Rochester Active Transportation Plan Draft

SEPTEMBER 2022
Active Transportation Plan

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: 1. Rochester Active Transportation Plan Final Draft (15020 : Active Transportation Plan Adoption)
F.1.b
City of Rochester Active Transportation Plan
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Project Management Team Jeff Feece, Rochester Parks and
Recreation
Matt Tse, City of Rochester Community
Jo Anne Judge-Dietz, Olmsted County
Development
Public Health
Dillon Dombrovski, City of Rochester Public
Josh Johnsen, City of Rochester
Works
Administration
Colin Harris, Alta Planning + Design
Karen Cohen, Pedestrian and Bicycle
Maria Wardoku, Alta Planning + Design Advisory Committee
Brian Morgan, Short Elliott Hendrickson Kelly Corbin, RNeighbors
Kevin Bright, City of Rochester Community
Development
Project Steering Committee
Lauren Jensen, City of Rochester
Aaron Buckley, City of Rochester Community Development
Barry Skolnick, Resident Marty Cormack, We Bike Rochester
Bradley Bobbitt, Rochester Public Transit Matthieu Lynch, We Bike Rochester
Brett Jenkinson, City of Rochester Public Mike Nigbur, City of Rochester Parks and
Works Recreation
Brett Ostby, We Bike Rochester Molly Patterson-Lundgren, City of
Cassy Greenwood, Olmsted County Public Rochester Community Development
Health Muhammad Khan, Rochester-Olmsted
Cindy Steinhauser, City of Rochester Council of Governments
Administration Nick Miller, Rochester Resident, We Bike
Dustin Morrow, Rochester Safe Routes to Rochester
School Ryan Yetzer, City of Rochester Community
Edward Cohen, Resident Development
Emma Miller-Schindelar, Rochester Sam Budzyna, City of Rochester Public

Community Development Works
Jarrett Hubbard, City of Rochester Steve Baumgartner, Pedestrian and Bicycle

Administration Advisory Committee
Jaymi Wilson, City of Rochester

Administration
2
Packet Pg. 12
F.1.b
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction Vision and Goals
This active transportation examines The project steering committee (PSC), City
the use of human-powered modes of staff, and project team worked together
transportation (primarily walking and to create the plan’s vision statement:
biking), and develops recommendations for
Active transportation provides equitable
improvement through future investments.
freedom of movement. Walking and
It guides future investments in places to
bicycling in the City of Rochester are
walk and bike.
primary modes of transportation that are
The City of Rochester created this safe, convenient, and enjoyable.
Active Transportation Plan to update
The goals guiding the plan are:
the 2012 Rochester Area Bicycle Master
Plan. Rochester has changed in terms of • Health: Invest in comfortable and
population, land use, and transportation enjoyable places for people of all ages
options since the 2012 plan was adopted. and abilities to walk and bike with
dignity year-round, especially in equity
Recognizing those changes and
priority areas.
anticipating future change, this Active
Transportation Plan identifies strategies • Equity: Invest in equity priority areas
based on residents’ needs and desires.
and transportation improvements to
Center equity in all parts of the project
foster a safe and healthy community process and maintain a focus of
with accessible connections between rectifying current and present inequity.
businesses, neighborhoods, schools, and • Safety: Center active transportation
other destinations. safety in all plans, policies, and
investments.
3
Packet Pg. 13
F.1.b
• Connectivity: People walking and and create more comfortable streets

bicycling can access everyday for pedestrians and bicyclists of all
destinations via low stress streets, ages and abilities.
sidewalks, and trails. • Every street and trail where people
• Resiliency: Create streets and trails are permitted to walk is part of
that make Rochester more resilient. Rochester’s walking network. To help
• Economy: Install walking and bicycling Rochester direct our limited resources
infrastructure as practical tools for to improve conditions on the walking
community prosperity. network, priority areas for walking
were developed using a combination of
Public Engagement five factors: demand, equity, land use,
traffic conditions, and crashes. Streets
Public outreach and engagement efforts in the downtown core generally have
for the Rochester Active Transportation the highest priority ranking, as well as
streets with higher speed limits carrying
Plan were designed to be inclusive and
higher traffic volumes.
interactive. Engagement was structured
• The plan developed a vision for An All
to inform the plan’s understanding of
Ages and Abilities (AAA) bicycle network
community needs and opportunities,
that would be designed to serve people
shape plan recommendations, and build of all ages and abilities, and come
support for the planning process and for within ⅛ mile (a 2-3 minute walk) of
plan implementation. major destinations. (See Figure 1) The
AAA Bicycle Network will be designed
Rochester residents said they want more to meet Rochester residents’ desire for
transportation options. Many people physical separation between people
want to drive less, and walk, bike, and biking and people driving motorized
take transit more often. People said vehicles on busier roadways. It also
designs for separation between people
they would bike more if there were more
biking and people walking where
separation between bikeways and motor needed.
vehicles, better connected bikeways,
• Using a combination of the prioritization
more bikeways, and more comfortable results, public input, and review of
crossings of busy streets. People said that opportunities in the City’s Capital
they would walk more if there were more Improvement Program, ten potential
nearby destinations, more comfortable near term projects were selected
crossings of busy streets, better lighting, for further analysis to accelerate
implementation of the AAA network.
clear sidewalks during the winter, more
Cost estimates for these ten projects,
sidewalks, and more shade.
along with cross-sections showing
further detail on three “do now”
Recommendations & projects, can be found in Appendix C:
Implementation Resources Implementation Resources.
• A design resource guide was developed • Key process and policy
as part of the Active Transportation recommendations around GIS and
Plan (see Appendix D: Design Resource data collection, public engagement
Guide). The document presents and communication, evaluation, and
guidance for local planners, engineers, shared micromobility were developed
and advocates to improve the in response to City team member ideas
walkability and bikability of Rochester and needs.
4
Packet Pg. 14
F.1.b
Executive Summary
Figure 1. Vision for the All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network
VISION FOR ALL
COUNTY RD 3 NW
31 AVE NW
AGES & ABILITIES £
52
BICYCLE NETWORK
75 ST NW
NW £
63 75 ST NE
R
V IS TA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAIR I E
DW
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
60 AVE NW
OA
PLAN
BR
South Fork
Zumbro River
55 ST NW
BICYCLE FACILITIES W
NE
RD N
Essex
50 AVE NW
22 AVE NW
Park
E RIVER RD
Existing facility, sufficient Northern
Hills Golf
48 ST NE
ER
Existing facility, repaving Course
W RIV
potentially needed 41 ST NW
37 ST NW 37 ST
Existing facility, AAA upgrade NE
NORTHE R N
W
VAL E CIR
potentially needed
RIV
CL
9 AVE N
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
ER
W CIR
R
YH
Planned AAA Facility RD N
E
IG
PK
NE
A
VA VIOL
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ON HIL
DR
KR-7
LL
Reservoir EY
LS
Reservoir
E LT
NW
W
19 ST NW R DR
N
D
R NW NW E
£
14
1 4 ST NE
7 ST NW Silver Lake Quarry Hill

7 ST NE Nature Center
3 ST N W Cascade
Lake
NTRY CLUB R CENTER ST E
DR SE
C OU DW COLLEGE VIEW RD E
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST SE
£ 6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
E
63 Soldiers
COLL EG
8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
Memorial
LE
FOX
VALLEY Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW
EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

SW 16 ST
MA
M RD Bamber SW IO
R
LE N
DOWNTOWN INSET MAP SA Zumbro Lake 16 ST S E RD
W
BROAD
South Park S SE
RD
11 A
OD 20 ST SW 20 ST SE
EL MAYO W O
TO VE SE
£
WAY AVE S
N
HI 52 PIN
LLS
DR E WO
3 AVE NW
NW OD R
D 15 SW
18 AVE S W
DS
RD S
E
AS
SI
EY
SI 30 ST SE
LL
YR
DR
VA
NW
COUNT
14 ST NE
BAMBER
14 ST NW
13 S T NW
11 AVE NW
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
BROADWAY AVE N
11 AVE NE
4 AVE NW
E
Sil
R LAKE DR N
ver Lake
45 ST SE
7 ST NW
48 ST SW 48 ST SE Gamehaven
7 ST NE Reservoir
£ CI
VE
52
ST BRIDGET RD SE
VI
CC
W SIL
ENTER DR NW 55 ST SE
16 AVE NW
6 AVE NW
Cascade Willow Creek

SIMPSON RD SE
Creek Reservoir
11 AVE SW
CENTER ST W CENTER ST E
16 AVE SW
11 AVE SW
6 AVE SW
11 AVE SE
£
COUNTY RD 8 SW
2 ST SW
63 Y RD 16 SE
South Fork COUN C OUNT
Zumbro River TY R
4 ST SE D1
4 ST SW 6 W
SW
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
Bear
4 AVE SW
3 AVE SW
Creek
BROADWAY AVE S
W 6 ST SW 6 ST SE
3 AVE SE
18 AVES
£ Root
COUNTY RD 20 SE
63
8 AVE SE
Soldiers River
Memorial Park
North Branch
£
14
Field 9 ST SE
Root River
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
¥
90
5
Packet Pg. 15
TABLE OF CONTENTS
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 16
F.1.b
01 INTRODUCTION APPENDIX A: ENGAGEMENT
Why Create an Active
SUMMARY
Transportation Plan? 9 Public Engagement Phase 1 A2
2
A Vision for Walking & Biking in Public Engagement Phase 2 A16
16
Rochester 11
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL
02 CONTEXT ANALYSIS
Community Engagement 15
Existing Conditions B2
2
Existing Conditions 17
Planning & Policy Context 20
APPENDIX C: IMPLEMENTATION
RESOURCES
03 RECOMMENDATIONS
Shared Micromobility C2
2
Street and Trail Improvements 24 Cost Estimates C6
6
Process & Policy Recommendations
Recommendations
MultiModal Street Cross Sections 14
32
32 C14
APPENDIX D: DESIGN RESOURCE

APPENDIX D: DESIGN RESOURCE
GUIDE
GUIDE
Packet Pg. 17
INTRODUCTION
01
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 18
F.1.b
Introduction
WHY CREATE Planning 2 Succeed: Rochester

Comprehensive Plan 2040 (P2S) estimates
AN ACTIVE an increase in 55,000 new residents and
TRANSPORTATION
50,000 new jobs by 2040. Status quo
projections show an increase in vehicle
PLAN? miles traveled of 50%; this plan aims
to reduce or eliminate the additional
vehicle miles traveled. Limitations such as
This active transportation examines adherence to compact growth patterns,
the use of human-powered modes of and constraints to capacity for roadway
transportation (primarily walking and expansions, as well as an expected 70%
biking), and develops recommendations for increase in downtown employment, will
improvement through future investments. require new solutions and means by which
It guides future investments in places to people move about the city. Rochester
walk and bike. cannot maintain current commute
patterns—or meet climate, livability, and
An active transportation plan creates a community goals—and accommodate city
opportunity for public agency staff to growth projections.
invite community members and elected
officials to come together to answer Historically, our roads have been designed
questions like: How can we make streets to prioritize the efficient movement of
safer? How can we make it easier for more automobiles, typically at the expense
people to walk or bike to get where they of all other users. Safe and convenient
need to go? How can our transportation bicycle and pedestrian travel is vital to
system support local businesses and the community’s quality of life, economy,
adapt to changing technology and travel public health, and resiliency. Active
habits? transportation facilities serve many
users in the community—for many
The City of Rochester created this
Active Transportation Plan to update
the 2012 Rochester Area Bicycle Master Safe and convenient
Plan. Rochester has changed in terms of bicycle and
population, land use, and transportation
options since the 2012 plan was adopted. pedestrian travel
Recognizing those changes and
anticipating future change, this Active
is vital to the
Transportation Plan identifies strategies community’s quality
and transportation improvements to
foster a safe and healthy community of life, economy,
with accessible connections between public health, and
businesses, neighborhoods, schools, and
other destinations. resiliency.
9
Packet Pg. 19
F.1.b
(often underrepresented) groups, non- prefer to live in a walkable neighborhood
motorized travel is the sole means of daily with a mix of houses, stores, and local
transportation to primary destinations in businesses. To achieve these outcomes, a
the City. Within recent years, studies of safe and reliable transportation network
access mobility and access gaps revealed must give residents walking and biking
limitations on travel choice primarily access to their daily destinations.
affecting low- and moderate-income This means recognizing the primary
neighborhoods, residents experiencing purpose of a transportation network is
mobility impairments, the elderly, and to connect people to places where they
workers of 2nd and 3rd shifts. want and need to go. Plans and projects
developed by the City must support
Safe, viable, and convenient
cohesive neighborhoods while retaining
transportation options that reduce
a mix of housing and transportation
dependency on auto ownership are crucial
options. In short, transportation must be
for reducing housing & transportation
better integrated with land development
cost burdens. In 2018, approximately 40%
patterns to reduce the dependency on
of Rochester households spent over 45%
personal automobile use.
of household income on the combined
costs of housing and transportation. An intentionally designed, well-planned
Availability of diverse and affordable active transportation system plays an
housing options in the community are essential role in supporting this objective.
shrinking. A holistic active transportation Additionally, it fulfills numerous core
framework increases the number of principles of the Rochester Comprehensive
affordable transportation options Plan: greater access to a wider range of
available to accommodate the mobility commuting options will provide residents
needs of an aging population and adapt with increased flexibility, reduced
to the changing travel and dwelling car dependency, and the ability to
preferences of younger generations. pursue a healthier lifestyle. This Active
Transportation Plan Update sets in motion
In 2015, Southeast Minnesota Association
a tangible, measurable, and achievable
of Realtors found that the majority of
mission for non-motorized transportation.
Rochester’s current residents would
10
Packet Pg. 20
F.1.b
Introduction
A VISION FOR WALKING & BIKING IN

ROCHESTER
The project steering committee (PSC), City staff, and project team worked together to
create the plan’s vision statement:
Active transportation provides equitable freedom

of movement. Walking and bicycling in the City of
Rochester are primary modes of transportation that
are safe, convenient, and enjoyable.
Goals and Objectives • Expand Safe Routes to School

infrastructure and non-infrastructure
The plan goals are presented in bold, and projects to every public school in
supporting objectives are shown in bullet Rochester
points that follow. The project goals were
Equity: Invest in equity priority areas
shaped by: based on residents’ needs and desires.
Center equity in all parts of the project
• Project Steering Committee
process and maintain a focus of
• Pedestrian & Bicycle Advisory rectifying current and present inequity.
Committee (PBAC)
• Study and eliminate existing disparities
• We Bike Rochester related to the ease and enjoyment of
• Citizens Advisory on Transit using active transportation in Rochester
• Sustainability & Resiliency Action Plan • Use MnDOT tools for identifying walking
and bicycling priority areas; focus
• Stakeholder Interviews investment on meeting the needs of
• Community Listening Sessions people living in high priority areas for
• Community Development rectifying inequities
• Public Works
Safety: Center active transportation
• Parks and Recreation safety in all plans, policies, and
investments.
Health: Invest in comfortable and • Create joyful places for people to walk
enjoyable places for people of all ages
and bike and that provide a sense of
and abilities to walk and bike with
personal safety
dignity year-round, especially in equity
priority areas. • Eliminate all fatal and serious injury
• Complete sidewalk gaps (especially on crashes involving people walking and
pedestrian priority corridors) bicycling
• Connect people to everyday • I.ncrease year-round usability of active

destinations via low stress active transportation network
transportation infrastructure
11
Packet Pg. 21
F.1.b
• Implement projects that center on • Create a continuous system of low-

active transportation safety; utilize the stress streets for active transportation.
following principles: This system also includes placemaking
opportunities and green stormwater
» Separate people walking and
infrastructure. These items particularly
bicycling from people driving and serve people using active and public
include appropriate signage transportation
» Design roadways to lower motor
vehicle speeds Resiliency: Create streets and trails
that make Rochester more resilient.
» Reduce roadway right-of-way
dedicated to driving • Study all programmed reconstruction
and resurfacing projects for
» Reconnect areas that have been
opportunities to add infrastructure
disconnected by dangerous
that mitigates climate change and its
roadway crossings
effects on people walking, bicycling,
» Increase signal timing to allow and taking transit
people more time to cross the
• Improve air quality for people walking,
street and priority over people
bicycling, and waiting for transit
driving
• Study new mobility options for their
• S
. horten pedestrian crossing distance ability to promote greater active
and reduce roadway width transportation and less reliance on
• Install demonstration projects that personal cars and single occupancy
focus on safety improvements vehicle trips
• S
. afety education programs for • Reduce transportation-related
motorists to help create a culture where greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
active transportation is valued and • Reduce impermeable area of public
supported streets; reduce right of way dedicated
• C
. ontinuous education for elected to driving
officials and public agency staff
promote buy-in for implementing the Economy: Install walking and bicycling
plan infrastructure as practical tools for
community prosperity.
Connectivity: People walking and • Demonstrate the benefits of active
bicycling can access everyday transportation to community members
destinations via low stress streets,
• Educate the business community about
sidewalks, and trails.
the social, environmental, and economic
• Investment in vital infrastructure is return on investment from active
led by residents living in priority equity transportation
areas. Vital infrastructure includes
• Complete the City Loop and other
elements that make the experience of
projects to strengthen active
walking more comfortable and beautiful,
transportation use downtown
such as green stormwater systems,
shade trees, lighting, benches, and • Engage surrounding neighborhoods
public artwork early in the implementation and design
process for future street projects
• Implement high priority bicycle
included in the active transportation
connections
network
12
Packet Pg. 22
F.1.b
Introduction
Priority Performance 6. Miles of sidewalk gaps on pedestrian

priority mapped corridors; miles of
Measures arterial roadways without dedicated
The following priority performance bicycling infrastructure
measures will help the City of Rochester 7. Number of new developments approved
track plan progress over time. with no off-street parking spaces or
fewer off-street parking spaces than
1. T
. ransportation-related greenhouse gas minimum
emission reductions
Recommended Progress Tracking Tools:
2. Miles of sidewalk installed; miles of
bikeway installed • Annual report to City Council and City
Engineer include important metrics
3. Percent of people who walk or bike to
such as annual active transportation
work
funding shown as a percentage of the
4. Pedestrian and bicycle involved total City’s transportation funding,
collisions and a comparison of annual active
5. Projects installed in potential high transportation funding compared to the
crash areas, as noted from the plan’s City’s overall budget figure
systemic safety analysis found in • Develop and maintain geographic
Appendix B (paired with evaluation of databases for bicycling and walking
these projects’ performance over time) infrastructure and key performance
measure statistics
Table 1. Key Terms
Term Meaning in this Plan
Walking Walking is an inclusive term that includes both ambulatory and

non-ambulatory modes. Walking encompasses all forms of mobility
devices, including using a wheelchair, cane, walker, or other mobility
device that allows the user to travel at human speed.
Equity priority Areas with high concentrations of people who are not white, have
areas limited English speaking ability, are seniors, lack a vehicle, identify
as having a disability, and/or have low incomes
Active Human-powered modes of transportation, primarily walking and

Transportation bicycling
All Ages and Bicycle trails and on-street lanes designed to be comfortable to a
Abilities bicycle range of bicyclists, including children, seniors, women, people with
facilities disabilities, people moving goods or cargo, people of color and low-
income riders
13
Packet Pg. 23
CONTEXT
02
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 24
F.1.b
Context
COMMUNITY • Gather input on walking, biking, and

rolling needs, opportunities, and
ENGAGEMENT expectations
• S
. olicit feedback on potential trade-
offs, recommendations, and priorities
Process Engagement activities were structured
Public outreach and engagement efforts in two phases. The goals of Phase 1
for the Rochester Active Transportation engagement were to introduce the
Plan were designed to be inclusive and project, inform the public on the plan’s
interactive. Engagement was structured vision and goals, and gather input on
to inform the plan’s understanding of the community needs and desires.
community needs and opportunities, Opportunities for public input included
shape plan recommendations, and build public events, listening sessions, a survey,
support for the planning process and for and an online interactive map. Public input
plan implementation. and the resulting recommendations from
the Sustainability and Resiliency Plan were
The main goals of public outreach were: also considered.
• Educate the public about the project Phase 2 invited feedback on draft
goals and timeline
recommendations and project
• Build relationships prioritization. Opportunities to participate
• Create a community-informed vision included an online survey and targeted
and shared understanding of vision and listening sessions.
goals
Figure 2. Opportunities for public input
15
Packet Pg. 25
F.1.b
Figure 3. Phase 1 Outreach by the Numbers

“I hope for more
street closures to
car traffic for more
pedestrian and
bike use.”
“I’m so glad this is

a priority!”
Highlights In Phase 2, members of the public were

asked to review maps showing the draft
During Phase 1, three major themes walking network prioritization results, the
emerged in public engagement: desire draft Vision for an All Ages and Abilities
for more transportation options, tension (AAA) Bicycle Network, and the draft
over transitioning to a multimodal AAA network prioritization results. The
transportation system, and desire for majority of survey respondents felt that
comfort and safety in public spaces. the prioritization results for both the
Pedestrian and AAA Bicycle Networks
Rochester residents said they want more
definitely or mostly accurately reflected
transportation options. Many people
the areas that are most important for
want to drive less, and walk, bike, and
walking and bicycling improvements. Nearly
take transit more often. People said
80% of those who bike or want to bike
they would bike more if there were more
said they will be able to reach all or most
separation between bikeways and motor
places they want to go when the AAA
vehicles, better connected bikeways,
Bicycle Network is fully built.
more bikeways, and more comfortable
crossings of busy streets. People said that For more information on the public
they would walk more if there were more engagement process for this plan, refer
nearby destinations, more comfortable to the Phase 1 and Phase 2 engagement
crossings of busy streets, better lighting, summaries in Appendix A: Engagement
clear sidewalks during the winter, more Summary.
sidewalks, and more shade.
16
Packet Pg. 26
F.1.b
Context
EXISTING heart disease and poor mental health.

The analysis of geographic differences
CONDITIONS in access to resources was overlaid on
other analyses to plan an equitable active
transportation system.
The Existing Conditions Memo in Appendix
B: Technical Analysis documents changes Where People Travel
to the physical and social environments
More than half of Rochester’s 510,000 daily
that influence walking and bicycling in
trips are under 3 miles, making them good
Rochester, highlighting demographic, land
candidates for conversion from driving to
use, and active transportation network
active modes. The highest concentration
changes since the 2012 Bicycle Plan. Major
of destinations for active trips is found
findings from the analysis are summarized
around downtown, the Kutsky Park
below.
neighborhood, 41st St NW & 18th Ave NW,
What’s Changed in Rochester Graham Park, Mayo High School, Rochester
Community and Technical College, Federal
The population has increased and Medical Center, and the Rochester
become more racially diverse. The median Recreation Center (Figure 5).
household income has risen at roughly the
same rate as the cost of living. Barriers to Travel
Downtown neighborhoods have added Factors that restrict convenient and
several full block urban infill developments. comfortable access to destinations
Future mixed use transit-oriented centers include major multi-lane roadways,
and transit supportive neighborhoods railroads, rivers, low intersection density,
have been added to the land use plan. and high impermeable (paved) surfaces.
Many miles of trails and bikeways have
Pedestrian and bicycle crashes make
been built since the 2012 plan.
up only 2% of crashes in Rochester, but
Geographic Differences in account for 39% of fatal and 14% of
serious injury crashes.
Access to Resources and
Health Lower stress bicycling facilities make up
most of the transportation network, but in
Based on demographic factors like income
many cases riders on lower stress facilities
and race, Rochester residents have
must make stressful crossings of multilane
different levels of access to resources,
roadways or travel significantly out of
political power, and mobility options. Some
their way to lower stress crossings. These
areas of the city have concentrations of
stressful crossings may discourage many
people with higher access, while other
people from riding at all.
areas have concentrations of people
with lower access (Figure 4). Areas where
people have lower access tend also to
have higher rates of health issues like
17
Packet Pg. 27
F.1.b
Figure 4. Social Inequality by Census Block Group
COUNTY RD 3 NW
31 AVE NW
EQUITY ANALYSIS
75 ST NW £
52
NW £
63 75 ST NE
R
V IS TA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAIR I E
DW
60 AVE NW
OA
PLAN
BR
South Fork
Zumbro River
55 ST NW
Most access to resources, W
NE
RD N
Essex
50 AVE NW
power, and mobility
22 AVE NW
Park
E RIVER RD
Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
ER
Average access to Course
W RIV
resources, power, and 41 ST NW
mobility 37 ST NW 37 ST
NE
NORTHE R N
W
Least access to resources, VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
9 AVE N
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
power, and mobility
ER
W CIR
R
YH
E
RD N
IG
PK
NE
A
VA VIOL
H
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
KR-7
DR ON HIL
LL
Reservoir EY
LS
Reservoir
E LT
NW
W
19 ST NW R DR
N
D
NW
R NW
E
£ 14
1 4 ST NE

3 ST N W Cascade
Lake
DR SE
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST SE
£ 6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
E
63 Soldiers
COLL EG
8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
Memorial
LE
FOX
VALLEY Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

W 16 ST
DS
MA
SW
MR Bamber IO
R
LE N
SA Zumbro Lake 16 ST S E RD
W
BROAD
South Park S SE
RD
11 A
O D 20 ST SW 20 ST SE
MAYO W O
VE SE
£
WAY AVE S
52 PIN
E WO
W
OD R
D 15 SW
18 AVE S W
DS
RD S
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
VA
COUNT
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
Willow Creek
SIMPSON RD SE
Reservoir
11 AVE SW
£
COUNTY RD 8 SW
63 Y RD 16 SE
COUN C OUNT
TY R
D1
6 W
SW
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
Root
COUNTY RD 20 SE
River
Park
North Branch
Root River
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
¥
90
18
Packet Pg. 28
F.1.b
Context
Figure 5. Concentration of Destinations
COUNTY RD 3 NW
ACTIVE
31 AVE NW
TRANSPORTATION £
52
DEMAND
75 ST NW
NW
R £
63 75 ST NE
E VI STA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
60 AVE NW
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
NW South Fork
BANDEL RD NW
I
65 ST NW PRAI R
DW
D Zumbro River
W RIVER R
OA
BR
PLAN
55 ST NW
CONCENTRATION OF
NE
Essex
22 AVE NW
E RIVER RD
Park
DESTINATIONS Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
Highest
50 AVE NW
Course
Lowest 41 ST NW
37 ST NW 37 ST
NORTHE R N
W NE
VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
W CIR
ER
R
Y
D NE
HI
PK
NE
AR
GH
KR-7 N HILLS D VA VIOL
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ELTO
R
Reservoir
DR
LL
NW
Reservoir E
W W Y
N
19 ST NW DR
N
R NW
£
E
14 14
ST N E
7 S T NW Quarry Hill
Cascade Lake Silver Lake
3 ST N W
CENTER ST E
DR SE
NTRY CLUB R
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST S E
W CI R C
6 ST SW 6 ST SE
COLL E GE
Soldiers
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
8 1/2 ST SE
LE
FOX
VALLE
Memorial
Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

W
M
DS Bamber 16 S 16 ST SE RI
A
MR T SW ON
LE Zumbro Lake
SA 11 A
BROAD
RD
W
South Park S
RD SE
V
D 20 ST SW 20 ST SE
E SE
O
MAYO W O
WAY AVE S
£
52 PIN
E WO
W
D 15 SW
OD R
18 AVE S W
RD S
DS
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
£
VA
COUNT
63
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
SIMPSON RD SE
Willow Creek
11 AVE SW
Reservoir
COUNTY RD 8 SW
Y RD 16 SE
TY
RD 1 C OUNT
6
CO U N
¥
SW
W 90
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
COUNTY RD 20 SE
Root River
Park
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
£
63
19
Packet Pg. 29
F.1.b
PLANNING & POLICY Parks and Recreation

System Plan
CONTEXT
The Parks and Recreation
System Plan (2016) provides
Rochester-Olmsted a comprehensive overview
Bicycle Master Plan of Rochester parks, natural
areas, and trails, and identifies system
The Rochester-Olmsted Bicycle investments over the next twenty years.
Master Plan (2012) was adopted An interconnected network of trails is
by the City of Rochester in 2012 identified as essential for making the
and identifies needed bicycling recreation system accessible for as many
infrastructure for improving connectivity users as possible. This plan characterizes
and usability of the bicycle environment trails as essential for providing sustainable
for both recreation and transportation transportation options, and to maintain
in the Rochester and Olmsted County the City’s commitment to active living and
area. The current Active Transportation environmental sustainability.
Plan is a direct update to this plan, with a
broadened scope of influence to include 2045 Long Range
all forms of active transportation. Transportation Plan
2040 Planning 2 Succeed Chapter 12 of the ROCOG 2045
Comprehensive Plan Long Range Transportation
Plan (2020) focuses on active transportation
The City of Rochester’s Planning 2 recommendations: regional systems of trails,
Succeed: Comprehensive Plan 2040 walking paths, and other features supporting
(2018) conceptualizes a city-wide pedestrians, bicyclists, and non-motorized
network of nodes and corridors—an travel. This plan addresses both Rochester
integrated framework of mixed residential, city limits and the greater Olmsted County
commercial, retail, office, and industrial area, highlighting infrastructure projects
uses connected by high-quality transit along specific corridors and facilities for
and multi-modal systems, supportive improved multi-modal connectivity to major
of pedestrian-centered infrastructure regional destinations.
and expanded transportation choices.
A significant portion of this plan Downtown Integrated Transit
accentuates the importance of Studies Reports
integrating land use with a complete
A series of five Integrated Transit
transportation network, where a multi-
Studies (ITS) Reports were prepared for
modal street system should enhance the
the Destination Medical Center (DMC)
vitality of both private and public realms.
Transportation & Infrastructure Program
The Active Transportation Plan Update is a
and the City of Rochester, supporting
direct response to several Core Strategies
and embracing the vision presented in the
for implementation of P2S.
Downtown Rochester Master Plan and the
DMC Development Plan.
20
Packet Pg. 30
F.1.b
Context
City Loop Study Non-Motorized

The City Loop Study (2018) Transportation Analysis
refines concepts described
The Non-Motorized
in the DMC Development
Transportation Analysis (2015)
Plan, recommending facility
technical memo summarizes
design, route alignment, and
the existing conditions for
implementation of the downtown
active transportation modes
City Loop. The City Loop envisions a
in Rochester, and constructs a foundation
world-class pedestrian and bicycle trail
for the recommendations of walk- and bike-
in downtown Rochester, facilitating safe,
supportive polices to be included within the
enjoyable, and healthy access throughout
updated Rochester Comprehensive Plan.
the Development District for visitors and
This analysis focused on the infrastructure
residents alike.
conditions affecting the amount of active
Street Use & Complete Streets transportation use and the quality of the
Study Report experience.
The Street Use & Complete
ADA Transition Plan
Streets Study Report (2018) is a
technical memo investigating the . he ADA Transition Plan (2013) identifies
T
proposed multimodal elements structural modifications necessary to public
of the downtown Rochester facilities to ensure programs, services, and
transportation system. This study activities are accessible to people with
identifies pedestrian, bicycle, and transit different abilities and compliant with ADA
enhancements to downtown streets, requirements. It specifically addresses
and incorporates urban placemaking pedestrian curb ramps, access to the right-of-
and Complete Streets principles into way, and accessible pedestrian traffic signals.
the design of a healthy, walkable, and The plan establishes a prioritization system
sustainable downtown realm. for the timeframe and location of facility
upgrades, which is incorporated into annual
DMC District Design capital improvement budget estimates.
Guidelines
Resolution Establishing a
The DMC District Design
Complete Streets Policy
Guidelines (2017) is a
comprehensive set of The Resolution Establishing a Complete
architectural and placemaking guidelines Streets Policy (2009) is an adopted ordinance
to help shape the growth of the DMC explicitly recognizing the needs of pedestrians,
District in a clear and consistent manner. bicyclists, and transit riders. This ordinance
Within these guidelines, design details prioritizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
are applied at three scales: the entire facility design in all roadway projects, and
Downtown District, streets and corridors, emphasizes the primacy of safety for all users
and individual sites and buildings. of the roadway, regardless of age, ability, or
mode of transportation.
21
Packet Pg. 31
RECOMMENDATIONS
03
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 32
F.1.b
Recommendations
Design Resource Guide The design resource guide includes seven

sections:
A design resource guide was developed
1. Introduction
as part of the Active Transportation Plan
(see Appendix D: Design Resource Guide). 2. Pedestrian Toolbox
The document presents guidance for local 3. Bicycle Toolbox
planners, engineers, and advocates to 4. Shared Use Trails
improve the walkability and bikability of 5. Enhanced Crossing Treatments
Rochester and create more comfortable
6. Network Connections and Supporting
streets for pedestrians and bicyclists of all
Facilities
ages and abilities.
7. Pedestrian-Bicycle Operations and
Planners and project designers should Maintenance
refer to this guide in developing the
infrastructure projects recommended by Figure 6. Example Graphic from Design
this plan, but they are not a substitute for Resource Guide
thorough project-by-project evaluation by
a landscape architect or engineer upon
implementation. Eye Level
4’ 6” - 5’ 10”
The design resource guide and (1.3 m - 1.7 m)
recommendations in the document are

for use on City of Rochester roadways.
Projects must not only be planned for
their physical aspects as facilities serving
specific transportation objectives;
they must also consider effects on
the aesthetic, social, economic and
environmental values, needs, constraints
and opportunities in a larger community
setting. This is commonly known as
Context Sensitive Design, and should
be employed when determining which
Shoulders
standard is applicable in each scenario. 1’ 10” (0.5 m)
All walkway and bikeway design resource Walking

guide in the document meet or exceed 2’ 6” (0.75 m)
the minimums set by the Americans Minimum Accessible Width*

with Disabilities Act Accessible Design 3’ (0.9 m)
Guidelines (ADAAG) and the Public Right of
Preferred Operating Space
Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).
5’ (1.5 m)
*At point of contact
23
Packet Pg. 33
F.1.b
STREET AND TRAIL

