopted plan in place demonstrates public support for implementation of pedestrian infrastructure and can increase the likelihood of securing resources in a competitive funding landscape. The following programs provide competitive funding for pedestrian infrastructure; additional vetting may be required to determine eligibility of the Plan’s specific projects. 70 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION Active Transportation Program (ATP), California Transportation Commission Consolidates many former federal and state programs to fund a wide range of capital and non-capital projects. Preference is given to projects that are located within disadvantaged communities, which has been included as part of this Plan’s methodology for priority pedestrian corridors. Eligibility: Active transportation infrastructure or non-infrastructure projects, quick- build project pilots, and active transportation plans. Current Status: Applications are available annually. There are five application types (large project, medium project, small project, non-infrastructure only, or plan). More information at: https://catc.ca.gov/programs/active-transportation-program Local Streets and Roads Program, California Transportation Commission Uses funds from SB 1 to fund projects on the local streets and roads system. Eligibility: Projects that support basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and safety. Current Status: To be eligible for funding, the City must submit a proposed project list to the California Transportation Commission. More information at: https://catc. ca.gov/programs/sb1/local-streets-roads-program Solutions for Congested Corridors, California Transportation Commission Provides $250 million annually to achieve a balanced set of transportation, environmental, and community access improvements that reduce congestion throughout the state. Eligibility: Projects that implement specific transportation performance improvements (like pedestrian improvements) designed to reduce congestion by providing more transportation choices to residents, commuters, and visitors and are part of a comprehensive corridor plan. Current Status: The next application cycle will be for fiscal year 2022-2023. More information at: https://catc.ca.gov/programs/sb1/solutions-for-congested-corridors- program 71 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, California Strategic Growth Council Funds projects that facilitate compact development, including active transportation infrastructure and amenities, with neighborhood scale impacts. Available to government agencies and institutions (including local government, transit agencies and school districts), developers and nonprofit organizations. Eligibility: Transportation projects that support transit-oriented development and reduce green-house gas emissions, including projects that encourage connection to transit networks as well as pedestrian facilities. Current Status: Applications are invited through the issuance of Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) yearly. Subscribe to the AHSC email list to receive notifications and announcements. More information at: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-funding/active- funding/ahsc.shtml Transformative Climate Communities, California Strategic Growth Council and Department of Conservation Funds community-led development and infrastructure projects that achieve environmental, health, and economic benefits in disadvantaged communities. Eligibility: Pedestrian facilities Current Status: The TCC Program does not currently have funding allocated for the next round of awards, but more information can be found at: https://sgc.ca.gov/ programs/tcc/resources/ Local Partnership Program (LPP), California Transportation Commission Funds public agencies in which voters have approved fees, tolls or taxes dedicated solely to transportation improvements. Eligibility: Pedestrian facilities, transit facility improvements, and projects that mitigate environmental impacts of new transportation infrastructure on air or water quality. Current Status: Funding is distributed annually in a formulaic program and a competitive program. The formulaic program distributes 60% of the total funds based on tax/toll/fee revenues, while the competitive program distributes 40% of the total funds in a competitive application process. More information at: https://catc.ca.gov/ programs/sb1/local-partnership-program 72 AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), Caltrans Allocates certain state transportation funds for state highway improvements, intercity rail, and regional highway and transit improvements. Eligibility: Transportation-related capital improvement projects Current Status: The STIP is a five-year plan, updated every two years. City staff should work with regional transportation authorities to nominate projects for inclusion in the STIP. More information at: https://catc.ca.gov/programs/state-transportation- improvement-program Metro Active Transport, Transit First/Last Mile Program (MAT), Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Utilizes Measure M funds (approximately $857 million) over 40 years to support active transportation infrastructure projects throughout Los Angeles County. Eligibility: Capital projects that improve or grow the active transportation network or expand the reach of transit and are consistent with Metro’s First/Last Mile Strategic Plan or Active Transportation Strategic Plan. Current Status: Program cycles occur every 2-5 years (the last cycle was awarded in 2020 for fiscal years 2021-2025). More information at: https://www.metro.net/ projects/metro-active-transport-mat-program/ Sustainable Communities Program, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Provides a mechanism to promote local jurisdictional efforts and test local planning tools. Eligibility: Planning efforts related to integrated land use, active transportation, or climate action and greenhouse gas reduction. Current Status: Calls for applications are released throughout the fiscal year. More information at: https://scag.ca.gov/sustainable-communities-program 73 PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION | AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN References 1 California Legislative Information. Assembly Bill No. 43 Chapter 690. https://leginfo. legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB43 2 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. “Proven Safety Countermeasurers: Walkways.” 2018. 3 Chen, L., Chen, C., and Ewing, R. “The Relative Effectiveness of Pedestrian Safety Countermeasures at Urban Intersections: Lessons from a New York City Experience.” 2012. 4 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. “Proven Safety Countermeasurers: Medians and Pedestrian Crossing Islands in Urban and Suburban Areas.” 2018. 5 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. Toolbox of Countermeasures and Their Potential Effectiveness for Pedestrian Crashes. https://safety. fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/ped_tctpepc/ 6 Bennett, M., Manal, H., and Van Houten, R. “A Comparison of Gateway In-Street Sign Treatment to other Driver Prompts to Increase Yielding to Pedestrians at Crosswalks.” 2014. 7 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. “Proven Safety Countermeasurers: Leading Pedestrian Intervals.” 2018. 8 Safety Source: Desktop Reference for Crash Reduction Factors. Federal Highway Administration. 9 Retting, R., Nitzburg, M. Farmer, C.; Knoblauch, R. “Field Evaluation of Two Methods for Restricting Right Turn on Red to Promote Pedestrian Safety.” ITE Journal. January 2002. 10 Fitzpatrick, K. and Park, E. S. “Safety Effectiveness of the HAWK Pedestrian Crossing Treatment., 2010. 11 U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration. “Proven Safety Countermeasurers: Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon.” 2018. 12 Fitzpatrick, K. and Park, E. S. “Safety Effectiveness of the HAWK Pedestrian Crossing Treatment., 2010. 75 Azusa Pedestrian Plan Appendix A: Existing Conditions Technical Memo A Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum 1 1100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201, Monterey Park, CA 91754 T: (323) 260-4703 | F: (323) 260-4705 | www.koacorp.com MONTEREY PARK ORANGE ONTARIO SAN DIEGO LA QUINTA CULVER CITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Subject: July 8, 2021 Carina Campos and Miguel Cabanas – City of Azusa Carlos Velásquez and Raquel Jimenez – KOA Corporation Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum JC01124 The City of Azusa is located at the foot of the San Gabriel Mountains, 20 miles east of Downtown Los Angeles. It is bordered by the Cities of Glendora to the east, Irwindale and Duarte to the west, and the Census-designated places of Citrus and Vincent to the south. According to the US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, as of 2019, Azusa’s population was 49,753. In comparison to the rest of California, Azusa has average to high socioeconomic indicators. Azusa has a high employment rate at approximately 70 percent. Azusa has average homeownership rates, with 55 percent of housing units being occupied by property owners. The housing burden for low-income renters (renters with household incomes of less than or equal to 30% of the Department of Housing and Urban Development area median family income) is also average, with 27 percent of low-income renters spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing costs. Azusa has above average park and supermarket access, and retail density as compared to the rest of California, according to the California Healthy Places Index (HPI). The HPI places Azusa in the 36th percentile of California census tracts for healthy communities. 1.0 METHODOLOGY Maps were produced to visualize commuting patterns, land use, infrastructure, collisions, and sociodemographic data and are discussed below to summarize existing conditions in the City of Azusa. Sociodemographic data was gathered from the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates. Data regarding land use and infrastructure were provided by the City of Azusa. Collision data was gathered using the University of California Berkeley’s Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) to query the State of California’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) for 2015-2019. Maps were created using the above data in conjunction with GIS analysis. 1.1 CENSUS DATA Census data was gathered at the block group level and joined to a shapefile of the block groups within the City of Azusa. While analysis was conducted on a block group level, a shapefile of the City of Azusa boundary was used to clip data for the final visualization, ensuring areas within Azusa are the focus of map. Parameters were visualized from “Low” to “High.” Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum 2 1.2 COLLISION DATA Collision data was inputted into GIS, where it was separated based on what users were involved (i.e., automobilists, bicyclists, pedestrians) and severity (i.e. severe injury, fatality, or visible injury). These collisions were then visualized based on density using heat maps and other symbology. 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 COMMUTING PATTERNS Azusa residents primarily commute to work via a private automobile, with approximately 76 percent of the population driving alone and 11 percent carpooling. Commuters living in the areas surrounded by the Foothill Freeway (I-210) and Azusa’s southern border as well as Azusa Avenue and Azusa’s eastern border primarily drive alone to work. The same is true for the block groups directly north of Downtown Azusa. Carpooling is most common in the northmost areas of Azusa and in the southwest part of the city, near the Azusa Quarry. Approximately 9 percent of Azusa residents commute to work by walking. The highest density of walking commuters lives at the eastern border of the city near Azusa Pacific University. There is also a large concentration of workers who commute by walking along the northern side of the Gladstone Street corridor between Jackson Avenue and Azusa Avenue. Figure 1 shows percent of walking commuters by block group. Approximately 3 percent of residents use transit for their commute. The highest concentration of residents who commute via transit is between CA-39 and Cerritos Avenue near Slauson Park and the Soldano Senior Village, as well as in the southeast corner of Azusa near the Brookwood Apartments and Gladstone Street Elementary School. Additionally, transit use is high directly to the east of Downtown Azusa, near Dalton Elementary School and the Rosedale Community. Figure 2 shows percent of transit commuters by block group. Walking Commute (% of Workers 16 and Over) by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 1 Public Transit Commute (% of Workers 16 and Over) by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 2 Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum 5 2.2 LAND USE The City of Azusa has distinct delineations between land uses. The western border, below Sierra Madre Avenue holds industrial uses. The northern areas of Azusa are open space. The eastern portion of Azusa to the east of Vernon Avenue is residential. Corridors of commercial and mixed-use exist along Azusa and San Gabriel Avenues, Foothill Boulevard, and Arrow Highway. These land uses influence the way people use the street; for example, people are more likely to walk in commercial areas. Meanwhile, industrial areas are less likely to attract pedestrian traffic. Figure 3 shows land use in the City of Azusa. 2.3 INFRASTRUCTURE Roadways The City of Azusa’s main thoroughfares are classified as Principal Arterials in Azusa’s General Plan. Azusa Avenue (CA-39) between Arrow Highway and the Foothill Freeway (I-210), Citrus Avenue between Arrow Highway and Alosta Avenue, and Arrow Highway, Foothill Boulevard/Alosta Avenue, and Irwindale Avenue within Azusa’s limits are Principal Arterials. All of these roadways have 4 lanes, two through lanes in each direction. It is especially important to have thorough pedestrian infrastructure on streets with 4 lanes. This is because it takes pedestrians longer to cross the street. Further, these roads have higher speed limits (between 35 and 40) which reduces pedestrian visibility and increase risk of severe injury or fatality in the case of a collision. The 2004 General Plan classifies Azusa Avenue (CA-39) north of the Foothill Freeway (I-210), Cerritos Avenue south of I-210, Citrus Avenue north of Alosta Avenue, Vincent Avenue south of Gladstone Street, Sierra Madre Avenue west of Vosburg Drive, and Baseline Road, Todd Avenue and Gladstone Street within the city limits as Secondary Arterials. These roadways range from 2 to 4 lanes, though 4 lanes are most common. This width makes pedestrian infrastructure particularly important to increasing pedestrian comfort and safety. The speed limits on these streets range from 35 to 45; these high speeds increase risk to pedestrians. The final classification provided by the General Plan is collector. Vernon Avenue, San Gabriel Avenue, Alameda Avenue, Cerritos Avenue north of Baseline Road, and 5th Street and 9th Street are classified as collectors. These roadways have between 2 and 4 lanes, though 2 lanes are most common. The streets have speed limits ranging from 25 to 30. Reduced speeds and fewer lanes makes collectors more comfortable for pedestrians than more heavily traveled, wider roads. Other streets in Azusa are not classified in the General Plan and are considered local streets with a higher frequency of residences. Figure 4 shows road classifications and number of lanes. Signals The City of Azusa’s traffic signals fall primarily on Primary and Secondary Arterials, as well as Collectors. Figure 5 shows the location of traffic signals. The location and spacing of signals effects pedestrian safety. This is especially true on wide or heavily traveled streets, as pedestrians rely on signals to cross safely. If there is significant distance between signals on a heavily traveled road, pedestrians either have to walk significantly further to get to their destination or will choose to cross at a non-signalized point, which greatly increases risk. There is approximately a half mile between signals on Arrow Highway, for example, which makes it less pedestrian-friendly. Signals on the western portion of Gladstone Street and southern portion of Citrus Avenue also lack frequent signals. Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum 6 Bicycle Facilities Azusa has a variety of bicycle facilities. It has one Class I Bike Path, the San Gabriel River Trail, which traverses the San Gabriel Mountain foothills from the San Gabriel Canyon Gateway Center, along the San Gabriel River past the city limit to Seal beach and the Pacific Ocean. It is 38-miles in length total, with approximately 2.6 miles falling within Azusa. Class II Bike Lanes exist on Sierra Madre Avenue, 9th Street, Alosta Avenue, Baseline Road, Gladstone Street, Arrow Highway, Todd Avenue, Vernon Street, San Gabriel Avenue, Alameda Avenue, and Cerritos Avenue. Class III Bike Routes exist on 9th Street, Foothill Boulevard, 5th Street, Gladstone Street, Vincent Avenue, CA-39, Palm Drive, and Citrus Avenue. Bike lanes increase comfort for both pedestrians and bicyclists as they decrease the visual width of the street, encouraging reduced speeds, and create a wider buffer between vehicles and pedestrian infrastructure. Figure 6 highlights existing bicycle facilities. Land Use Mixed Use Industrial Commercial Residential Open Space Library City Hall Gold School Azusa GIS Data, jprado, 2021 Figure 3 Downtown Street Classification Library City Hall Gold School Azusa GIS Data, jprado, 2021 Figure 4 ] [ ][ ][ # *Indicates when the number of lane changes within the same Secondary Arterial Principal Arterial Secondary Arterial Collector Number of Lanes Lane Transition* Traffic Controls Traffic Signal Library City Hall Gold School Azusa GIS Data, jprado, 2021 Figure 5 Bicycle Facilities Class II: Lane Class I: Path Class III: Route Library City Hall Gold School Azusa GIS Data, jprado, 2021 Figure 6 Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum 11 2.4 COLLISIONS Between 2015 and 2019, there were 1,331 total traffic collisions in the City of Azusa, or an average of 266 a year. Eight of these collisions were fatal, and 69 resulted in severe injury. Collisions occurred most (24 percent) between the hours of 3:00 PM and 5:59 PM. This period is a peak commuting period with higher traffic volumes, increasing frequency of collisions. The most common primary collision factors for all collisions were unsafe speeds (35 percent), failure of automobilist or active transportation user to properly observe right-of-way (19 percent), and improper turning (11 percent). The primary collision factors for collisions resulting in fatality or severe injury (KSI) were unsafe speeds (19 percent), failure of automobilist or active transportation user to properly observe right-of-way (16 percent), pedestrian violations (14 percent), and those driver or