IMPROVEMENTS
Pedestrian Network Priorities
Every street and trail where people are
permitted to walk is part of Rochester’s
walking network. To help Rochester
direct our limited resources to improve
conditions on the walking network, priority
areas for walking were developed using a
combination of five factors:
“If I can walk to work
• Demand: areas where people live, work,
play, learn, shop, and take transit
(weighted at 26%)
downtown, get groceries
• L
. and use: areas where many people downtown, go to a gym
downtown, etc. then my
and destinations are close together
(weighted at 13%)
• T
. raffic conditions: streets with higher
speed limits and more lanes (weighted
family can live with one
at 18%)
• C
. rashes: locations where people driving
vehicle, rather than two.”
motor vehicles crashed into people
walking, and the crash was reported to of survey respondents (176 people) said
the police (weighted at 17%) that the walking network prioritization
• E
. quity: primarily areas with higher “definitely” or “mostly” accurately reflects
percentages of people with disabilities the most important areas for walking.
and lack of access to vehicles (this
factor also includes people with low Improvements to the pedestrian network
incomes, people with limited English- should include but go beyond what is
speaking ability, people over age 65, and required by the Americans with Disabilities
people who do not identify as white)
Act (ADA) to achieve universal access.
(weighted at 26%)
Universal access strives to do more
Streets in the downtown core generally than meet ADA requirements; it aims to
have the highest priority ranking, as incorporate accessibility into the core
well as streets with higher speed limits of the design, not as an afterthought.
carrying higher traffic volumes. Universal design creates environments
that function for everyone, where
Members of the public were asked to elements like lighting and decorative
review maps showing the draft walking paving serve not only an aesthetic but
network prioritization results. Over 70%
functional purpose.
24
Packet Pg. 34
F.1.b
Recommendations
Figure 7. Pedestrian Network Prioritization
PEDESTRIAN
COUNTY RD 3 NW
31 AVE NW
NETWORK
£
52
PRIORITIZATION 75 ST NW
NW £
63 75 ST NE
R
V IS TA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAIR I E
DW
60 AVE NW
OA
PLAN
BR
South Fork
Zumbro River
55 ST NW
PEDESTRIAN NETWORK
W
NE
RD N
Essex
50 AVE NW
PRIORITIZATION RESULTS
22 AVE NW
Park
E RIVER RD
Northern
48 ST NE
0-1 (Lowest) Hills Golf
ER
Course
W RIV
1-2
2-3 41 ST NW
3-4 37 ST NW 37 ST
NE
NORTHE R N
W
4-5 VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
9 AVE N
LE
5-6 VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
ER
W CIR
R
YH
6-7 RD N
E
IG
PK
NE
A
VA VIOL
H
7-8
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ON HIL
DR
KR-7
LL
8-9 Reservoir EY
LS
Reservoir
E LT
NW
W
19 ST NW R DR
N
D
9-10 (Highest) R NW NW E
£
14
1 4 ST NE

3 ST N W Cascade
Lake
DR SE
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST SE
£ 6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
E
63 Soldiers
COLL EG
8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
Memorial
LE
FOX
VALLEY Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

SW 16 ST
MA
M RD Bamber SW IO
R
LE N
W
BROAD
South Park S SE
RD
11 A
EL MAYO W O
TO VE SE
£
WAY AVE S
N
HI 52 PIN
LLS
DR E WO
3 AVE NW
NW OD R
D 15 SW
18 AVE S W
DS
RD S
E
AS
SI
EY
SI 30 ST SE
LL
YR
DR
VA
NW
COUNT
14 ST NE
BAMBER
14 ST NW
13 S T NW
11 AVE NW
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
BROADWAY AVE N
11 AVE NE
4 AVE NW
E
Sil
R LAKE DR N
ver Lake
45 ST SE
7 ST NW
7 ST NE Reservoir
£ CI
VE
52
ST BRIDGET RD SE
VI
CC
W SIL
16 AVE NW
6 AVE NW

SIMPSON RD SE
Creek Reservoir
11 AVE SW
16 AVE SW
11 AVE SW
6 AVE SW
11 AVE SE
£
COUNTY RD 8 SW
2 ST SW
63 Y RD 16 SE
Zumbro River TY R
4 ST SE D1
4 ST SW 6 W
SW
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
Bear
4 AVE SW
3 AVE SW
Creek
BROADWAY AVE S
W 6 ST SW 6 ST SE
3 AVE SE
18 AVES
£ Root
COUNTY RD 20 SE
63
8 AVE SE
Soldiers River
Memorial Park
North Branch
£
14
Field 9 ST SE
Root River
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
¥
90
25
Packet Pg. 35
F.1.b
All Ages and Abilities Bicycle
Network Vision for All Ages and Abilities Bicycle
Network
Existing Network
The plan developed a vision for An All Ages
Rochester’s bicycle network is composed
and Abilities (AAA) bicycle network that
of bike lanes and trails. Over the last ten
would be designed to serve people of all
years, approximately 20 miles of trails and
ages and abilities, and come within ⅛ mile
bike lanes have been built in Rochester.
(a 2-3 minute walk) of major destinations.
These active transportation facilities have
helped to close gaps in the network and In cases where the network does not
improve access to destinations citywide. directly connect to the destination,
traversing the last 1/8 mile may mean riding
While the bicycle network has grown, much
on a quiet residential street, or walking
work remains to make bicycling for daily
with the bike along a sidewalk for 2-3
transportation a viable option for more
minutes.
Rochester residents. In 2019, the median
trip distance in the City of Rochester
More than half of

was 2.9 miles. During Fall 2019 specifically,
about 510,000 trips per day started in
the City of Rochester; 80% of those trips
were made using a motor vehicle. Trips of
Rochester’s 510,000
three miles or less are considered to be
potential candidates for conversion from
daily trips could
driving to active modes. meaning that potentially be made
by active modes.
more than half of daily trips in Rochester
can potentially be made by active modes.
26
Packet Pg. 36
F.1.b
Recommendations
Figure 8. Vision for the All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network
VISION FOR ALL
COUNTY RD 3 NW
31 AVE NW
AGES & ABILITIES £
52
BICYCLE NETWORK
75 ST NW
NW £
63 75 ST NE
R
V IS TA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAIR I E
DW
60 AVE NW
OA
PLAN
BR
South Fork
Zumbro River
55 ST NW
BICYCLE FACILITIES W
NE
RD N
Essex
50 AVE NW
22 AVE NW
Park
E RIVER RD
Existing facility, sufficient Northern
Hills Golf
48 ST NE
ER
Existing facility, repaving Course
W RIV
potentially needed 41 ST NW
37 ST NW 37 ST
Existing facility, AAA upgrade NE
NORTHE R N
W
VAL E CIR
potentially needed
RIV
CL
9 AVE N
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
ER
W CIR
R
YH
Planned AAA Facility RD N
E
IG
PK
NE
A
VA VIOL
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ON HIL
DR
KR-7
LL
Reservoir EY
LS
Reservoir
E LT
NW
W
19 ST NW R DR
N
D
R NW NW E
£
14
1 4 ST NE

3 ST N W Cascade
Lake
DR SE
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST SE
£ 6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
E
63 Soldiers
COLL EG
8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
Memorial
LE
FOX
VALLEY Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

SW 16 ST
MA
M RD Bamber SW IO
R
LE N
W
BROAD
South Park S SE
RD
11 A
EL MAYO W O
TO VE SE
£
WAY AVE S
N
HI 52 PIN
LLS
DR E WO
3 AVE NW
NW OD R
D 15 SW
18 AVE S W
DS
RD S
E
AS
SI
EY
SI 30 ST SE
LL
YR
DR
VA
NW
COUNT
14 ST NE
BAMBER
14 ST NW
13 S T NW
11 AVE NW
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
BROADWAY AVE N
11 AVE NE
4 AVE NW
E
Sil
R LAKE DR N
ver Lake
45 ST SE
7 ST NW
7 ST NE Reservoir
£ CI
VE
52
ST BRIDGET RD SE
VI
CC
W SIL
16 AVE NW
6 AVE NW

SIMPSON RD SE
Creek Reservoir
11 AVE SW
16 AVE SW
11 AVE SW
6 AVE SW
11 AVE SE
£
COUNTY RD 8 SW
2 ST SW
63 Y RD 16 SE
Zumbro River TY R
4 ST SE D1
4 ST SW 6 W
SW
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
Bear
4 AVE SW
3 AVE SW
Creek
BROADWAY AVE S
W 6 ST SW 6 ST SE
3 AVE SE
18 AVES
£ Root
COUNTY RD 20 SE
63
8 AVE SE
Soldiers River
Memorial Park
North Branch
£
14
Field 9 ST SE
Root River
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
¥
90
27
Packet Pg. 37
F.1.b
Destinations connected by the network Prioritization

include schools, shopping/commercial
centers, parks, recreational spaces, major With the plan’s goals (health, equity,
employers, the downtown transit center, safety, connectivity, resiliency, and
hospitals and medical centers, libraries, economy) in mind, planned facilities and
and community centers. existing facilities identified as potentially
needing an upgrade or repaving were
The distance between parallel bikeways scored using a combination of five factors:
is ¼ mile or less in areas with more
residences and jobs, and ½ mile or less in • D
. emand: areas where people live, work,
play, learn, shop, and take transit
areas with fewer residences and jobs.
(weighted at 30%)
The network is made up of existing • L
. and use: areas where many people
bikeways, bikeways that were proposed and destinations are close together
in previous plans, and newly proposed (weighted at 5%)
bikeways based on public input, city staff • Level of Traffic Stress: streets where
input, and a review of the data on physical speeds, number of travel lanes, and
inadequate bicycling facilities make it
and social conditions for biking.
uncomfortable to ride a bike (weighted
The AAA Bicycle Network will be designed at 30%)
to meet Rochester residents’ desire for • Crashes: locations where people driving
physical separation between people biking motor vehicles crashed into people
biking, and the crash was reported to
and people driving motorized vehicles
the police (weighted at 5%)
on busier roadways. It also designs for
separation between people biking and • E
. quity: areas with higher percentages
of people with disabilities, households
people walking where needed.
without access to vehicles, people with
On some streets an AAA bikeway can fit in low incomes, people with limited English-
speaking ability, people over age 65,
the existing roadway space, while on other
and people who do not identify as white
streets, implementing an AAA bikeway may (weighted at 30%)
need to occur with street reconstruction.
The prioritization results (Figure 9) were
In Phase 2 engagement for this plan, shared with the public through the Phase
members of the public were presented 2 engagement process. Among those
with a map of the vision for the AAA who bike or are interested in biking, over
Bicycle Network (Figure 8), and then asked 75% of respondents (153 people) said that
how many of the places they want to the network prioritization “definitely” or
go would be easy to reach by bicycling “mostly” accurately reflects the most
when the network is fully built. Nearly important areas for bicycling.
80% of respondents who bike or want to
bike said they will be able to easily reach
all or most destinations. For more see “We need more
Public Engagement Phase 2 public input in
Appendix A. businesses on bike
routes for easy access”
28
Packet Pg. 38
F.1.b
Recommendations
Figure 9. Prioritization Results for the All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network
COUNTY RD 3 NW
ALL AGES & ABILITIES
31 AVE NW
NETWORK £
52
PRIORITIZATION
75 ST NW
NW £
63 75 ST NE
R
V IS TA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAIR I E
DW
60 AVE NW
OA
PLAN
BR
South Fork
Zumbro River
55 ST NW
AAA NETWORK
W
NE
RD N
Essex
50 AVE NW
22 AVE NW
PRIORITIZATION RESULTS Park
E RIVER RD
Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
ER
0-4 (Lowest) Course
W RIV
41 ST NW
4-6
37 ST NW 37 ST
6-8 NE
NORTHE R N
W
VAL E CIR
RIV
8-10 (Highest) CL
9 AVE N
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
ER
W CIR
R
YH
Existing facility, upgrade RD N
E
IG
PK
NE
A
VA VIOL
H
likely not needed
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ON HIL
DR
KR-7
LL
Reservoir EY
LS
Reservoir
E LT
NW
W
19 ST NW R DR
N
D
R NW NW E
£
14
1 4 ST NE

3 ST N W Cascade
Lake
DR SE
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST SE
£ 6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
E
63 Soldiers
COLL EG
8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
Memorial
LE
FOX
VALLEY Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

SW 16 ST
MA
M RD Bamber SW IO
R
LE N
W
BROAD
South Park S SE
RD
11 A
EL MAYO W O
TO VE SE
£
WAY AVE S
N
HI 52 PIN
LLS
DR E WO
3 AVE NW
NW OD R
D 15 SW
18 AVE S W
DS
RD S
E
AS
SI
EY
SI 30 ST SE
LL
YR
DR
VA
NW
COUNT
14 ST NE
BAMBER
14 ST NW
13 S T NW
11 AVE NW
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
BROADWAY AVE N
11 AVE NE
4 AVE NW
E
Sil
R LAKE DR N
ver Lake
45 ST SE
7 ST NW
7 ST NE Reservoir
£ CI
VE
52
ST BRIDGET RD SE
VI
CC
W SIL
16 AVE NW
6 AVE NW

SIMPSON RD SE
Creek Reservoir
11 AVE SW
16 AVE SW
11 AVE SW
6 AVE SW
11 AVE SE
£
COUNTY RD 8 SW
2 ST SW
63 Y RD 16 SE
Zumbro River TY R
4 ST SE D1
4 ST SW 6 W
SW
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
Bear
4 AVE SW
3 AVE SW
Creek
BROADWAY AVE S
W 6 ST SW 6 ST SE
3 AVE SE
18 AVES
£ Root
COUNTY RD 20 SE
63
8 AVE SE
Soldiers River
Memorial Park
North Branch
£
14
Field 9 ST SE
Root River
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
¥
90
29
Packet Pg. 39
F.1.b
Figure 10. All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network Near Term Projects
*Note: projects
are numbered in no
particular order
30
Packet Pg. 40
F.1.b
Recommendations
Near Term Projects The AAA Bicycle

Using a combination of the prioritization
results, public input, and review of
Network will be
designed to
opportunities in the City’s Capital
Improvement Program, ten potential near
term projects were selected for further meet Rochester
analysis to accelerate implementation of
the AAA network. residents’ desire for
In no particular order, these projects are: physical separation
• Elton Hills Dr from Assisi Dr NW to
Broadway Ave N
between people
• 7th St NW/NE from Douglas Trail to 11th biking and people
Ave NE
• Center St E from Zumbro River to 15th driving on busier
Ave SE
• 4th St SE from Broadway to 19th Ave SE
roadways and
• 16th St SW/SE from Salem Rd SW to 11th separation
Ave SE
• 11th Ave SW/NW from 14th St NW to 2nd between people
St SW
• 11th Ave NE/SE from 4th St SE to 14th St
biking and people
NE
walking where
• 16th Ave NW connection along Cascade
Creek needed.
• 3rd Ave SE from 6th St SE to Broadway
• 41st St NW from W Circle Dr NW to W
River Pkwy NW
See Figure 10 for a map of these ten near

term projects, as well as other projects in
the process of securing funding, design, or
construction.
Cost estimates for these ten projects,

along with cross-sections showing further
detail on three “do now” projects, can
be found in Appendix C: Implementation
Resources.
31
Packet Pg. 41
F.1.b
PROCESS & POLICY • Involve Public Works GIS staff in the

creation of future plans. Schedule
RECOMMENDATIONS check-in meetings between GIS staff
and the consultant team from the
beginning of the project.
Key process and policy recommendations • Create a “wish list” of data that have
not been created by the City or other
around GIS and data collection, public
agencies. Work through the list as
engagement and communication, interns or other staff are available for
evaluation, and shared micromobility data collection work.
were developed in response to City team • Coordinate regularly with the County
member ideas and needs. and ROCOG to facilitate data
sharing and create more efficient
ADA Transition Plan data collection, maintenance, and
Recommendations distribution processes for the region.
• Develop a standardized set of
• Reframe accessibility improvements
characteristics to collect for pedestrian
in terms of universal access. The plan
ramps, including characteristics needed
must also clearly communicate that
to prioritize ramps for improvements.
accessibility is a human rights issue. Go
beyond ADA to think holistically about • Dedicate funding to develop a
creating environments that work for all. comprehensive, up-to-date inventory of
pedestrian ramps, either via staff field
• Document all curb ramps, sidewalks,
surveys, automated data collection and
push buttons, and crosswalks within
analysis (e.g., PathVu, StreetScan), or a
the City. This detailed inventory will give
combination of multiple approaches.
planners and engineers information
about existing conditions and areas in
need of accessibility enhancements.
Public Engagement and
• Enhance connections at bus stop
Communication
transfer points throughout the system Public engagement and communication
for people with disabilities. These
recommendations seek to enhance
connections include walking between
forms of transit and walking to/from relationships with community members
destinations during a transit trip. and increase education about the benefits
of active transportation infrastructure.
GIS and Data Collection
• Build time into project schedules to
GIS and data collection recommendations update City communications about
focus on improving the City’s data project progress, benefits, and
other information. Involve other City
availability over time.
departments in this work to avoid
• Dedicate funding within consultant capacity issues with any one group (e.g.,
project budgets and City staff time Parks & Recreation, Public Works).
budgets toward developing new • Create a new staff role dedicated
datasets AND maintaining existing to community engagement and
datasets. communication. Focus on proactively
• Develop a data maintenance and collaborating with community
management plan for data created as members, especially underrepresented
part of this planning initiative. communities (e.g., people with
disabilities, people of color).
32
Packet Pg. 42
F.1.b
Recommendations
• Regularly report on transportation Network Development

benefits and upcoming projects to
City Council members and the public. Network development recommendations
Work with business owners and other focus on improving physical infrastructure
community leaders to share their
throughout the city and creating a
positive experiences with multi-modal
connected network for walking and biking.
transportation improvements.
• After completing the plan, host • Consider connections through and
educational sessions for relevant adjacent to parks when developing
agencies to support them in this plan’s network recommendations.
incorporating the plan in their work. This would enhance access to park
resources and contribute to a multi-
Evaluation functional network (e.g., one that serves
utilitarian and recreational demand).
Coordinated approaches to evaluation
• Integrate green stormwater
would quantify the benefits of active infrastructure within active
transportation and make a strong case for transportation projects, especially in
continued investment of staff time and flood control areas and downtown.
funding. • Explore future opportunities to apply
flood control funding to on-street
• Create an evaluation plan for Public
infrastructure projects that can improve
Works projects that allows staff to
green stormwater infrastructure.
measure and communicate the benefits
of active transportation and transit • Consider options for the City taking a
improvements. greater role in year-round maintenance
of more active transportation facilities,
• Create an evaluation plan to help Parks
perhaps by contracting to local small
& Recreation more systematically
businesses for snow removal and other
measure usage of and attendance at
operations.
Parks facilities and programming, which
could help to justify further investments • Include year-round maintenance costs
in active transportation infrastructure in project budgets.
and build resident support. • Prioritize the development of
• Evaluate on- and off-street parking infrastructure that provides high quality
supply, demand, pricing, and policy active transportation travel in winter,
history to identify potential parking including separated bike lanes.
surpluses throughout the city. Consider
the potential for district parking plans
and seek ways to disincentivize driving/ “If I could get to and
parking.
• Expand bicycle and pedestrian data from my destination
collection throughout the City to better
characterize the need for implementing uninterrupted by car
plan recommendations. Consider using
Replica or another data service for this traffic is something
information. This could provide more
information than expanding the network that would immensely
of physical bike counters throughout
the city. Incorporate findings within City incentivize me to bike”
communications.
33
Packet Pg. 43
F.1.b
Shared Micromobility Since Nice Ride’s closure, Parks &
Recreation has offered a bike share
Background program that allows community members
to check-out 8-12 conventional (and two
In 2016, Nice Ride opened a bike sharing
electric-assist) bikes from the public
service in Rochester, offering human-
library from May through October each
powered orange bicycles at two (and later,
year. In June 2020, Rochester entered
three) staffed docking stations in the
a new phase of shared micromobility
city. But by 2018, these docking stations
services when the City Council authorized
were closed: limited locations, hours, and
Lime, a private shared micromobility
ridership; a dearth of bike-friendly roads;
service provider, to offer electric scooters
a change in ownership of Nice Ride; and
and electric bikes. Lime has continued
advances in dock-less bikes, electric bikes,
to provide electric scooters and electric
and phone-based bike rental apps all
bikes since, with approval from the City to
contributed to the limited duration of the
continue operations (of up to 300 scooters
program.
and 50 electric bikes) through the end of
the 2023 season.
34
Packet Pg. 44
F.1.b
Recommendations
As the City assesses existing shared However, because shared micromobility

micromobility offerings and plans for can meet many private organizations’
future services, there are a number goals, opportunities for partnership
of critical considerations that will abound. Sponsorship on bikes, scooters,
help to inform the direction of shared or docking stations can drive brand
micromobility services in the City: awareness. Organizational memberships
can serve as a perk for employees and
1) Define Program Goals
can account for a large share of system
What does Rochester want from shared ridership and revenue.
micromobility? Establishing program goals
Public funding can come from the local,
can guide decision-making about how
state, and federal levels. Local funding is
to design, fund, and implement a shared
often the most flexible and can fill in gaps
micromobility program.
not covered by other revenue sources.
Common goals include: improve access to Local funding can also help address
key destinations; improve access to and community-specific goals, such as
from public transit; improve public health; improving equitable access to a local park
improve transportation system safety; or grocery store.
introduce new people to biking and other
3) Review Laws and Regulations
forms of non-vehicular travel; reduce
congestion; and reduce greenhouse gas An understanding of the legal landscape
emissions and other types of pollution will also inform program design. Municipal
(e.g., noise, water, particulate). counsel can provide insight on this front,
and insurance and liability coverage can
Equity is an overarching priority
help to reduce risks.
for program design and should be
incorporated into each specific program 4) Assess Existing Infrastructure and
goal. Pricing structures, infrastructure Infrastructure Needs
siting, and other program design choices
The existing conditions analyses
will influence the equity impacts of shared
conducted as part of this plan will form
micromobility.
the basis for understanding bicycle and
2) Evaluate Resource Availability pedestrian infrastructure in Rochester.
By leveraging these findings, Rochester
How much funding is available from public
can identify important infrastructure
and non-public sources? While some early
characteristics—e.g., network gaps,
shared micromobility programs were
protected bike corridors, areas of high
funded entirely by private organizations,
need—and use these to shape where
time has shown that public investment
shared micromobility services are
is critical to sustain an effective and
offered, as well as areas where additional
equitable program. This aligns with other
infrastructure is needed to support safe
modes of transportation, where public
and comfortable trips for all users.
investment complements user fees and
other funding sources.
35
Packet Pg. 45
F.1.b
5) Identify Program Parameters parking spaces; protected on- and off-

road facilities) into planned projects.
With clear program goals, an
• Quantify existing use and estimate
understanding of available resources, demand for shared micromobility
knowledge of the legal context, and services for the next 10-15 years.
data describing active transportation • Develop an implementation plan for
facilities, travel patterns, and related shared micromobility for adoption by
community characteristics, the City will the City Council.
be poised to make critical program design
decisions. Who will own and operate the Other Recommendations
program? How much public funding will • Hire a dedicated bike and pedestrian
be used, and to what ends? Will the fleet planner; participants identified this as
comprise human-powered bikes, electric- critical to the plan’s success.
assist bikes, electric scooters, or a mix • Continue collaboration between Public
of multiple device types? How will pricing, Works and Parks & Recreation.
service location, and program seasonality • Explore opportunities for better
promote equitable access and use? coordinating work that involves multiple
agencies or City departments.
Next Steps
• Require pedestrian facilities as part of
The above considerations will help to the development approval process.
shape a long-term vision for shared • Proactively identify grants to support
micromobility in Rochester and will inform bike and pedestrian projects that align
with this plan.
actions needed to realize this vision. As
the City begins this planning process, • Use demonstration projects as a way to
it will be critical to collaborate with build momentum for long-term change.
communities and residents impacted by • Encourage Parks & Recreation and
limited transportation access, as well other city departments to start piloting
as with relevant organizations (e.g., bike electric-assist cargo bikes as a way to
advocacy groups, health promotion non- reduce reliance on internal combustion
profits, transportation safety advocates). engine vehicles.
Working with Lime and Rochester’s Parks • Enhance options for downtown bike
& Recreation department to identify repair and provide amenities for bicycle
successes, limitations, and unmet needs commuters.
of existing shared micromobility programs
• Implement consistent wayfinding
will also be key. Short- and medium-term
signage for active transportation
actions include:
throughout networks; consider showing
• Convene a shared micromobility time in addition to distance.
advisory committee.
• Solicit public input around existing and
desired shared micromobility services.
• Integrate shared micromobility
infrastructure needs (e.g., device
36
Packet Pg. 46
This page intentionally blank
37
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 47
Recommendations
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 48
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 49
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 50
SUMMARY
APPENDIX A: ENGAGEMENT
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 51
PHASE 1
PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 52
F.1.b
Appendix A: Engagement Summary
SUMMARY “Biking is a terrific

way to get around!
Public outreach and engagement
I have really
efforts for the Rochester Active
Transportation Plan are inclusive,
interactive, and structured to inform
appreciated how
our team’s understanding of community
needs and opportunities, shape plan
much the City of
recommendations, and build support Rochester has
for the planning process and for plan
implementation. invested in creating
The principal goals of public outreach are: bike lanes on major
• Educate the public about the project
goals and timeline
roads through
• Build relationships downtown and
• Create a community-informed vision
and shared understanding of vision and maintaining the trail
goals
• Gather input on walking, biking, and
system.”
expectations
Three major themes emerged in
• S
. olicit feedback on potential trade-
offs, draft recommendations, and public engagement: desire for more
priorities transportation options, tension
over transitioning to a multimodal
Engagement activities are structured transportation system, and desire for
in two phases. The goals of Phase 1 comfort and safety in public spaces.
engagement for the project are:
The memo organizes community input into
• Introduce the project
the following categories:
• Inform the public on the plan’s vision
and goals • Priorities For Pedestrians
• Gather input on the community needs • Bicycle Facility Needs
and desires • Design
This memo summarizes Phase 1, beginning • Programs and Policies

by outlining opportunities for public • Maintenance and Operations
input on the plan. These included public
Phase 2 of public engagement invited
events, listening sessions, a survey, and
feedback on draft recommendations,
an online interactive map. Public input and
trade-offs, project prioritization, and
the resulting recommendations from the
implementation action steps.
Sustainability and Resiliency Plan are also
incorporated in the summary.
A3
Packet Pg. 53
F.1.b
OPPORTUNITIES FOR Listening Sessions
PUBLIC INPUT ON The project team met with community

groups to discuss their ideas and concerns
THE PLAN
in depth. These groups included:
• National Federation for the Blind,

Rochester Chapter
The public engagement process is focused
on achieving a broad audience and • disABILITY Mayo Employee Resource
Group (MERG)
reaching diverse communities. A project
steering committee made up of residents, • Citizens Advisory for Transit
public agency staff, and community group • We Bike Rochester
representatives provided input on public • Rochester Bike Summit
involvement strategies. In Phase 1, public • Rochester Pedestrian and Bicycle
engagement strategies included a survey, Advisory Committee
interactive web map, public events, and
listening sessions. Community voices from Survey
previous and concurrent engagement
Nearly 1,000 Rochester residents and
efforts were also included in Phase 1.
visitors took the project’s online survey.
Public Events The survey included optional demographic
questions that shed light on how closely
The project team partnered with the the survey respondents represent the
city and community organizations to residents of Rochester:
engage members of the public at events
• Disability: Of those who reported
throughout the summer of 2021, including:
a disability status, 11% identified as
• Safe City Nights having a disability.
• Rochester Farmers Market • Race and ethnicity: Of those who
reported a race or ethnicity, 87% of
• Thursdays Downtown
identified as White alone (not Hispanic
• Pata de Perro Community Bike Shop or Latino) and 13% as a race other
• RCTC Resource Fair than White. People who identify as
White alone were over-represented in
• Riverfront Reimagined
the survey, as they make up 75% of
• Mobility Fair Rochester’s population.
Residents and visitors had the opportunity • Home ownership: Of those who
reported home ownership status, home
to share ideas via a post-it note board,
owners were overrepresented in the
bean counting game, and/or informal survey, with 87% of respondents owning
interviews, depending on the type of their home. 66% of homes in Rochester
event. Regardless of the format, a central are owner occupied.
question was posed to individuals at each • County of origin: Of those who
event: W
. hat would make you more likely to reported a country of origin, people
bike or walk somewhere in the city? who were born in the United States
A4
Packet Pg. 54
F.1.b
were overrepresented in the survey, Interactive Online Map
comprising 96% of survey respondents
but 86% of Rochester’s population. Rochester residents and visitors left
• Age: People aged 18 to 24 were the 395 suggestions on the webmap, made
most underrepresented age group, at 91 comments in response to the original
3% of survey respondents but 11% of suggestions, liked the suggestions 1,544
Rochester’s adult population. People times, and disliked the suggestions 27
aged 25-34 were also underrepresented,
times.
at 17% of respondents and 21% of
Rochester adult residents. People
over age 74 were underrepresented,
Previous and Concurrent
at 4% of survey respondents but Engagement
9% of Rochester’s adult population.
People aged 35 to 44 were the most The project team incorporated findings
overrepresented group in the survey, from the extensive engagement process
at 25% of respondents and 17% of for the Rochester Sustainability and
Rochester adult residents. People aged Resiliency Plan. Engagement included
45 to 74 were also overrepresented. nearly 40 in-depth listening sessions with
• Gender: Of those who reported a community groups and individuals who
gender, 48% were female, 49% were reflect the diversity of Rochester, including
male, and 3% were Trans, genderqueer/ elders, immigrants, black people, people of
gender non-conforming, or other. 51% of
color, young adults, high school students,
Rochester residents identify as female.
people with disabilities, and more.
• Sexual Identity: Of those who
Members of the public also shared their
reported a sexual identity, 84% were
Heterosexual/Straight, and 16% were perspectives through a survey available in
Asexual, Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Queer, English, Spanish, Somali, and Arabic.
Questioning, or preferred to self-
identify.
A5
Packet Pg. 55
F.1.b
SURVEY FINDINGS “I walk or bike

everywhere year-
Why People Walk
round - rain, snow
Health (73% of respondents) and
recreation (67%) are the most common or shine.”
reasons survey respondents walk around
the city. Shopping or errands (39%) and
as past of a trip to work (24%) are also connected options for shared-use paths/
common reasons for walking. 15% selected trails” tied at 33%. 28% chose “Social
“other.” 20 of the 149 “other” responses equity, prioritizing historically-marginalized
mentioned dog walking. Many people communities (including low-income
noted that they walk when the distance to households, people of color, older adults,
their destination is short or when parking people with disabilities, etc.).”
is difficult.
Why People Bike MAJOR THEMES

The most popular reason survey
respondents bike around the city is Three major themes emerged in public
for recreation on regional trails (59%), engagement for this plan and the
followed by health (53%), for recreation Sustainability and Resiliency Plan: desire
on paved roads (40%), for shopping or for more transportation options, tensions
errands (24%), and as part of a trip to over transitioning to a multimodal
work (21%). 30% of respondents selected transportation system, and desire for
“other”, with the majority noting that they comfort and safety in public spaces.
do not bike. Further detail on community input that will
inform the development of major pieces of
Top Priorities this plan is found on the following pages.
When asked what four priorities Rochester

Desire for More
should prioritize in planning for the future
Transportation Options
of the City’s active transportation
system, 37% selected “transportation While the majority of survey respondents
options that support a sustainable city are satisfied with how often they use each
(address climate change, resiliency, mode of transportation, a significant
reduction in driving, etc.).” 34% selected portion of respondents want to change
“Improved safety for all modes.” “Improved how they move around. Thirty percent
maintenance of existing transportation want to walk more frequently than they
infrastructure”, “Safer, more comfortable, currently do, 40% want to bike more, and
and/or more connected options for 42% want to take transit more (Figure
walking and biking along roadways,” and 1). Thirty-five percent want to drive less
“Safer, more comfortable, and/or more frequently (Figure 2).
A6
Packet Pg. 56
F.1.b
Figure 1. Percent of Survey Respondents Who Want to Travel Key

by the Given Mode More Frequently Than They Currently Do
How Frequently Respon-
dents Currently Travel
Walk by the Given Mode
Daily or A Few
Bike Times Per Week
Rarely or A Few
Times Per Month
Transit
Never
Drive
Carpool
Thirty
percent
Motorcycle or
Scooter
Taxi or Uber of survey

0 10 20 30 40 50 respondents
want to
% of Survey Respondents Who Want to Travel by
the Given Mode More than as They Currently Do
Figure 2. Percent of Survey Respondents Who Want to walk more

Travel by the Given Mode Less Frequently Than They
Currently Do frequently,
Walk 40% want to
Bike
bike more,
and 42%
Transit
want to
Drive take transit
Carpool more. Thirty-
Motorcycle or
five percent
Scooter
want to
Taxi or Uber
drive less
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
% of Survey Respondents Who Want to Travel by
40
frequently.
the Given Mode Less than as They Currently Do
A7
Packet Pg. 57
F.1.b
During engagement for the Sustainability

and Resiliency Plan, many people shared
“I don’t bike - it
that they find it difficult to get around
Rochester without a car, and that they
is too dangerous
to bike on major
feel more socially isolated when they travel
by car. These sentiments were echoed in
input on the Active Transportation Plan; streets required to
as noted above, “Transportation options
that support a sustainable city” was
get a bike from my
the most popular priority among survey
respondents.
neighborhood to
Tension Over Transitioning to
the places I visit.”
a Multimodal System
Desire for Comfort and Safety
People shared widely diverging views on
whether the existing bicycle and walking
in Public Spaces
network is sufficient. While some feel People shared that they want to feel
that bicycle facilities are taking up space more connected to each other and more
that should be used to move and store comfortable in public spaces (including
motor vehicles, others feel that much while traveling along streets and trails).
more should be done to support bicycling. Many people biking have experienced
Some want people biking to share space harassment and aggression from people
with people walking, while others want driving. Some people of color feel
them to be separated. Sharing space is of uncomfortable in public space because
particular concern on downtown streets. they fear mistreatment based on their
race or ethnicity. Others feel more
Some people voiced concern over the
afraid of violent crime in Rochester than
feasibility of traveling by modes other
they once did. Poorly maintained active
than driving during winter months, while
transportation facilities and environments
others shared that they already travel by
contribute to a sense of discomfort.
active modes year-round.
There is general agreement about the
possible improvements that would make
“I live one mile from people feel more comfortable bicycling

in public spaces. Most people agree that
my evening job but bicycle facilities should be separated from

vehicle traffic where possible to maximize
don't feel it is safe comfort for all. To feel comfortable leaving
their bikes while going inside to work
to walk alone in the or shop, many people would like to see
dark.” more secure, covered bike parking that

is publicly accessible, especially in the
downtown area and near transit stops.
A8
Packet Pg. 58
F.1.b
INPUT ON PRIORITIES “I would walk more