bicyclist being under the influence (9 percent). Lighting conditions influenced crash severity in Azusa. Of total collisions, 69.8% occurred in daylight conditions and 4% occurred in dark conditions. Meanwhile, 49.4% of KSI collisions occurred in the daylight and 6.5% occurred in dark conditions. This discrepancy is particularly indicative of higher crash risk at night, given that fewer trips are taken during the night than the day. The corridors with the highest number of collisions were Azusa Avenue, Arrow Highway, and Foothill Boulevard. These were also the corridors with the most KSI collisions, with 1 fatality and 22 severe injuries. Most collisions (63 percent) occurred at or within 250 feet of an intersection. Of the 1,331 collisions, 84 (6 percent) involved at least one pedestrian. Of the 77 overall KSI collisions, 15 (19 percent) involved a pedestrian. This highlights the disproportionate risk faced by people walking. All Collisions Of all collisions, including all modes, the highest density occurred between 2015 and 2019 occurred in Downtown Azusa, between the Gold Line right-of-way and 5th Street on the north and south, and between Angeleno Avenue and Alameda Avenue on the west and east. The junctions of Citrus Avenue and Alosta Avenue, Cerritos Avenue and Arrow Highway, and CA-39 and Arrow Highway also experienced a high number of collisions. Figure 7 provides a heat map of collision locations. Pedestrian Collisions Pedestrian collisions occurred most (24 percent) between the hours of 6:00 PM and 8:59 PM. This is later than the peak period for all collisions, suggesting greater risk to pedestrians in dusk and dark conditions. The most common primary collision factors for pedestrian collisions were failure of motorists to yield to pedestrian right-of-way (39 percent), pedestrian violation of right-of-way (35 percent), and improper turning (4 percent). The primary collision factors for KSI collisions were pedestrian violation of right-of- way (69 percent), failure of automobilist or active transportation user to properly observe right-of-way (16 percent) and failure of motorists to yield to pedestrian right-of-way (13 percent). This suggests that pedestrian violation/error is more risky than motorist violation/error; this is likely due to increased vulnerability of pedestrians and midblock crossing which results in conflict between pedestrians and vehicles with higher speeds. Of total pedestrian collisions, 57% occurred in daylight conditions and 4% occurred in dark conditions. Meanwhile, 33% of KSI collisions occurred in the daylight and 7% occurred in dark conditions. The highest density of collisions involving pedestrians occurred at or near the intersection of Cerritos Avenue and Arrow Highway. The Foothill Boulevard corridor between San Gabriel Avenue and Cerritos Avenue, as well as the San Gabriel Avenue and Azusa Avenue (CA-39) corridors between 5th and 9th Street, had a high rate of collisions. This shows that Downtown Azusa held a disproportionate number of Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum 12 pedestrian collisions. The intersection of Citrus Avenue and Alosta Avenue, which falls on the southwestern corner of the Azusa Pacific University campus, also showed a high pedestrian collision density. Figure 8 provides a heat map of pedestrian collision locations. There were 15 pedestrian collisions that resulted in a KSI between 2015 and 2019. Five of these collisions occurred in Downtown Azusa. The primary corridors on which these collisions occurred were Arrow Highway and Foothill Boulevard, with 4 killed or severe injury collisions occurring on each. Figure 10 shows the location of KSI collisions. Bicycle Collisions The Azusa Avenue (CA-39) corridor and the Foothill Boulevard corridor held high densities of collisions involving bicyclists, the intersection of these holding the greatest density. The intersections of Cerritos and 3rd Street, Citrus Avenue and Alosta Avenue, and Azusa Avenue (CA-39) and Arrow Highway also held a high density of collisions involving bicyclists. Figure 9 provides a heat map of bicyclist collision locations. All Collisions (Motor Vehicle, Bicycle, Pedestrian) Library City Hall Gold School SWITRS, 2015-2019 Collisions Figure 7 Sparse Dense Pedestrian Collisions Library City Hall Gold School SWITRS, 2015-2019 Collisions Figure 8 Sparse Dense Pedestrian KSI Collisions Highest Level of Injury Killed Severely Injured <all other values> Library City Hall Gold School SWITRS, 2015-2019 Collisions Figure 9 Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Existing Conditions Memorandum 17 2.4 SOCIODEMOGRAPHICS Population Density The City of Azusa has a population density of approximately 5,200 people per square mile. Meanwhile, the population density of Glendora and Duarte is approximately 2,600 people per square mile and 3,200 per square mile respectively. As can be seen, Azusa is denser than its neighboring cities. This may, in part, be explained by the presence of Azusa Pacific University on Azusa’s eastern border. The block groups with the greatest density fall on the southern border of Azusa, south of Gladstone Street, and on the eastern border of Azusa along the Foothill Boulevard corridor near Azusa Pacific University. The areas with the lowest population density correspond with Azusa’s industrial and open space land uses, falling on the northern and western borders of Azusa. Figure 11 shows population density by block group. Median Household Income The median household income for the City of Azusa is approximately $60,200. The block groups with the highest median household income are in the northeastern portion of Azusa and in the southeastern portion of Azusa between I-210 and the Dalton Wash. Areas with lower density, in the northern and western parts of Azusa correspond with higher median household incomes. Figure 12 shows median household income by block group. Vehicle Access The average car ownership in the City of Azusa is two cars per household. Approximately 3.2 percent of households have no access to a vehicle. The block groups with the greatest percentage of households with no vehicle access are south of Gladstone Street between CA-39 and Cerritos Avenue, north of Gladstone Street between Citrus Avenue and the eastern city limit, and north of 4th Street between CA-39 and Cerritos Avenue. Figure 13 shows the percentage of households with no vehicle access by block group. 3.0 CONCLUSION The existing conditions highlighted in this report will be used to inform the creation of an Azusa Pedestrian Plan. These conditions allow a better understanding of locations with high pedestrian density in order to prioritize areas for pedestrian improvements. Population Density by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 10 Median Household Income by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 11 No Vehicle Access (% of Households) by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 12 76 Azusa Pedestrian Plan Appendix B: Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis B Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis 1 1100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201, Monterey Park, CA 91754 T: (323) 260-4703 | F: (323) 260-4705 | www.koacorp.com MONTEREY PARK ORANGE ONTARIO SAN DIEGO LA QUINTA CULVER CITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Subject: July 8, 2021 Carina Campos and Miguel Cabanas – City of Azusa Carlos Velásquez and Raquel Jimenez – KOA Corporation Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis JC01124 The Azusa Pedestrian Plan (The Plan) aims to improve access and safety for people who walk in Azusa. The Plan will do that by identifying areas of most need and developing treatments geared toward improving the pedestrian experience and environment. As part of this process, a trip potential analysis was conducted to identify specific areas in Azusa that would be the most suitable for pedestrian improvements due to their proximity to pedestrian trip generators and sociodemographic characteristics, and should work towards increasing the number of walking trips throughout Azusa. 1.0 FACTORS To estimate pedestrian trip potential, seven factors were used to create a composite pedestrian trip potential score. Table 1 provides a description and justification for each of these factors. Table 1: Factors Considered in the Pedestrian Trip Potential Score Factor Description Source Justification Percent of workers that commute by walking The percentage of total workers 16 and over who commute by foot. 2019 ACS 5- year estimates People who commute by walking make consistent and reliable pedestrian trips. Because American Community Survey commuting trips make up only 15% of all trips, this factor is weighted half of others. Population density The number of people per square mile. 2019 ACS 5-year estimates Population density is associated with increased access to resources in walking distance, as well as traffic congestion. These characteristics make walking a more convenient and viable option. Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis 2 Percent below the poverty line The percentage of the block group population that falls below the federal poverty guidelines based on their household size (i.e. $12,490 for a household of one, $16,910 for a household of two). 2019 ACS 5- year estimates Poverty status increases the likelihood that an individual does not have access to a car, does not have the funds for the maintenance and operation of their car, or has other limitations to using vehicles. This increases the rate of walking. Percent within 1/4-mile of a gold line station of 500-feet of the intersection of two bus routes The percentage of land area within a block group that falls into the radius around transit stops. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Transit is more accessible to those who live near transit stops. People accessing transit most often walk to the stop. Transit stops, therefore, attract walking trips. Percent within 1/4-mile of a school The percentage of land area within a block group that falls into a ¼-mile radius of a school or university. County of Los Angeles GIS In California, 26-31 percent of students walk or bicycle to school. This generates consistent daily pedestrian trips. Percent within 1/4-mile of a local-serving commercial land use The percentage of land area within a block group that falls into a ¼-mile radius of a local-serving commercial use, such as a market, salon, restaurant, or other service, which is not a big-block store or major chain. Azusa General Plan, Fieldwork Local serving-retail is a destination that attracts pedestrian trips, as nearby residents can conveniently access goods and services. Excluding big-block stores and major chains accounts for the fact that these larger stores are more likely to be access by vehicle. Percent within 1/4-mile of a park The percentage of land area within a block group that falls into a ¼-mile radius of a park. County of Los Angeles GIS Parks are a local destination to which people are more likely to walk as they aim to achieve either physical activity or time outdoors. Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis 3 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 CENSUS DATA The following factors were retrieved from the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates: percent that commute by walking, population density, and percent below poverty line. Data was broken down by block group as it is the smallest geographic unit for which ACS data can be retrieved. This was preferred as it would allow the analysis to be conducted at the neighborhood level. 2.2 PROXIMITY DATA The proportion of each census block group that is within a specific proximity of known pedestrian trip generators was used to score transit, school, commercial land use, and park variables. Block groups that have a larger proportion near these trip generator locations are scored highest. See Figure 1 as an example for the proximity to schools factor. Figure 1: The area of each green buffer divided by the total area of the blue block groups gives the percentage of the block group that is within a 1/4-mile radius of a school. Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis 4 3.3 CLASS BREAKS Depending on their range of scores, each of the seven factors were broken into classes using Jenks Natural Breaks. Jenks Natural Breaks was selected, as this method effectively identifies natural clusters in the data in order to make each class more meaningful or distinct. Each of the seven trip potential factors were broken into 5 classes. Each class was then assigned a number from 0 to 4, with 0 being the lowest pedestrian trip potential score. With the school factor, for example, the block groups with the lowest percentage of land area within a ¼-mile radius of a school were assigned a score of 0, while those with the highest percentage were assigned a score of 4. 3.3 COMPOSITE TRIP POTENTIAL SCORE After each factor was calculated and scored, they were aggregated to create the composite pedestrian trip potential score. The weight of the seven factors was equal, aside for walking commute, which was weighted 50% of the others. The weight of this factor was reduced in order to avoid overweighting American Community Survey commuting trips, which account for only 15% of all trips. Given this weighting, the calculation was as follows: Pedestrian Trip Potential Indicator = (WalkIndicator*0.5) + (PopulationDensityIndicator*1) + (PovertyIndicator*1) + (TransitProximityIndicator*1) + (SchoolProximityIndicator*1) + (LocalCommercialProximityIndicator*1) + (ParksProximityIndicator*1) The resulting pedestrian trip potential score ranged in values between 3.5 and 25. These values were broken into classes using Jenks Natural Breaks and mapped using a gradient color scale. 3.0 PEDESTRIAN TRIP POTENTIAL RESULTS Pedestrian trip potential is highest near Downtown Azusa and to the south of Azusa Pacific University on the eastern border of Azusa. These areas likely scored highest due to their proximity to local serving retail and schools, as well as relatively high population density. The area between Azusa Avenue and Cerritos Avenue, on the west and east, and Mason Street and Arrow Highway, on the north and south, also shows high pedestrian trip potential. Theses areas likely scored highest due to their proximity to local serving retail and schools, as well relatively high levels of poverty. Figure 1 shows pedestrian trip potential score by block group. These areas, due to their proximity to local-serving destinations, population density, and sociodemographics, may attract a greater rate of pedestrian travel than other parts of Azusa. As such, these areas should be prioritized in active transportation infrastructure investments. Pedestrian Trip Potential by Block Group Low Medium High Library City Hall Gold School US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2019 Figure 1 77 Azusa Pedestrian Plan Appendix C: Prioritization Analysis & Framework C Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Prioritization Methodology 1 1100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201, Monterey Park, CA 91754 T: (323) 260-4703 | F: (323) 260-4705 | www.koacorp.com MONTEREY PARK ORANGE ONTARIO SAN DIEGO LA QUINTA CULVER CITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: July 13, 2021 To: Carina Campos, Matt Marquez, Carlos Hernandez From: Carlos Velásquez and Raquel Jimenez – KOA Corporation Subject: Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Prioritization Framework JC01124 Based on data collection and analysis, this memo sets forth the prioritization framework for the Azusa Walks! Pedestrian Plan. Factors such as pedestrian trip potential, collisions, existing infrastructure, and vehicle access were analyzed across Azusa’s street network and weighted to prioritize both street segments and intersections. The methodology for this prioritization is outlined below. 1.0 RECOMMENDED APPROACH To help inform the project identification process, intersections (major intersections and intersections of neighborhood significance – near parks, schools, community centers) and roadway segments (between selected intersections) will be prioritized separately. Select prioritization criteria has been chosen in order to streamline the analysis and provide clearer results. Table 1 and Table 2 reflects the criteria proposed for the intersection and roadway prioritization analyses. The existing Azusa street network will be scored into high-, medium-, and lower-priority groups. Locations of high priority will then be reviewed alongside prioritization subscores and stakeholder input to further identify project recommendations. By categorizing projects by their priority (high, medium, lower) rather than a numeric ranking, this methodology allows for flexibility in implementation and helps the City prioritize investments in the future. Prioritization of projects may change as new development or funding opportunities occur within Azusa, a reality that is better addressed through tiered priority groups than numbered rankings. The criteria shown on the following page will be used to prioritize Azusa’s pedestrian network to better identify locations for recommended improvements. Recommendations will primarily include infrastructural treatments such as crossing improvements and active transportation infructure. These treatments will work towards the goals of safety, connectivity, access, and equity in Azusa’s street network. Azusa Pedestrian Plan (Azusa Walks!) – Prioritization Methodology 2 2.0 PRIORITIZATION CRITERIA Table 1: Intersection Prioritization Criteria Criteria Measure Description Weight Safety Pedestrian Collision History Based on Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), intersections with the greatest density of collisions involving pedestrians Collisions that resulted in fatal or severe injury (KSI) will be weighted higher, with a weight of 3 versus 1 for non-KSI collisions. Highest Access Pedestrian Trip Potential Based on the Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis by Azusa Block Group, intersections in block groups with the highest pedestrian trip potential Medium Connectivity Distance from Signalized Intersection Based on GIS analysis, intersections that are furthest from signalized intersections, making them a more critical pedestrian crossing High Equity Vehicle Access Based on census data and GIS analysis, intersections in block groups with lowest vehicle access Medium Median Household Income Based on census data, intersections in block groups with the lowest median household income Medium Table 2: Roadway Prioritization Criteria Criteria Measure Description Weight Safety Pedestrian Collision History Based on Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), roadways with the greatest density of collisions involving pedestrians Collisions that resulted in fatal or severe injury (KSI) will be weighted higher, with a weight of 3 versus 1 for non-KSI collisions. Highest Access Pedestrian Trip Potential Based on the Pedestrian Trip Potential Analysis by Azusa Block Group, roadways in block groups with the highest pedestrian trip potential Medium Connectivity Street Classification Based on Azusa GIS data, roadways that are classified as primary throughways in Azusa, such as Principal Arterial, Secondary Arterial, or Collector Primary Arterials will have the greatest weight (having more destinations and traffic density, on average), followed by Secondary Arterial, and then Collector High Equity Vehicle Access Based on census data and GIS analysis, roadways in block groups with lowest vehicle access Medium Median Household Income Based on census data, intersections in block groups with the lowest median household income High Li tt le D a lton Wash Big Dal t o n W as h San D i m a s W a sh Littl e D a l t on W as h Azusa Walks! High Priority Segments MediumHighHighest City Limit Parks Commercial Land Use 0 0.25 0.50.13 Miles ¯ 9/8/2021 Sierra Madre Boulevar d Alosta Avenue Foothill Boulevard Baseline Road Gladstone Street Arrow Highway 9th Street Tod d Aven u e Ir wi n d a l e Aven u e Verno n Aven u e Az u s a Aven u e Ce r ritos Aven u e Ci t rus Aven u e 5th Street Sa n G a b rie l Aven u e San Gabr i e l C a n y on Road Al a m e d a A v e n u e Ro c k v a l e A v e n u e Ba r r a n c a A v e n u e Newburgh Street Li tt le D a lton Wash Big Da l t o n W as h San D i m a s W a sh Littl e D a l t on W as h Azusa Walks! High Priority Intersections MediumHighHighest City Limit Parks Commercial Land Use 0 0.25 0.50.13 Miles ¯ 9/8/2021 Sierra Madre Boulevar d Alosta Avenue Foothill Boulevard Baseline Road Gladstone Street Arrow Highway 9th Street Tod d Aven u e Ir wi n d a l e Aven u e Verno n Aven u e Az u s a Aven u e Ce r ritos Aven u e Ci t rus Aven u e 5th Street Sa n G a b rie l Aven u e San Gabr i e l C a n y on Road Al a m e d a A v e n u e Ro c k v a l e A v e n u e 78 Azusa Pedestrian Plan Appendix D: Proposed Recommendations D Azusa Walks - List of Proposed Pedestrian Recommendations Location Details Treatment Category 1st Add shade trees, south edge (Vernon Ave to Dalton Ave)Add Shade Trees 2 1st Add shade trees, north edge (San Gabriel Ave to Pasadena Ave)Add Shade Trees 3 1st 1st St, north and south edges (Orange Ave to Angeleno Ave)Add Pedestrian-Scale Lighting 2 1st Widen sidewalk, 1st St, north edge Widen Sidewalk 2 1st/Alameda North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Alameda SE Corner, add ped crossing or "stop ahead" sign as warning for fast traffic exiting the freeway Upgrade Signage 2 1st/Alameda LPI with increased walking time LPI 3 1st/Angeleno North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Cerritos All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Dalton North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Orange North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Orange South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Pasadena Across 1st, west leg of 1st St/Pasadena Ave Midblock Crossing (HAWK)3 1st/Pasadena North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/San Gabriel North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Vernon All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 1st/Vernon LPI with increase walking time LPI 3 9th 9th St (Soldano Ave to Pasadena Ave)Add Sidewalk 2 9th/Alameda All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 9th/Alameda NW corner 9th St/Alameda Ave, Into 9th St and Alameda Ave Curb Extension 3 9th/Alameda NE corner 9th St/Alameda Ave, Into Alameda Ave Curb Extension 3 9th/Azusa NE corner Azusa Ave/9th St, Into 9th St and Azusa Curb Extension 3 9th/Azusa All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 9th/Dalton All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 9th/Dalton SE corner 9th St/Dalton Ave, Into 9th St Curb Extension 3 9th/Dalton SW corner 9th St/Dalton Ave, Into Dalton Ave Curb Extension 3 9th/Pasadena All legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 9th/Pasadena NE corner Pasadena Ave/9th St, Into 9th St and Pasadena Ave Curb Extension 3 9th/Pasadena SE corner Pasadena Ave/9th St, Into 9th St Curb Extension 3 9th/San Gabriel SE corner San Gabriel Ave/9th St, Into 9th St Curb Extension 3 9th/San Gabriel SE corner San Gabriel Ave/9th St, Into San Gabriel Ave and 9th St Curb Extension 3 9th/San Gabriel All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 9th/Soldano North and south legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 9th/Soldano NE corner Soldano Ave/9th St Enhanced Intersection Lighting 2 Alosta Widen sidewalk, currently ~5 ft, north side (Rockvale Ave to Wash)Widen Sidewalk 3 Alosta Widen sidewalk, currently ~5 ft, south side (Wash to Fadi's Flower Place)Widen Sidewalk 3 Azusa Walks - List of Proposed Pedestrian Recommendations Location Details Treatment Category Alosta Add shade trees, north side (Rockvale Ave to Wash)Add Shade Trees 2 Alosta Add shade trees, north side (5th St to Raising Cane's)Add Shade Trees 2 Alosta Add shade trees, north side (Powell Ave to Barranca Ave)Add Shade Trees 2 Alosta Along Alosta Ave (Foothill Blvd to Barranca Ave)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs 2 Alosta/5th West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Alosta/5th Center median west leg Alosta Ave/5th Street Enhanced Intersection Lighting 2 Alosta/Barranca All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Alosta/Barranca NW corner Alosta Ave/Barranca, Into Alosta Curb Extension 3 Alosta/Calera South and East Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Alosta/Calera SW corner Alosta Ave/Calera Ave, add paint and bollards Tighten Turn Radius 3 Alosta/Citrus LPI LPI 3 Alosta/Fenimore South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Alosta/Powell South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Alosta/Rockvale South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Alosta/Rockvale SW Corner Alosta Ave/Citrus Ave, Into Rockvale Curb Extension 3 Arrow Arrow Hwy (Azusa Ave to Citrus Ave)Pedestrian-Scale Lighting 3 Arrow Along Arrow Hwy (Azusa Ave to Citrus Ave)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs 2 Arrow/Azusa SE corner Azusa Ave/Arrow Hwy, Into Arrow Hwy Curb Extension 3 Arrow/Cerritos NW corner Cerritos Ave/Arrow Hwy Curb Extension 3 Azusa Azusa Ave (4th St to 11th St) Both sides, enhance shade Add Shade Trees 2 Azusa Azusa Ave (4th St to 11th St)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs 2 Azusa Add shade trees, east and west edges (CA-210 to Arrow Hwy)Add Shade Trees 2 Azusa Improve sidewalk, not accessible due to poles (Russell Street to Arrow Hwy)Improve Sidewalk 1 Azusa Midblock across Azusa Ave at Target egress High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Azusa Midblock across Azusa Ave at Quiznos High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/10th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/10th NW corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/10th NE corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/10th SW corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/10th SE corner Azusa Ave/10th St, Into Azusa and 10th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/11th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/11th NW corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension 3 Azusa Walks - List of Proposed Pedestrian Recommendations Location Details Treatment Category Azusa/11th NE corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/11th SW corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/11th SE corner Azusa Ave/11th St, Into Azusa and 11th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/1st LPI with increased walking time LPI 3 Azusa/1st All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/4th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/4th NW Corner Azusa Ave/4th St into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/4th NE Corner Azusa Ave/4th St, into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/4th SW Corner Azusa Ave/4th St into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/4th SE Corner Azusa Ave/4th St into Azusa and 4th Curb Extension 3 Azusa/5th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/5th SW Corner Azusa Ave/5th Street into Azusa Curb Extension 3 Azusa/Azusa East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/EB CA-210 Off-ramp West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/EB CA-210 On-ramp East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/EB CA-210 On-ramp West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/Foothill All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Azusa/Foothill LPI LPI 3 Azusa/Leton North median between Azusa Ave and Leton Ave Curb Ramp 1 Azusa/Leton South median between Azusa Ave and Leton Ave Curb Ramp 1 Azusa/Leton Between medians High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/Newburgh All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/Newburgh LPI with extra walking time LPI 3 Azusa/Paramount All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa/Paramount NE Corner Azusa Ave/Paramount St into Azusa Curb Extension 3 Azusa/Roland Across Azusa Ave at the south leg of Azusa Ave/Roland St Midblock Crossing (HAWK)3 Azusa/Santa Fe East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Baseline/Citrus All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Baseline/Citrus NW Corner Baseline Rd/Citrus Ave Into Baseline Curb Extension 3 Baseline/Fenimore Add "Use Crosswalks" sign Upgrade Signage 1 Baseline/Fenimore North and West Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Baseline/Rockvale North and east legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Baseline/WB