FOR PEDESTRIANS if there were more
sidewalks, walking
Desired Improvements
paths to places
Nearly 30% of survey respondents want
to walk more often than they currently do. (not just around
neighborhoods),
One-third or more of these respondents
said that the following changes would
support them in walking more:
and more protected
1. More destinations near me
2. More comfortable crossings of busy crossings for
streets
3. Better lighting when it is dark outside
pedestrians.”
4. Sidewalks cleared after it snows
5. More sidewalks • People walking should have priority at
intersections in the downtown area.
6. More shade on my walking route
• Sidewalks are needed to access transit.
The top investment priorities among • People walking need access routes
people who are frequent walkers or want through construction zones.
to walk more are:
A few streets came up repeatedly as
1. Improve safety of roadway crossings for major concerns for people walking:
people walking and biking
2. Improve safety for all road users • County Rd 22 (W Circle Dr NW)
3. Improve winter maintenance of • 11th Ave NW

sidewalks and bikeways, including snow • 7th St NW
removal
• 65th St NW
4. Improve routine maintenance of streets,
• 2nd St SW and SE
including repaving
• 14th Ave SW
5. Build more sidewalks that are fully
accessible to people walking or • 20th St SW
including using a wheelchair, cane, • Broadway Ave S and N
walker, or other mobility device
• Viola Rd NE
6. Improve signal timing and coordination
• College View Rd E
Common Concerns • Highway 14
• There is not enough time to cross at

signals.
• Pedestrian call buttons are unreliable.
A9
Packet Pg. 59
F.1.b
INPUT ON BICYCLE Northwest

• There is an opportunity for a bicycle
FACILITY NEEDS facility on Elton Hills Drive that could be
a key east-west connection.
• A bicycle facility is needed on Valleyhigh
Themes Rd NW to Oxbow Park.
• A bridge to access the Douglas Trail
Forty percent of survey respondents want
from 14th Street NW is needed.
to bike more often than they currently do.
• Maintenance is needed on the trail
Two-fifths or more of these respondents
on the east side of County Rd 22 (W
said they would bike more if there were: Circle Dr NW). Safety improvements are
needed at the intersection of County Rd
1. More separation between bikeways and
22 and Valleyhigh Rd NW.
motor vehicles
• Trail crossings of 11th Ave NW and 16th
2. Better connected bikeways
Ave NW north of Cascade Creek need
3. More bikeways (bike lanes, trails, etc.) safety improvements.
4. More comfortable crossings of busy
streets Northeast
• The trail crossing of 11th Ave NE is
Common concerns voiced in the survey, uneven and not visible to people driving.
webmap, and at in-person events include:
• There were multiple concerns about
• Transitions between bicycle facilities safety for people biking and walking in
(from a trail to a bike lane, for example) the area where Broadway Ave N crosses
Silver Lake and intersects with 14th St
• Gaps in facilities, such as facilities
NE. Commenters noted that there is
ending before intersections, trails that
a gap in the connection from the trail
turn into sidewalks, or missing links
to on-street bike lanes on 14th St, as
between trails and destinations
well as insufficient space for biking and
• Need for new facilities to access walking on the bridge over Silver Lake.
destinations like Quarry Park, Oxbow
• Repaving is needed along the path on
Park, the History Center, Crossroads
the east side of the South Fork Zumbro
Center, RCTC, and the Apache Mall
River north of Elton Hills Drive NW.
• Poor trail surface quality
• Narrow trails and sidewalks, especially Southeast
on bridges • The Hwy 52/Hwy 63 interchange area is
• Trail crossings of roadways, with a a major barrier to biking and walking.
preference for grade separation • The Southeast area is cut off from
• Car/truck parking in downtown bikeways Soldiers Field.
Most Popular Webmap Southwest

Suggestions • Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are
needed to support travel along and
The most liked and commented-upon across 18th Ave SW from the City limits
suggestions are highlighted in Figure 3. to Mayowood Road/Zumbro South Park.
A10
Packet Pg. 60
F.1.b
Figure 3. Webmap Comments
WEBMAP
COUNTY RD 3 NW
31 AVE NW
COMMENTS £
52
75 ST NW
NW
R £
63 75 ST NE
E VI STA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
60 AVE NW
NW South Fork
AY
I
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAI R D Zumbro River
DW
W RIVER R
OA
PLAN
BR
55 ST NW
WEBMAP BARRIERS AND
NE
Essex
DESTINATIONS
22 AVE NW
Park
E RIVER RD
Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
Suggestion with >20 likes or Course
50 AVE NW
>1 response 41 ST NW
Other Suggestion 37 ST NW 37 ST
NE
NORTHE R N
WR
VAL E CIR
WEBMAP ROUTES CL
IVE R
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
LE
W CIR
R
Suggestion with >20 likes or
Y
D NE
HI
PK
AR
NE
GH
>1 response
WY N
KR-6
CLE D
ELTO
R
Reservoir
DR
E
LL
NW
Reservoir Y
Other Suggestion W
W
DR
N
19 ST NW N
R NW E
£
14 14
ST NE
3 ST N W
DR SE
C OU COLLEGE VIEW RD E
23 AVE SW
DW
2 ST SW 4 ST S E
6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
COLL E GE
Soldiers 8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
LE
FOX
VALLE
Memorial
Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

W
DS
M
R Bamber 16 S 16 ST SE RI
A
EM Zumbro Lake T SW ON
L
SA
11 A
RD
BROAD
South Park
W
S
RD SE
V
D 20 ST SW 20 ST SE
E SE
O
MAYO W O
WAY AVE S
£
52 PIN
E WO
OD R
W
D 15 SW
DS
18 AVE S W
RD S
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
£
VA
63
COUNT
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
SIMPSON RD SE
Willow Creek
Reservoir
11 AVE SW
COUNTY RD 8 SW
Y RD 16 SE
TY
RD 1 C OUNT
6
CO U N SW
W
¥
90
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
COUNTY RD 20 SE
Root River
Park
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
£
63
A11
Packet Pg. 61
F.1.b
INPUT ON DESIGN “Bike lanes need

to be physically
Separation of Modes
separated with
Over 70% of survey respondents who
want to bike daily or a few times per week hard barriers to
said they would bike more if the bikeways
provided more separation from motor
prevent cars from
vehicles. Separation from traffic was the
most important factor for those who want
driving or parking in
to bike a few times per month or rarely. them.”
Separation of people walking from people
bicycling is important in areas with higher
volumes of people walking or biking, such • Evaluate and implement alternatives to
as downtown and on popular trails. Many pesticides and fertilizers in landscaping
existing trails and sidewalks were noted as practices.
being too narrow, especially on bridges. • Prioritize the use of materials that are
made to last, reducing the ongoing
Climate Change Resilience operation, maintenance, and eventual
replacement of the materials. Further,
During engagement for the Sustainability as a means to reduce heat island
and Resiliency Plan, many Rochester effect, evaluate materials that have a
residents said they want public spaces higher solar reflectivity index.
that are designed to be more resilient and
usable all year round even during harsh Amenities
weather. Members of the public want to • Include public art that reflects diversity
see more trees, better management of of community and promotes equity.
stormwater and flooding in public spaces, • Provide signage that is accessible in
food-producing plants included in public multiple languages and abilities.
landscapes, and designs that support • Develop and implement uniform waste
pollinator populations. and recycling stations across City
facilities, including parks and outdoor
The Sustainability and Resiliency Plan spaces.
recommends the following:
• Assess climate change vulnerability

and evaluate risk and resilience
by determining flood prone areas
throughout the City and evaluate flood
risk potential not only for current design
standards but also for design standards
reflective of predicted climate change
scenarios.
A12
Packet Pg. 62
F.1.b
INPUT ON “We need more

PROGRAMS AND mixed use
POLICIES
neighborhoods and
Land Use
corner convenience
Sixty percent of survey respondents who
stores so all people
want to walk more said they would walk
more “if there were more destinations
are within biking
near me.” The following recommendations distance of milk,
eggs, and bread.”
from the Sustainability and Resiliency Plan
align with this feedback:
• Evaluate zoning policy changes for new

developments and require sidewalks for • Create a bike/walk promotion campaign
safe community service access. to encourage alternative transportation
• Evaluate and facilitate developments habits and healthy living.
that prioritize living, working, shopping,
entertainment, and food in centralized Education
areas. Prioritize current childcare, food,
and transportation deserts. Half of survey respondents said that is
somewhat important or very important to
• Repurpose underused or vacant land to
create complete, walkable communities. increase education about safe walking,
biking, and driving behaviors.
Amenities
The Sustainability and Resiliency Plan
• Provide free covered bike parking in recommends creating an Accessible
downtown garages by their entrance Transportation Education Campaign using
and at transit stops.
trusted community connections and
• Encourage bike parking at businesses, messengers to carry information into the
including City facilities.
broader community and lower dependence
• Encourage and fund more opportunities on single-occupancy vehicles. It also
for public art in the community. supports creating a Bike and Pedestrian
Coordinator position at the City.
Encouragement
The following recommendations from the Workforce Development
Sustainability and Resiliency Plan would The Sustainability and Resiliency Plan
encourage active transportation: recommends evaluating opportunities to
• Develop events and activities to expand or create a local service learning
increase support for local businesses. program that would skill building for
• Provide an accessible transportation workforce development such as jobs in
app and/or web based program with tree/lawn care, sustainability, renewable
directions in multiple languages. energy, stormwater infrastructure, etc.
A13
Packet Pg. 63
F.1.b
INPUT ON “Our trail system

MAINTENANCE AND is wonderful, but
OPERATIONS some trails are in
One-third of survey respondents said that
bad shape.”
the city should prioritize maintenance of
existing facilities in plans for the future of
Pavement quality on trails was highlighted
the City’s active transportation system.
as a concern in multiple webmap
The Sustainability and Resiliency Plan comments, many of them in the Northwest
recommends creating a tool to allow quadrant of the city and in areas that
community members to share specific experience flooding:
issues such as damaged sidewalks,
• Cascade Creek trail north of railroad
maintenance problems, potholes, frost
tracks
heaves, broken lights, etc.
• Trail connecting 10th St SE and 10 1/2 St
SE west of Bear Creek
Snow and Ice
• Along 18th Ave NW north of 55th St NW
Forty-four percent of survey respondents
• Along Bandel Rd NW north of 55th St NW
who want to walk or bike daily or multiple
• Along 55 St NW from Hwy 63 to Douglas
times per week said that they would walk
Trail
more if the sidewalks were cleared after it
• IBM campus east of Valleyhigh Dr NW
snows.
• East side of the South Fork Zumbro River
Nearly 80% of survey respondents said north of Elton Hills Drive NW
that it is very important or somewhat • Trail to Kellogg Middle School
important for the city to improve winter
• East side of County Rd 22 between
maintenance of sidewalks and bikeways, Valleyhigh Rd and 19th St NW
including snow removal.
• Trail through Northern Heights Park
Multiple webmap comments described • Along 37th St NE/NW from 18th Ave NW
areas with poor drainage that fill with to Broadway Ave N
debris and become icy in winter, leading to • Near bridge across creek at Essex Park
injuries. • Along Silver Creek west of 11th Ave NE
Pavement Quality Striping

Eighty-four percent of survey respondents Striping is worn down on the 41st St NW
said that it is very important or somewhat bike lanes.
important for the city to improve routine
maintenance of streets, including Centerline or edge markings on trails
repaving. would assist with navigation at night and
are important to people with limited vision.
A14
Packet Pg. 64
A15
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 65
PHASE 2
PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 66
F.1.b
SUMMARY “I’m a very

confident rider, but
I don’t like biking in
Public outreach and engagement
efforts for the Rochester Active
Transportation Plan are inclusive,
interactive, and structured to inform
some areas with my
our team’s understanding of community
needs and opportunities, shape plan
kids. Improving bike
recommendations, and build support safety and access
is wonderful!”
for the planning process and for plan
implementation.
The principal goals of public outreach are:
• Educate the public about the project

goals and timeline
“To make walking
• Build relationships safer, we need
• Create a community-informed vision
and shared understanding of vision and slower traffic
goals
• Gather input on walking, biking, and
in many places.
expectations
Drivers aren’t
• S
. olicit feedback on potential trade- always careful.”
offs, draft recommendations, and
priorities
Engagement activities are structured Vision for an All Ages and Abilities
in two phases. The goals of Phase 1 (AAA) Bicycle Network, and the draft
engagement for the project are to invite AAA network prioritization results. The
feedback on draft recommendations, majority of survey respondents felt that
trade-offs, project prioritization, and the prioritization results for both the
implementation action steps. Pedestrian and AAA Bicycle Networks
definitely or mostly accurately reflected
This memo summarizes Phase 2, beginning the areas that are most important for
by outlining opportunities for public input walking and bicycling improvements.
on the plan. These included listening Nearly 80% of those who bike or want to
sessions and a survey with online bike said they will be able to reach all or
interactive maps. most places they want to go when the
AAA Bicycle Network is fully built. Public
Members of the public were asked to
feedback in listening sessions and at
review maps showing the draft walking
community events was also generally
network prioritization results, the draft
supportive of the Plan.
A17
Packet Pg. 67
F.1.b
OPPORTUNITIES FOR • Disability: Of those who reported a

disability status, 14% identified as
PUBLIC INPUT ON having a disability.
• Race and ethnicity: Of those who
THE PLAN
reported a race or ethnicity, 89% of
identified as White and 11% as a race
other than White. People who identify
The public engagement process is focused as White alone were over-represented
on achieving a broad audience and in the survey, as they make up 75% of
Rochester’s population.
reaching diverse communities. A project
steering committee made up of residents, • Car/truck ownership: Of those who
reported car/truck ownership, 98% said
public agency staff, and community group
their family owns a car or truck.
representatives provided input on public
• Income: 54% of those who reported
involvement strategies. In Phase 2, public
their income said their household
engagement strategies included a survey
income in 2021 was over $100,000. The
with interactive web maps and listening median household income in Rochester
sessions. is $76,034.
• Age: People aged 18 to 24 were the
Listening Sessions most underrepresented age group, at
The project team met with community 8% of survey respondents but 11% of
Rochester’s adult population. People
groups in listening sessions and at
aged 25-34 were also underrepresented,
community events to discuss their ideas at 9% of respondents and 21% of
and concerns in depth. The listening Rochester adult residents. People
sessions included Mayo disABILITY MERG over age 74 were proportionately
and The National Federation of the Blind- represented, at 9% of survey
Rochester Chapter. Events included respondents and 9% of Rochester’s
adult population. People aged 35 to
the Transportation Fair and a Bikeable
44 were the most overrepresented
Community Workshop.
group in the survey, at 27% of
respondents and 17% of Rochester
Survey adult residents. People aged 45 to 74
were also overrepresented, at 46%
263 Rochester residents and visitors took
of respondents and 41% of Rochester
the project’s online survey. Of those who
adults.
shared their relationship to Rochester,
• Gender: Of those who reported a
95% of respondents live in Rochester, 63%
gender, 38% were female, 58% were
work in Rochester, 6% own a business male, and 4%identified another way.
in Rochester, and 5% go to school in 51% of Rochester residents identify as
Rochester. female.
The survey included optional demographic

questions that shed light on how closely
the survey respondents represent the
residents of Rochester:
A18
Packet Pg. 68
F.1.b
SURVEY Figure 4. Keeping in mind the plan’s goals (health, equity,

safety, connectivity, resiliency, and economy), do the
FINDINGS prioritization results accurately reflect the most important
areas for walking improvements in Rochester?
Members of the public Not
were asked to review maps Some-
Definitely Mostly at
what
showing the draft walking All
network prioritization
results, the draft Vision for 0 20 40 60 80 100
an All Ages and Abilities
% of Survey Respondents (245 Responses)
(AAA) Bicycle Network, and
the draft AAA network
Table 1. Themes in comments by those who said the walking
prioritization results. The
network prioritization looks mostly, somewhat, or not at all
maps were interactive,
accurate
allowing users to zoom
in and out (See Figure Theme (Number of Times Mentioned)
5). About 5% of survey
Downtown generally feels more accessible by walking
respondents said they
than other areas of Rochester; there should be less
had trouble understanding
emphasis on downtown (7)
how to use the map. Text
clarifying how to turn on the Need for accessibility for people with disabilities (6)
legend was added above
Skeptical of the viability of walking in Rochester due to
the map to improve ease of
winter weather (6)
use.
Major road crossings are an issue in general (5)
Walking Network
Car-free spaces (especially in downtown) would be a
Over 70% of respondents way to create safer and more comfortable places to
(176 people) said that walk and bike. (4)
the walking network
More emphasis on parks (4)
prioritization “definitely”
or “mostly” accurately Need for winter maintenance (4)
reflects the most important Need more sidewalks (4)
areas for walking (Figure
Focus on downtown-adjacent neighborhoods (3)
4). Those who answered
anything other than Need access to the Rochester Alternative Learning
“definitely” were prompted Center (3)
to share what doesn’t look
Improve connections to Apache Mall (3)
quite right. Themes from
their responses are listed in Highway 52 is a barrier (3)
Table 1. Generally increase attention to SE (3) and NW (2) areas
A19
Packet Pg. 69
F.1.b
Figure 5. Interactive Pedestrian Network Prioritization Map included in Phase 2 Survey
In addition to the ideas and locations • Southeast locations
mentioned by multiple people, the
» 11th Ave SE near Mayo High School
following were mentioned once: and Pinewood Elementary School
• Northwest locations » 3rd Ave SE from 14th to 16th
» 11th Ave NW crossing to Hyvee » South Broadway and 16th

Barlows grocery store » Broadway south of 52
» Civic Center Dr at 1st Ave NW and » Gamehaven Reservoir
4th Ave NW » 16 St SE between the Fair Grounds
» Elton Hills and Mayo High School
» 19th St NW & Valley High Drive » Mobile homes in SE
• Northeast locations » Woodlake Drive

» Willow Creek trail south of Hwy 52
» 31st Street NE between Broadway
and East River Road • Southwest locations
» North Broadway to Zumbro River » 4th St SW
» Century Hills » 6th St SW and Memorial Parkway
» Century High School » Mobile homes in SW
» East side of Silver Lake
• Ideas
» South side of Silver Lake
» 7th St NE by Silver Lake » Automatically include pedestrians
in traffic signal phases
» Crossing of Broadway by Silver Lake
trails » No right turn on red
» Teton » Covered bike and walk ways
» Quarry Hill trail » Eliminate the need to cross major

streets when using trails
A20
Packet Pg. 70
F.1.b
All Ages & Abilities Bicycle

Network
Nearly 80% of
Respondents were asked how often they
those who bike or
want to bike said
bike. 23% bike at least once a week year-
round; 37% bike at least once a week in
warmer months; 12% bike occasionally; 11% they will be able to
don’t currently bike but are interested in
riding a bike; and 17% are not interested in reach all or most
riding a bike.
places they want
Those who bike or are interested in biking
were asked how many of the places they
to go when the
want to go are easy to reach by bicycling.
Of the 212 people who responded, only 20
All Ages & Abilities
(9%) said it is easy to reach all the places Bicycle Network is
they want to go. 28% said it is easy to
reach most places, 53% said it is easy to fully built.
reach some places, and 9% said it is not
easy to reach any place. Those who do not
currently bike but are interested generally
(Figure 6), and then asked how many of
are able to reach fewer of the places
the places they want to go would be easy
they want to go by bike than those who
to reach by bicycling when the network is
currently bike (Figure 7).
fully built. Nearly 80% of respondents said
Respondents were presented with a map they will be able to easily reach all or most
of the vision for the AAA Bicycle Network destinations (Figure 8).
Figure 6. Interactive All Ages & Abilities Bicycle Network Map included in Phase 2 Survey
A21
Packet Pg. 71
F.1.b
Figure 7. Access to destinations with current bicycle network
I bike at
least once Key
a week
year-round It is currently easy
(59) for me to reach
_____ of the
I bike at least places I want to go
once a week in Rochester by
in warmer bicycle
months (95)
All
I bike
occasionally Most
(30)
Some
I don’t currently
None
bike, but I am
interested in
riding a bike
(28)
0 20 40 60 80 100
% of Survey Respondents
Figure 8. Access to destinations when the All Ages & Abilities Bicycle Network is fully built
I bike at
least once Key
a week
year-round When the All Ages &
(57) Abilities Bicycle
Network is fully
I bike at least built, it will be easy
once a week for me to reach
in warmer _____ of the
months (91) places I want to go
in Rochester by
bicycle
I bike
occasionally All
(29)
Most
I don’t currently
bike, but I am Some
interested in
riding a bike (27)
None
0 20 40 60 80 100
A22
Packet Pg. 72
F.1.b
Respondents were asked to review

the prioritization results for the AAA 75% of those
Bicycle Network. Among those who bike
or are interested in biking, over 75% of
who bike or want
to bike said that
respondents (153 people) said that the
network prioritization “definitely” or
“mostly” accurately reflects the most the network
important areas for bicycling (Figure 4).
Those who answered anything other than prioritization
“definitely” were prompted to share what
doesn’t look quite right. All respondents
“definitely” or
were asked for their suggestions for “mostly” accurately
improving the AAA Network, and asked to
share any additional thoughts about the reflects the most
important areas for
network. Themes from these responses
are listed in Table 2.
bicycling.
Figure 9. Keeping in mind the plan’s goals (health, equity, safety, connectivity, resiliency,
and economy), do the prioritization results accurately reflect the most important areas
for biking improvements in Rochester?
I bike at Key
least once
a week Keeping in mind the
year-round plan’s goals (health,
(54) equity, safety, con-
nectivity, resiliency,
I bike at least and economy), do
once a week the prioritization
in warmer results accurately
months (91) reflect the most
important areas for
bicycling improve-
ments in Rochester?
I bike
occasionally
(31) Definitely
I don’t currently Mostly

bike, but I am
interested in
riding a bike Somewhat
(25)
0 20 40 60 80 100 Not at all
A23
Packet Pg. 73
F.1.b
Table 2. Themes in comments about the All Ages & Abilities Bicycle Network
Theme (Number of Times Mentioned)
Desire for continuously connected bike facilities separated and physically protected
from vehicles (34)
Hesitation about investing in bicycle infrastructure (30), including viability of bicycling

in Rochester due to winter weather (6) and concern about on-street bike lanes (11)
Prioritize a trail connecting the Woodlake Drive Business Park (where the Rochester
Alternative Learning Center and Channel One food bank are located) and
Gamehaven Park to the rest of the city to the north (13)
Highway 52 is a key barrier (8). Overpasses of Hwy 52 at 19th St NW, 2nd St SW, 55th
St NW, and 37th St NW were pointed out as in need of improvement
Broadway is a key barrier (8). Crossings at 14th St NE/Silver Lake Dam are an issue (3).
North Broadway in general was noted as an issue, as well as Broadway at 16th St SW/
SE and south of Highway 5
Maintenance (repaving, sweeping, snow clearance, etc) is important (6)
Design of bike facilities should seek to minimize steep grades (6)
Need better connections to the extreme southern part of Rochester (5)
Need a bridge over East Circle Dr NE connecting Century Point to Quarry Hil (3)
The parking-protected bikeway on 4th is not working well (3)
In addition to these themes, respondents

shared locations where they would like to
see better conditions for bicycling: “I am looking at this
• Areas to increase priority generally: from a powerchair
» Crossings of major roadways (4) seat and I can go
» East-west pathways across city
outside of the downtown core (2) where a bike goes
» Connect to downtown (2)
» Less downtown (2)
around the city,
» Commuting corridors except it needs to
» Non-community corridors
» Suburbs
be smoother and
» Neighborhoods near downtown no obstructions.”
» New elementary and middle schools
A24
Packet Pg. 74
F.1.b
• Northwest locations
“Right now I either
» 19th St NW (2)
» Civic Center Dr (2) have to bike on
bike paths that
» Elton Hills Dr (2)
» Path on both sides of 55th St NW
between Hwy 52 and 18th Ave NW feel like they take
(2)
» Cascade Lake forever and do lots
» Connection between 6th Ave NW
and the Cascade Trail
of winding/stopping
» Connection between 7th St NW and and starting, or bike
the Cascade Lake Trail
» Connections to Barlow Plaza and on busy roads with
Fresh Thyme
» 18th Ave NW between 37th Ave NW
small bike lanes if
and Elton Hills Dr
» A bridge across Civic Center Drive
I want to go the
NW, somewhere between 1st and
4th Ave NW
grocery store.”
» Connection to Douglas Trail at 14th
St NW and/or 15th St NW » Hwy 14 crossings near RCTC
» Repave the path on 37th St NW » 18th Ave SE
between Broadway and West River
Road » Rochester Public Library
» Repave Riverwalk west of » Intersections of 3rd Ave SE at 4th

Recreation Center St SE, 7th St SE
» 3rd Ave SE (1 supportive; 1 opposed)
• Northeast locations
» A Meadow Park bridge from the
» Connect Circle Drive with Quarry Hill Fairgrounds, north across Hwy
near the softball field 14 (follow the RR spur line) to
» N Heights Dr NE Sunnyside
» Repave trail on the east side of • Southwest

the Zumbro River near Oakwood
Cemetery » 16th St SW (2)
» Repave trail on 37th St NE near » 18th Ave SW

Hyvee » 4th St SW
» 11th Ave NE
• Outside of Rochester
» E Center ST
» Chester Woods Park
• Southeast locations
» Byron
» 4th St SE (2) » Connect to neighboring cities
A25
Packet Pg. 75
F.1.b
LISTENING SESSION
RESULTS
In Phase 2, the project team reconnected
with stakeholder groups engaged in
Phase 1 to seek feedback on the plan. Two
groups from Phase 1 participated in virtual
Phase 2 listening sessions, disABILITY
Mayo Employee Resource Group (MERG)
and the National Federation of the Blind-
• Overall, those presented with a map in
Rochester Chapter.
person were very focused on whether
The team also engaged stakeholders the priority routes were accurate and
were very focused on which projects
through the Transportation Fair and
would move forward.
a Bikeable Community Workshop. The
• Those presented with the map virtually
Bikeable Community Workshop was
were less interested in routes and more
an independently planned event, but interested in the design elements and
involved many of the project stakeholders, features.
and frequently touched on the Active
Transportation Plan as a next step in Transportation Fair
Rochester’s advancement of bikeable
The Transportation Fair is an annual event
infrastructure.
put on by the city to introduce kids to
Key Themes different forms of transportation, and
the vehicles and crew that run them. It
Phase 2 listening sessions revealed general is historically well-attended by families,
support for the plan from the participants with a number of interactive exhibits. The
in each session. The same information was project team presented the prioritization
provided at the transportation fair and maps for kids and parents to look at and
listening sessions, though responses and started conversations by having kids find
feedback varied significantly between the their home on the map, and discuss where
two virtual events and the one in-person they like to ride or walk. This often led
event. The larger Bikeable Community to parent involvement in the discussion
Workshop had unique feedback as it and spurred a number of conversations
took a much more comprehensive look at about routes that felt unsafe and needed
existing conditions and desired outcomes. upgrades or improvements.
Key takeaways from all engagement Specific feedback of note:

sessions:
• In nearly every case, safety concerns
• The methodology used to determine matched identified priorities for the
which routes would be selected was city to address (Silver Lake/Broadway,
seen favorably, with no negative 3rd Ave, Viola, Kutzky Park/16th Ave NW,
comments about the priorities or the Center St).
approach to weighting them.
A26
Packet Pg. 76
F.1.b
• Most comments were geographic, noting that it can still create challenges
focusing on routes rather than what for those who aren’t able to easily
type of road treatment was installed. navigate sidewalks.
• Kids were very focused on their
Bikeable Community
neighborhood and short routes to parks
& school, while adults noted their bike Workshop
commute (typically to downtown).
BikeMN organized and hosted the
Virtual Meetings with Groups workshop and took a comprehensive look
from Phase I at Rochester as a bikeable community,
with a focus on engineering, engagement,
The two virtual meetings were both with equity, evaluation/planning, education,
disability advocacy groups (disABILITY and encouragement. This was a two-
MERG and National Federation of the part event with virtual and in-person
Blind – Rochester Chapter). Other groups components.
involved in Phase I were unavailable for
participation in Phase 2 during the window Specific feedback of note:
for the project. Both were encouraged by • The city seems to be effective in
the All Ages and Abilities plan and added designing bike infrastructure, noting
further context to specific treatments complete streets and bike lanes going in
they felt were vital regardless of which on recent projects, but little is done to
route was considered. Both groups wanted connect with neighboring communities.
safer intersections and wider pathways • Additional focus on education and
to provide enough room on trails for encouragement identified as a
pedestrians and bikes to share space gap to increase buy-in for active
transportation. This was not a
safely.
primary focus of the plan, and
Specific feedback of note: warrants consideration for future city
efforts in parallel with infrastructure
• Sidewalk and trail width is impacted by improvements.
light poles, parking meters, and other • Protected bike infrastructure came up
features. This has an outsized impact often as a preference for users. The top
on those who are mobility-limited. ten project list largely reflects this with
Sufficient width for mobility devices and separated bike lanes and trails.
bikes in shared corridors was cited as a
• Discussion of “walksheds” and
challenge by multiple participants.
“bikesheds,” focusing future routes
• Effective audible signals for crosswalks on filling in pathways people want to
were cited multiple times as an use to access key destinations. This
important safety feature, along with aligned well with the priorities of the
high contrast paints and treatments to plan, and the top 10 projects, which
make crossings and routes more visible largely connect outlying areas with the
both to pedestrians and vehicles. downtown core or create new cross-
• The 1/8 mile assumption of acceptable town pathways.
walking distance between routes and
destinations was a concern, with some
A27
Packet Pg. 77
A28

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 78
ANALYSIS
APPENDIX B: TECHNICAL
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 79
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 80
F.1.b
Appendix B: Technical Analysis
SUMMARY
This memo documents changes to disease and poor mental health. The
the physical and social environments analysis of geographic differences in
that influence walking and bicycling in access to resources will be overlaid on
Rochester, highlighting demographic, land other analyses to plan an equitable active
use, and active transportation network transportation system.
changes since the 2012 Bicycle Master
Plan. It provides context that will inform Where People Travel
the development of the next phases of More than half of Rochester’s 510,000 daily
the plan, including information on travel trips are under 3 miles, making them good
patterns and barriers to travel. candidates for conversion from driving to
active modes. The highest concentration
What’s Changed in Rochester
of destinations for active trips is found
The population has increased and around downtown, the Kutsky Park
become more racially diverse. The median neighborhood, 41st St NW & 18th Ave NE,
household income has risen at roughly the Graham Park, Mayo High School, Rochester
same rate as the cost of living. Community and Technical College, Federal
Medical Center, and the Rochester
Downtown neighborhoods have added
Recreation Center.
several full block urban infill developments.
Future mixed use transit-oriented centers Barriers to Travel
and transit supportive neighborhoods
have been added to the land use plan. Factors that restrict convenient and
comfortable access to destinations
Many miles of trails and bikeways have include major multi-lane roadways,
been built since the 2012 plan. railroads, rivers, low intersection density,
and high impermeable (paved) surfaces.
Geographic Differences in
Access to Resources and Pedestrian and bicycle crashes make
Health up only 2% of crashes in Rochester, but
account for 39% of fatal and 14% of
Based on demographic factors like income serious injury crashes.
and race, Rochester residents have
different levels of access to resources, Lower stress bicycling facilities make up
political power, and mobility options. Some most of the transportation network, but in
areas of the city have concentrations of many cases riders on lower stress facilities
people with higher access, while other must make stressful crossings of multilane
areas have concentrations of people roadways or travel significantly out of
with lower access. Areas where people their way to lower stress crossings. These
have lower access tend also to have stressful crossings may discourage many
higher rates of health issues like heart people from riding at all.
3
Packet Pg. 81
F.1.b
WHAT’S CHANGED IN
ROCHESTER?
Rochester’s last bicycle plan was adopted
in 2012. Rochester has changed in terms of
population, land use, and transportation
options since that time.
Demographics
The City of Rochester has had a total
population increase of 14,626 people, or
14%, from 2010 to 2020.
All racial and ethnic groups have increased

in population during this time. The number
of people identifying as Black or African
American alone has grown by 62%, the
Figure 1. Population by Race and Ethnicity,
number of people identifying as Hispanic
2010 to 2020
or Latino has grown by 45%, and the
100,000
number of people identifying as Asian 2010 Population
alone has grown by 31%. The number +3%
identifying as American Indian or Alaska 80,000

2020 Population
Native alone has grown by 29%, Native

Hawaiian or Pacific Islander alone by
60,000
47%, some other race alone by 102%, and
two or more races by 125%. The number
identifying as White alone has increased 40,000
by 3%.
The median income for an individual living 20,000