CA-210 On-ramp South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Baseline Add shade trees, both sides (Rockvale Ave to Citrus Ave)Add Shade Trees 2 Cerritos Cerritos Ave (Gladstone St to Arrow Hwy), 4.3 road diet Road Diet 3 Cerritos Add shade trees, east edge (Gladstone St to Arrow Hwy)Add Shade Trees 3 Cerritos/Gladstone South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Azusa Walks - List of Proposed Pedestrian Recommendations Location Details Treatment Category Cerritos/Gladstone North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Cerritos/Gladstone All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Cerritos/Gladstone NE Corner, add paint and bollards Tighten Turn Radius 2 Cerritos/Gladstone SW Corner, add paint and bollards Tighten Turn Radius 2 Cerritos/Gladstone Add Ped Crossing sign Upgrade Signage 1 Cerritos/Gladstone Consider closing NB and SB right-turn lanes to extend sidewalks Close Turn Lanes 3 Cerritos/Newburgh All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Cerritos/Newburgh LPI with more walking time LPI 3 Cerritos/Woodcroft Across Cerritos, south leg of Cerritos Ave/Woodcraft St Midblock Crossing (HAWK)3 Citrus Add shade trees, east and west edges (Foothill Blvd to University Dr)Add Shade Trees 2 Citrus Add shade trees, east and west edges (Clementine St to Arrow Hwy)Add Shade Trees 2 Citrus Foothill Blvd to Arrow Hwy Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs 2 Citrus/Armstead All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Citrus/Armstead NE Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension 3 Citrus/Armstead NW Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension 3 Citrus/Armstead SW Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension 3 Citrus/Armstead SE Corner Citrus Ave/Armstead St into Armstead Curb Extension 3 Citrus/Armstead SE Corner, potential relocation to NE corner Add Bus Shelter 2 Citrus/Baseline NW Corner Add Bus Shelter 2 Citrus/Clementine Across Citrus Ave at north leg of Citrus Ave/Clementine St to split large block and provide access to commercial uses Midblock Crossing (HAWK)3 Citrus/EB CA-210 Off-ramp All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Citrus/EB CA-210 On-ramp West Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Citrus/EB CA-210 On-ramp East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Citrus/Gladstone All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Citrus/Gladstone NW corner Citrus Ave/Gladstone St into Gladstone Curb Extension 3 Citrus/Laxford NE corner Add Bus Shelter 3 Citrus/Laxford SW corner Add Bus Shelter 2 Citrus/Mauna Loa All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Citrus/Mauna Loa SW Corner Add Bus Shelter 3 Citrus/Mauna Loa SE Corner Add Bus Shelter 3 Citrus/Nearfield South Leg, with ped refuge island HAWK 2 Citrus/University South and east legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Crescent Dr (south of)Ped Path in old rail ROW Mult-use Trail 2 Dalton Improve crosswalk at senior center High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Loren Ave to Vernon Ave)Add Shade Trees 2 Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Orange Ave to San Gabriel Ave)Add Shade Trees 2 Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Dalton Ave to Cerritos Ave)Add Shade Trees 2 Azusa Walks - List of Proposed Pedestrian Recommendations Location Details Treatment Category Foothill Add shade trees, north side (Alosta Ave to Citrus Ave)Add Shade Trees 2 Foothill Foothill Blvd (Loren Ave to Citrus Ave)Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs 2 Foothill/Alameda All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Foothill/Angeleno South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Angeleno East Leg RRFB 3 Foothill/Between Rockvale Ave Midblock across Foothill Blvd Midblock Crossing (HAWK)3 Foothill/Cerritos All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Cerritos SW corner Foothill Blvd/Cerritos Ave Into Foothill Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Cerritos SE corner Foothill Blvd/Cerritos Ave Into Foothill Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Citrus All Legs Pedestrian Scramble 2 Foothill/Citrus SE corner Foothill Blvd/Citrus Ave into Foothill Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Citrus NW corner Foothill Blvd/Citrus Ave Tighten Turn Radius 3 Foothill/Coney NW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Coney SW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Coney Upgrade current crossing, midblock across Foothill Blvd HAWK 3 Foothill/Dalton All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Foothill/Georgia North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Foothill/Loren NW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Loren SW Corner Foothill Blvd/Coney Ave into Foothill Blvd Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Loren Upgrade current crossing, midblock across Foothill Blvd HAWK 3 Foothill/Miller North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Foothill/Orange East, west, and south legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Palm East Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Foothill/Pasadena All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Pasadena NE corner Add Bus Shelter 3 Foothill/Rockvale South Leg Upgrade to Larger Stop Sign 1 Foothill/Sago North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Sago North Leg Upgrade to Larger Stop Sign 1 Foothill/San Gabriel NW Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 Foothill/San Gabriel NE Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 Foothill/San Gabriel SW Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 Foothill/San Gabriel SE Corner Foothill Blvd/San Gabriel Ave, Into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 Foothill/San Gabriel All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 3 Foothill/Soldano North and South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Soldano East Leg RRFB 3 Azusa Walks - List of Proposed Pedestrian Recommendations Location Details Treatment Category Foothill/Soldano West Leg RRFB 3 Foothill/Stein North Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Stein North Leg Upgrade to Larger Stop Sign 1 Foothill/Sunset South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 Foothill/Sunset SW corner Foothill Blvd/Sunset Ave Into Sunset Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Sunset SE corner Foothill Blvd/Sunset Ave Into Sunset Curb Extension 3 Foothill/Sunset West Leg RRFB 3 Foothill/Vernon North and East Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Foothill/Vernon SE corner at existing crosswalk Curb Ramp 1 Foothill/Virginia East and South Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 2 Renwick Rd (south of)Pedestrian Path in LADWP ROW Mult-use Trail 3 San Gabriel San Gabriel Ave (9th St to 2nd St)Road Diet 2 San Gabriel/2nd North Leg RRFB 2 San Gabriel/2nd East and West Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 San Gabriel/2nd NE corner San Gabriel/2nd Into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/2nd SE corner San Gabriel/2nd Into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/3rd All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 San Gabriel/3rd NW corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/3rd NE corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/3rd SW corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/3rd SE corner San Gabriel Ave/3rd St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/4th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 San Gabriel/4th NW corner San Gabriel Ave/4th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/4th NE corner San Gabriel Ave/4th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/5th All Legs High Visibility Crosswalks 1 San Gabriel/5th NW corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/5th NE corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/5th SW corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/5th SE corner San Gabriel Ave/5th St into San Gabriel Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/5th Add additional one way sign on westside lights, visible from east leg Upgrade Signage 1 San Gabriel/6th NW corner San Gabriel Ave/6th St into San Gabriel and 6th Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/6th NE corner San Gabriel Ave/6th St into San Gabriel and 6th Curb Extension 3 San Gabriel/6th East, West, and South Leg High Visibility Crosswalks 1 San Gabriel/6th Increase size and lighting of one way sign Upgrade Signage 1 Azusa Pedestrian Plan Appendix E: Proposed Recommendations (cost estimates) E ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL STREET LIGHTING INSTALL PEDESTRIAN STREET LIGHTING (INCLUDING PULL BOX, CONDUIT, AND WIRING; 50' POLE SPACING ON BOTH SIDES OF STREET)40 EA $10,000 $400,000 $400,000 SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL SIGN 2 EA $500 $1,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 24 EA $2,000 $48,000 $49,000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFY SIGNAL TIMING (LPI)1 LS $15,000 $15,000 INSTALL MIDBLOCK CROSSING (HAWK)1 LS $300,000 $300,000 $315,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS INSTALL SIDEWALK (WIDENING)14400 SF $14 $201,600 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION 1 EA $50,000 $50,000 INSTALL SHADE TREE WITH GRATE (25' SPACING)204 EA $2,000 $408,000 $659,600 $1,423,600 $99,652 $69,400 $15,000 $170,832 $85,416 $56,944 $15,000 $142,360 $498,769 $2,576,973 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION CITY OF AZUSA 1ST STREET - VERNON AVENUE TO ROCKVALE AVENUE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: LOCATIONS: - ALAMEDA AVENUE (SE CORNER) - FENIMORE AVENUE LOCATION: -ORANGE AVENUE TO ANGELENO AVENUE TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN BASELINE ROAD - ROCKVALE AVENUE TO CITRUS AVENUE LOCATION: - FENIMORE AVENUE (NW CORNER) GRAND TOTAL LOCATIONS: - ROCKVALE AVENUE TO CITRUS AVENUE (BOTH SIDES) - SAN GABRIEL AVENUE TO PASADENA AVENUE (NORTH SIDE) STREET LIGHTING SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - PASADENA AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - VERNON AVENUE - ALAMEDA AVENUE LOCATION: - ORANGE AVENUE TO SAN GABRIEL AVENUE (NORTH SIDE) PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) LOCATIONS: - ORANGE AVENUE (NORTH & SOUTH LEG) - ANGELENO AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - SAN GABRIEL AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - DALTON AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - PASADENA AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - VERNON AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - ALAMEDA AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - CERRITOS AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - ROCKVALE AVENUE (NORTH AND EAST LEGS) - WB CA-210 ON-RAMP (SOUTH LEG) - CITRUS AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - FENIMORE AVENUE (NORTH AND WEST LEGS) ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL STREET LIGHTING INSTALL PEDESTRIAN STREET LIGHTING (INCLUDING PULL BOX, CONDUIT, AND WIRING)1 EA $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 22 EA $2,000 $44,000 $44,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT PCC CURB RAMP 1 EA $6,500 $6,500 CONSTRUCT DRIVEWAY 1 EA $8,000 $8,000 INSTALL CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK 320 LF $160 $51,200 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION 2 EA $50,000 $100,000 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION WITH SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (INCLUDES REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION OF POLES, FOUNDATIONS, MAST ARM, LUMINAIRE, VEHICLE HEADS, PEDESTRIAN HEADS, PUSH BUTTONS, VIDEO DETECTION, PULL BOX, CONDUIT AND WIRING) 3 EA $200,000 $600,000 $765,700 $824,700 $57,729 $69,500 $20,000 $150,000 $75,000 $50,000 $5,000 $82,470 $320,256 $1,654,655 TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY LOCATIONS: - ALAMEDA AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - DALTON AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - SOLDANO AVENUE (NORTH & SOUTH LEGS) - PASADENA AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - AZUSA AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - SAN GABRIEL AVENUE (ALL LEGS) SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - SOLDANO AVENUE TO PASADENA AVENUE (SOUTH SIDE) LOCATIONS: - SAN GABRIEL AVENUE (SE CORNER) - AZUSA AVENUE (NE CORNER) - PASADENA AVENUE (NE CORNER) STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION LOCATIONS: - DALTON AVENUE (SW CORNER) - ALAMEDA AVENUE (NE CORNER) CITY OF AZUSA 9TH STREET - SAN GABRIEL AVENUE TO PASADENA AVENUE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATION: - SOLDANO AVENUE (NE CORNER) STREET LIGHTING SUBTOTAL: 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL STREET LIGHTING INSTALL PEDESTRIAN STREET LIGHTING (INCLUDING PULL BOX, CONDUIT, AND WIRING)1 EA $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL DYNAMIC SPEED WARNING SIGN (SOLAR)1 EA $10,000 $10,000 CONSTRUCT CURB TIGHTENING (STRIPING AND BOLLARDS)1 EA $5,000 $5,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 10 EA $2,000 $20,000 $35,000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFY SIGNAL TIMING (LPI)1 LS $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS INSTALL SIDEWALK (WIDENING)7750 SF $14 $108,500 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION 1 EA $50,000 $50,000 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION WITH SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (INCLUDES REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION OF POLES, FOUNDATIONS, MAST ARM, LUMINAIRE, VEHICLE HEADS, PEDESTRIAN HEADS, PUSH BUTTONS, VIDEO DETECTION, PULL BOX, CONDUIT AND WIRING) 1 EA $200,000 $200,000 INSTALL SHADE TREE WITH GRATE (25' SPACING)129 EA $2,000 $258,000 $616,500 $681,500 $47,705 $12,000 $20,000 $168,000 $84,000 $56,000 $5,000 $68,150 $274,165 $1,416,520 LOCATIONS: - 5TH STREET (WEST LEG) - ROCKVALE AVENUE (SOUTH LEG) - FENIMORE AVENUE (SOUTH LEG) - POWELL AVENUE (SOUTH LEG) - CALERA AVENUE (SOUTH AND EAST LEGS) - BARRANCA AVENUE (ALL LEGS) LOCATIONS: - CALERA AVENUE (SW CORNER) LOCATIONS: - CALERA AVENUE LOCATIONS: - FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO BARRANCA AVENUE CITY OF AZUSA ALOSTA AVENUE - FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO BARRANCA AVENUE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATION: - 5TH STREET (CENTER MEDIAN WEST LEG) STREET LIGHTING SUBTOTAL: TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - CITRUS AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - LITTLE DALTON WASH TO FADI'S FLOWER PLACE - ROCKVALE AVENUE TO LITTLE DALTON WASH LOCATIONS: - 5TH STREET TO RAISING CANE'S (NORTH SIDE) - ROCKVALE AVENUE TO LITTLE DALTON WASH (NORTH SIDE) - POWELL AVENUE TO BARRANCA AVENUE (NORTH SIDE) STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION LOCATIONS: - CITRUS AVENUE (SW CORNER) 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL STREET LIGHTING INSTALL PEDESTRIAN STREET LIGHTING (INCLUDING PULL BOX, CONDUIT, AND WIRING; 50' POLE SPACING ON BOTH SIDES OF STREET)104 EA $10,000 $1,040,000 $1,040,000 SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL DYNAMIC SPEED WARNING SIGN (SOLAR)1 EA $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION WITH SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (INCLUDES REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION OF POLES, FOUNDATIONS, MAST ARM, LUMINAIRE, VEHICLE HEADS, PEDESTRIAN HEADS, PUSH BUTTONS, VIDEO DETECTION, PULL BOX, CONDUIT AND WIRING) 2 EA $200,000 $400,000 $400,000 $1,450,000 $101,500 $23,000 $10,000 $174,000 $87,000 $58,000 $10,000 $145,000 $494,040 $2,552,540 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATIONS: - CERRITOS AVENUE (NW CORNER) - AZUSA AVENUE (SW CORNER) CITY OF AZUSA ARROW HIGHWAY - AZUSA AVENUE TO CITRUS AVENUE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATION: -ORANGE AVENUE TO ANGELENO AVENUE STREET LIGHTING SUBTOTAL: LOCATIONS: - AZUSA AVENUE TO CITRUS AVENUE ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL DYNAMIC SPEED WARNING SIGN (SOLAR)1 EA $10,000 $10,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 44 EA $2,000 $88,000 $98,000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFY SIGNAL TIMING (LPI)1 LS $60,000 $60,000 INSTALL MIDBLOCK CROSSING (HAWK)1 LS $300,000 $300,000 $360,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS INSTALL SIDEWALK (WIDENING)930 SF $14 $13,020 CONSTRUCT PCC CURB RAMP 2 EA $6,500 $13,000 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION 8 EA $50,000 $400,000 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION WITH SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (INCLUDES REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION OF POLES, FOUNDATIONS, MAST ARM, LUMINAIRE, VEHICLE HEADS, PEDESTRIAN HEADS, PUSH BUTTONS, VIDEO DETECTION, PULL BOX, CONDUIT AND WIRING) 5 EA $200,000 $1,000,000 INSTALL SHADE TREE WITH GRATE (25' SPACING)732 EA $2,000 $1,464,000 $2,890,020 $3,348,020 $234,361 $192,200 $60,264 $401,762 $225,600 $112,800 $75,200 $334,802 $1,196,402 $6,181,413 LOCATION: - 10TH STREET (ALL CORNERS) - 4TH STREET (ALL CORNERS) LOCATIONS: - SANTA FE AVENUE (EAST LEG) - 4TH STREET (NORTH, WEST AND EAST LEGS) - EB CA-210 ON-RAMP (EAST LEG) - EB CA-210 ON-RAMP (WEST LEG) - AZUSA LANE (EAST LEG) - NEWBURGH STREET (SOUTH AND EAST LEGS) - LETON AVENUE (BETWEEN MEDIANS) - FOOTHILL BOULEVARD (ALL LEGS) - MIDBLOCK AT QUIZNOS - MIDBLOCK AT TARGET EGRESS - 11TH STREET (ALL LEGS) - 5TH STREET (ALL LEGS) - EB CA-210 OFF-RAMP (WEST LEG) - PARAMOUNT STREET (NORTH AND WEST LEGS) LOCATION: - RUSSEL STRET TO ARROW HIGHWAY (AROUND POLES) CITY OF AZUSA AZUSA AVENUE - 11TH STREET TO ARROW HIGHWAY PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATIONS: - 11TH STREET TO 4TH STREET SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - FOOTHILL BOULEVARD - 1ST STREET - NEWBURGH STREET LOCATION: - ROWLAND AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL LOCATION: - 11TH STREET (ALL CORNERS) - 5TH STREET (SW CORNER) LOCATION: - LETON AVENUE (NORTH AND SOUTH MEDIAN) CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY LOCATIONS: - 11TH STREET TO 4TH STREET (BOTH SIDES) - CA-210 TO ARROW HIGHWAY (BOTH SIDES) STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL SIGN 1 EA $500 $500 REMOVE AND INSTALL STRIPING (ROAD DIET)1 LS $44,400 $44,400 CONSTRUCT CURB TIGHTENING (STRIPING AND BOLLARDS)2 EA $5,000 $10,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 8 EA $2,000 $16,000 $70,900 TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFY SIGNAL TIMING (LPI)1 LS $15,000 $15,000 INSTALL MIDBLOCK CROSSING (HAWK)1 LS $300,000 $300,000 $315,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK AND MODIFY SIGNAL (REMOVE RIGHT-TURN POCKETS)1 LS $650,000 $650,000 INSTALL SHADE TREE WITH GRATE (25' SPACING)106 EA $2,000 $212,000 $862,000 $1,247,900 $87,353 $40,000 $20,000 $149,748 $74,874 $49,916 $10,000 $124,790 $433,099 $2,237,680 CITY OF AZUSA CERRITOS AVENUE - GLADSTONE STREET TO ARROW HIGHWAY PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATIONS: - GLADSTONE STREET TO ARROW HIGHWAY TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - NEWBURGH STREET LOCATION: - WOODCROFT AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: LOCATIONS: - NEWBURGH AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - GLADSTONE AVENUE (RIGHT-TURN EB) - GLADSTONE AVENUE (RIGHT-TURN WB) - GLADSTONE AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - NEWBURGH AVENUE (WEST) 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL LOCATIONS: - GLADSTONE STREET LOCATIONS: - GLADSTONE STREET (NE AND SW CORNERS) LOCATION: - GLADSTONE STREET CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY LOCATIONS: - GLADSTONE STREET TO ARROW HIGHWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL DYNAMIC SPEED WARNING SIGN (SOLAR)1 EA $10,000 $10,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 17 EA $2,000 $34,000 $44,000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL INSTALL MIDBLOCK CROSSING (HAWK)2 LS $300,000 $600,000 $600,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION WITH SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (INCLUDES REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION OF POLES, FOUNDATIONS, MAST ARM, LUMINAIRE, VEHICLE HEADS, PEDESTRIAN HEADS, PUSH BUTTONS, VIDEO DETECTION, PULL BOX, CONDUIT AND WIRING) 5 EA $200,000 $1,000,000 INSTALL BUS SHELTER 6 EA $25,000 $150,000 INSTALL SHADE TREE WITH GRATE (25' SPACING)644 EA $2,000 $1,288,000 $2,438,000 $3,082,000 $215,740 $47,000 $20,000 $369,840 $184,920 $123,280 $15,000 $308,200 $1,047,835 $5,413,815GRAND TOTAL LOCATION: - BASELINE ROAD (NW CORNER) - ARMSTEAD STREET (SE CORNER) - LAXFORD ROAD (SW AND NE CORNER) - MAUNA LOA AVENUE (SE AND SW CORNER) LOCATIONS: - ARMSTEAD STEET (ALL CORNERS) - GLADSTONE STREET (NW CORNER) CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY LOCATIONS: - FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO UNIVERSITY WAY (BOTH SIDES) - CLEMENTINE STREET TO ARROW HIGHWAY (BOTH SIDES) STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY CITY OF AZUSA CITRUS AVENUE - UNIVERSITY WAY TO LAXFORD RD PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATIONS: - FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO ARROW HIGHWAY 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) LOCATIONS: - UNIVERISTY WAY (SOUTH AND EAST LEGS) - MAUNA LOA AVENUE (NORTH, SOUTH AND EAST LEGS) - EB CA-210 ON-RAMP (WEST LEG) - EB CA-210 ON-RAMP (EAST LEG) - GLADSTONE STREET (ALL LEGS) - EB CA-210 OFF-RAMP (WEST AND SOUTH LEGS) - ARMSTEAD STREET (ALL LEGS) SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - NEARFIELD STREET (SOUTH LEG) - CLEMENTINE STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL DYNAMIC SPEED WARNING SIGN (SOLAR)1 EA $10,000 $10,000 UPGRADE SIGN TO LARGER SIGN 3 EA $1,000 $3,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 31 EA $2,000 $62,000 $75,000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)4 LS $30,000 $120,000 INSTALL MIDBLOCK CROSSING (HAWK)3 LS $300,000 $900,000 INSTALL PEDSTRIAN SCRAMBLE 1 LS $25,000 $25,000 $1,045,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT PCC CURB RAMP 1 EA $6,500 $6,500 CONSTRUCT TIGHTER CURB RADIUS WITH SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS 1 EA $150,000 $150,000 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION 8 EA $50,000 $400,000 CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION WITH SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (INCLUDES REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION OF POLES, FOUNDATIONS, MAST ARM, LUMINAIRE, VEHICLE HEADS, PEDESTRIAN HEADS, PUSH BUTTONS, VIDEO DETECTION, PULL BOX, CONDUIT AND WIRING) 6 EA $200,000 $1,200,000 INSTALL BUS SHELTER 1 EA $25,000 $25,000 INSTALL SHADE TREE WITH GRATE (25' SPACING)290 EA $2,000 $580,000 $2,361,500 $3,481,500 $243,705 $155,000 $50,000 $417,780 $208,890 $139,260 $20,000 $348,150 $1,215,428 $6,279,713 LOCATION: - SALDANO AVENUE (WEST AND EAST LEGS) - ANGELENO AVENUE (EAST LEG) - SUNSET AVENUE (WEST LEG) LOCATIONS: - CITRUS AVEUE (NW CORNER) LOCATION: - CONEY AVENUE - BETWEEN ROCKVALE AVENUE AND PALM DRIVE - LOREN AVENUE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT LOCATION: - CITRUS AVENUE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: LOCATIONS: - VERNON AVENUE (SE CORNER) LOCATION: - PASADENA AVENUE (NE CORNER) LOCATIONS: - ORANGE AVENUE TO SAN GABRIEL AVENUE (NORTH SIDE) - DALTON AVENUE TO CERRITOS AVENUE (NORTH SIDE) - LOREN AVENUE TO VERNON AVENUE (NORTH SIDE) - ALOSTA AVENUE TO CITRUS AVENUE (NORTH SIDE) STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: LOCATIONS: - SAN GABRIEL (ALL CORNERS) - CERRITOS AVENUE (SW AND SE CORNER) - CITRUS AVENUE (SE CORNER) LOCATIONS: - CONEY AVENUE (NW AND SW CORNER) - SUNSET AVENUE (SW AND SE CORNER) - LOREN AVENUE (NW AND SW CORNER) STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATIONS: - LOREN AVENUE TO CITRUS AVENUE CITY OF AZUSA FOOTHILL BOULEVARD - CONEY AVENUE TO CITRUS AVE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATIONS: - STEIN WAY - ROCKVALE AVENUE - SAGO LANE LOCATIONS: - ORANGE AVENUE (SOUTH, WEST AND EAST LEGS) - SUNSET AVENUE (SOUTH LEG) - ANGELENO AVENUE (SOUTH LEG) - SOLDANO AVENUE (NORTH AND SOUTH) - PASADENA AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - STEIN WAY (NORTH LEG) - CERRITOS AVENUE (SOUTH, WEST AND EAST LEGS) - SAGO LANE (NORTH LEG) - MILLER AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - GEORGIA AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - VIRGINIA AVENUE (SOUTH AND EAST LEGS) - VERNON AVENUE (NORTH LEG) - ALAMEDA AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - DALTON AVENUE (ALL LEGS) - PALM DRIVE (EAST LEG) - SAN GABRIEL (ALL LEGS) ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING UPGRADE SIGN TO LARGER SIGN 4 EA $1,000 $4,000 REMOVE AND INSTALL STRIPING (ROAD DIET)1 LS $76,000 $76,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 17 EA $2,000 $34,000 $114,000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)1 LS $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT CURB EXTENSION 14 EA $50,000 $700,000 $700,000 $844,000 $59,080 $92,000 $30,000 $101,280 $50,640 $33,760 $20,000 $84,400 $315,638 $1,630,798 10% CONTINGENCY 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: LOCATION: - 2ND STREET (NORTH LEG) TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) FINAL DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION LOCATIONS: - 6TH STREET (NW AND NE CORNERS) - 5TH STREET (ALL CORNERS) - 4TH STREET (NW AND NE CORNERS) - 3RD STREET (ALL CORNERS) - 2ND STREET (NE AND SE CORNERS) CITY OF AZUSA SAN GABRIEL AVENUE 9TH STREET TO 2ND STREET PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE LOCATIONS: - 6TH STREET - 5TH STREET LOCATIONS: - 9TH STREET TO 2ND STREET LOCATIONS: - 6TH STREET (SOUTH, WEST AND EAST LEGS) - 5TH STREET (ALL LEGS) - 4TH ST (SOUTH, WEST AND EAST LEGS) - 3RD STREET (NORTH AND SOUTH LEG) - 3RD STREET (WEST AND EAST LEGS) - 2ND STREET (EAST AND WEST LEGS) ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL STRIPING 5400 LF $2 $10,800 INSTALL SIGN 20 EA $500 $10,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 1 EA $2,000 $2,000 $22,800 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT PCC CURB RAMP 5 EA $6,500 $32,500 CONSTRUCT MULTI-USE PATH 1 LS $472,560 $472,560 $505,060 $527,860 $36,950 $13,500 $52,786 $105,000 $52,500 $35,000 $20,000 $52,786 $215,132 $1,111,514 PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: CITY OF AZUSA CRESCENT DRIVE - VERNONT AVENUE TO ANGELENO AVENUE PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN ITEM DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANTITY UNIT OF MEASURE UNIT PRICE ITEM TOTAL SIGNING AND STRIPING INSTALL STRIPING 30660 LF $2 $61,320 INSTALL SIGN 64 EA $500 $32,000 INSTALL HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS 8 EA $2,000 $16,000 $109,320 TRAFFIC SIGNAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS (PER LOCATION)2 LS $50,000 $100,000 $100,000 STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCT PCC CURB RAMP 16 EA $6,500 $104,000 CONSTRUCT MULTI-USE PATH (TWO-WAY CLASS I BIKEWAY FROM VINCENT AVENUE TO CITRUS AVENUE)1 LS $2,172,091 $2,172,091 $2,276,091 $2,385,411 $166,979 $53,000 $100,000 $286,249 $143,125 $95,416 $20,000 $238,541 $837,293 $4,326,014 PROJECT MANAGEMENT STORM WATER BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) 10% CONTINGENCY 24% INFLATION (3.4% PER YEAR @ 7 YEARS) GRAND TOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION CITY OF AZUSA LADWP ROW (VINCENT AVENUE AND NEWBURGH STREET TO CITRUS AVENUE AND BIG DALTON WASH) PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE SIGNING AND STRIPING SUBTOTAL: STREET IMPROVEMENTS SUBTOTAL: TRAFFIC SIGNAL SUBTOTAL: TOTAL FOR BASE BID ITEMS MOBILIZATION & DEMOBILIZATION TRAFFIC CONTROL, PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION FINAL DESIGN ITEM TOTAL 1ST STREET + BASELINE RD $2,576,973 9TH STREET $1,654,655 ALOSTA AVENUE $1,416,520 ARROW AVENUE $2,552,540 AZUSA AVENUE $6,181,413 CERRITOS AVENUE $2,237,680 CITRUS AVENUE $5,413,815 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD $6,279,713 SAN GABRIEL AVENUE $1,630,798 CRESCENT DRIVE $1,111,514 LADWP RIGHT-OF-WAY $4,326,014 $35,381,636 AZUSA WALKS! PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN ALL CORRIDORS PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE CORRIDOR GRAND TOTAL AZUSA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN | PRIORITIZATION & IMPLEMENTATION