+62%
in Rochester has risen from $32,981 in 2010 +31%
+45%
+114%
to $38,635 in 2019, an increase of 17%. The
0
median income for a household has risen White Asian or Black or Hispanic All Others
alone Pacific African or Latino
from $63,428 to $73,106, an increase of Islander American
alone alone
15%. Meanwhile, the average cost of living
Source: 2010 and 2020 Decennial Census
has gone up by 16%. The unemployment
rate has decreased from 6% to 3.6%.
4
Packet Pg. 82
F.1.b
Land Use campus has also expanded in the
downtown with student housing and a new
Since the last plan was adopted, most student union.
new single-family development has
occurred on the north side of Rochester Future mixed use transit-oriented centers
with the completion of the next phases and transit supportive neighborhoods
of developments that were started in the have been added to the land use plan
pre-2008 economic downturn. since 2012. There are also two future large
transit village nodes that were identified
The downtown neighborhoods have added as part of the Rochester Transit Oriented
several full block urban infill developments, Development Plans, located around the
primarily apartment or hotel buildings Mayo Clinic West Parking Lot and Graham
with some including first floor commercial. Park.
There have been a few new office buildings
added since 2012 with Discovery Square
located on the north half of the block
between 4th and 5th Street SW and 2nd
and 3rd Ave SW being the most prominent.
The University of Minnesota Rochester
5
Packet Pg. 83
F.1.b
Active Transportation
Infrastructure
Rochester’s bicycle network is composed
of bike lanes and trails (Figure 2). Over the
last ten years, many miles of trails and
bike lanes have been built in Rochester.
These active transportation facilities have
helped to close gaps in the network and
improve access to destinations across the
city.
One of the most significant projects

was the extension of the Douglas Trail to
Cascade Lake. This project included the
construction of a bicycle and pedestrian
bridge over 7th St NW and over Valleyhigh
Dr NW as shown below. Bollard-Protected Bike Lane near Mayo Clinic
2012 2019
Bicycle and Pedestrian Bridge over Valleyhigh Dr NW
6
Packet Pg. 84
F.1.b
Figure 2. Existing Bicycle Network with Recent Additions Highlighted
COUNTY RD 3 NW
31 AVE NW
EXISTING BICYCLE £
52
NETWORK
75 ST NW
NW £
63 75 ST NE
R
V IS TA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAIR I E
DW
60 AVE NW
OA
PLAN
BR
South Fork
Zumbro River
55 ST NW
Facility Type
W
NE
RD N
Essex
50 AVE NW
22 AVE NW
Park
E RIVER RD
Northern
Bike Lane, one direction Hills Golf
48 ST NE
ER
Bike Lane, both directions Course
W RIV
41 ST NW
Protected Bike Lane or 37 ST NW 37 ST
Shared Use Path NE
NORTHE R N
W
VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
Bicycle Facility Added in Last
9 AVE N
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
ER
W CIR
R
YH
10 Years RD N
E
IG
PK
NE
A
VA VIOL
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ON HIL
DR
KR-7
LL
Reservoir EY
LS
Reservoir
E LT
NW
W
19 ST NW R DR
N
D
R NW NW E
£
14
1 4 ST NE

3 ST N W Cascade
Lake
DR SE
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST SE
£ 6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
E
63 Soldiers
COLL EG
8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
Memorial
LE
FOX
VALLEY Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

SW 16 ST
MA
M RD Bamber SW IO
R
LE N
W
BROAD
South Park S SE
RD
11 A
MAYO W O
VE SE
£
WAY AVE S
52 PIN
E WO
W
OD R
D 15 SW
18 AVE S W
DS
RD S
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
VA
COUNT
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
Willow Creek
SIMPSON RD SE
Reservoir
11 AVE SW
£
COUNTY RD 8 SW
63 Y RD 16 SE
COUN C OUNT
TY R
D1
6 W
SW
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
Root
COUNTY RD 20 SE
River
Park
North Branch
Root River
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
¥
90
7
Packet Pg. 85
F.1.b
WHO LIVES IN • Percent of residents age 65 or older

• Percent of housing units with no vehicle
ROCHESTER? available
• Percent of households with at least one
person with a disability
Equity • Percent of residents with income under
185% of the poverty level
Understanding equity is important
for the development of multi-modal A percentile score for each census block
transportation plans. The historical, group was created for each of the six
social, and political dynamics in the United equity indicators. (For example, a census
States have produced transportation block group with a very high percentage
infrastructure that is not evenly of residents over age 65 relative to the
distributed across communities. These other census tracts in Rochester might
dynamics have also caused segregation of score in the 90th percentile. A census
housing by race and income. Housing that block group with a very low percentage of
is affordable to people with lower incomes residents over age 65 might score in the
is often located close to high traffic 10th percentile.)
roadways that increase levels of noise and
pollution and restrict options for active Results
transportation. The percentile scores were averaged to
determine an overall equity score. In Figure
People with lower incomes are cost-
4, the 25% of census block groups where
burdened by car ownership and would
the population generally is expected to
benefit from access to transit and safer
have the least access to resources, power,
walking and biking facilities. People with
and mobility options are shown in yellow.
higher incomes, privileges, and easier
The 25% of census block groups where the
access to power, such as ability to speak
population generally is expected to have
English fluently and Whiteness, often
the most access to resources, power, and
have more transportation options, less
mobility options are shown in blue. All other
exposure to high traffic roadways, and
census block groups are considered to
more access to green spaces.
have average access.
Methodology
This analysis of geographic differences
Equity was examined at the census in access to resources will be overlaid on
block group level using 2019 American other analyses to plan an equitable active
Community Survey data. The following transportation system.
equity indicators were included in the
analysis:
• Percent of residents not identifying as

white alone (not Latino or Hispanic)
• Percent of households with limited
English speaking ability
8
Packet Pg. 86
F.1.b
Figure 4. Social Inequality by Census Block Group
COUNTY RD 3 NW
31 AVE NW
EQUITY ANALYSIS £
52
£ 75 ST NE
75 ST NW 63
NW
R
V IS TA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
BANDEL RD NW
65 ST NW PRAIR I E
DW
60 AVE NW
OA
PLAN
BR
South Fork
Zumbro River
55 ST NW
Most access to resources, W
NE
RD N
Essex
50 AVE NW
power, and mobility
22 AVE NW
Park
E RIVER RD
Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
ER
Average access to Course
W RIV
resources, power, and 41 ST NW
mobility 37 ST NW 37 ST
NE
NORTHE R N
W
Least access to resources, VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
9 AVE N
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
power, and mobility
ER
W CIR
R
YH
E
RD N
IG
PK
NE
A
VA VIOL
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ON HIL
DR
KR-7
LL
Reservoir EY
LS
Reservoir
E LT
NW
W
19 ST NW R DR
N
D
NW
R NW
E
£
14
1 4 ST NE

3 ST N W Cascade
Lake
DR SE
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST SE
£ 6 ST SW
W CI R C
6 ST SE
E
63 Soldiers
COLL EG
8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
Memorial
LE
FOX
VALLEY Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

SW 16 ST
MA
M RD Bamber SW IO
R
LE N
W
BROAD
South Park S SE
RD
11 A
MAYO W O
£ VE SE
WAY AVE S
52 PIN
E WO
W
OD R
D 15 SW
18 AVE S W
DS
RD S
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
VA
COUNT
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
Willow Creek
SIMPSON RD SE
Reservoir
11 AVE SW
£
COUNTY RD 8 SW
63 Y RD 16 SE
COUN C OUNT
TY R
D1
6 W
SW
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
Root
COUNTY RD 20 SE
River
Park
North Branch
Root River
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
¥
90
9
Packet Pg. 87
F.1.b
Health • High cholesterol

• No leisure time physical activity
Determinants of health include clinical
• Mental health not good for >=14 days
care, biology and genetics, social and
economic factors, health behaviors, and • Physical health not good for >=14 days
the physical environment. Scientists A percentile score for each census tract
do not know the precise contribution of was created for each of the nine physical
each determinant, but together, health activity-related health indicators. (For
behaviors, the physical environment, and example, a census tract with a very high
social and economic factors explain 60-75 rate of asthma relative to the other
percent of health outcomes. All of these census tracts in Rochester might score in
factors can be impacted by physical the 90th percentile. A census tract with a
activity. very low rate of asthma might score in the
Physical activity is an important way to 10th percentile.)
reduce the risk of high blood pressure,
Results
diabetes, stroke, heart disease, certain
types of cancers, depression, and anxiety. The percentile scores were averaged to
Communities designed to promote safe determine a health score. In Figure 5, the
and connected active transportation and highest scoring census tracts (yellow) are
recreational opportunities are positively in the top 25% of census tracts and have
associated with greater levels of resident the highest rates of health concern. The
physical activity and consequently, with lowest scoring census tracts (blue) are
improved health. in the bottom 25% of census tracts and
have the lowest rates of health concern.
Methodology The areas with the highest rates of health
The health analysis conducted for the concern generally align with the areas
Rochester Active Transportation Plan where residents have the lowest access to
uses the Centers for Disease Control and resources, power, and mobility options.
Prevention’s PLACES 2018 data. Health
indicators related to physical activity
include crude prevalence of the following
among adults aged 18+ years:
• High blood pressure

• Asthma
• Coronary heart disease
• Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
• Diabetes
10
Packet Pg. 88
F.1.b
Figure 5. Physical Activity Related Health Concern by Census Tract
COUNTY RD 3 NW
ACTIVE
31 AVE NW
TRANSPORTATION £
52
DEMAND
75 ST NW
NW
R £
63 75 ST NE
E VI STA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
60 AVE NW
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
NW South Fork
BANDEL RD NW
I
65 ST NW PRAI R
DW
D Zumbro River
W RIVER R
OA
BR
PLAN
No Data 55 ST NW
PHYSICAL ACTIVITY-
NE
Essex
22 AVE NW
E RIVER RD
Park
RELATED HEALTH Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
CONCERN
50 AVE NW
Course
Lowest 41 ST NW
37 ST NW 37 ST
NORTHE R N
W NE
VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
Highest
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
W CIR
ER
R
Y
D NE
HI
PK
NE
AR
GH
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ELTO
R
Reservoir
DR
LL
NW
Reservoir E
W W Y
N
19 ST NW DR
R NW N
£
E
14 14
ST NE
3 ST N W
CENTER ST E
DR SE
NTRY CLUB R
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST S E
W CI R C
6 ST SW 6 ST SE
COLL E GE
Soldiers
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
8 1/2 ST SE
LE
FOX
VALLE
Memorial
Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

W
M
A
R T SW ON
L EM Zumbro Lake
11 A
SA
BROAD
RD
W
South Park S
RD SE
V
D 20 ST SW 20 ST SE
E SE
O
MAYO W O
WAY AVE S
£
52 PIN
E WO
W
D 15 SW
OD R
18 AVE S W
RD S
DS
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
£
VA
COUNT
63
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
SIMPSON RD SE
Willow Creek
11 AVE SW
Reservoir
COUNTY RD 8 SW
Y RD 16 SE
TY
RD 1 C OUNT
6
CO U N
¥
SW
W 90
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
COUNTY RD 20 SE
Root River
Park
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
£
63
11
Packet Pg. 89
F.1.b
WHERE DO PEOPLE • Work: Concentration of jobs based on

2018 Longitudinal Employer-Household
TRAVEL? Dynamics (LEHD) data on all jobs at the
block group level
• Shop: Concentration of shopping
destinations based on 2018 LEHD data
Destinations on retail jobs at the block group level
Count data of people walking and biking • Transit: Concentration of transit stops
alone typically do not reflect demand • Parks and trails: Concentration of trail
for walking and biking due to the lack and park destinations, with parks given
of adequate facilities to support active more weight than trails because of the
transportation. A lack of people walking greater variety of amenities available at
and biking does not necessarily indicate parks
a lack of demand, so evaluation of the • Institutions: Concentration of
concentration of destinations is used to institutional land uses, including
understand where people want to walk and destinations like schools, the library,
bike. post offices, hospitals, city hall, and fire
stations
Methodology
The composite Live Work Play analysis Results
conducted for this Plan combines six factors As shown in Figure 6, the highest
to determine areas where demand for concentration of destinations is found
walking and biking is likely to be high: around downtown, the Kutsky Park
• Live: Population density based on 2019 neighborhood, 41st St NW & 18th Ave NE,
American Community Survey population Graham Park, Mayo High School, Rochester
data at the block group level Community and Technical College, Federal
Medical Center, and the Rochester
Recreation Center.
12
Packet Pg. 90
F.1.b
Figure 6. Concentration of Destinations
COUNTY RD 3 NW
ACTIVE
31 AVE NW
TRANSPORTATION £
52
DEMAND
75 ST NW
NW
R £
63 75 ST NE
E VI STA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
60 AVE NW
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
NW South Fork
BANDEL RD NW
I
65 ST NW PRAI R
DW
D Zumbro River
W RIVER R
OA
BR
PLAN
55 ST NW
CONCENTRATION OF
NE
Essex
22 AVE NW
E RIVER RD
Park
DESTINATIONS Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
Highest
50 AVE NW
Course
Lowest 41 ST NW
37 ST NW 37 ST
NORTHE R N
W NE
VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
W CIR
ER
R
Y
D NE
HI
PK
NE
AR
GH
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ELTO
R
Reservoir
DR
LL
NW
Reservoir E
W W Y
N
19 ST NW DR
N
R NW
£
E
14 14
ST N E
3 ST N W
CENTER ST E
DR SE
NTRY CLUB R
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST S E
W CI R C
6 ST SW 6 ST SE
COLL E GE
Soldiers
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
8 1/2 ST SE
LE
FOX
VALLE
Memorial
Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

W
M
A
MR T SW ON
LE Zumbro Lake
11 A
SA
BROAD
RD
W
South Park S
RD SE
V
D 20 ST SW 20 ST SE
E SE
O
MAYO W O
WAY AVE S
£
52 PIN
E WO
W
D 15 SW
OD R
18 AVE S W
RD S
DS
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
£
VA
COUNT
63
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
SIMPSON RD SE
Willow Creek
11 AVE SW
Reservoir
COUNTY RD 8 SW
Y RD 16 SE
TY
RD 1 C OUNT
6
CO U N
¥
SW
W 90
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
COUNTY RD 20 SE
Root River
Park
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
£
63
13
Packet Pg. 91
F.1.b
Active Trip Potential Figure 7. Number of daily trips by total

distance traveled
Trips of three miles or less are considered
to be potential candidates for conversion Under a Half Mile
from driving to active modes. A casual
cyclist can complete a three mile trip in 0.5 to 1 Mile
about 15 to 20 minutes (or less, if using
an electric bike). A half-mile walking trip 1-2 Miles
takes about 10 minutes.
2-4 Miles
During Fall 2019, about 510,000 trips per
day started in the City of Rochester. 80%
4-8 Miles
of those trips were made using a motor
vehicle. The median trip distance was 2.9
8-16 Miles
miles, meaning that more than half of daily
trips could potentially be made by active
16+ Miles
modes. 21% of trips were under a half-mile
(Figure 7). 0 5 10 15 20 25
% of Daily Trips
Areas planned for high density and
mixed-use land uses have high active Replica, September-November 2019
trip potential because many origins (like
apartments) and destinations (like grocery
stores and restaurants) are located More than half of
close together, and there are enough. In
Rochester, these areas are mostly located Rochester’s 510,000
in the center of the city, with additional
areas along 2nd St SW, Broadway Ave
daily trips could
N, College View Rd E, and parts of
northwestern Rochester (Figure 8).
potentially be made
by active modes.
14
Packet Pg. 92
F.1.b
Figure 8. High density and mixed-use land uses
COUNTY RD 3 NW
ACTIVE
31 AVE NW
£
TRANSPORTATION 52
DEMAND
75 ST NW
NW
R £
63 75 ST NE
E VI STA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
60 AVE NW
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
NW South Fork
BANDEL RD NW
I
65 ST NW PRAI R
DW
D Zumbro River
W RIVER R
OA
BR
PLAN
55 ST NW
HIGH DENSITY, MIXED USE
NE
Essex
22 AVE NW
E RIVER RD
LAND USES Northern
Park
48 ST NE
Downtown Core and Fringe
Hills Golf
50 AVE NW
Course
High Density Residential; 41 ST NW
Traditional Core or Transit 37 ST NW 37 ST
NORTHE R N
W NE
Supportive Neighborhood VAL E CIR
RIV
CL
Mixed Use Transit Oriented
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
W CIR
ER
R
Y
Centers or Supportive D NE
HI
PK
NE
AR
GH
WY N
Corridors CLE D
KR-6
ELTO
R
Reservoir
DR
LL
NW
Reservoir E
W W Y
N
DR
Medical Campus 19 ST NW N
R NW
£
E
14 14
ST NE
3 ST N W
CENTER ST E
DR SE
NTRY CLUB R
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST S E
W CI R C
6 ST SW 6 ST SE
COLL E GE
Soldiers
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
8 1/2 ST SE
LE
FOX
VALLE
Memorial
Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

W
M
A
R T SW ON
L EM Zumbro Lake
11 A
SA
BROAD
RD
W
South Park S
RD V
SE
20 ST SE
O D 20 ST SW E SE
MAYO W O
WAY AVE S
£
52 PIN
E WO
W
D 15 SW
OD R
18 AVE S W
RD S
DS
E
EY
30 ST SE
LL
YR
£
VA
COUNT
63
BAMBER
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
45 ST SE
Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
55 ST SE
SIMPSON RD SE
Willow Creek
11 AVE SW
Reservoir
COUNTY RD 8 SW
Y RD 16 SE
TY
RD 1 C OUNT
6
CO U N
¥
SW
W 90
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 1 SE
COUNTY RD 20 SE
Root River
Park
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 MILES
£
63
15
Packet Pg. 93
F.1.b
WHAT ARE THE Street North where Highway 63 splits to

the east. Highway 14 is the only east/west
BARRIERS TO highway. In the eastern part of the city, it
TRAVEL?
is a four lane road with an adjacent multi-
use trail until it merges with Highway 52
before heading west at Civic Center Drive.
These roads disconnect the urban core
Active Trip Barriers from the suburban style developments
There are several factors that restrict around Rochester.
convenient and comfortable access to
Broadway Avenue and Civic Center Drive
destinations via active transportation
are the major north/south and east/
in Rochester, including major multi-lane
west roads. These roadways carry higher
roadways, railroads, rivers, low intersection
volumes of traffic at speeds of 30 to
density, and high impermeable land
55mph depending upon the segment
use. Figure 9 illustrates the barriers to
of roadway. They provide access to
active transportation, each of which are
destinations, in particular closer to the
described below.
downtown core, with continuous sidewalks,
traffic signals and block spacing providing
Highways/Major Vehicle Routes
consistent facilities and frequent crossing
The downtown core of Rochester is
opportunities. Broadway features bike
served by a traditional grid network of
lanes, sidewalks on both sides of the
streets which provides frequent crossing
street and trails on certain portions
opportunities for people walking and
of the road. Civic Center Drive does
biking. Outside of the downtown area,
not have any bike lanes and does not
the street network is characterized
consistently have a sidewalk. There are
by a more suburban style pattern of
portions with sidewalk on the south side
development. This more circuitous street
near the downtown but heading west it is
pattern presents a barrier to accessing
inconsistent and disconnected. Outside
destinations with fewer crossing
of downtown the intersection spacing is
opportunities. There are also limited
wider. East Circle Dr and West Circle Dr
crossings of major roadways and highways
form a loop road that travels around the
in locations across the City.
City of Rochester. These are both high
Three highways travel through Rochester. speed roads that typically have vehicles
Highway 52 is the largest and most moving faster than the posted speed
consistent barrier extending from the limits and reduced access.
southeast quadrant to the north, generally
Railroads
bisecting the city as it runs north/south.
Highway 63 enters Rochester from the The City of Rochester has a main railroad
south and then connects with Highway 52 line owned by Canadian Pacific that
on the south end of the City. These two extends east/west through the city. This
roads run together until reaching 75th railroad line extends north of the main
16
Packet Pg. 94
F.1.b
Figure 9. Barriers to Active Transportation
Low Intersection Density
Low Intersection Density
Flood Fringe A
Flood Fringe B
A
Flood Fringe B
17
Packet Pg. 95
F.1.b
downtown area running along Civic Center Low Intersection Density

Drive to the northwest. To the east it The downtown and core downtown
passes by the Olmsted County Recycling neighborhoods of Rochester are served
Center but does not follow a specific by a street grid system that is more
roadway alignment. There are two main conducive for bicycle and pedestrian
north/south spur lines that connect to connectivity providing frequent crossing
industrial land uses within Rochester. Most opportunities as noted above. The city has
of these industrial areas are no longer suburban type development surrounding
actively serviced by the railroad so the the downtown core. An assessment of low
number of trains that use the north/south intersection density was completed with
lines is limited. low intersection density defined as less
than 130 intersections per square mile.
Rivers
The Zumbro River is the largest river in High Impermeable Land Use
the City of Rochester. It flows north and Areas with a high percentage of
enters the city from the Southwest. impermeable land typically have a limited
Silver Lake is a centralized lake that was amount of tree canopy, large surface
created by a dam on the Zumbro River. parking areas and wide roadways. The lack
There are several smaller creeks in the of tree canopy and the high percent of
city, but they are primarily located within surface covered by pavement contributes
parks with trails and often abut residential to a heat island effect in these areas. The
backyards. Most of the larger bodies of heat island effect results in temperatures
water are stormwater ponds that have 1-7 degrees higher due to absorption and
been created for specific developments. re-emitting the sun’s energy, making
There are three major areas with lakes. these areas less comfortable for active
The Cascade Lake area to the west, the transportation.
Mayowood Lake area to the southwest and
Silver Lake just north of Downtown.
The Zumbro River is the main source of

flooding in the City of Rochester. The
Army Corps of Engineers oversee the
large floodwalls that exist in Rochester’s
downtown. These walls serve to limit
flooding from the Zumbro River to
downtown. Bear Creek and Cascade
Creek, and the trails and pedestrian
bridges across them, were also a part of
the same flood control project.
18
Packet Pg. 96
F.1.b
Crashes Figure 10. Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes

as a Percentage of Crashes for All Modes
A review of crash data provides some
35
insight into existing safety conditions for Pedestrian
Crashes
people walking and biking, recognizing
30
however, that these crashes only Bicycle
represent only those that are reported Crashes
25
to law enforcement. Further, the data
does not reflect near miss events. To 20
understand the complete safety picture,
it is necessary to obtain additional 15
information from stakeholders about
their experiences and perceived safety at 10
locations across the city.
5
Methodology
Citywide crash information from January 0
% of All % of All Fatal % of All Serious
1, 2016 through December 31, 2020 was Crashes Crashes Injury Crashes
analyzed using MnDOT’s Crash Mapping
Application (MnCMAT2). This data is based
on information provided by the responding
law enforcement officer, victims, and Pedestrian and
witnesses. It is important to recognize
that each of these participants have bicycle crashes are
their own unique perspective on the
events that occurred which are impacted 2% of all crashes
by the emotion and personal feelings of
the individual. These elements should be
but account
considered when interpreting the data. for 39% of fatal
Results crashes and 14%
of serious injury
There were a total of 9,628 reported
crashes in Rochester during the last
5 years. Of those crashes, 79 involved
pedestrians, 89 involved bicyclists, and the
crashes.
remaining 9,460 crashes were vehicle only
crashes. Pedestrian and bicycle crashes Of the 168 pedestrian and bicycle crashes
make up a small percentage of the total (shown in Figure 11), approximately 85%
crashes within the City of Rochester were coded as occurring on City streets,
(approximately 2%) but account for 39% the other 15% of crashes occurred along
of fatal and 14% of serious injury crashes the State, County, or other roadways.
(Figure 10).
19
Packet Pg. 97
F.1.b
Figure 11. Pedestrian and Bicycle Crashes, 2016-2020
85 ST NW
PEDESTRIAN/BIKE
31 AVE NW
18 AVE NW
CRASHES
(2016-2020) 75 ST NW £
52
£
63 75 S
T NE
PRAIR
!
IE V
N
ISTAD
VE
60 AVE NW
37 AVE NW
CITY OF ROCHESTER
YA
NW
R NW
WA
65 ST NW OV
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ER
BANDEL R D
D
LAN
OA
PLAN D
DR NW
BR
Pedestrian Crashes
55 ST NW
! W
Essex
RD N
50 AVE NW
! Fatal Northern 48 ST NW
Park
48 ST NE
! Serious Injury
Hills Golf !
ER
Course
W RIV
Other Crashes 41 ST NW
Bike Crashes
37 ST NW 37 ST
! ! !! NE
NORTHE R
E RIVE R RD NE
VAL EC
W
IRC
9 AVE N
! Fatal
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW LE
W CIR
DR
Y
12
HI
! Serious Injury N
AVE NW
GH
NE
ELT
! V D NE
VIO L A R
CLE
AL
DR
KR-6
ON
! Other Crashes Reservoir !
LE
YD
NW
IL
H
R
DR N
LS NE
19 ST NW
! !! DR
£ !NW
W
14
! W 7S ! !14 ST NE
11 AVE NW
!IL DER R T NW
! ! Silver !
! Lake
11 AVE NE
D NW Quarry Hill
!
! ! !! 7 ST N
! E !
Nature
Center
! !! !
scade
3 ST N W Ca ke
! La
! ! ! CENTER ST E
COUNTRY CL ! !!
23 AVE SW
! !! !
! !!!! 4 ST SE
UB RD COLLEGE VIEW RD E
W !! !!2!ST! SW
30 AVE SE
6 ST SW ! ! ! ! !!
6 ST SE
W CI R
!Soldiers!
! ! ! 8 1/2 ST SE
3 AVE SE
! Memorial Field ! 15 A
8 AVE SE
LE
£
14
VE
C
South Fork
!
DR
Zumbro River
! ! !! ! !
SE
L
60 AVE SW
VAL E
FOX
SW
R EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

D
16 S T SW !
SW
!
MA
S W
! ! Bear ION R!
£
RD Bamber 16 ST SE
R
LE
M Lake 63 !
!
11 A
SA Creek D
SW ! SE
BROADWAY AVE S
Zumbro South
INSET MAP RD20 ST SW
V
E SE
Park 20 ST SE
MAYO W O O D
!
!
! £
52 PIN
EW
BROADWAY AVE N
O OD
R L A KE DR NE
!
RD SW
7 ST NW RD
S E
!
11 AVE NW
7 ST NE
! !
EY
18 AVE SW
L 30 ST SE
L
VA
! !
BAMBER
VE
CIV
!
W SIL
I C CENTER DR NW
!
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
£
6 AVE NW
16 AVE NW
Cascade
!
4 AVE NW
52 Creek
3 AVE NW
! ! 45 ST SE
!
£
14
CENTER ST W
!
!
!
48 ST SW
CENTER ST E
!
!
48 ST SE Gamehaven
Reservoir
!
BROADWAY AVE S
11 AVE SW
6 AVE SW
!
ST BRIDGET RD SE
! ! ! ! !
2 ST SW
! ! ! ! 55 ST SE
SIMPSON RD SE
3 AVE SW
Willow
11 AVE SW
Creek
! Reservoir
4 ST SE
4 ST SW
! !
£
63
4 AVE SW
COUNTY RD 8 SW
! !
!
3 AVE SE
!
6 ST SW
!! CO D 16 SE
SW ! Soldiers
! U N TY R
18 AVE
¥
COUN
£
63
Memorial TY W 90
L C DR S
COUNTY RD 20 SE
Field R D 16 SW
COUNTY RD 1 SE
! !
0 1 2 MILES
Root
River
Park
20
Packet Pg. 98
F.1.b
. ll six of the fatal pedestrian crashes

A Table 1. Population and Jobs by Equity
occurred when it was dark. Four of the Area
16 serious injury pedestrian and bicycle
crashes occurred when it was dark.
Access Percent of Percent
. ix of the 23 fatal and serious injury
S to Power, Population of Jobs
Resources,
pedestrian and bicycle crashes involved a and Mobility
left turning vehicle failing to yield. Options
The relationship between crashes and

equity status is shown in Figure 12. The Least 19% 50%
areas where residents generally have
the least access to power, resources, Average 48% 29%
and mobility options experience a
disproportionate number of crashes
Most 33% 21%
relative to their residential population.
Some of the disparity may be explained by
the high number of jobs and destinations
in these areas (Table 1). The areas where Figure 12. Crashes by Equity Area
resident have the least access to
resources contain 19% of Rochester’s
60
population and 50% of its jobs, but 73%
of all fatal and severe injury pedestrian
50
crashes.
Twenty percent of pedestrian and bicycle

40
crashes occurred in the 0.3 square mile
downtown area near Mayo Clinic, which is
also within an area where residents have 30
the least access to resources, power, and

mobility options. 20
10
0
% of % of Bicycle % of Vehicle
Pedestrian Crashes Crashes
Crashes
Census Block Group Access to Power,

Resources, and Mobility Options
Least Average Most
21
Packet Pg. 99
F.1.b
Level of Traffic Stress Most people living in Rochester are likely to

be interested in biking, but uncomfortable
A majority of the public would like to walk riding on busy streets.
or ride bicycles more but are discouraged
from doing so by perceived safety The Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (BLTS)
concerns, lack of facilities, or a lack of analysis estimates the level of comfort for
knowledge about where the appropriate people biking on a given roadway segment.
facilities are located. Surveys nationally BLTS helps to identify where gaps or
show that 50-60 percent of people say deficiencies in a bike network exist, and
they would ride a bicycle more (or start provides a measure of how likely different
riding) if they had access to facilities that types of riders, based on ability and
provided more separation from traffic, comfort level, are to use the facility.
lower traffic speeds, and/or lower traffic
Methodology
volumes (Figure 13). Additionally, evidence
has shown that increasing the number of BLTS is determined by characteristics of
bicyclists on the road improves safety for a given roadway segment that affect
all transportation modes. Cities with high a bicyclist’s perception of safety and
bicycling rates tend to have lower crash comfort, including posted speed limit,
rates. number of travel lanes, and the presence
and character of bicycle lanes. The
Figure 13. Types of Bicyclists
22
Packet Pg. 100
F.1.b
combination of this criteria classifies a where only strong and fearless bicyclists
road segment into one of four levels of would feel comfortable riding. These
traffic stress as shown in Figure 14: roadways are generally characterized
by high volumes, high speeds, several
• BLTS 1 represents roadways where travel lanes, and complex transitions
bicyclists of all ages and abilities would approaching and crossing intersections.
feel comfortable riding. These roadways
are generally characterized by low Results
volumes, low speeds, no more than
The results of the BLTS analysis, shown in
two travel lanes, and traffic control
Figure 15, help identify existing areas that
measures at intersections. These
roadways may have bicycle facilities; are low-stress for many bicyclists, and
separated shared-use paths for identifies the degree to which roadways
bicycles also fall into this category. must be improved in order to provide a
• BLTS 2 represents slightly less comfortable experience for riders of all
comfortable roadways, where most ages and abilities.
adults would feel comfortable riding.
Approximately 65% of the street network
• BLTS 3 represents moderately
uncomfortable roadways, where most within the City of Rochester is classified
experienced bicyclists would feel as BLTS 1, facilities on which people of all
comfortable riding. ages and abilities would feel comfortable
• .BLTS 4 represents high-stress roadways riding. This low stress network is primarily
LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS

Figure 14. Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress and typical roadway conditions
INCREASING LEVEL OF COMFORT, SAFETY, AND INTEREST IN BICYCLING FOR TRANSPORTATION
LTS 4 LTS 3 LTS 2 LTS 1

No bike lane on a busy street Narrow bike lane or shoulder Buffered bike lane on a calm street Separated bike lane
on a busy street
23
Packet Pg. 101
F.1.b
Figure 15. Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
COUNTY RD 3 NW
BICYCLE LEVEL OF
31 AVE NW
£
TRAFFIC STRESS 52
75 ST NW
NW
R £
63 75 ST NE
E VI STA D
N
18 AVE NW
E
AV
60 AVE NW
CITY OF ROCHESTER
AY
NW South Fork
BANDEL RD NW
I
65 ST NW PRAI R
DW
D Zumbro River
W RIVER R
OA
BR
PLAN
55 ST NW
BICYCLE LEVEL OF
NE
Essex
22 AVE NW
E RIVER RD
Park
TRAFFIC STRESS Northern
48 ST NE
Hills Golf
4 (Highest Stress)
50 AVE NW
Course
3 41 ST NW
2
37 ST NW 37 ST
NORTHE R N
W NE
VAL E CIR
1 (Lowest Stress)
RIV
CL
LE
VALLEYHIGH RD NW ED
W CIR
ER
R
Y
D NE
HI
PK
NE
AR
GH
WY N
CLE D
KR-6
ELTO
R
Reservoir
DR
LL
NW
Reservoir E
W W Y
N
19 ST NW DR
N
R NW
£
E
14 14
ST NE
3 ST N W
CENTER ST E
DR SE
NTRY CLUB R
23 AVE SW
2 ST SW 4 ST S E
W CI R C
6 ST SW 6 ST SE
COLL E GE
Soldiers
3 AVE SE
8 AVE SE
8 1/2 ST SE
LE
FOX
VALLE
Memorial
Field £
14
60 AVE SW
DR
R
D
SW
SW

W
M
A
R T SW ON
EM Zumbro Lake
DOWNTOWN INSET MAP L
11 A
SA
BROAD
RD
W
South Park S
RD SE
V
D 20 ST SW 20 ST SE
E SE
O
EL MAYO W O
WAY AVE S
TO
N
HI
£
52 PIN
Z um br o R iv
E
S o u t h F or r
LL WO
3 AVE NW
SD
D 15 SW
OD R
11 AVE NE
18 AVE S W
RN
RD S
AS W DS
E
SI
SI
EY
DR 30 ST SE
k
LL
e
YR
£ NW
£
VA
63
COUNT
63
BAMBER
14 ST NW 13 S T NW 14 ST NE
11 AVE NW
BROADWAY AVE N
40 ST SW 40 ST SE
4 AVE NW
R LAKE DR NE
Si
lver Lake
45 ST SE
7 ST NW
CI Reservoir
ST BRIDGET RD SE
VI 7 ST NE
£
C C ENTER DR NW
VE
52
W SIL
16 AVE NW
6 AVE NW
55 ST SE
SIMPSON RD SE
Willow Creek
11 AVE SW
Reservoir
16 AVE SW
11 AVE SW
11 AVE SE
COUNTY RD 8 SW
2 ST SW
Y RD 16 SE
TY
RD 1 C OUNT
6
CO U N
¥
4 ST SW 4 ST SE SW
W 90
L C DR S
3 AVE SW
COUNTY RD 1 SE
BROADWAY AVE S
W 6 ST SW 6 ST SE Bear
3 AVE SE
Creek
18 AVES
COUNTY RD 20 SE
8 AVE SE
6 AVE SW
Soldiers Root River
£
14 Memorial
Field
9 ST SE Park
HWY 30 SW
0 1 2 M ILES
£
63
24
Packet Pg. 102
F.1.b
BLTS 4 Roadway near Washington Elementary School
comprised of low speed residential streets The areas where residents have the least
and trails. access to resources, power, and mobility
options make up 13% of the city’s land
Five percent of the network is classified as
area, but contain 21% of the city’s BLTS
BLTS 2, comfortable for most adults. 12% is
3 and 4 roadways. 34% of the network in
classified as BLTS 3, comfortable only for
these areas is higher stress.
experienced riders, and 19% is classified
as BLTS 4, high stress roadways where The areas where residents have the most
only strong and fearless bicyclists may access to resources, power, and mobility
be comfortable. Most BLTS 4 roadways options make up 45% of the city’s land
are multilane, higher speed roadways like area but contain only 37% of the BLTS 3
Circle Dr, Civic Center Dr, Broadway Ave, and 4 roadways. 24% of the network in
and 2nd St SE. these areas is higher stress.
While BLTS 1 and 2 facilities make up most

of the transportation network, in many
cases riders on lower stress facilities must
make stressful crossings of BLTS 3 and
4 roadways or travel significantly out of
their way to lower stress crossings. These
stressful crossings discourage many
people from riding at all.
25
Packet Pg. 103
26

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 104

RESOURCES
APPENDIX C:
IMPLEMENTATION
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 105

MICROMOBILITY
SHARED
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 106

F.1.b
Appendix C: Implementation Resources
DEFINE PROGRAM EVALUATE RESOURCE

GOALS AVAILABILITY
Establishing a set of program goals An accurate understanding of both
established a foundation for subsequent financial and non-financial resources will
decision-making about how to contribute to successful and sustained
design, fund, and implement a shared program implementation. How much
micromobility program. Common program funding is available from public and non-
goals include: public sources? What can private partners
bring to the table? What is the balance
• Improve access to key destinations
between start-up costs (those that are
• I.mprove access to and from public
incurred only once, at the beginning of the
transit
program) and ongoing operating costs,
• Improve public health which are incurred annually?
• Improve transportation system safety
While some early iterations of shared
• Introduce new people to biking and
other forms of non-vehicular travel micromobility programs were funded
entirely by private organizations, time has
• Reduce congestion
shown that public investment is critical
• Reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)
to sustain an effective and equitable
emissions and other types of pollution
program. This aligns with other modes of
(e.g., noise, water, particulate)
transportation, where public investment—
Equity is an overarching priority for e.g., the costs for constructing and
program design should and should be maintaining roadways and free public
incorporated into each specific program parking for private automobiles, or the
goal. Thoughtful program design decisions cost of purchasing and operating buses
can ensure that community members as part of a transit system—supplements
who have been most harmed by—and user fees and other funding systems.
who have benefited the least from—
But because shared micromobility can
auto-centric transportation systems
meet many private organizations’ goals,
are disproportionately benefit from
opportunities for partnership abound.
shared micromobility. Pricing structures,
Sponsorship on bikes, scooters, or docking
infrastructure siting, and other program
stations can drive brand awareness.
design choices will influence the equity
Organizational memberships can serve as
impacts of shared micromobility.
a perk for employees and comprise a large
share of system ridership and revenue.
“Title” sponsorship, where a single entity

is branded on all devices, infrastructure,
and communications, can be a substantial
3
Packet Pg. 107
F.1.b
Figure 1. Composition of operating costs and revenues for shared micromobility
Sponsorships Overhead
Per Ride Fees
Rebalancing/ Recharging
Fixed Fees
Maintenance
Subsidies
Marketing
Other Grants
Customer Support
Federal Grants
Other Permit and Regulatory Fees
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
% of Revenues % of Operating Costs
Source: NABSA 2020 State of the Industry Report
funding source for a program. New York and can fill in gaps not covered by other
City’s “Citi Bike” program, where Citi Bank revenue sources. Local funding can also
is the title sponsor, is an iconic example help address community-specific goals,
of how this type of partnership can such as improving equitable access to a
work. Major local institutions, such as the local park or grocery store.
Mayo Clinic, IBM, or institutions of higher
Figure 1 describes the typical composition
education can be ideal partners, either
of operating costs and revenues for
for title sponsorship or other types of
agency and nonprofit owned shared
program support.
micromobility systems.
Public funding can come from the local,
state, and federal levels. Federal funding
sources include the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA), Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), and Department
of Energy (DOE). At the state level, the
Transportation Alternatives Solicitation,
operated by the Minnesota Department
of Transportation (MnDOT), is a funding
source that support bicycle-related
projects and infrastructure. Local funding,
meanwhile, is often the most flexible
4
Packet Pg. 108
F.1.b
REVIEW LAWS & IDENTIFY PROGRAM

REGULATIONS PARAMETERS
An understanding of the legal landscape— With a clear set of program goals, an
primarily the local ordinances and state understanding of available resources,
statutes that relate to conventional knowledge of the legal context, and
bicycle, electric bicycle, and electric socio-demographic data describing
scooter use in Rochester—will inform bicycle facilities and related community
program design as well. The successful characteristics, the City will be poised to
operation of shared micromobility make critical program design decisions.
programs in communities across
Minnesota suggests that municipalities
such as Rochester can address any legal
requirements or constraints and offer
their community members important
transportation benefits via shared
micromobility. Municipal counsel can
provide insight on this front, and insurance
and liability coverage can help to reduce
risks.
ASSESS EXISTING
INFRASTRUCTURE &
NEEDS
The existing conditions analyses

conducted as part of this plan forms
the basis for a fuller understanding of
bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in
Rochester. By leveraging these data and
findings, Rochester can identify important
infrastructure characteristics—e.g.,
network gaps, protected bike corridors,
areas of high need—and use these to
shape where micromobility services are
offered, as well as areas where additional
infrastructure is needed to support safe
and comfortable trips.
5
Packet Pg. 109
COST ESTIMATES
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 110

F.1.b
INTRODUCTION • MnDOT average bid prices and

Rochester’s average bid prices were
recorded for bid items needed to
complete each treatment.
The project team developed typical unit
• Applicable items were associated to
costs for a variety of bicycle treatments each treatment and quantities for each
based on the Rochester Design Resource were estimated.
Guide. These per unit costs were then
• Typically, the higher bid price was used
applied to the ten near-term projects. This to complete cost calculations.
process involved the following elements:
Calculated unit costs were then compared
• Identification of pedestrian and bicycle
with the researched costs to ensure
friendly treatments from the Rochester
accuracy of estimated quantities and
Design Resource Guide
costs. The final “unit cost estimate” was
• Research of associated costs for each
achieved by selecting the greatest cost
treatment
estimate (so long as it was not an outlier
• Compilation of per-unit costs
from the others) and increasing by 10%.
• Application of per-unit costs to the ten
near term projects Recommended treatment types for
near term projects (shown in Figure 2)
METHODOLOGY were developed assuming a retrofit (not
a reconstruction where curbs could be
moved) to show what could be possible
First, the project team selected applicable without a full reconstruction and to
pedestrian and bicycle treatments that demonstrate how the unit cost estimate
could be implemented by the city from the table can be directly applied to planning-
City of Rochester Design Resource Guide.
level project cost estimates. Treatment
Three treatments were identified for
types are based on the Rochester Design
the “pedestrian toolbox”, 10 treatments
for the “bicycle toolbox”, 10 treatments Resource Guide and a desktop review
for “crossing treatments” and two of roadway conditions (widths, lane
treatments for “supporting facilities”. configurations, parking presence, bus stop
These 25 treatments and the assumptions presence, speed limit, traffic volumes,
associated with them are shown in Table 1, etc).
Table 2, Table 3, and Table 4. Assumptions
were made at the discretion of the To develop near term project cost
engineer. estimates, the team selected the
Research was conducted on each of these appropriate treatments to align with the
treatments from a wide variety of sources recommendations, applied the appropriate
explained later in this document. General quantities to each treatment, and
per unit costs were gathered from these calculated a projected cost to achieve an
sources and recorded. This step was
AAA facility and crossing improvements
completed to gain a general idea of unit
for each of the 10 near term projects
costs for each treatment. Per-unit costs
were calculated using average bid prices (Table 5).
and estimated quantities.
7
Packet Pg. 111
F.1.b
Figure 2. All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network Near Term Projects
*Note: projects
are numbered in no
particular order
8
Packet Pg. 112
F.1.b
Table 1. Pedestrian Toolbox Unit Costs*
Treatment Assumptions Unit Unit Cost
Estimate
Directional Curb Includes removal of diagonal curb ramp EA $8,000

Ramp
Curb Extension Assumed 8'x20' extension EA $16,500
Corner Radii Assumed 30' radius to 5' radius EA $24,000
Table 2. Supporting Facility Unit Costs*

Estimate
Short Term Bike Inverted U with concrete pad EA $750

Parking
Long Term Bike Bike locker EA $2,600

Parking
*Sources: Previous Projects (SEH, Rochester); 2020 Average Bid Prices for Awarded Contracts;
Costs for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure Improvements; Pedestrian Crosswalk Policy
Development Guidelines; Texas Bicycle Tourism Trails Study
9
Packet Pg. 113
F.1.b
Table 3. Bicycle Toolbox Unit Costs*

Estimate
Bicycle Lanes Striping changes to add lanes on both MI $110,000
sides of street - no parking lanes
Bicycle Lanes Striping changes to add lanes on both MI $132,000

sides of street - with parking lanes
Buffered Bicycle Striping changes to add lanes and MI $132,000

Lanes buffers on both sides of street - no
parking lanes
Buffered Bicycle Striping changes to add lanes and MI $152,000

Lanes buffers on both sides of street - with
parking lanes
Separated Bike One-way with traffic delineators on MI $190,000

Lanes both sides of street
Separated Bike Two-way with striped median and MI $168,000

Lanes traffic delineators on one side of
street
Separated Bike One-way with concrete median and MI $1,880,000

Lanes curb on both sides of street
Separated Bike Two-way with concrete median and MI $1,012,000

Lanes curb on one side of street
Bike Boulevard Includes signage and painted symbols MI $14,000
Shared Use Trail MI $575,000
10
Packet Pg. 114
F.1.b
Table 4. Crossing Treatments Unit Costs*
Estimate
Marked Crosswalks EA/LEG $3,300
Mid Block Crosswalk Includes 8'x20' pedestrian refuge EA $13,200

island
Rectangular Rapid EA $35,000

Flashing Beacon
(RRFB)
Ped Hybrid Beacon EA $125,000
Separated Bicycle EA/ $2,000

Signal Phase HEAD
Bike Detection & Loop detection system EA $2,000

Actuation
Bicycle Box Includes paint and 2 signs EA $12,500
Two-Stage Turn Box EA $2,200
Driveway & Minor EA $2,750

Street Crossings
Roundabout Upgrade existing roundabout to EA $95,000

bicycle friendly
11
Packet Pg. 115
F.1.b
Table 5. Near Term AAA Project Planning Level Cost Estimates
Street Length (mi) Total Cost
1: Elton Hills Dr from Assisi Dr NW to Broadway Ave N 1.8 $2,005,300
2: 7th St NW/NE from Douglas Trail to 11th Ave NE 2.3 $1,990,100
3: Center St E from Zumbro River to 15th Ave SE 0.7 $164,300
4: 4th St SE from Broadway to 19th Ave SE 1.4 $2,027,400
5: 16th St SW/SE from Salem Rd SW to 11th Ave SE 2.2 $4,329,000
6: 11th Ave SW/NW from 14th St NW to 2nd St SW 1 $1,555,000
7: 11th Ave NE/SE from 4th St SE to 14th St NE 1.2 $2,438,000
8: 16th Ave NW connection from trail to 4th St NW 0.03 $20,000
9: 3rd Ave SE from 6th St SE to Broadway 2 $3,942,000
10: 41st St NW from W Circle Dr NW to W River Pkwy NW 2.5 $1,590,650
12
Packet Pg. 116
13
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 117

STREET CROSS
SECTIONS
MULTIMODAL
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 118

F.1.b
Figure 3, Figure 4, and Figure 5 show example cross sections for three near-term All
Ages and Abilities bicycle projects. The cross-sections are meant to be planning-level
suggestions of “short-range” retrofit ideas for high priority streets that would fit within
the existing curb-to-curb width of the existing street. Note that other locations of the
streets have varying cross sections and high-complexity intersections that would require
more extensive analysis and development of assumptions—and may require curbs to
change location and present potential right-of-way impacts.
Figure 3. 4th St SE from 7th Ave SE to 19th Ave SE
15
Packet Pg. 119
F.1.b
Figure 4. 11th Ave NW from 10th St NW to 14th St NW
16
Packet Pg. 120
F.1.b
Figure 5. 7th St NW from Douglas Trail to 13th Ave NW
17
Packet Pg. 121
18

F.1.b
Packet Pg. 122

RESOURCE GUIDE
APPENDIX D: DESIGN
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 123

TABLE OF CONTENTS
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 124

F.1.b
01 INTRODUCTION 05 ENHANCED CROSSING

Context 5 TREATMENTS
Guidance Basis 8 Crosswalks
Quick Build Projects 9 Marked Crosswalks at Intersections 52
Design Needs of Pedestrians 14 Marked Crosswalks at Midblock 54
Design Needs of Bicyclists 18 Median Refuge Islands 55
Signals and Beacons
Pedestrian Signalization Improvements 56
02 PEDESTRIAN TOOLBOX Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons 57

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon 58
Introduction 21
Separated Bike Signal Phase 59
Sidewalks
Bike Detection and Actuation 61
Sidewalk Zones and Widths 22
Intersection Treatments
Curb Ramps 24
Bike Box 63
Curb Extensions 26
Two Stage Turn Box 65
Corner Radii 27
Driveway and Minor Street Crossings 66
Bike Mixing Zones 68
Roundabouts 70
03 BICYCLE TOOLBOX Raised Intersections 72
Introduction 29
Bike Lanes
Standard Bike Lanes 32
06 NETWORK CONNECTIONS
Buffered Bike Lanes 34
AND SUPPORTING
Separated Bike Lanes - One-way 36
FACILITIES
Separated Bike Lanes - Two-way 38
Short-term Bike Parking 75
Separated Bike Lane Barriers 40
Long-term Bike Parking 79
Bike Boulevards
Transit Stop Design 81
Bike Boulevard Overview 42
Trail and On-Street Transitions 82
Traffic Calming 44
Wayfinding 84
04 SHARED USE TRAILS

07 PEDESTRIAN-
Shared Use Trails 47 BICYCLE OPERATIONS AND
Bollard Alternatives 49 MAINTENANCE
Screening/Barrier Separation Types 50
Sidewalk Maintenance 87
Parking, Loading, and Garbage Access 88
Bike Access Through Construction Areas 90
Bike Facility Maintenance 92
Winter Maintenance Best Practices 94
Winter Maintenance Program 102
Packet Pg. 125

INTRODUCTION
01
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 126

F.1.b
Appendix D: Design Resource Guide
CONTEXT
Over the course of the last two decades, cities new and reconstructed local streets will be
across the United States have altered the way designed for a 20 mph speed limit.
streets and roads are built. Paradigms are
This design toolbox presents coordinated
shifting as street-space is no longer viewed as
guidance for many audiences—local planners,
only for automobiles: place-making advocates
engineers, elected officials, the development
have increasingly attempted to “reclaim” the
community, and community advocates—
streets; sidewalks are expanding to provide
with the collective mission of improving the
additional space for pedestrians; public right-
walkability and bikeability of Rochester. This
of-way such as on-street parking stalls are
toolkit specifically seeks to empower the
converted to outdoor patios, bike parking,
community to aid city officials in advancing
or urban landscape areas; and, the COVID-19
Rochester’s 2009 Complete Streets Policy.
pandemic has fundamentally altered the way
By distributing ownership into the hands of
cities manage the curbside. Intentional design
invested residents, it intends to enhance
is critical to establishing a cost-effective
collaboration between the City and the
and contextually appropriate multimodal
community during the design and engineering
transportation network within Rochester.
phases of road rehabilitation projects.
In 2009, Rochester became the first city in
This toolkit is a mechanism by which local
Minnesota to adopt a “Complete Streets”
advocacy committees may measure City
policy. Complete streets are designed to
projects against its commitment to maintain
accommodate all users by enabling safe and
safe and friendly neighborhoods, eliminate
convenient access for pedestrians, bicyclists,
severe injuries and traffic deaths on City
motorists, and transit riders of all ages and
streets, and increase neighborhood vitality and
abilities. Complete streets improve community
livability. Finally, this toolkit is meant to inspire
connectivity by providing travelers with
innovation in planning, designing, constructing,
options to access the places they need to
and maintaining Rochester’s streets for
go. Nonetheless, while the goal of complete
pedestrians and bicyclists of all ages and
streets is to better accommodate all users of
abilities.
all abilities, this does not mean all modes are
equally prioritized on every street. Planners and project designers should
refer to these guidelines in developing the
Between 2019 and 2021, Rochester conducted
infrastructure projects recommended by
a city-wide Speed Limit Technical Evaluation
this plan, but they are not a substitute for
and subsequent “Slower-is-Safer” Campaign.
thorough project-by-project evaluation by
As a result, speed limits on all local streets
a landscape architect or engineer upon
were reduced to 25 mph. Speed limit reductions
implementation. Furthermore, this toolkit is not
enforceable by law is one tactic to promote
intended as a legal standard, but offers design
traffic safety: long-term changes to driving
and cost-estimate guidance, and should
behavior often requires physical roadway
be integrated with local, state, and federal
design and construction with the goal to
policies and resources to ensure compliance.
increase safety for all users. In the city, all
5
Packet Pg. 127
F.1.b
ADDITIONAL CONTEXTUAL NOTES
• Future roadway planning, engineering, • Compatible design does more than
design and construction will continue help those who already walk or bicycle:
to strive for a balanced transportation it encourages greater use of non-
system that includes a seamless, motorized transportation.
accessible bicycle and pedestrian • The design guidelines and
network and encourages bicycle and recommendations in this document
pedestrian travel wherever possible are for use on City of Rochester
• Achieving the appropriate design for roadways. Projects must not only be
any project is not a simple process planned for their physical aspects as
as designers are expected to facilities serving specific transportation
balance many competing needs and objectives; they must also consider
constraints. In order to address public effects on the aesthetic, social,
expectations, a community’s needs, economic and environmental values,
and the limitations of available funding needs, constraints and opportunities
and right-of-way, a project’s broader in a larger community setting. This is
context and its projected impacts commonly known as Context Sensitive
needs to be considered when applying Design, and should be employed
this design toolkit. when determining which standard is
applicable in each scenario.
• There are many reasons to integrate
bicycle and pedestrian facilities into • All walkway and bikeway design
typical roadway development policy. guidelines in this document meet
The goal of a transportation system or exceed the minimums set by
is to better meet the needs of people the Americans with Disabilities Act
- whether in vehicles, bicyclists or Accessible Design Guidelines (ADAAG)
pedestrians - and to provide access to and the Public Right of Way Accessibility
goods, services, and activities. Guidelines (PROWAG).
• Supporting active modes gives users • All traffic control devices, signs,
important transportation choices, pavement markings used and identified
whether it is to make trips entirely by in this document must conform to the
walking or bicycling, or to access public “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
transit. Often in urban or suburban Devices” (MUTCD).
areas, walking and bicycling are the
fastest and most efficient ways to
perform short trips.
• Convenient non-motorized travel
provides many benefits, including
reduced traffic congestion, user
savings, road and parking facility
savings, economic development, and a
better environment by helping reduce
the greenhouse gases.
6
Packet Pg. 128
This page intentionally left blank
7
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 129

F.1.b
GUIDANCE BASIS
The sections that follow serve as an inventory of pedestrian and bicycle design
treatments and provide guidelines for their development. These treatments and design
guidelines are important because they represent the tools for creating a pedestrian- and
bicycle-friendly, accessible community. The guidelines are not, however, a substitute for
a more thorough evaluation by a professional engineer prior to implementation of facility
improvements. The following guidelines are incorporated in this Design Guide.
National Guidance Minnesota Guidance

The National Association of City Minnesota Manual on Uniform
Transportation Officials’ (NACTO) Urban Traffic Control Devices
Bikeway Design Guide (2012) and Urban (MN MUTCD) defines the
Street Design Guide (2013) are collections standards used by road
of nationally recognized street design managers nationwide to install
standards, and offers guidance on the and maintain traffic control
current state of the practice designs. devices on all public streets,
highways, bikeways, and private
roads open to public traffic.
The National Association of City Transportation The Minnesota Department

Officials’ (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design of Transportations's Bicycle
Guide (2012) provides cities with state- Facility Design Manual
of-the-practice solutions that can help (2020) establishes uniform
create complete streets that are safe and design criteria for Minnesota
enjoyable for bicyclists. The designs were roadways. The manual should
developed by cities for cities, since unique be used in conjunction with the
urban streets require innovative solutions. current versions of the MnDOT
In August 2013, the Federal Highway Road Design Manual and the
Administration issued a memorandum Minnesota Manual on Uniform
officially supporting use of the document. Traffic Control Devices.
Separated Bike Lane Planning and The Minnesota Department of

Design Guide (2015) is the latest national Transportations's Minnesota's
guidance on the planning and design of Best Practices for Pedestrian
separated bike lane facilities released and Bicycle Safety (2021)
by the Federal Highway Administration identifies proven strategies
(FHWA). The resource documents best and treatments. The manual
practices as demonstrated around the should be used in conjunction
U.S., and offers ideas on future areas of with the current versions of the
research, evaluation and design flexibility. MnDOT Road Design Manual
and the Minnesota MUTCD
The Federal Highway Administration’s

Small Town and Rural Multimodal The City of Rochester’s
Networks Report (2016) offers resources DMC City Loop draft (2018)
and ideas to help small towns and rural refines and advances the
communities support safe, accessible, concepts described in the DMC
comfortable, and active travel for people Development Plan and puts
of all ages and abilities. It connects forward recommendations
existing guidance to rural practice and for facility design, route
includes examples of peer communities. alignment, and implementation
of the City Loop.
8
Packet Pg. 130
F.1.b
QUICK BUILD PROJECTS

Throughout this document quick build
projects are identified with a shovel icon.
Quick build projects will also be identified
with a project timeframe of: “now,” “soon,”
or “later” that depends on the design
parameters, implementation feasibility,
and funding availability of the particular NOW SOON LATER
project.
Quick build is a method to improve Quick Build Defined

communities for walking, bicycling, and
Quick build puts bicycle, pedestrian or
micromobility on a minimal budget and on
traffic safety improvements in place using
a compressed timeline, as both planning
low-cost materials that can be installed
and building are much less expensive.
quickly. Quick build projects are flexible
Quick build works to meet mobility needs and designed to be easily changed or even
by helping people to choose active modes removed if necessary. Most quick build
more often. Those mobility needs will vary projects can be constructed in mere days
depending on the community, and may or weeks and can go from conception to
include safer crossings, slower streets, reality within months. Quick build projects
an extended bikeway network, or safer are not pop-up or demonstration projects
routes to transit, schools, and essential that are intended to be removed after a
workplaces. In every case, people require short period.
a safe, connected, and comfortable
Quick build allows the community to
network for active transportation.
benefit immediately from walking and
bicycling safety improvements, with
9
Packet Pg. 131
F.1.b
flexibility for public feedback to impact

the design while building enthusiasm
and support for more permanent
infrastructure. Once a project is accepted
by a community, quick builds can last for
years if maintained, or rebuilt using more
durable materials.
The goal is to offer a series of interim

street improvements that create a
complete, connected network of physically
safe environments for people walking,
bicycling, and using micromobility to get
safely where they wish to go. Quick build
infrastructure is usually more than a bike
lane quickly striped; it should create the
kind of comfortable, protected, connected
bikeways that have been proven to enable
people of all ages and abilities to use
active transportation.
have the support of new stakeholders.
Ideally, quick build projects will build
off of existing plans that have already Quick build projects are intended to
been approved and were created be community-led and, based on real-
with community input. Quick build time feedback, iterative and adaptable.
becomes a way to implement previously An inclusive planning process which
recommended active transportation consults and involves the community
projects in a relatively short time throughout is essential. While quick build
frame. More extensive, and potentially leverages opportunities for speed and
permanent, improvements can be added ease of installation, projects should
in the future as the project evolves, based not move forward without consultation,
on public input, interest, and use. engagement, and open lines of
communication with the community
Real Time Public Engagement members who will be most impacted by
Traditional projects require long periods a project’s creation or by its removal.
of outreach for projects that are planned This is important during planning and
for years in the future. Meetings typically implementation—and beyond, and planners
attract more privileged stakeholders with should extend the public feedback period
the spare time to engage in the process. into a longer term period of project
Stakeholders change as time passes, evaluation.
requiring more outreach when the project
is built according to old plans that may not
10
Packet Pg. 132
F.1.b
Re-Allocating Space is Easier Assemble the Team

Sometimes it is necessary to reallocate Who needs to be at the table?
road space within the existing cross-
How does one assemble an administrative
section to create safer crossings for
team or working group to get a quick build
pedestrians or a protected lane for people
project off and running? The answer is not
on bikes. With quick build, communities
simple or formulaic, as the answer differs
get to see and adjust what works on
in as many ways as there are different
the ground, rather than in theory. Unlike
agency departmental structures and
concrete infrastructure, quick build street
administrations. Here are some key things
designs can be adapted by adding a
to keep in mind and to effectively deliver
planter box, moving bollards, restriping
quick build projects.
a lane, or even removing a project if
necessary. During installation the City of Some of these people need to be at every
Rochester can say “we are trying this.” discussion, others don’t. Some need to
Evaluation and review becomes part of be consulted, others simply informed.
the process and feedback on a quick Some are critical, while some are optional.
build design can become part of the Some may be staff while others are hired
public input for the eventual project, if the consultants. Build your team for what
public supports making it permanent. This makes sense in your community for your
feedback is usually much more informed project. If you cannot fill a role listed here
than traditional planning processes, where due to budget or staffing constraints,
stakeholders are asked to imagine how pursue additional outreach to that
it will feel to use a new street alignment department to ensure the project can be
based on modeled data, renderings and implemented smoothly with appropriate
PowerPoint presentations. buy-in from the role outlined for the
“missing seat.”
Feedback from the community can include
the need for curb access for delivery and Who’s not at the table?
passenger access. Business managers,
Meaningfully including everyone who needs
delivery people, and other users can see
to have a voice in the process is not easy.
the impact in real time, and planners can
Continue to identify who is missing and to
adjust the design to accommodate those
create new ways to expand engagement
needs.
throughout the process. Take a close look
at the “table” the team has set to see if
the format, messaging, power dynamics,
or other factors present unintentional
barriers or biases. Leverage the trial period
as an opportunity to call attention to
the need for broad, inclusive assessment
and encourage additional community
members, leaders and organizations to
participate.
11
Packet Pg. 133
F.1.b
Person Role
Agency Staff
• Champions the value of and need for quick-build facilities to

the public and other municipal staff
• Keeps project on track, problem solves issues as they arise,
maintaining momentum and overall communication among
the various stakeholders and participants
• Identifies community partners and stakeholders who need
to be at the table and helps to ensure they are engaged
Key Coordinator • Available for feedback and communication from
stakeholders, including elected officials, other municipal
staff, and community leaders
• Stays aware of projects and best practices in other
jurisdictions
• Identifies opportunities and community needs as they arise
• Should be adept at working with underrepresented and
marginalized communities
Communications • Helps everyone stay “on message” about the quick-build

In some agencies, strategy
especially smaller
ones, this person • Develops online tools for community feedback
may be the • Collects and reports on feedback received from the most
same as the “key
coordinator.” representative group possible
• Understands the jurisdiction’s goals, vision, opportunities

and challenges when it comes to active transportation
• Can interpret code, policy, and other crucial regulations
Transportation
Planners • Can provide helpful information regarding the existing active
transportation network and its gaps
• Has access to planning tools, such as mapping software,
that aid in decision-making
Transportation • Understands traffic patterns, street design, regulations,

Engineers etc.
Engineering and • Can ensure that facilities meet standards and best
planning roles practices so they are as safe and navigable as possible
may be held by the
same staffer. • Involved in approval of street plans
• Understands aspects of the project that others will not (e.g.

Representatives how trash pickup will be impacted)
from other
departments • Contributes to the identification of important corridors to
that will interface
with the project include from an equity and connectivity perspective (ex.
Health, Economic, Parks, Housing, Planning Departments)
12
Packet Pg. 134
F.1.b
Person Role
Representatives
from other • Needs to be informed of projects to provide technical
departments that insight and avoid potential conflict once facilities are in
will interface with place
the project
• May be tasked with formal review of street changes (e.g.
Community Leaders
Fire Department)
• Believes in the project and ensures that the community is

involved in its planning and installation
• Has broad connections and rapport in the community
and can bring a variety of voices to the table to speak to
community needs and perspectives
Neighborhood or
Community • Monitors the project after installation and relays feedback
Ambassador or to the key coordinator, providing resident perspective and
Champion flagging issues
• During public engagement you are likely to find this person
advocating for a quick-build facility in their neighborhood
• This person should receive compensation for their time and
local expertise
• Can help share information with local businesses

• Will want to understand what types of improvements are
Local Business planned and what the expected timeline is.
Leaders
• May be able to donate materials that could embellish the
project area like picnic tables, chairs, flower pots, etc.
• Leaders of nonprofits, social services organizations, and

religious institutions will help to support and improve the
project if engaged.
Representatives
from community • Bicycle advocacy organizations will understand the needs
organizations, and perspectives of pedestrians and bicyclists in the
especially community and can offer insight as potential future users
bicycle advocacy of these facilities
organizations
• Can help disseminate information to the bicycle and
pedestrian community, gather feedback, and improve future
iterations of the project
• Have the power to approve the use of funds or staff, often

much more quickly than others can
• In some jurisdictions, approve or deny street changes
Elected Officials • Receives direct communication from their constituents
about needs, challenges and complaints
• Can raise the profile of these improvements among their
constituents and beyond (or rally against them)
13
Packet Pg. 135
F.1.b
DESIGN NEEDS OF PEDESTRIANS
Types of Pedestrians development. Older adults walk more
slowly and may require assistive devices
Pedestrians have a variety of for walking stability, sight, and hearing.
characteristics and the transportation
network should accommodate a variety of Disabled Pedestrian Design
needs, abilities, and possible impairments. Considerations
Age is one major factor that affects
The table below summarizes common
pedestrians’ physical characteristics,
physical and cognitive impairments,
walking speed, and environmental
how they affect personal mobility,
perception. Children have lower eye height
and recommendations for improved
and may walk slower than adults. They
pedestrian-friendly design.
also perceive the environment differently
at various stages of their cognitive
Disabled Pedestrian Design Considerations
Impairment Effect on Mobility Design Solution

Physical Difficulty propelling over uneven or Firm, stable surfaces and structures,
Impairment soft surfaces. including ramps or beveled edges.
Necessitating
Wheelchair and Cross-slopes cause wheelchairs to Cross-slopes of less than two percent.
Scooter Use veer downhill or tip sideways.
Require wider path of travel. Sufficient width and maneuvering space.
Physical Difficulty negotiating steep grades Cross-slopes of less than two percent.
Impairment and cross slopes; decreased Smooth, non-slippery travel surface.
Necessitating stability and tripping hazard.
Walking Aid Use
Slower walking speed and reduced Longer pedestrian signal cycles, shorter
endurance; reduced ability to crossing distances, median refuges, and
react. street furniture.
Hearing Less able to detect oncoming Longer pedestrian signal cycles, clear
hazards at locations with limited sight distances, highly visible pedestrian
Impairment sight lines (e.g. driveways, angled signals and markings.
intersections, channelized
right turn lanes) and complex
intersections.
Vision Limited perception of path Accessible text (larger print and raised
ahead and obstacles; reliance on text), accessible pedestrian signals
Impairment memory; reliance on non-visual (APS), guide strips and detectable
indicators (e.g. sound and texture). warning surfaces, safety barriers, and
lighting.
Cognitive Varies greatly. Can affect ability to Signs with pictures, universal symbols,
Impairment perceive, recognize, understand, and colors, rather than text.
interpret, and respond to
information.
14
Packet Pg. 136
F.1.b
Pedestrian Characteristics by Age
Age Characteristics
0-4 Learning to walk
Requires constant adult supervision
Developing peripheral vision and depth
perception
Eye Level 5-8 Increasing independence, but still
4’ 6” - 5’ 10” requires supervision
(1.3 m - 1.7 m)
Poor depth perception
9-13 Susceptible to “darting out” in

roadways
Insufficient judgment
Sense of invulnerability
14-18 Improved awareness of traffic

environment
Insufficient judgment
19-40 Active, aware of traffic environment
41-65 Slowing of reflexes
65+ Difficulty crossing street
Shoulders Vision loss

1’ 10” (0.5 m)
Difficulty hearing vehicles approaching
Walking from behind
2’ 6” (0.75 m)
Minimum Accessible Width*

3’ (0.9 m) Source: AASHTO. Guide for the Planning, Design, and
Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, Exhibit 2-1. 2004.
Preferred Operating Space
5’ (1.5 m)
*At point of contact
15
Packet Pg. 137
F.1.b
Design Needs of Runners Design Needs of Strollers

Running is an important recreation and Strollers are wheeled devices pushed by
fitness activity commonly performed on pedestrians to transport babies or small
shared use paths. Many runners prefer children. Stroller models vary greatly in
softer surfaces (such as rubber, bare their design and capacity. Some strollers
earth or crushed rock) to reduce impact. are designed to accommodate a single
Runners can change their speed and child, others can carry 3 or more. Design
direction frequently. If high volumes needs of strollers depend on the wheel
are expected, controlled interaction or size, geometry and ability of the adult who
separation of different types of users is pushing the stroller.
should be considered.
Strollers commonly have small pivoting
front wheels for easy maneuverability,
but these wheels may limit their use on
Runner Dimensions
unpaved surfaces or rough pavement.
Preferred Operating Space Curb ramps are valuable to these users.
5’ (1.5 m)
Lateral overturning is one main safety
concern for stroller users.
Shoulders
1’ 10” (0.5 m)
Stroller Dimensions
Sweep Width
4.3’ (1.3 m)
Sweep Width
3’ 6” (1.5 m)
Physical Length
5’ (1.5 m)
16
Packet Pg. 138
F.1.b
Design Needs of Wheelchair can also control the wheelchair using

Users handles attached to the back of the chair.
As the American population ages, the Power wheelchairs use battery power to
age demographics in Rochester may also move the wheelchair. The size and weight
shift, and the number of people using of power wheelchairs limit their ability
mobility assistive devices (such as manual to negotiate obstacles without a ramp.
wheelchairs, powered wheelchairs) will Various control units are available that
increase. enable users to control the wheelchair
movement, based on their ability (e.g.,
Manual wheelchairs are self-propelled joystick control, breath controlled, etc).
devices. Users propel themselves using push
rims attached to the rear wheels. Braking Turning maneuvers requires additional
is done through resisting wheel movement space for wheelchair devices. Providing
with the hands or arm. A second individual adequate space for 180 degree turns at
appropriate locations is an important
Wheelchair User Design Considerations element of accessible design.
Effect on Mobility Design Solution

Difficulty propelling over uneven or soft Firm, stable surfaces and structures, including ramps or beveled
surfaces. edges.
Cross-slopes cause wheelchairs to veer Cross-slopes of less than two percent.

downhill.
Require wider path of travel. Sufficient width and maneuvering space.
Eye Height 3’8”

(1.1 m)
Handle 2’9”
(0.9 m)
Armrest
2’5” (0.75 m)
Physical Width: 2’6” (0.75 m) Physical Width: 2’2” (0.7 m)
Minimum Operating Width: 3’ (0.9 m) Minimum Operating Width: 3’ (0.9 m)
Minimum Width of Accessway*: 4’ (1.2 m) Minimum to Make a 180 Degree Turn: 5’ (1.5 m)
Minimum to Make a 180 Degree Turn: 5’ (1.5 m)

*Provide 5’ x 5’ passing zone every 200’ if travel way width is less than 5 feet. Wheelchair User Dimensions
17
Packet Pg. 139
F.1.b
DESIGN NEEDS OF BICYCLISTS

The facility designer must have an understanding of how bicyclists operate and how their
bicycle influences that operation. Bicyclists, by nature, are much more affected by poor
facility design, construction and maintenance practices than motor vehicle drivers. By
understanding the unique characteristics and needs of bicyclists, a facility designer can
provide quality facilities and minimize user risk.
Bicycle as a Design Vehicle Bicycle Rider - Typical Dimensions
Similar to motor vehicles, bicyclists and Operating

Envelope
their bicycles exist in a variety of sizes 8’ 4”
and configurations. These variations
occur in the types of vehicle (such as
a conventional bicycle, a recumbent
bicycle or a tricycle), and behavioral
characteristics (such as the comfort level
of the bicyclist). The design of a bikeway
should consider reasonably expected
Eye Level
bicycle types on the facility and utilize the 5’
appropriate dimensions.
The figure illustrates the operating space

and physical dimensions of a typical adult Handlebar
bicyclist, which are the basis for typical Height
3’8”
facility design. Bicyclists require clear
space to operate within a facility. This
is why the minimum operating width is
greater than the physical dimensions of
the bicyclist. Bicyclists prefer five feet Physical
Operating
or more operating width, although four Width 2’6”
feet may be minimally acceptable if the
Minimum
pavement is continuous and there is no Operating
curbing present.. Preferred Operating Width 4’
Width 5’
In addition to the design dimensions of
a typical bicycle, there are many other
commonly used pedal-driven cycles and
accessories to consider when planning
and designing bicycle facilities. The
most common types include tandem
bicycles, recumbent bicycles, and trailer
accessories.
18
Packet Pg. 140
F.1.b
Bicycle as Design Vehicle - Design Speed Expectations
BICYCLE TYPE FEATURE TYPICAL SPEED
Upright Adult Paved level surfacing 8-12 mph*
Bicyclist
Crossing 10 mph
Intersections
Downhill 30 mph
Uphill 5 -12 mph

Recumbent Paved level surfacing 18 mph
Bicyclist
* Typical speed for causal riders per MnDOT Bicycle Facility Design Manual.
19
Packet Pg. 141
02
PEDESTRIAN TOOLBOX
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 142

F.1.b
INTRODUCTION
The Pedestrian Toolbox includes • The most comfortable areas for
pedestrians include in and around the
pedestrian-oriented infrastructure
elements that create a more comfortable downtown area where speeds are lower
and roads tend to have fewer lanes.
and safe pedestrian experience. The
toolbox provides design options for the • Signalized crossing opportunities are
also the highest in the downtown core
identified locations of high need within the
while the distance between crossing
2015 Rochester Comprehensive Plan 2040
opportunities increases on the
Non-Motorized Transportation Analysis. periphery of town.
This toolbox will be helpful to city staff

in addressing the pedestrian needs and
opportunities as found within the Non-
Motorized Transportation Analysis. Some
of these critical findings included:
• Most crashes occur at intersections. A walkable,

• Enhancing the visibility of marked
crossings,as well as providing additional
pedestrian-friendly
crossing enhancements for mid-block
crossings of larger streets. environment meets
• Opportunities to incorporate innovative
bikeway treatments to increase user
the overall goals of
comfort. creating a healthy
Additionally, the Pedestrian Environmental
Quality Index (PEQI) analysis provided an
city (more walking,
assessment of the comfort of walking a sustainable city
along and across arterial roadways in
Rochester. Many arterials are wide and (less driving), and
a vibrant public
with high vehicles speeds, exposing
‘vulnerable’ non-motorized transportation
users to risk in the event of a crash.
Findings showed:
realm.”
• The least comfortable areas include US
14, West Circle Drive north of US 14, and
-Rochester Destination Medical Center
Hwy 63 south of US 52.
(DMC) District Design Guidelines
21
Packet Pg. 143
F.1.b
SIDEWALKS
SIDEWALK ZONES & WIDTHS
Sidewalks are the most fundamental element of the walking network, as they provide
an area for pedestrian travel separated from vehicle traffic. Providing adequate
and accessible facilities can lead to increased numbers of people walking, improved
accessibility, and the creation of social space. The following guidance is informed by the
Rochester DMC City Loop Guidelines.
Design Features
Suburban Sidewalk
Enhancement Primary Building

Zone Amenity Zone Pedestrian Zone Frontage Zone
The curbside The amenity The primary The building frontage

lane can act zone, also called pedestrian zone allows pedestrians
as a flexible the furnishing zone is the area a comfortable “shy”
space to or landscaping intended for distance from the
further buffer zone, buffers pedestrian travel. building fronts, fencing,
the sidewalk pedestrians from This zone should walls and vertical
from moving the adjacent be entirely free landscaping. It provides
traffic, and roadway, and of permanent opportunities for
may be used is also the area and temporary window shopping, to
for a bike where elements objects. place signs, planters, or
facility. Curb such as street chairs.
extensions trees, signal Wide pedestrian
and bike poles, signs, and zones are needed
corrals may other street in areas or where
occupy this furniture are pedestrian flows
space where properly located. are high.
appropriate.
22
Packet Pg. 144
F.1.b
Building
Parking Lane/ Primary
Street Classification Amenity Zone Frontage
Enhancement Zone Pedestrian Zone Zone*
Varies 4 - 6 ft 6 - 8 ft 2 ft
Local Streets
Pedestrian Priority Areas Varies 6 - 10 ft 8 ft 2 - 8 ft
Arterials and Collectors Varies 4 - 6 ft 6 - 8 ft 4 - 6 ft
*Indicates ideal frontage zone space. Actual frontage zone is contingent

upon the City’s development code and required set backs
Typical Application Materials and Maintenance

• Wider sidewalks should be installed near Sidewalks are typically constructed out
schools, at transit stops, or anywhere of concrete and are separated from
high concentrations of pedestrians
the roadway by a curb or gutter and
exist.
sometimes a landscaped boulevard.
• At transit stops, an 8 ft by 5 ft clear
Less expensive walkways constructed of
space is required for accessible
asphalt, crushed stone, or other stabilized
passenger boarding/alighting at
the front door location per ADA surfaces may be appropriate. Ensure
requirements. accessibility and properly maintain all
• Sidewalks should be continuous on both surfaces regularly. Surfaces must be
sides of urban commercial streets, and firm, stable, and slip resistant. Colored,
should be required in areas of moderate patterned, or stamped concrete can add
residential density (1-4 dwelling units distinctive visual appeal. See ‘Sidewalk
per acre). Maintenance’ for more information.
• When retrofitting gaps in the sidewalk
network, locations near transit stops,
schools, parks, public buildings, and
other areas with high concentrations
of pedestrians should be the highest
priority.
23
Packet Pg. 145
F.1.b
CURB RAMPS
Curb ramps are the design elements that allow all users to make the transition from the
street to the sidewalk. A sidewalk without a curb ramp can be useless to someone in a
wheelchair, forcing them back to a driveway and out into the street for access. There are
a number of factors to be considered in the design and placement of curb ramps.
Diagonal ramps should include a Curb ramps should be located so that they do not project
clear space of at least 48” x 4" within into vehicular traffic lanes, parking spaces, or parking
the crosswalk for user maneuverability access aisles. Three configurations are illustrated below.
Parallel Curb Ramp
Perpendicular
Diagonal Curb Ramp
Curb Ramps
(Recommended)
(Crosswalk spacing not to scale. For illustration purposes only)
Typical Application raised tactile device and the surrounding

infrastructure is important so that the
Curb ramps must be installed at all change is readily evident to partially
intersections and midblock locations sighted pedestrians.
where pedestrian crossings exist, as
mandated by federal legislation (1973 Design Features
Rehabilitation Act and ADA 1990). All
• The level landing at the top of a ramp
newly constructed and altered roadway should be at least 4 feet long and
projects must include compliant curb at least the same width as the ramp
ramps. In addition, existing facilities must itself. The slope of the ramp should be
be upgraded to current standards when compliant to current standards.
appropriate. • If the top landing is within the sidewalk
or corner area where someone in
The edge of an ADA compliant curb ramp a wheelchair may have to change
should be marked with a detectable direction, the landing must be a
warning surface (also known as truncated minimum of 4’-0” long (in the direction
domes) to alert people with visual of the ramp run) and at least as wide as
the ramp, although a width of 5’-0” is
impairments to changes in the pedestrian
preferred.
environment. Visual contrast between the
24
Packet Pg. 146
F.1.b
Not recommended: Diagonal curb ramp configuration. Recommended: Directional curb ramps
for crossing in both directions.
Further Considerations Materials and Maintenance

Where feasible, separate directional It is critical that the interface between a
curb ramps for each crosswalk at an curb ramp and the street be maintained
intersection should be provided rather adequately. Asphalt street sections
than having a single ramp at a corner for can develop vertical differentials where
both crosswalks. Although diagonal curb concrete meets asphalt at the foot of the
ramps might save money, they orient ramp, which can catch the front wheels of
pedestrians directly into the center of a wheelchair.
the intersection, which can be challenging
for wheelchair users and pedestrians with
visual impairments. Diagonal curb ramp
configurations are not recommended.
Curb radii need to be considered when

designing directional ramps. While curb
ramps are needed for use on all types of
streets, the highest priority locations are
on streets near transit stops, schools,
parks, medical facilities, shopping areas.
25
Packet Pg. 147
F.1.b
B
C
A
CURB EXTENSIONS
Curb extensions, also called curb bulbouts and neckdowns, minimize pedestrian exposure
during crossing by shortening the crossing distance and giving pedestrians a better
chance to see and be seen before beginning to cross. Curb extensions are appropriate for
any crosswalk where it is desirable to shorten the crossing distance and there is a parking
lane adjacent to the curb.
Typical Application angled parking lane.
• For purposes of efficient street C

• Curb extension length can be adjusted
to accommodate bus stops or street
sweeping and snow plowing, the
furniture.
minimum radius for the reverse curves of
the transition is 10 ft and the two radii
Further Considerations
should be balanced to be nearly equal.
• The curb extension width should If there is no parking lane, adding curb
terminate one foot short of the parking extensions across a roadway shoulder may
lane to maximize bicyclist safety when be a problem for bicycle travel and truck or
bicycle lanes are not present. This bus turning movements.
buffer is also preferred when bicycle
lanes are present. Materials and Maintenance
Design Features Planted curb extensions may be designed
as a bioswale, a vegetated system for
A
• Where a bike lane runs adjacent to the
stormwater management. To maintain
curb extension, design with a 1‘ buffer
from edge of parking lane (preferred). proper stormwater drainage, curb
extensions can be constructed as refuge
B
• Crossing distance is shortened by
approximately 6-8 feet with a parallel islands offset by a drainage channel or
parking lane or 15 feet or more with an feature a covered trench drain.
26
Packet Pg. 148
F.1.b
CORNER RADII
The size of a curb’s radius can have a significant impact on pedestrian comfort and
safety. A smaller curb radius provides more pedestrian area at the corner, allows more
flexibility in the placement of curb ramps, results in a shorter crossing distance and
requires vehicles to slow more on the intersection approach. During the design phase, the
chosen radius should be the smallest possible for the circumstances and consider the
effective radius in any design vehicle turning calculations.
Typical Application
The curb radius may be as small as 3 ft US
DI
where there are no turning movements, or RA
YSICAL RA
E
IV
5 ft where there are turning movements PH D
CT
FE
IU
and adequate street width. Wide outside
EF
S
travel lanes, on-street parking and bike
lanes create a larger effective turning
radius and can therefore allow a smaller
physical curb radius.
Design Features
Corners have two critical dimensions which
must be considered together.
• The physical radius controls the Recommended: Bidirectional curb ramps

pedestrian experience. for crossing in both directions.
• The effective radius is the widest
turning arc that a vehicle can take
through the corner and is larger than
the physical radius.
Several factors govern the choice of
curb radius in any given location. These
include the desired pedestrian area of
the corner, traffic turning movements,
street classifications, design vehicle
turning radius, intersection geometry, and
whether there is on-street parking or a
bike lane (or both) between the travel lane
and the curb.
27
Packet Pg. 149
03
BICYCLE TOOLBOX
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 150

F.1.b
INTRODUCTION
FACILITY SELECTION: BICYCLE USER TYPE
The current AASHTO Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities encourages designers
to identify their rider type based on the trip purpose (Recreational vs Transportation)
and on the level of comfort and skill of the rider (Causal vs Experienced). A user-type
framework for understanding a potential rider’s willingness to bike is illustrated in the
figure below. Developed by planners in Portland, OR* and supported by research**, this
classification identifies four distinct types of bicyclists.
Strong and Fearless – This group is

willing to ride a bicycle on any roadway Typical Distribution of
regardless of traffic conditions.
Bicyclist Types
Comfortable taking the lane and riding in a 1% Strong and
vehicular manner on major streets without Fearless
designated bicycle facilities.
5-10% Enthused and
Enthused and Confident - This group of Confident
people riding bicycles who are riding in
most roadway situations but prefer to
have a designated facility. Comfortable
riding on major streets with a bike lane.
Interested but Concerned – This group is

more cautious and has some inclination
towards bicycling, but are held back by
concern over sharing the road with cars. Interested but
Not very comfortable on major streets, 60%
Concerned
even with a striped bike lane, and prefer
separated pathways or low traffic
neighborhood streets.
No Way, No How – This group comprises

residents who simply aren’t interested
at all in bicycling and may be physically
unable or don’t know how to ride a bicycle,
and they are unlikely to adopt bicycling in 30% No Way, No How
any way.
* Roger Geller, City of Portland Bureau of Transportation.

Four Types of Cyclists. http://www.portlandonline.
com/transportation/index.cfm?&a=237507. 2009.
** Dill, J., McNeil, N. Four Types of Cyclists?
Testing a Typology to Better Understand
Bicycling Behavior and Potential. 2012.
29
Packet Pg. 151
F.1.b
FACILITY SELECTION: COMFORT

In order to provide a bikeway network that meets the needs of the Rochester’s
“Interested but Concerned” residents (who comprise the majority of the population),
bikeways must be low-stress and comfortable. By using a metric called Level of Traffic
Stress (LTS), specific facility types can be matched to the needs of people who bicycle in
Rochester. Generally, “Interested but Concerned,” users will only bicycle on LTS 1 or LTS 2
facilities.
Levels of Traffic Stress (LTS)
WHAT TYPE OF BICYCLISTS WILL RIDE ON

THIS LTS FACILITY?
LTS LEVEL DESCRIPTION
STRONG & ENTHUSIASTIC & INTERESTED BUT
FEARLESS CONFIDENT CONCERNED
Presents the lowest level of traffic stress; demands

less attention from people riding bicycles, and
attractive enough for a relaxing bicycle ride. Suitable
LTS 1 for almost all people riding bicycles, including children YES YES YES
trained to ride in the street and to safety cross
intersections.
Presents little traffic stress and therefore suitable to

most adults riding bicycles, but demandsmore
LTS2 attention than might be expected from children.
YES YES SOMETIMES
More traffic stress than LTS2, yet significantly less than

LTS3 the stress of integrating with multilane traffic. YES SOMETIMES NO
A level of stress beyond LTS 3. Includes roadways that

have no dedicated bicycle facilities and moderate to
higher vehicle speeds and volumes OR high speed
LTS4 and high volume roadways WITH an exclusive riding YES NO NO
zone (lane) where there is a significant speed
differential with vehicles.
30
Packet Pg. 152
F.1.b
FACILITY SELECTION: BIKEWAYS

Selecting the best bikeway facility type for a given roadway can be challenging, due
to the range of factors that influence bicycle users’ comfort and safety. There is a
significant impact on bicycling comfort when the speed differential between bicyclists
and motor vehicle traffic is high and motor vehicle traffic volumes are high. This page can
help determine when a Separated Bikeway is most appropriate relative to other facility
types.
Facility Selection Table

As a starting point to identify a preferred facility, the chart below can be used to
determine the recommended type of bikeway to be provided in particular roadway speed
and volume situations. To use this chart, identify the appropriate daily traffic volume on
the existing or proposed roadway, and locate the facility types indicated by those key
variables.
Other factors beyond volume which affect facility selection include traffic speed, traffic
mix of automobiles and heavy vehicles, the presence of on-street parking, intersection
density, surrounding land use, and roadway sight distance. These factors are not included
in the facility selection chart below, but should always be considered in the facility
selection and design process.
Average Annual Daily Traffic (1,000 Vehicles/day Or 100 Vehicles/peak hour)
FACILITY TYPE Street Class 0 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 7.5+ 10+ 12.5+
SHARED USE TRAIL N/A
BICYCLE Local
LTS 1 RECOMMENDED
BOULEVARD
LTS 2 RECOMMENDED
LTS 3 MORE ADVANCED
BIKE ROUTE Local BICYCLISTS ONLY
BIKE LANE Collector

Arterial
BUFFERED BIKE LANE Collector

Arterial
SEPARATED BIKEWAY Arterial
31
Packet Pg. 153
F.1.b
STANDARD BICYCLE LANES

On-street bike lanes designate an exclusive space for bicyclists through the use of
pavement markings and signs. The bike lane is located directly adjacent to motor vehicle
travel lanes and is used in the same direction as motor vehicle traffic. Bike lanes are
typically on the right side of the street, between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road
edge or parking lane.
C
A
Typical Application Design Features

• Bike lanes may be used on any street A• Mark inside line with 6" stripe. (MN
with adequate space, but are most MUTCD 9C.04) Mark 4" parking lane line
effective on streets with moderate or "Ts".
traffic volumes ≤ 6,000 ADT (≤ 4,000
preferred). B• Include a bicycle lane marking (MN
MUTCD Figure 9C-3) at the beginning of
• Bike lanes are most appropriate on blocks and at regular intervals along the
streets with lower to moderate speeds route. (MN MUTCD 9C.04)
≤ 30 mph.
C• 6 foot width preferred adjacent to
• Appropriate for skilled adult riders on on-street parking, (5 foot min.). Buffer
most streets. preferred when parking has high
• May be appropriate for children when turnover, see Buffered Bike Lanes.
configured as 6+ ft wide lanes on lower- D• 5–6 foot preferred adjacent to curb and
speed, lower-volume streets with one gutter or 4 feet more than the gutter
lane in each direction. pan width.
E• The R3-17 "Bike Lane" sign is optional,

but recommended in most contexts.
32
Packet Pg. 154
F.1.b
• On high speed streets (≥ 40 mph) the
minimum bike lane should be 6 feet.
• It may be desirable to reduce the width
of general purpose travel lanes in order
to add or widen bicycle lanes.
• On multi-lane streets, the most
appropriate bicycle facility to provide
for user comfort may be buffered
bicycle lanes or physically separated Bike lanes provided dedicated spaces
bicycle lanes. for bicyclists to ride on the street.
• Contraflow bike lanes are a special type
of bike lane that can be implemented
in specific locations where a dedicated
bike lane is needed for a particular
direction of travel, but the roadway
is oriented for one-way travel in the
opposite directioin, and/or when space
constraints preclude a bike facility
on nearby parallel routes that would
otherwise serve this need. Contraflow
bike lanes are effective in providing
short, critical connections along Place Bike Lane Symbols to Reduce Wear
bikeways, and special attention needs
Bike lane word, symbol, and/or arrow markings (MN
to be paid to facility transitions to other
MUTCD Figure 9C-3) should be placed outside of
bikeway types. the motor vehicle tread path in order to minimize
wear from the motor vehicle path. (NACTO 2012)
Manhole Covers and Grates:
• Manhole surfaces should be Construction of manholes, access
manufactured with a shallow surface panels or other drainage elements
texture in the form of a tight, nonlinear should be constructed with no variation
pattern. in the surface. The maximum allowable
tolerance in vertical roadway surface
• If manholes or other utility access
will be 1/4 of an inch.
boxes are to be located in bike lanes
within 50 ft. of intersections or within
Materials and Maintenance
20 ft. of driveways or other bicycle
access points, special manufactured Bike lane striping and markings will
permanent nonstick surfaces ensure a
require higher maintenance where
controlled travel surface for bicyclists
vehicles frequently traverse over them at
breaking or turning.
intersections, driveways, parking lanes,
• Manholes, drainage grates, or other
and along curved or constrained segments
obstacles should be set flush with
the paved roadway. Roadway surface of roadway. Bike lanes should also be
inconsistencies pose a threat to maintained so that there are no pot holes,
safe riding conditions for bicyclists. cracks, uneven surfaces or debris.
33
Packet Pg. 155
F.1.b
BUFFERED BICYCLE LANES

Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space,
separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking
lane.
A
B

• Anywhere a conventional bike lane is A
• The minimum bicycle travel area (not
being considered. including buffer) is 5 feet wide.
• While conventional bike lanes are most B
• Buffers should be at least 2 feet wide.
appropriate on streets with lower to If buffer area is 4 feet or wider, white
moderate speeds (≤ 30 mph), buffered chevron or diagonal markings should be
bike lanes provide additional value on used.
streets with higher speeds (+30 mph) • For clarity at driveways or minor street
and high volumes or high truck volumes crossings, consider a dotted line.
(up to 6,000 ADT).
• Buffers may be applied on the parking
• On streets with extra lanes or lane side, the travel side, both or alternating
width. depending on the main source of
• Appropriate for skilled adult riders on concern.
most streets.
34
Packet Pg. 156
F.1.b
Buffered bike lanes should consider both The use of additional pavement markings delineates
vehicular traffic and parked cars. space between vehicles and bicyclists.

• Color may be used within the lane to Bike lane striping and markings will
discourage motorists from entering the require higher maintenance where
buffered lane.
• On multi-lane streets with high vehicles intersections, driveways, parking lanes,
speeds, the most appropriate bicycle
and along curved or constrained segments
facility to provide for user comfort may
of roadway.
be physically separated bike lanes.
• NCHRP Report #766 recommends, when Bike lanes should be maintained so that
space is limited, installing a buffer there are no pot holes, cracks, uneven
space between the parking lane and surfaces or debris. Additionally, the bike
bicycle lane where on-street parking
lane buffer presents an opportunity to be
is permitted rather than between
the bicycle lane and vehicle travel used for snow storage in winter months.
lane.1 This buffer is particularly useful
in commercial areas where parking
turnover is higher.
1 National Cooperative Highway Research

Program. Report #766: Recommended Bicycle Lane
Widths for Various Roadway Characteristics.
35
Packet Pg. 157
F.1.b
SEPARATED BIKE LANES - ONE-WAY

One-way separated bike lanes, also known as protected bikeways or cycle tracks, are
on-street bikeway facilities that are separated from vehicle traffic. Physical separation
is provided by a barrier between the bikeway and the vehicular travel lane. These barriers
can include flexible posts, bollards, parking, planter strips, extruded curbs, or on-street
parking. Separated bikeways using these barrier elements typically share the same
elevation as adjacent travel lanes, but the bikeway could also be raised above street
level, either below or equivalent to sidewalk level.
A
C
Typical Use Design Features
• Along streets on which conventional A• Pavement markings, symbols and/or
bicycle lanes would cause many arrow markings must be placed at the
bicyclists to feel stress because of beginning of the separated bikeway and
factors such as multiple lanes, high at intervals along the facility based on
bicycle volumes, high motor traffic engineering judgment to define the bike
volumes (9,000-30,000 ADT), higher direction. (MN MUTCD 9C.04)
traffic speeds (35+ mph), high incidence
of double parking, higher truck traffic
B• 6’-7’ foot width preferred in areas with
high bicycle volumes or uphill sections to
(10% of total ADT) and high parking facilitate safe passing behavior.
turnover.
• Along streets for which conflicts
C• When placed adjacent to parking, the
parking buffer should be 3 ft wide to
at intersections can be effectively allow for passenger loading and to
mitigated using parking lane prevent door collisions. When no buffer
setbacks, bicycle markings through is present, buffers as narrow as 18
the intersection, and other signalized inches may still provide value.
intersection treatments.
• When placed adjacent to a travel lane,
one-way raised cycle tracks may be
configured with a mountable curb to
36
Packet Pg. 158
F.1.b
Parked cars serve as a barrier between bicyclists and the vehicle lane. Barriers could also
include flexible posts, bollards, planters, or other design elements. Source: Alta
allow entry and exit from the bicycle • Special consideration should be given
lane for passing other bicyclists or to at transit stops to manage bicycle and
access vehicular turn lanes. pedestrian interactions.

• If the buffer area is 4 feet or wider,
white chevron or diagonal markings Bikeway striping and markings will require
should be used. higher maintenance where vehicles
• Curbs may be used as a channeling frequently traverse over them at
device. Grade-separation provides an intersections, driveways, parking lanes,
enhanced level of separation in addition and along curved or constrained segments
to buffers and other barrier types. of roadway. Green conflict striping (if
• Where possible, physical barriers such used) will also generally require higher
as removable curbs should be oriented maintenance due to vehicle wear.
towards the edge of the buffer so as to
maximize lane width for bicycle use. Bikeways should be maintained so that
• A retrofit separated bikeway has a there are no pot holes, cracks, uneven
relatively low implementation cost surfaces or debris.
compared to road reconstruction by
making use of existing pavement and Access points along the facility should be
drainage and using a parking lane as a provided for street sweeper vehicles to
barrier. enter/exit the separated bikeway.
• Gutters, drainage outlets and utility
Composite and reboundable delineator
covers should be designed and
configured as not to impact bike travel. systems, offer more durability and may
withstand winter conditions better. If
• For clarity at major or minor street
crossings, consider a dotted line for not used, delineators should be removed
the buffer boundary where cars are during winter for plowing operations as the
expected to cross. buffer area can be used for snow storage.
37
Packet Pg. 159
F.1.b
SEPARATED BIKE LANES - TWO-WAY

Two-Way separated bike lanes are bicycle facilities that allow bicycle movement in both
directions on one side of the road. Two-way separated bikeways share some of the same
design characteristics as one-way separated bikeways, but often require additional
considerations at driveway and side-street crossings, and intersections with other
bikeways.

Works best on the left side of one-way A
• 12 foot operating width preferred (10 ft
streets. minimum) width for two-way facility.
• Streets with high motor vehicle volumes

B
• In constrained locations an 8 foot
minimum operating width may be
and/or speeds considered.
• Streets with high bicycle volumes. • Adjacent to on-street parking a 3
• Streets with a high incidence of wrong- foot minimum width channelized
way bicycle riding. buffer or island should be provided to
• Streets with few conflicts such as accommodate opening doors. (NACTO,
driveways or cross-streets on one side 2012).
of the street. • Additional signalization and signs may
• Streets that connect to shared use be necessary to manage conflicts.
trails.
38
Packet Pg. 160
F.1.b
A two-way facility can accommodate bicyclists in two directions of travel.
Further Considerations considered with any project. Bicycle

exclusive signals and other control
• A two-way separated bikeway on one elements are often recommended with
way street should be located on the left two-way separated bikeways.
side.
• A two-way separated bikeway may Materials and Maintenance
be configured at street level or as a
Bikeway striping and markings will require
raised separated bikeway with vertical
separation from the adjacent travel higher maintenance where vehicles
lane. frequently traverse over them at
• Two-way separated bikeways should intersections, driveways, parking lanes,
ideally be placed along streets with long and along curved or constrained segments
blocks and few driveways or mid-block of roadway. Green conflict striping (if
access points for motor vehicles. used) will also generally require higher
• Two-way separated bikeways may maintenance due to vehicle wear.
have implications for signalized and
unsignalized intersections that put Bikeways should be maintained so that
contra-flow bicyclists in increased there are no pot holes, cracks, uneven
levels of risk. This should be strongly surfaces or debris.
Access points along the facility should be

provided for street sweeper vehicles to
enter/exit the separated bikeway.
39
Packet Pg. 161
F.1.b
SEPARATED BIKE LANE BARRIERS

Separated bike lanes may use a variety of vertical elements to physically separate the
bikeway from adjacent travel lanes. Barriers may be robust constructed elements such as
curbs, or may be more interim in nature, such as flexible delineator posts.
Barrier Separation Media Separation
Flexible Delineators
(10’-40’ spacing) Raised Curb
Wheel Stops (2’ min. width,
(6’ spacing, 4' if plantings
1’ from travel lane) present)
Optional
Planting
Elevation Separation
3’ Buffer and Spatial
Envelope for Barriers
Raised
Planter Boxes Bike Facility
(Consistent spacing)
Parking Separation
Jersey Barriers
(Consistent spacing)
Buffered
Door Zone
(2’ min. and
P optional
Flexible
Delineators)
Typical Application
Appropriate barriers for retrofit Appropriate barriers for reconstruction
projects: projects:
• Parked cars • Curb separation
• Flexible delineators • Medians
• Bollards • Landscaped medians
• Planters • Raised protected bike lane with vertical
or mountable curb
• Parking stops (for use in areas where
winter maintenance is not an issue) • Pedestrian Refuge Islands
40
Packet Pg. 162
F.1.b
Raised separated bikeways are bicycle facilities that are vertically separated from motor vehicle traffic.
Design Features Further Considerations

• Maximize effective operating space by • With new roadway construction, a
placing curbs or delineator posts as raised separated bikeway can be less
far from the through bikeway space as expensive to construct than a wide
practicable. or buffered bicycle lane because of
• Allow for adequate shy distance of shouldower trenching and sub base
1 to 5 feet from vertical elements to requirements.
maximize useful space. • Parking should be prohibited within 30
• When next to parking allow for 3 feet feet of intersections and driveways to
of space in the buffer space to allow improve visibility.
for opening doors and passenger
unloading. Materials and Maintenance
• The presences of landscaping in Separated bikeways protected by
medians, planters and safety islands concrete islands or other permanent
increases comfort for users and
physical separation, can be swept and
enhances the streetscape environment.
plowed by smaller street sweeper vehicles.
Access points along the facility should be

provided for street sweeper vehicles to
enter/exit the separated bikeway.
41
Packet Pg. 163
F.1.b
BIKE BOULEVARDS
BIKE BOULEVARD OVERVIEW
A Bike Boulevard is a low-speed, low-volume roadway that is designed to enhance comfort
and convenience for people bicycling. It provides better conditions for bicycling while
improving the neighborhood character and maintaining emergency vehicle access. Bike
Boulevards are intended to serve as a low-stress bikeway network, providing direct, and
convenient routes across Rochester. Key elements of Bike Boulevards are unique signage
and pavement markings, traffic calming and diversion features to maintain low vehicle
volumes, and convenient major street crossings.
Treatments depicted may vary per roadway segment or location.
Typical Use mph. Utilize traffic calming to maintain

or establish low volumes and discourage
• Parallel with and in close proximity to vehicle cut through / speeding.
major thoroughfares (1/4 mile or less) on
low-volume, low-speed streets. Design Features
• Follow a desire line for bicycle travel
• Signs and pavement markings are the
that is ideally long and relatively
minimum treatments necessary to
continuous (2-5 miles).
designate a street as a bike boulevard.
• Avoid alignments with excessive zigzag
• Implement volume control treatments
or circuitous routing. The bikeway should
based on the context of the bike
have less than 10% out of direction
boulevard, using engineering judgment.
travel compared to shortest path of
While motor vehicle volumes should not
primary corridor.
exceed 3,000 vehicles per day, ideal
• Local streets with traffic volumes of conditions are 1,500 vehicles per day or
fewer than 3,000 vehicles per day and less.
with average operating speeds below 30
42
Packet Pg. 164
F.1.b
A painted intersection, planters, and curb extensions An example of an large pavement marking to
to reinforce that the street is intended for local, slow- reinforce that the street is a Bike Boulevard.
speed use instead of cut-through vehicle traffic.
monitor vehicle volumes on adjacent

• Intersection crossings should be streets to determine whether traffic
designed to enhance comfort and calming results in inappropriate
minimize delay for bicyclists of diverse volumes. Traffic calming can be
skills and abilities. implemented on a trial basis.

Bike Boulevards require few additional
• Bike Boulevards are established on maintenance requirements to local
streets that improve connectivity to
roadways. Signage, signals, and other
key destinations and provide a direct,
traffic calming elements should be
low-stress route for bicyclists, with low
motorized traffic volumes and speeds, inspected and maintained according to
designated and designed to give bicycle local standards.
travel priority over other modes.
• Bike Boulevard retrofits to local streets
are typically located on streets without
existing signalized accommodation
at crossings of collector and arterial
roadways. Without treatments for
bicyclists, these intersections can
become major barriers along the Bike
Boulevard.
• Traffic calming can deter motorists
from driving on a street. Anticipate and
43
Packet Pg. 165
F.1.b
TRAFFIC CALMING
Traffic calming devices can help mitigate speeding and cut-through traffic by changing
driver behavior through a variety of visual or physical changes to the road environment.
Such measures may reduce the design speed of a street and can be used in conjunction
with reduced speed limits to reinforce the expectation of lowered speeds.
Typical Application avoid having to merge into traffic at a

narrow pinch point.
• Traffic calming measures should be
• Traffic calming measures should always
limited to local or minor collector streets,
consider emergency vehicle response
typically with a maximum posted speed of
times and turning abilities.
35 mph.
• Traffic calming measures should be Design Features
implemented when the safety of all
roadway users, especially pedestrians and • There are a variety of treatments and
bicyclists, is at risk due to high vehicular combinations of treatments that can
speeds. The risk can be determined by an be used for traffic calming. Reference
engineering study. City of Rochester Neighborhood Traffic
Management Program Handbook for a
• Traffic calming measures can be more
list of Level 1, Level 2, and level 3 traffic
applicable in areas with high potential for
calming measures. This handbook
conflict between pedestrian/bicyclist and
should be used as the primary tool for
motor vehicles.
developing traffic calming plans.
• Traffic calming measures may be most
• Level 1 traffic calming measures
appropriate in areas with predominantly
include strategies and devices that
residential or mixed-use land use.
are primarily focus on safety. They
• If applicable, traffic calming measures are meant to regulate, warn, inform,
should not infringe on bicycle space. enforce, and educate motorists,
Where possible, provide a bicycle route
outside of the element so bicyclists can
44
Packet Pg. 166
F.1.b
cyclists, and pedestrians on the road.
Examples include, radar signs, pavement
markings, turn restrictions, temporary
speed bumps.
• Level 2 traffic calming devices and
roadway design features are used
primarily to reduce traffic speeds within
residential areas. Level 2 devices are
used when Level 1 calming devices have
not been effective. Examples include,
speed tables, chicanes, traffic circles,
and tree planting.
• Level 3 traffic calming measures are
implemented to discourage cut-through
traffic from utilizing residential streets.
Level 3 devices are used when traffic
volumes in a particular area have
been found to be significantly higher
compared to similar streets in other
areas. Examples include, diverters,
partial street closures, and median
barrier/forced turn islands.
Further Consideration
Benefits of speed management include:
• Improves conditions for bicyclists,
pedestrians, and residents on local and
minor collector streets.
• Reduced travel speeds decreases the
exposure risks between bicyclists/
pedestrians and motor vehicles.
• Reduced travel speeds result in reduced
injury severity in the event of a collision.
• Helps achieve a safer and more livable
neighborhood while balancing the
transportation needs of the roadway.
45
Packet Pg. 167
04
SHARED USE TRAILS
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 168

F.1.b
SHARED USE TRAILS

A shared use trail provides a travel area separate from motorized traffic for bicyclists,
pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers, and other users. Shared use trails
are desirable for bicyclists of all skill levels preferring separation from traffic. Bicycle
trails should generally provide directional travel opportunities not provided by existing
roadways. Most shared use trails are designed for two-way travel.
Typical Use
• In waterway corridors, such as along
canals, drainage ditches, rivers, and
creeks.
• In abandoned rail corridors (commonly
referred to as Rails-to-Trails or Rail-
Trails.)
• In active rail corridors, trails can be built
adjacent to active railroads (referred to
as Rails-with-Trails.)
• In utility corridors, such as power line
and sewer corridors.
• Along roadways.
47
Packet Pg. 169
F.1.b
Design Features Further Considerations
A
• 12 ft is recommended for heavy use Under most conditions, centerline
situations with high concentrations markings are not necessary. Centerline
of multiple users. A separate track
markings should only be used if necessary
(5’ minimum) can be provided for
for clarifying user positioning or preferred
pedestrian use.
operating procedure: Solid line = No
• 10 ft is recommended in most situations
Passing; Dashed line = Lane placement
and will be adequate for moderate to
heavy use. Trails with a high volume of bidirectional
• 8 ft is the minimum width (with 2’ ft traffic should include a centerline. This
shoulders) allowed for a two-way can help communicate that users should
bicycle trail and is only recommended
expect traffic in both directions and
for low traffic situations. (Caltrans
Design Manual) encourage users to travel on the right and
pass on the left.
Lateral Clearance
Where there is a sharp blind curve,
• A 2 ft or greater shoulder on both sides
painting a solid yellow line with directional
of the trail should be provided.
arrows reduces the risk of head-on
Overhead Clearance collisions.
B• Clearance to overhead obstructions Small scale signs should be used in trail

should be 8 ft minimum, with 10 ft
environments.
recommended.
Terminate the trail where it is easily
Striping
accessible to and from the street system,
• When striping is required, use a 4 inch preferably at a trailhead, controlled
dashed yellow centerline stripe with 4
intersection or at the beginning of a dead-
inch solid white edge lines.
end street.
• Solid centerlines can be provided on
tight or blind corners and transitions, Use of bollards should be avoided
and on the approaches to roadway when possible. If bollards are used
crossings.
at intersections and access points,
they should be colored brightly and/or
supplemented with reflective materials to
be visible at night.
48
Packet Pg. 170
F.1.b
BOLLARD ALTERNATIVES
Bollards are physical barriers designed to restrict motor vehicle access to the shared
use trail. Unfortunately, physical barriers are often ineffective at preventing access, and
create obstacles to legitimate trail users. Alternative design strategies use signage,
landscaping and curb cut design to reduce the likelihood of motor vehicle access.
C
A
D

• Bollards or other barriers should not A• “No Motor Vehicles” signage (R5-3) may
be used unless there is a documented be used to reinforce access rules.
history of unauthorized intrusion by B• At intersections, split the trail tread
motor vehicles. into two sections separated by low
landscaping.
• If unauthorized use persists, assess
C• Vertical curb cuts should be used to
whether the problems posed by discourage motor vehicle access.
unauthorized access exceed the risks
and issues posed by bollards and other
D• Low landscaping preserves visibility and
emergency access.
barriers.
49
Packet Pg. 171
F.1.b
SCREENING/BARRIER SEPARATION
TYPES
Urban trails typically transverse through a range of channel configurations, trail types,
and adjacent land uses. As a result, a toolkit of options is required in order to apply
appropriate edge conditions to the unique circumstances along the trail. Edge conditions
comprise the range of treatments used to transition from the path of travel to space
adjacent to the trail. Edge conditions include shoulder buffers, screening, barriers, railing,
and other visual and tactile cues to indicate the path of travel.¹ These treatments keep
users from venturing off the trail, protect users from hazards, delineate the path of travel
where users are separated by direction, mode or speed, and enhance the comfort and
attractiveness of the trail.
Design Features
Shoulders should be a minimum of 2 feet Barriers and Railings
wide 3 feet preferred) and constructed Fences, walls, and railings will likely be
of the same material as the trail or a recurring element along the trail to
another durable surface. Shoulders provide separation between the trail and
should be sloped at 2% to 5% away to the channel edge, rail lines, and private
reduce ponding and minimize debris on property. In some areas, railings and/ or
the trail. Three feet minimum is required security fences will be on both sides of the
where signage or other furnishings will trail.
be installed. A shoulder of at least 1 foot
should be provided between the trail and
any fencing or barrier. Where the shoulder
serves as a pedestrian path, a maximum
cross slope of 2% is required to remain
compliant with ADA regulations.
50
Packet Pg. 172
05
TREATMENTS
ENHANCED CROSSING
51
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 173

F.1.b
MARKED CROSSWALKS AT
INTERSECTIONS
Marked crosswalks signal to motorists that they must stop for pedestrians
and encourages pedestrians to cross at designated locations. Installing
crosswalks alone will not necessarily make crossings safer, particularly on
multi-lane roadways. Marked crosswalks across the uncontrolled leg of unsignalized
intersections should follow the design guidance of marked crosswalks at mid-block
locations.
Typical Application where they can best be seen by

oncoming traffic.
At signalized intersections, all crosswalks
should be marked. At unsignalized Design Features
intersections, crosswalks may be marked • The crosswalk should be located to
under the following conditions: align as closely as possible with the
through pedestrian zone of the sidewalk
• At an intersection within a school zone
corridor.
or on a walking route, trail crossings,
and at parks, libraries, or community • Transverse markings are the most basic
centers. crosswalk marking type, but may wear
faster as every vehicle drives over the
• At a complex intersection, to orient
markings.
pedestrians in finding their way across.
• Continental markings provide improved
• At an offset intersection, to show
visibility and can be located outside of
pedestrians the preferred route across
vehicle wheel paths.
traffic with the least exposure to
vehicular traffic and traffic conflicts. • Local climate can present unique
challenges for pavement markings due
• At an intersection with visibility
to extreme heat/ cold, snow plows, and
constraints, to position pedestrians
de-icing techniques.
52
Packet Pg. 174
F.1.b
Continental crosswalk markings should The effectiveness of marked crossings
be used at crossings with high pedestrian depends entirely on their visibility;
use, particularly where the crossing is not maintaining marked crossings should be a
controlled by signals or stop signs, such high priority. Thermoplastic markings offer
as a local street crossing of a multi-lane increased durability when compared to
arterial. These type of markings should conventional paint.1
also be used where vulnerable pedestrians
1 The appropriate marking material(s) should
are expected, including crossings near be determined on a project basis.
schools. Continental crosswalk marking
also requires less on-going maintenance
and lasts longer than other marking
techniques.
Crosswalk Examples
Transverse
Markings
Continental
Markings
53
Packet Pg. 175
F.1.b
MARKED CROSSWALKS AT MID-

BLOCK
An effective pedestrian crossing at an uncontrolled location consists of a marked
crosswalk, appropriate pavement markings, warning signage, and other treatments to
slow or stop traffic such as curb extensions, median refuges, beacons, hybrid beacons,
and signals. Designing crossings at mid-block locations depends on an evaluation of
motor vehicle traffic volumes, sight distance, pedestrian traffic volumes, land use
patterns, vehicle speed, and road type and width.
When space is available, a median

refuge island may improve user
safety by providing pedestrians
space to cross one side of the
street at a time. See Median
Refuge Islands for more guidance.
Typical Application • Crosswalk markings legally establish

mid-block pedestrian crossing
Locations where mid-block crossings • Pedestrian and stop warning signage
should be considered include: (W11-2 and R1-5C) should be installed
at the crossing to alert drivers of the
• Long blocks (longer than 600 ft.) with
potential presence of pedestrians in the
destinations on both sides of the
roadway
street.
• Locations with heavy pedestrian traffic, Further Considerations
such as schools, shopping centers, and
shared use trail crossings. Uncontrolled crossings of multi-lane
• At transit stops, where transit riders roadways with over 15,000 ADT may be
must cross the street on one leg of possible with features such as sufficient
their journey. crossing gaps in vehicular traffic (more
than 60 per hour), median refuges, or
Design Features beacons, and good sight distance.
• Detectable warning strips are required
On roadways with low to moderate traffic
to help visually impaired pedestrians
identify the edge of the street and are volumes and posted speeds at or below 30
required through ADA mph, a raised crosswalk may be the most
appropriate crossing design to improve
• Advance stop lines should be placed
20-50 feet in advance of multi-lane pedestrian visibility and safety.
uncontrolled mid-block crossings
54
Packet Pg. 176
F.1.b
MEDIAN REFUGE ISLANDS

Median refuge islands are located at the mid-point of a marked crossing and help improve
safety by increasing visibility and allowing pedestrians to cross one direction of traffic at
a time. Refuge islands minimize pedestrian exposure at mid-block crossings by shortening
the crossing distance and increasing the number of available gaps for crossing.
Median refuge islands can also be configured as an off-set crossing. This requires
pedestrians to change their direction of travel while in the median - to face on-coming
vehicles - before crossing. Here, pedestrians are more likely to see, and establish eye
contact with on-coming motorists before stepping into the roadway.
Cut-through median
refuge islands are
preferred over curb ramps
to better accommodate
wheel chairs users.
W11-2,
W16-7P

• Refuge islands can be applied on any • Cut-through median refuge islands are
roadway with a left turn center lane or preferred over curb ramps to better
median that is at least 6’ wide. accommodate wheel chairs users.
• Islands are appropriate at signalized or • Pedestrian warning signage should
unsignalized crosswalks. be placed at the crossing. Advanced
• The refuge island must be accessible, warning signage should also be
preferably with an at-grade passage considered where site obstructions may
through the island rather than ramps be present on the approach.
and landings. • This treatment may be combined with
• The island should be at least 6’ wide Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons
between travel lanes and at least 20’ (RRFBs). See treatment description for
long (40’ minimum preferred). more information.
• Provide double centerline marking,
reflectors, and “KEEP RIGHT” signage
in the island on streets with posted Refuge islands may require frequent
speeds above 30 mph. maintenance of road debris. Trees and
plantings in a landscaped median must be
maintained so as not to impair visibility.
55
Packet Pg. 177
F.1.b
SIGNALS AND BEACONS

PEDESTRIAN SIGNALIZATION IMPROVEMENTS
Typical Application
Pedestrian signal heads indicate to
pedestrians when to cross at a signalized
crosswalk. Pedestrian signal indications are
recommended at all traffic signals except
where pedestrian crossing is prohibited
by signage. Countdown signals should be
used at all new and rehabbed signalized
intersections.
Design Features
Adequate pedestrian crossing time is
Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) provide
a critical consideration at signalized
intersections. The length of a signal phase crossing assistance to pedestrians with
with parallel pedestrian movements should various types of disabilities
provide sufficient time for a pedestrian to
safely cross the adjacent street. The MN
MUTCD recommends a walking speed of 3.5 Pushbuttons should be located so that
ft per second. someone in a wheelchair can reach the
button from a level area of the sidewalk
At crossings where older pedestrians
without deviating significantly from the
or pedestrians with disabilities are
natural line of travel into the crosswalk.
expected, crossing speeds as low as 3 ft
Pushbuttons should be marked (for
per second should be assumed. Special
example, with arrows) so that it is clear
pedestrian phases can be used to provide
which signal is affected.
greater visibility or more crossing time for
pedestrians at certain intersections. In areas with very heavy pedestrian traffic,
consider an all-pedestrian signal phase
Large pedestrian crossing distances can be
to give pedestrians free passage in the
broken up with medians islands into multiple
intersection when all motor vehicle traffic
stages. If the crossing is multi-stage,
movements are stopped. This may provide
pedestrian push buttons must be provided.
operational benefits as vehicle turning
This ensures that pedestrians are not
stranded on the median, and is especially movements are then unimpeded.
applicable on large, multi-lane roadways
with high vehicle volumes, where providing
sufficient pedestrian crossing time for a It is important to perform ongoing
single stage crossing may be an issue. maintenance of traffic control equipment.
Consider semi-annual inspections
Consider the use of a Leading Pedestrian
of controller and signal equipment,
Interval (LPI) a headstart for pedestrians.
intersection hardware, and detectors.
56
Packet Pg. 178
F.1.b
RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASH BEACONS

(RRFB)
Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) are a type of active warning
beacon used at unsignalized crossings. They are designed to increase
driver compliance on multi-lane or high-volume roadways.
Providing secondary installations

of RRFBs on median islands
improves driver yielding behavior W11-2,
W16-7P
Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons

(RRFB) dramatically increase
compliance over conventional
warning beacons
Typical Application 2, S1-1, or W11-15, (and W16-7P if post-

mounted). See FHWA Interim Approval 21
• Guidance for marked/unsignalized for more information.
crossings applies. • Beacons may be installed as side
• RRFBs should not be used at crosswalks mounted or in overhead installations.
controlled by YIELD signs, STOP signs,
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (HAWKs), or Further Considerations
traffic control signals.
• RRFBs should initiate operation based RRFBs elicit the highest increase in
on user actuation and should cease compliance of all the amber warning
operation at a predetermined time beacon enhancement options.
after the user actuation or, with passive
detection, after the user clears the One study found that going from no
crosswalk. beacons to a two-beacon RRFB installation
increased yielding from 18 percent to 81
Design Features percent. A four-beacon arrangement raised
compliance to 88%. Additional studies of
• RRFBs are typically activated by long term installations show little to no
pedestrians manually with a push button, decrease in yielding behavior over time.
or can be actuated automatically
with passive detection systems. See See FHWA Interim Approval 21 (IA-21) for
Enhanced Crossing Treatment Selection more information on RRFBs.
page for more details on appropriate
applications.
• Providing secondary installations of
RRFBs on median islands improves RRFBs should be regularly maintained
conspicuity and driver stopping behavior. to ensure that all lights and detection
• Must be used in conjunction with W11- hardware are functional.
57
Packet Pg. 179
F.1.b
PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON (PHB)

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB) or High-Intensity Activated Crosswalks (HAWK) are used
to improve non-motorized crossings of major streets. A hybrid beacon consists of a signal
head with two red lenses over a single yellow lens on the major street, and a pedestrian
signal head for the crosswalk. Hybrid beacons are only used at marked mid-block
crossings or unsignalized intersections. They are activated with a pedestrian pushbutton
at each end. If a median refuge island is used at the crossing, another pedestrian
pushbutton can be located on the island to create a two-stage crossing.
Typical Application Further Considerations

• Suitable for arterial streets where • PHBs are normally activated by push
speeds are above 30-45 mph and there buttons, but may also be triggered by
are three or more lanes of traffic (or two infrared, microwave, or video detectors.
lanes with a median refuge). If not on-demand, the maximum delay
• Where off-street bicycle facilities for activation of the signal should be two
intersect major streets without minutes, with minimum crossing times
signalized intersections. determined by the width of the street,
but a much shorter delay is strongly
• At intersections or midblock crossings preferred.
where there are high pedestrian volumes.
• Each crossing, regardless of traffic
speed or volume, requires review to
Design Features identify sight lines, potential impacts on
• PHBs may be installed without meeting traffic progression, timing with adjacent
traffic signal control warrants based signals, capacity, and safety.
on engineering judgment if roadway • The installation of hybrid beacons
speed and volumes are excessive for should also include public education
comfortable pedestrian crossings. and enforcement campaigns to ensure
• If installed within a signal system, signal proper use and compliance.
engineers should evaluate the need for
the hybrid beacon to be coordinated Materials and Maintenance
with other signals.
PHBs are subject to the same maintenance
• Parking and other sight obstructions
needs and requirements as standard
should be prohibited for at least 100
traffic signals. Signing and striping need
feet in advance of and at least 20 feet
beyond the marked crosswalk to provide to be maintained to help users understand
adequate sight distance. any unfamiliar traffic control.
58
Packet Pg. 180
F.1.b
SEPARATED BICYCLE SIGNAL PHASE

Separated bicycle lane crossings of signalized intersections can be accomplished
through the use of a bicycle signal phase which reduces conflicts with motor vehicles by
separating bicycle movements from any conflicting motor vehicle movements. Bicycle
signals are traditional three lens signal heads with green, yellow and red bicycle stenciled
lenses.

• Two-way protected bikeways where A• An additional “Bicycle Signal” sign
contraflow bicycle movement or should be installed below the bicycle
increased conflict points warrant signal head.
protected operation.
B• Designs for bicycles at signalized
• Bicyclists moving on a green or yellow crossings should allow bicyclists to
signal indication in a bicycle signal shall trigger signals via pushbutton, loop
not be in conflict with any simultaneous detectors, or other passive detection,
motor vehicle movement at the to navigate the crossing.
signalized location
• On bikeways, signal timing and
• Right (or left) turns on red should be actuation shall be reviewed and
prohibited in locations where such adjusted to consider the needs of
operation would conflict with a green bicyclists.
bicycle signal indication.
59
Packet Pg. 181
F.1.b
A bicycle signal head at a signalized crossing A bicycle detection system triggers a change in
creates a protected phase for cyclists to the traffic signal when a bicycle is detected.
safely navigate an intersection.

• A bicycle signal should be considered Bicycle signal detection equipment
for use only when the volume/collision or should be inspected and maintained
volume/geometric warrants have been
regularly, especially if detection relies
met.
on manual actuation. Pushbuttons and
• The Federal Highway Administration
loop detectors will tend to have higher
(FHWA) has approved bicycle signals for
maintenance needs than other passive
use, if they comply with requirements
from Interim Approval 16 (I.A. 16). Bicycle detection equipment.
Signals are not approved for use in
conjunction with Pedestrian Hybrid
Beacons.
• Bicyclists typically need more time to
travel through an intersection than
motor vehicles. Green light times
should be determined using the bicycle
crossing time for standing bicycles.
• Bicycle detection and actuation
systems include user-activated buttons
mounted on a pole, loop detectors that
trigger a change in the traffic signal
when a bicycle is detected and video
detection cameras, that use digital
image processing to detect a change in
the image at a location.
60
Packet Pg. 182
F.1.b
BIKE DETECTION AND ACTUATION

Bicycle detection and actuation is used to alert the signal controller of bicycle crossing
demand on a particular approach. Proper bicycle detection should meet two primary
criteria: accurately detects bicyclists and provides clear guidance to bicyclists on how to
actuate detection (e.g., what button to push, where to stand).
Typical Application • The MN MUTCD provides guidance on

stencil markings and signage related to
• At signalized intersections within bicycle signal detection.
lanes or general purpose travel lanes.
• At signalized intersections within left Video Detection
turn lanes used by bicyclists. • Video detection systems use digital
• At signalized intersections within image processing to detect a change in
separated bike lanes. the image at a location. These systems
can be calibrated to detect bicycle,
• In conjunction with active warning although there may be detection
beacons and pedestrian hybrid issues during poor lighting and weather
beacons. conditions.
Design Features Thermal Detection
Push Button Actuation • Infrared detection systems typically

consist of one or more thermal
• User-activated button mounted on a cameras, a microprocessor to process
pole facing the street. the thermal imagery, and software
• The location of the device should not to interpret the traffic flow data and
require bicyclists to dismount or be communicate with the traffic signal
rerouted out of the way or onto the controller. These systems are typically
sidewalk to activate the phase. Signage able to extract a significant amount of
should supplement the signal to alert data from the thermal imagery.
bicyclists of the required activation to
prompt the green phase. Microwave Detection
• Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor
Loop Detectors Detection (RTMS)
• Loop detectors are bicycle-activated • RTMS is a system which uses
and installed within the roadway to frequency modulated continuous
allow the presence of a bicycle to be wave radio signals to detect objects
detected by the signal. This allows the in the roadway. This method marks the
bicyclist to stay within the lane of travel detected object with a time code to
without having to maneuver to the determine its distance from the sensor.
side of the road to a pedestrian push
button. • The RTMS system is unaffected by
temperature and lighting, which can
• Loops should be sensitive enough to affect standard video detection.
detect bicycles should be supplemented
with pavement markings to instruct
bicyclists how to trip them.
61
Packet Pg. 183
F.1.b
User-activated button mounted on a pole Bicycle loop detection

• Bicycle loops and other detection It is important to perform ongoing
mechanisms can also provide bicyclists maintenance of traffic control equipment.
with an extended green time before the
Consider semi-annual inspections
light turns yellow so that bicyclists of
of controller and signal equipment,
all abilities can reach the far side of the
intersection. intersection hardware, and detectors.
• User comprehension of the bicycle

detector Pavement markings is low,
although some treatments show
promise in increasing proper usage.
Researchers at Portland State
University found that 23.5% of bicyclists
correctly positioned themselves over
the stand-alone marking, use increased
to 34.8% when the marking was paired
with a R10-22 sign, and increased
further to 48.4% when installed over a
green background.
62
Packet Pg. 184
F.1.b
INTERSECTION TREATMENTS
BICYCLE BOX
A bicycle box is designed to provide bicyclists with a safe and visible space to get in front
of queuing traffic during the red signal phase. Motor vehicles must queue behind the white
stop line at the rear of the bike box. On a green signal, all bicyclists can quickly clear the
intersection. This treatment received Interim Approval from the FHWA in 2016 (IA-18).
A
B

• At potential areas of conflict between A• 14 foot minimum depth from back of
bicyclists and turning vehicles, such as a crosswalk to motor vehicle stop bar.
right or left turn locations. (NACTO, 2012)
• At signalized intersections with high B• A “No Turn on Red” (MN MUTCD R10-11)
bicycle volumes. sign should be installed overhead to
• At signalized intersections with high prevent vehicles from entering the Bike
vehicle volumes. Box. A “Stop Here on Red” (MN MUTCD
R10-6) sign should be post mounted at
• Not to be used on downhill approaches the stop line to reinforce observance of
to minimize the right hook threat the stop line.
potential during the extended green
signal phase. C• A 50 foot ingress lane should be used to
provide access to the box.
• Use of green colored pavement is
recommended.
63
Packet Pg. 185
F.1.b
A bike box allows for bicyclists to wait in front of queuing traffic, providing
high visibility and a head start over motor vehicle traffic.
Further Considerations • Bike boxes should not be used to

accommodate bicyclist turns at
• This treatment positions bicycles intersections that have substantial
together and on a green signal, parallel green time as bicyclists cannot
all bicyclists can quickly clear the safely occupy the box when arriving on
intersection, minimizing conflict and green.
delay to transit or other traffic.
• Pedestrian also benefit from bike boxes,
as they experience reduced vehicle Materials and Maintenance
encroachment into the crosswalk.
• Bike boxes require permission from the Bike boxes are subject to high vehicle
FHWA to implement, and jurisdictions wear, especially turning passenger
must receive approval prior to vehicles, buses, and heavy trucks. As a
implementation. A State may request result, bike boxes with green coloring will
Interim Approval for all jurisdictions in require more frequent replacement over
that State.1
time. The life of the green coloring will
1 FHWA. Interim Approval for Optional Use of depend on vehicle volumes and turning
an Intersection Bicycle Box (IA-18). 2016. movements, but thermoplastic is generally
a more durable material than paint.
64
Packet Pg. 186
F.1.b
TWO-STAGE TURN BOXES

Two-stage turn boxes offer bicyclists a safe way to make turns at multi-lane signalized
intersections from a physically separated or conventional bike lane. On separated bike
lanes, bicyclists are often unable to merge into traffic to turn due to physical separation,
making the two-stage turning critical. This treatment received Interim Approval from
FHWA in 2017 (IA-20).
Typical Application
• Streets with high vehicle speeds and/or
traffic volumes.
• At intersections of multi-lane roads with
signalized intersections.
• At signalized intersections with a high
number of bicyclists making a left turn
from a right side facility.
• Preferred treatment to assist turning
maneuvers on bike lanes, instead of
requiring bicyclists to merge to make a
vehicular left turn, and are required for
to prevent motor vehicles from entering
separated bikeways to assist left turns
the turn box.
from a right side facility, or right turns
from a left side facility. • This design formalizes a maneuver called
a “box turn” or “pedestrian style turn.”
Design Features • Two-stage turn boxes reduce conflicts
by keeping bicyclists from queuing in a
• The two-stage turn box should be
bike lane or crosswalk and by separating
placed in a protected area. Typically
turning bicyclists from through
this is within the shadow of an on-street
bicyclists.
parking lane or protected bike lane
buffer area and should be placed in front • Bicyclist capacity of a two-stage turn
of the crosswalk to avoid conflict with box is influenced by physical dimension
pedestrians. (how many bicyclists it can fit) and
signal phasing (how frequently the box
• 10 foot x 6.5 foot preferred dimensions
clears).
of bicycle storage area (6 foot x 3 foot
minimum).
• Bicycle stencil and turn arrow pavement
markings should be used to indicate Turn boxes may subject to high vehicle
proper bicycle direction and positioning. wear, especially turning passenger
(NACTO, 2012) vehicles, buses, and heavy trucks, so, bike
boxes with green coloring will require more
Further Considerations frequent replacement over time. The life of
the green coloring will depend on vehicle
• Consider providing a “No Turn on Red” volumes and turning movements, but
(MN MUTCD R10-11) on the cross street Thermoplastic or MMA are generally more
durable material than paint.
65
Packet Pg. 187
F.1.b
DRIVEWAY & MINOR STREET

CROSSINGS
The added separation provided by separated bikeways creates additional considerations
at intersections and driveways when compared to conventional bicycle lanes. Special
design guidelines are necessary to preserve sightlines and denote potential conflict areas
between modes, especially when motorists turning into or out of driveways may not be
expecting bicycle travel opposite to the main flow of traffic.
At driveways and crossings of minor streets, bicyclists should not be expected to stop if
the major street traffic does not stop.

• Along streets with separated bikeway • Remove parking to allow for the
where there are intersections and appropriate clear sight distance before
driveways. driveways or intersections to improve
• Higher frequency driveways or crossings visibility. The desirable no-parking area
may require additional treatment such is at least 30 feet from each side of the
as conflict markings and signs. crossing.
• Use colored pavement markings and/
or shared line markings through conflict
areas at intersections.
• If a raised bikeway is used, the height of
the lane should be maintained through
the crossing, requiring automobiles to
cross over.
66
Packet Pg. 188
F.1.b
Intersection crossing markings can be used at high volume driveway and minor street crossings, as illustrated above.
• Motor vehicle traffic crossing the Further Considerations

bikeway should be constrained or
channelized to make turns at sharp • Removing obstructions and providing
angles to reduce travel speed prior to clear sight distance at crossings
the crossing. increases visibility of bicyclists.
• Driveway crossings may be configured • Treatments designed to constrain and
as raised crossings to slow turning cars slow turning motor vehicle traffic will
and assert physical priority of traveling slow drivers to bicycle-compatible travel
bicyclists. speeds prior to crossing the separated
bikeway.
• Motor vehicle stop bar on cross-streets
and driveways is setback from the
intersection to ensure that drivers slow Materials and Maintenance
down and scan for pedestrians and
bicyclists before turning. Green conflict striping and markings,
will require higher maintenance where
driveways and minor intersection. Green
conflict striping (if used) will also generally
require higher maintenance due to vehicle
wear.
67
Packet Pg. 189
F.1.b
F A
BIKE MIXING ZONES

A mixing zone creates a shared-space travel lane where turning motor vehicles yield to
people on bikes. Geometric design of the mixing zone is intended to slow motor vehicles
to bicycle travel speeds, provide regulatory guidance to people driving, and enable all
roadway users to negotiate conflicts upstream of the intersection.

• Used with wide buffered or protected A• Shared lane dimensions: 13 feet
bikeways to provide enough room to maximum width. Creates clear
establish a formal “yield” area for motor expectations of in-line operations.
vehicles.
B• Shared lane bicycle marking (“Sharrow”)
• Potential option when there is a used to clarify bike positioning in the
presence or need for a right turn only mixing zone.
lane.
C• Transition to mixing zone: 75 feet
• Most appropriate in areas with low to preferred length. The travel lane
moderate right-turn volumes (typically transition should begin a minimum of
less than 100 per hour). 70 feet and a maximum of 100 feet
in advance of the intersection. The
objective is to limit vehicle storage
within the mixing zone, thus slowing
operating speeds during merging.
68
Packet Pg. 190
F.1.b
D
• Entrance to mixing zone: 7:1 Further Considerations
recommended taper with 20 mph entry
speed for vehicles. • Flex posts may be installed in the
buffer between the mixing zone and
E• Yield line indicates bike priority in mixing
the adjacent through travel lane.
zone
However, this may result in more abrupt
F• The mixing zone should be buffered 2-6 motor vehicle transitions and is most
feet from the through travel lane. appropriate in slow-speed conditions
(20 mph or less).
• Use agressive transition taper
dimensions and short storage length
to promote slow motor vehicle travel
speeds
• Ensure clear sight lines in advance
of mixing zone, i.e. adequate parking
setback in the case of a parking
protected bike lane.
69
Packet Pg. 191
F.1.b
C
ROUNDABOUTS
Single lane roundabouts can provide high intersection throughput and reduced delay while
reducing points of conflict between people driving, walking, and riding bikes. Multilane
roundabouts can offer similar benefits, but introduce more complexity to the intersection
and require special design considerations. At roundabouts, it is important to provide
clear right-of-way rules to all people traveling through and guidance through use of
appropriately designed signage, pavement markings, and geometric design elements.
Typical Application • Ensure off-street trail users can see

approaching traffic before initiating
• Where a bike lane or separated bikeway crossing maneuvers.
approaches a single-lane roundabout.
• Reduce vehicular speeds at crossings to Design Features
20 mph or less.
A• Design approaches/exits to the lowest
• Support high yield-compliance speeds possible. Use effective radius of
behaviors by motorists at crossings. curvature less than or equal to 130’ for
• Provide smooth transitions between on- speeds of up to 20 MPH.
street bicycle facilities and off-street B• Allow people bicycling to exit the
trails. roadway onto a separated bike lane or
70
Packet Pg. 192
F.1.b
shared use trail that circulates around Further Considerations
the roundabout.
• Consider using speed tables, or raised
• Also allow people bicycling the choice
crosswalks to increase motorist yielding
to navigate the roundabout like motor
at crossings.
vehicles to “take the lane.”
• The publication Roundabouts:
C• Maximize yielding rate of motorists to
Informational Guide states, “... it is
people walking and people bicycling at
important not to select a multilane
crosswalks with small corner radii and
roundabout over a single-lane
reduced crossing distance.
roundabout in the short term, even
• Ensure good sightlines at crossings, when long-term traffic predictions
provide lighting at a point immediately eventually warrant a higher capacity
upstream of the crosswalk so that intersection design” (NCHRP 2010 p
drivers on both approaches to the 6-71). The purpose of this is to prevent
crosswalk have ample time to see and crashes in the interim time period. When
react to those in the crosswalk. intersections have more lanes and are
• Use mountable aprons/ramps at wider than necessary to safely and
roundabout entries, exits and the comfortably accommodate near term
central island to accommodate larger traffic, a higher crash rate and more
vehicles while keeping passenger vehicle frequent injury crashes occur.
speeds low. • Other circulatory intersection designs
• Detectable directional indicators can be exist but they function differently than
used at bike ramps entrances and exits the modern roundabout. These include
to prevent people with vision disabilities traffic circles (also known as “Rotaries,”
from entering the roadway at these and neighborhood traffic circles.
locations. • Multilane roundabouts support higher
traffic volumes and higher stress levels
for people on bikes. People on bikes
should not be encouraged to take the
lane while traveling through a multilane
roundabout.
• At multilane roundabout crossings,
consider a jog in the median to enhance
intersection awareness and judgement
for those crossing.
71
Packet Pg. 193
F.1.b
RAISED INTERSECTIONS
A raised intersection is a vertical speed control treatment that elevates the entire
intersection and its crosswalks to the level of the sidewalk. The intersection operates as
a large speed table with ramps on each approach, reinforcing slower vehicle speeds and
increasing awareness of pedestrian crossing activity. Crosswalks flush with the sidewalk
create a smoother travel path for pedestrians and reduces the need for curb ramps,
although detectable warning strips at the edges should still be provided.
A
B

• Minor intersections with a high volume A• Chevrons, or diagonal solid white lines
of pedestrian crossings. meeting at an angle should be used to
• Roads with speed limits under 30 mph indicate ramps to vehicular traffic.
and annual average daily traffic (AADT) B• If crosswalks are at-grade with the
less than 9,000. sidewalk, they do not need to be
• Reduce vehicle speeds through marked, but ADA-compliant detectable
pedestrian-oriented zones such as warning stips are always required.
commercial areas, campus settings, C• Include bollards on corners or along
and pick-up/drop-off locations. other pedestrian areas that are level
• Support high yield-compliance with the street and where crossings
behaviors by motorists at crossings. are not desired. Bollards protect and
delineate pedestrian spaces.
72
Packet Pg. 194
F.1.b
Unique crosswalk markings can be used to draw attention to the raised intersection,
as demonstrated above on an offset residential intersection.
D• The intersection can be constructed yellow when adjoining dark colored

from special paving materials, pavements.
emphasizng the pedestrian environment • Avoid applying this treatment to major
and public space. These materials can bus transit routes or primary emergency
include asphalt, concrete, stamped vehicle routes. These vehicles may
concrete, or pavers. High visibility street experience issues with vertical speed
materials will draw attention to the control elements.
raised intersection.
• Avoid applying this treatment to
Further Considerations areas with sharp curves, limited sight
distances, or steep roadway grades.
• If the intersection consists of two 1-way • Raised intersections may impact
streets, there will be two corners with street drainage or require catch basin
no vehicle turning movements. These relocation.
corners should be designed with the
smallest radius possible (approximately • Include appropriate warning signs and
2 ft). roadway markings to prepare motorists
for the raised crossings and alert snow
• Consider how the color of the plow operators to the location of the
detectable warning strips will ramps.
contrast with the colors of the raised
intersection, sidewalk, and roadway.
Detectable warning strips with higher
constrast will improve the delineation of
the spaces, such as red when adjoining
light-colored sidewalks, or bright white/
73
Packet Pg. 195
06
FACILITIES
AND SUPPORTING
NETWORK CONNECTIONS
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 196

F.1.b
SHORT-TERM BICYCLE PARKING
People need a safe, convenient place to secure their bicycle when they reach their
destination. This may be short-term parking of 2 hours or less, or long-term parking for
employees, students, residents, and commuters.
Information on short- and long-term bike parking has been informed by the Association
of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) Bicycle Parking Guide, which is updated
frequently and is available online at www.apbp.org.
Application Design Features

Bike Racks Bike Racks
• Bike racks provide short-term bicycle • When placed on sidewalks, 2 feet
parking and are meant to accommodate minimum from the curb face to avoid
visitors, customers, and others ‘dooring.’
expected to depart within two hours. It • 4 feet between racks to provide
should be an approved standard rack, maneuvering room.
appropriate location and placement.
• Locate close to destinations; 50
Bike Corrals feet maximum distance from main
building entrance.
• On-street bike corrals (also known
as on-street bicycle parking) consist • Minimum clear distance of 6 feet should
of bicycle racks grouped together be provided between the bicycle rack
in a common area within the street and the property line.
traditionally used for automobile • While bike racks could be installed
parking. perpendicular or parallel to the curb, it
• Bicycle corrals are reserved exclusively is important to ensure there is sufficient
for bicycle parking and provide a room for pedestrian traffic, even when a
relatively inexpensive solution to bike is locked to the rack.
providing high-volume bicycle parking.
Bicycle corrals can be implemented by Bike Corrals
converting one or two on-street motor • Bicyclists should have an entrance width
vehicle parking spaces into on-street from the roadway of 5-6 feet.
bicycle parking. • Can be used with parallel or angled
• Each motor vehicle parking space can parking.
be replaced with approximately 6-10 • Parking stalls adjacent to curb
bicycle parking spaces. extensions are good candidates for
bicycle corrals since the concrete
extension serves as delimitation on
one side.
75
Packet Pg. 197
F.1.b
• Where the placement of racks on
sidewalks is not possible (due to narrow
sidewalk width, sidewalk obstructions,
street trees, etc.), bicycle parking can
be provided in the street where on-
street vehicle parking is allowed in the
form of on-street bicycle corrals.
• Some types of bicycle racks may meet
design criteria, but are discouraged
except in limited situations. This
includes undulating “wave” racks,
schoolyard racks, and spiral racks. Inverted-U racks provide two points of contact.
These discouraged racks are illustrated
on the following page.
• Bike racks should be made of thick
stainless steel to reduce the chance
of thieves cutting through the racks to
take bicycles. Square tubing can provide
further protection from cutting, as well.
• If a bike rack is installed as surface
mount, countersink bolts or expansion
bolts should be used to keep the rack in
place. Covering the bolts with putty or
epoxy can provide additional protection.
Racks with square tubing, good spacing, and a

References concrete base likewise offer two points of contact.
MnDOT Bicycle Facility Design Manual.
APBP Bicycle Parking Guide 2015.
76
Packet Pg. 198
F.1.b
Types of Bike Racks to Use Types of Bike Racks to Avoid
These racks provide two points of contact These racks do not provide support at
with the bicycle, accommodate varying two places on the bike, can damage the
styles of bike, allow for the frame of wheel, do not provide an opportunity
a bicycle and at least one wheel to be for the user to lock the frame of their
secured by most U-locks, and are intuitive bicycle easily, and are not intuitive to use.
to use. Because of performance concerns, the
APBP Essentials of Bike Parking Report
recommends selecting other racks instead
of these.
POST & RING WHEELWELL

SECURE
WAVE
INVERTED-U
COMB WHEELWELL
COATHANGER BOLLARD
Communities may consider purchasing branded
U-racks for installation on sidewalks.
Graphics courtesy of Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle

Professionals Essentials of Bike Parking report (2015).
77
Packet Pg. 199
F.1.b
Space Requirements
The following minimum spacing requirements apply to some common installations of
fixtures like inverted U or post and ring racks that park one bicycle roughly centered
PLACEMENT
on each side of the rack. Recommended clearances are given first, with minimums in
parentheses where appropriate. In areas with tight clearances, consider wheelwell-
The following minimum spacing requirements apply to
secure racks, which can be placed closer to walls and constrain the bicycle footprint
some common installations of fixtures like inverted-U or
more reliably
post-and-ring racks thatthan inverted
park one U and
bicycle roughly post and ring racks. The footprint of a typical bicycle
centered
iseach
on approximately 6' x2'. Cargo
side of the rack. Recommended clearancesbikes and bikes with trailers can extend to 10' or longer.
are given first, with minimums in parentheses where
appropriate. In areas with tight clearances, consider
wheelwell-secure racks (page 6), which can be placed
closer to walls and constrain the bicycle footprint more
reliably than inverted-U and post-and-ring racks.
The footprint of a typical bicycle is approximately 6’ x 2’. 96”
Cargo bikes and bikes with trailers can extend to 10’ (72” min)
36”
or longer. (24”min)
16’ min
60”
(48” min)
96” 36”
(72” min)
48” (36” min)

24” min
36”
(24” min)
When installing sidewalk racks,
48” (36” min)
maintain thesidewalk
When installing pedestrian through
racks, maintain
120” recommended
zone. Racks through
the pedestrian should be
zone. placed
Racks should
be placed in line with existing sidewalk
Sidewalk racks in line with to
obstructions existing sidewalk
maintain a clear line of
Sidewalk racks adjacent travel for all sidewalk users.
adjacent auto
to on-street to on- obstructions to maintain a clear
parking should be placed
street
betweenparking
parking stalls
line of travel for all sidewalk
to avoid conflicts with
should be placed users.
opening car doors.
between parking
stalls to avoid
conflicts with
opening car doors
96” recommended
Crosswalk
60” 72” 48”
24” (36” preferred when adjacent to auto parking)
Graphics courtesy of Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle

Professionals Essentials of Bike Parking report (2015).
Crosswalk
78
Packet Pg. 200
F.1.b
LONG-TERM BICYCLE PARKING

Users of long-term parking generally place high value on security and weather protection.
Long-term parking is designed to meet the needs of employees, residents, public transit
users, and others with similar needs.
Information on short and long term bike parking has been obtained from the APBP Bicycle
Parking Guide, which is updated frequently and is available online at www.apbp.org.
Application Further Considerations

• At transit stops, bike lockers or a • As the APBP Bike Parking Guide notes,
sheltered secure enclosure may be increasing density of bike racks in
appropriate long term solutions. a long-term facility without careful
• On public or private property where attention to user needs can exclude
secure, long-term bike parking is users with less-common types of
desired. bicycles which may be essential due to
age, ability, or bicycle type.
• Near routine destinations, such as
workplaces, universities, hospitals, etc. • To accommodate trailers and long
bikes, a portion of the racks should
Design Features be on the ground and should have an
additional 36” of in-line clearance.
Bike Lockers
• Minimum dimensions: width (opening) 2.5
feet; height 4 feet; depth 6 feet. References
• 4 foot side clearance and 6 foot end MnDOT Bicycle Facility Design Manual
clearance. 7 foot minimum distance APBP Bicycle Parking Guide 2015.
between facing lockers.
Secure Parking Area

• Closed-circuit television monitoring or
on-site staff with secure access for
users.
• Double high racks & cargo bike spaces.
• Bike repair station with bench and bike
tube and maintenance item vending
machine.
• Bike lock “hitching post” – allows people
to leave bike locks.
79
Packet Pg. 201
F.1.b
High Density Bike Racks Bike Parking Rooms
Racks may be used that increase bike Long term bike parking may be available
parking density, like the ones below. While in dedicated rooms in residential and
these types of racks provide more spaces, commercial buildings. Bicycle parking can
racks that require lifting should not be be accommodated in 15 square feet per
used exclusively. People with heavier bikes space or less.
(i.e. cargo bikes) or people with disabilities
or people who are simply small in stature
may be unable to lift their bikes easily.
STAGGERED WHEELWELL-SECURE
Bike lockers
VERTICAL
TWO-TIER Secured parking areas
80
Packet Pg. 202
F.1.b
TRANSIT STOP DESIGN
Bus platforms or waiting areas serve as the critical transition point for pedestrians as
transit passengers. As such, bus platforms, shelters, and shelter amenities need to be
designed to the benefit of people boarding, alighting, waiting, and passing through.
Transit platforms and shelters should be designed to be comfortable and safe, accessible
for people with disabilities, sized appropriately based on ridership and demand, use space
efficiently, and to minimize delay and conflicts with other modes such as bicycles, and
competing sidewalk uses.

• Bus stops can range from simple • Bus shelters should be designed to
curbside stops with a pole and seating, minimize potential for conflicts between
to in-roadway platforms with shelters the bus, and people walking and
and other shelter amenities depending bicycling through the area.
on demand, adjacent land use, and • Site visibility is a critical safety and
available right of way. security factor. The bus operator needs
• Typically, bus stop shelters and to be able to see waiting passengers,
amenities occupy an area of the and waiting passengers need to
sidewalk, either in the furnishing zone, or be able to see approaching buses.
a reserved space in the frontage zone. The shelter, street trees, and other
They can also be located on transit vertical elements must not obstruct
islands which accommodates bicycle visibility. The stop and shelter should
through traffic, or in medians for center be adequately illuminated at night for
running alignments. safety and security.
• Shelters can face toward the roadway or • The shelter canopy should be sized to
away from the roadway. Shelters facing provide sufficient coverage based on
toward the roadway provide better stop demand.
sightlines, but may compete with other
sidewalk uses and adjacent property
access and circulation.
81
Packet Pg. 203
F.1.b
SHARED USE TRAILS AND ON-STREET

TRANSITIONS
Transitions occur where the trail meets a roadway or railway, where one trail typology
meets another, such as when an elevated trail transitions into an at-grade trail or
where separated trail segments transition into shared environments. Transitions may
also include horizontal shifts to avoid physical obstacles such as utility towers or other
structures. Trail access means providing a formalized way for people to arrive and depart
from the trail network by a variety of travel modes.

• Regional trail access points can take • Major trailheads feature convenient
several different forms ranging from access to transit, parking for 10 or more
major trailheads, minor trailheads, and vehicles, (including accessible spaces),
neighborhood entryways. These vary in short- and long-term bicycle parking,
the level of infrastructure and facility restrooms, trash/recycling facilities,
amenities. wayfinding/interpretive kiosks, benches/
picnic tables, and other day use
• These access points are multimodal
amenities.
transition points; they serve as the
transition between the on-street • Minor trailheads include similar facilities
network and the off-street network for as major trailheads but a lower provision
people walking, biking, riding transit, of vehicle and bike parking and day
and driving. use amenities, and may be further
from major transit and bike connection
• All trailheads should be open to the
points.
public.
• Neighborhood entrypoints are the most
basic form of local accessways that
do not provide many of the amenities
of trailheads due to space constraints,
neighborhood context, and/or proximity
to other trailheads.
82
Packet Pg. 204
F.1.b
Typology Transitions Mixing Zones
Design elements used to alert trail users Mixing zones are necessary where
include pavement markings such as optical physical space constraints do not allow
speed bars, zebra stripe crosswalks with for separated modes, or at locations
yield/stop markings, and “LOOK” legends along the trail where a high level of cross-
and arrows. Other visual indications traffic is expected. Mixing zones need to
include bike and pedestrian directional provide clear indication to all users that
markings, centerlane striping, and the use a transition is occurring in advance of the
of colored pavement to visually narrow or change, so that trail users can adjust their
indicate a change in environment. speeds and awareness appropriately to
proceed carefully into the mixing zone.
Tactile indications include speed humps,
tactile speed bars, and the use of multiple Advanced warning can be accomplished
surface types, such as concrete, asphalt, with advisory signage, pavement
and pavers. markings, and the use of contrasting
surface treatments (e.g. pavers/inlays with
Advisory, regulatory, and/or wayfinding
contrasting tones/textures, striping, or a
signage are should be considered at
combination of these treatments). These
transition points. Physical treatments to
design elements help to guide trail users
alert and guide trail users include traffic
safely through the mixing zone by alerting
calming measures such as vertical and
users to the change in conditions and thus
horizontal deflection.
reducing the speed differential.
Trail illumination is an important design
element that must be considered along
the trail, but is especially important in
transition zones.
83
Packet Pg. 205
F.1.b
WAYFINDING
The ability to navigate across an urbanized area is informed by landmarks, natural
features, and other visual cues. Signs throughout the city should indicate the direction
of travel, the locations and travel time distances to those destinations. A pedestrian
wayfinding system is similar to a transit, vehicular, or bike facility wayfinding system, in
12’ that it consists of comprehensive signing and/or pavement markings to guide pedestrians
11’ to their destination along routes that are safe, comfortable and attractive.
10’
9’
CIT Y NAME
8’ Sign types Decision sign

7’
Destination 1
6’
Destination 2
TRAIL
NAME
Destination 3
5’
4’
TRAIL NAME
1.0
MILE
3’
Destinations Points of Interest
Bus Station PARKS AND RECREATION NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Schools CIVIC FACILITIES COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS
TRAIL NAME
Hospital
!! Transit Stations
TRAIL NAME
2’
1’
Trailhead Secondary Access Decision Turn Confirmation Pavement Mile Recreational Interpretive
Kiosk Signage Sign Sign Sign Marking Marker Trail Marker Sign

Wayfinding signs will increase users’ • Confirmation signs indicate to
comfort and accessibility to the pedestrian pedestrians that they are on the right
trail to their destinations. They include
system in denser urbanized areas and
destinations and distance/time, but not
connections to other destinations across arrows
the larger region.
• Turn signs indicate where a route turns
Signage can serve both wayfinding and from one street onto another street.
safety purposes including: • Decision signs indicate the junction
of two or more pedestrian routes
• Helping to familiarize users with the to access key destinations. These
pedestrian network include destinations, arrows and
• Helping users identify the best routes to distances. Travel times are optional but
destinations within walking distance or recommended.
connections to other modes. • A regional wayfinding sign plan would
• Helping to address misperceptions about identify sign locations, sign type,
time and distance. destinations, and approximate distance
and travel time to destinations, and
• Helping overcome a “barrier to entry” for
highlight connections between urban
people who are not frequent walkers.
and non-urbanized areas.
84
Packet Pg. 206
F.1.b
• Bicycle wayfinding signs also visually
cue motorists that they are driving
along a bicycle route and should use
caution. Signs are typically placed
at key locations leading to and along
bicycle routes, including the intersection
of multiple routes.
• Too many road signs tend to clutter the
right-of-way, and it is recommended
that these signs be posted at a level
most visible to bicyclists rather than per
Tactile navigation sign
vehicle signage standards.
• Green is the color used for directional
guidance and is the most common color
of bicycle wayfinding signage in the US,
including those in the MNMUTCD.
• Check wayfinding signage along
bikeways for signs of vandalism, graffiti,
or normal wear and replace signage
along the bikeway network as-needed.
85
Packet Pg. 207
07
OPERATIONS AND
PEDESTRIAN-BICYCLE
MAINTENANCE
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 208

F.1.b
SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE
The sidewalk is an essential space for people walking and using wheelchairs and other
personal mobility devices, and it is also the location where many other important activities
take place. Each of the zones described in ‘Sidewalk Zones’ needs to be maintained for
the overall sidewalk space to function as intended.
Maintaining Sidewalk Zones on the primary pedestrian zone.

Maintainance should be prioritized
• The Primary Pedestrian Zone must by plant species, high demand
remain free and clear of obstacles areas, and/or narrow sidewalk
and impediments. This is the primary corridors. When not maintained, the
accessway for people traveling along primary pedestrian zones becomes
streets and to and from adjacent constrained, creating bottlenecks,
properties, and must be maintained to and may force pedestrians into the
ADA standards. street.
• P
. roperty owners are responsible for • During snow events, this zone may
maintaining all sidewalk zones abutting be designated for snow storage,
their property, not just the Building but must not impact the Primary
Pedestrian or Enhancement Zones.
Frontage Zone. The City shall enforce per
City Ordinance/Policy. • The Building Frontage Zone between
the Primary Pedestrian Zone and the
• Maintaining a firm, stable, and slip
abutting property may be utilized by
resistant surfaces is necessary for
businesses for outdoor cafe seating
people walking or rolling to traverse
by permit along commercial corridors,
this zone without risk of tripping,
and occupied by landscaping or other
slipping or otherwise uneven footing.
natural screening in residential areas.
• Regular sweeping ensures the zone is
• Outdoor seating shall not occupy
kept free of natural debris and litter.
the Primary Pedestrian Zone or
• Routine maintenance of sidewalk inhibit travel along the sidewalk.
damage due to tree roots, freeze-
• Landscaping in the Building
thaw, etc. is the responsibility of
Frontage Zone should be maintained
abutting property owners.
in a manner similar to landscaping
• The Amenity Zone is where street in the Amenity Zone. Landscaping
furnishing are located, where people should be maintained by property
are often picked up and dropped off, owners so as not to encroach on
where mail is delivered, and where other the Primary Pedestrian Zone.
loading/unloading happens. It’s the
• The Enhancement Zone must be
space where trees and landscaping are
maintained for the following uses:
planted, and where street lighting and
bike facilities, vehicle parking, curb
other utilities are located. This zone
extensions, and bike parking.
must be maintained properly to ensure
access to this area and all of these • Street sweeping and snow/ice
curbside uses are possible. removal should be conducted per
maintenance schedule and following
• Vegetation in the Amenity zone
significant weather events to help to
should be regularly maintained by
ensure intended use of this space.
the City so as not to encroach
Snow must not be stored in bikeways
87
Packet Pg. 209
F.1.b
PARKING, LOADING, AND GARBAGE ACCESS
Where separated bikeways are adjacent to on-street parking, drop-off locations, freight
loading zones, or designated garbage pick-up areas, the design of the separation at
those locations should provide an accessible aisle and adequate landing area to allow for
travel from the vehicle to the curb ramp.
Colored pavement within a bicycle lane may be used to increase the visibility of the
bicycle facility, raise awareness of the potential to encounter bicyclists, and reinforce
priority of bicyclists in conflict areas. In 2021, MnDOT received statewide Interim Approval
from FHWA for the use of green-colored pavement for bike lanes (IA-14). MnDOT must
maintains a list of locations using the green colored pavement.
Typical Application
• Streets with on-street parking and a such as retail or hotels, and cannot be
separated bikeway along the same relocated to adjacent block faces or
block face. alleys.
• Where ADA-accessible spaces are
desired, either due to proximity to Colored Pavement Treatment
nearby building entrances, street Within a weaving or conflict area to
grades, or other factors. identify the potential for bicyclist and
• Where loading and garbage pick-up motorist interactions and assert bicyclist
zones are desired along the same side priority.
of the street as a separated bikeway
due to adjacent commercial users
88
Packet Pg. 210
F.1.b
A B
Green colored conflict striping indicates the path of travel A passenger loading zone allows pedestrians to cross the
of people on bicycles, and alerts people intending to turn separated bike lane to access the loading island. These
across the bike lane to yield when bicyclists are present. designs should also incorporate truncated domes to alert
people walking with vision disabilities of the crossing.
• Across intersections, driveways and resistant and retro-reflective (MnMUTCD

Stop or Yield-controlled cross-streets. Section 3G.01).
• At bike boxes and two-stage turn boxes • In exclusive use areas, such as bike
boxes, color application should be solid
Design Features green.
• Accessible spaces should be located Further Considerations

adjacent to intersections to simplify
access to curb ramps. • Garbage pick-up, freight loading, and
drop-off hours should be restricted
• Accessible spaces must comply with all
to hours of the day when less bicycle
ADA requirements.
traffic is expected, to minimize
• To connect between the sidewalk and potential interactions.
parking spaces, a crosswalk across the
• The City can provide guidance to both
separated bikeway and curb ramp (6’
waste management operators and
minimum width) must be provided.
customers on desirable recycling/trash
• Place a YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIANS can and bin placement with respect to
(MUTCD R1-5) sign where the separated both walkways and bikeways to improve
bikeway crosses the parking access
safety and use of these facilities.
route to clearly establish a right-of-way.
Yield line pavement marking may be • Removing obstructions and providing
placed prior to the crosswalk. clear sight distance at crossings
increases visibility of bicyclists.
A• Typical white bike lane striping (solid or
dotted 6” stripe) is used to outline the • Driveway and intersection designs
green colored pavement. shall provide appropriate sight lines,
radii, and other features that deliver a
B• In weaving or turning conflict areas,
turning movement speed that provides
preferred striping is dashed, to match
the calculated time needed for turning
the bicycle lane line extensions.
motor vehicle drivers to see and react
• The colored surface should be skid to bikeway users.
89
Packet Pg. 211
F.1.b
BICYCLE ACCESS THROUGH CONSTRUCTION

AREAS
When construction work zones overflow into the right of way, or into an on- or off-street
bicycle facility, care must be taken to avoid conflicts with people walking and approaching
on bikes. If the work zone obstructs an existing bike facility, every effort should be made
to provide a facility of the same, or higher level of access and safety through the area.
It is unsafe to force people who are bicycling slowly into a shared lane situation, unless
posted speeds are 20 or 25 mph. At higher speeds, the speed differential is a potential
deadly combination and is an unacceptable option for how to allocate space along higher
speed roadways with construction zones.
Typical Applications reasonably clean riding surface in the

provisional bike facility. Allow temporary
• People on bicycles should not be led use of sidewalk in suburban areas
into conflicts with work site vehicles, (lower walk/bike volumes) by requiring
equipment, moving vehicles, open temporary ramps up to sidewalk and
trenches, or temporary construction down from sidewalk for short zones.
signage. Proper shared use signs on sidewalk are
• Whenever people area allowed to ride needed as well as “bikes yield to people
bikes through an exclusive work zone walking signs.”
area, measures should be taken to
provide a continuous path of travel for Design Features
bikes.
A
• Advanced signage alerts people
• Construction warning signage guides on bicycles to the changes ahead.
people on bikes through construction Construction warning signage at the
work zones, and/or along route detours. site should be located in the furnishing
• Debris should be swept to maintain a zone of the sidewalk, or in a location
90
Packet Pg. 212
F.1.b
In this poor example, the existing bike lane ends abruptly This existing bike lane was repurposed as a pedestrian
and forces people to ride in the adjacent vehicle travel travelway, but people riding are forced to merge into
lane. The existing bike lane is also covered in gravel the adjacent travel lane. Options for accommodating
and debris, increasing the likelihood of crashes. Options bike riding through the area could include: widening
for accommodating bike riding through the construction the pedestrian travelway sufficiently (8-10’, depending
zone include: strictly limiting the encroachment into on the number of expected users) to create a shared
the bike lane so it can still be used; requiring daily use path of travel; tapering to a single travel lane while
sweeping; narrowing the travel lanes so the bike lane providing a bike lane; providing a well-routed bike only
can continue. If the posted speeds are 20 - 25 mph, detour. If the roadway travel lanes are posted 20 or 25
another option would be to create a shared lane by mph, another option would be to add proper merge
providing merge pavement markings and signage, areas, signing, and temporary retro-reflective sharrows.
shared lane pavement markings, and signage. Setting a construction speed limit may help to reduce
roadway travel speeds and create a safer transition.
that does not obstruct the designated
path of travel for people walking Further Considerations
and bicycling. Signage mounts and
• Contractors should be made aware of
footings should not pose a hazard for
the needs of people on bikes, and be
bicycle wheels nor a tripping hazard for
properly trained in how to safely route
anyone walking, caning, or traveling in a
bicyclists through or around work zones.
wheelchair.
• Detour paths of travel and routing,
• Steel plates used to cover trenches
detour signage, and path of travel and
tend to have a 1”-2” vertical raised lip
closure signage should be included on all
over the roadway surface. Because
bikeways where construction activities
the plate is not flush, it can cause a
occur. Signage should also be provided
person on a bicycle to lose control
on all other roadways.
as they come into contact with it.
Require temporary asphalt (cold mix) • Require both temporary and final
around steel plates to create a smooth repaving to provide a smooth surface
transition. Require steel plate in use without abrupt edges
signs. • Use warning signs where steel plates
• Use steel plates only as a temporary are in use. These plates can be slippery,
measure during construction, not for particularly when wet. Applying traction
extended periods. to the surface of the plate can reduce
the likelihood of slips.
91
Packet Pg. 213
F.1.b
D
C
A B
E
F
BIKE FACILITY MAINTENANCE

Regular bicycle facility maintenance includes sweeping, snow plowing, maintaining
a smooth roadway, trimming encroaching vegetation, ensuring that the gutter-to-
pavement transition remains relatively flush, and installing bicycle friendly grates.
Pavement overlays are a good opportunity to improve bicycling facilities. The following
recommendations provide a menu of options to consider to enhance a maintenance
regimen.
A Sweeping facilities designated as major bikeways,

before roadways designated as minor
The City of Rochester Sweeping bikeways.
Operations Plan will identify debris
• Sweep bikeways periodically to minimize
management to ensure safe surface
accumulation on the facility to maintain
conditions in bikeways. Debris that is
safe surface conditions.
allowed to accumulate can become a
hazard due to loss of control, inner tube • Identify winter traction material removal
blow outs, as well as service dog safety. protocols to ensure traction materials
are removed from bike ways in a timely
The following are recommended items to manner.
include in the City’s Sweeping Operations
Plan. B Signage
• Cover both on-road and off-road • Include bikeway regulatory and
bikeways under the jurisdiction of the wayfinding signing as part of the
city. Can establish a seasonal sweeping roadway sign maintenance program,
regularly checking for vandalism,
schedule that allows for prioritization
graffiti, and wear. Schedule
of routes. The schedule could prioritize
replacement/repair as needed.
92
Packet Pg. 214
F.1.b
C Roadway Surface E Gutter-to-Pavement

• Smooth pothole-free surfaces are
Transition
especially critical for people on bikes. • Gutter-to-pavement transitions should
• The finished surface on bikeways does have no more than a 1/4” vertical
not vary more than 1/4” for new roadway transition.
construction. • Pavement transitions should be
• Pavement should be maintained so ridge examined during every roadway project
buildup does not occur at the gutter- for new construction, maintenance
to-pavement transition or adjacent to activities, and construction project
railway crossings. activities that occur in streets.
• Ensure pavement inspections occur
F Landscaping
after trenching activities are completed
and if excessive settlement has • Vegetation on the edge of the roadway
occurred to require mitigation prior to should not hang into or impede passage
the expiration of the project’s warranty along bikeways.
period.
• After storm events, remove fallen trees
• To the extent possible, pavement or other debris from bikeways as quickly
markings and green-colored areas as possible.
should be placed out of the vehicle
path of travel to minimize wear. In Coordination With Emergency
general, striping, pavement markings, Responders
and green colored areas should be well
• General roadway maintenance should
maintained especially areas in the path
be coordinated and prioritized on
of vehicle travel, and where high-turning
emergency response routes that
movements occur.
overlap with major and minor bikeways.
D Drainage Grates • Provide fire, police, and EMS services
with a map of major and minor bikeway
• New drainage grates should be bicycle-
routes.
friendly. Grates should have horizontal
slats on them so that bicycle tires and Recommended Bikeway
assistive devices do not fall through any
Maintenance Activities
vertical slats.
• Create a program to inventory all The following table summarizes
existing drainage grates, and replace maintenance activities. The City should
hazardous grates as necessary - ensure that each of these activities is
temporary modifications such as addressed in City requirements, various
installing rebar horizontally across the operations plans, or emergency response
grate should not be an acceptable plans. The frequency of each activity is
alternative to replacement. at the discretion of the City Engineer.
However, the activity should be done in a
timely enough manner to ensure bikeways
are operated in a safe manner for all users.
93
Packet Pg. 215
F.1.b
WINTER MAINTENANCE BEST PRACTICES

Many considerations factor into how to provide safe, ridable bikeway surface conditions
and sight lines in the winter. These factors are the bikeway type and the presence and
type of vertical protection or separation along a bikeway.
Snow Storage and Roadway adequate width to accommodate typical

Design snowfall accumulations, allows plows to
clear the roadway and bike lane of snow,
There are several roadway planning and and allows sidewalks to also be kept clear
design considerations that can be taken of snow storage.
to avoid the situation where there is no
snow storage provisions. Best practice for bike lanes or buffered
bike lanes is to plow snow onto the parking
Plan Roadways with Sufficient strip/snow storage strip as this practice
ROW most closely matches that of typical snow
plowing operations.
On new roadways, or in roadway re-
engineering projects that include bike The City standard is to always provide
lanes (or may include them in the future), a parkstrip between sidewalk and curb.
design the street to provide space within Calculating the width of the parkstrip is
the right of way for snow storage space. an exercise in right-of-way width available
Ensure that the snow storage space is of less width allocation to motor vehicle and
94
Packet Pg. 216
F.1.b
A parking protected bike lane in Salt Lake City, UT after a snow plow operation. Photo Credit: Travis Jensen
bike facilities. Additionally, identifying a Use the Wide Bike Lane Buffer
minimum parkstrip width based on snow
storage requirements also needs to be By providing a wide, painted bike lane
taken into consideration. The width of buffer, snow plow operations may be
the snow storage space will depend on able to store snow in the buffer between
equipment capabilities, width of roadway motor vehicle lane and the bike lane. This
and typical snowfall conditions. requires the roadway plow to plow snow
to the right, and the bike lane plow to
When right of way is restricted to such plow snow to the left. This method may
an extent that only curb-tight sidewalk be useful where there is insufficient snow
without snow storage space is available, storage area between the bike lane and
one of the following techniques needs the sidewalk. Considerations for this
to be deployed for that segment of the method include snow melt. During the day,
corridor. the stored snow can melt and sheet flow
across the bike lane, resulting in a very icy
bikeway surface condition. This needs to
be countered with a deicing operation.
95
Packet Pg. 217
F.1.b
A recessed thermoplastic bike lane Vertical delineators help inform snow plow
marking in Minneapolis, MN. drivers of obstacles such as cycletracks, raised
medians and bulb-outs in Bozeman, MT.
Recessed Thermoplastic as good indicators of the bicycle travel

way when they the ground is clear, but
Pavement Markings
after a snow event, these lose their utility,
Milling the area of pavement 3mm in depth and in some cases can become hazards,
where thermoplastic pavement markings making the travelway be difficult to
are applied has shown to be effective in navigate.
reducing damage as a result of snowplows
For this reason it is important to provide
in a 2010 study.1 Minneapolis, MN, mills the
other visual cues to indicate the bicycle
area of pavement where thermoplastic
travelway for those riding and snow
bike lane indicators are placed to help
plow vehicles. Possible locations for
reduce damage as a result of snowplows.
snow storage include the buffer area of
While this method increases the cost
protected bikeways, in the place of parked
of installation, it may save in long-term
cars in parking protected bike lanes, and
maintenance costs (and help preserve
along the furnishing zone of the sidewalk.
safety conditions along the roadway).
Piling snow in these locations all help to
Edge-of-roadway Visual Cues visually define the path of travel and help
snow plows operators identify curblines.
Pavement markings, striping, sidewalks This becomes especially critical when
curbs, and other types of travel the bike facility bends in or out around
delineators installed at ground-level serve curb extensions, median islands or other
¹ Development of Recessed Pavement transitions.
Markings that Incorporate Rumble Strips.
http://www.easts.info/publications/journal_
proceedings/journal2010/100292.pdf
96
Packet Pg. 218
F.1.b
A small snow plow vehicle clears sidewalks in Vancouver, BC.
Small Snow Plow Vehicles

When typical snow plows are too wide other uses throughout the year.
to fit, the City can consider using
Where used, cities have found that smaller
smaller, more specialized vehicles. These
vehicles are effective for cleaning and
specialized small snow plows are becoming
plowing protected bike lanes, sidewalks
particularly important for bikeways
and multiuse paths.2 They can also
that have confined travelways, such as
supplement maintenance activities on
separated bike lanes and trails.1
other public facilities, such as narrow
Many cities that experience harsh winter streets, parking lots, garages, basketball
climates maintain a fleet of these courts, and pedestrian malls.
specialized small snow plows, which are
In addition to making the transportation
sometimes referred to as ‘downsized
network more accessible during the winter,
street maintenance vehicles’ due to the
cities report operating cost savings and
fact that they can be repurposed for
reduced emissions stemming from the
1 Andersen, M., & Golly, T. (2016, February 11).
How cities clear snow from Protected Bike 2 Downsized Street Maintenance Vehicles
Lanes: A starter guide. Streetsblog USA. Case Studies. 2018. NACTO.
97
Packet Pg. 219
F.1.b
greater fuel efficiency of smaller vehicles.3 attachment will change the clearance
On the other hand, utilizing existing width and turning radius of the unit,
maintenance vehicles such as pickup affecting where it can be used. Among the
trucks with mounted snow blades may options currently available on the market,
prove to be much more cost-effective and clearance widths range from 4 ft - 12 ft
time-efficient than purchasing smaller with many vehicles being approximately 5 -
vehicles which operate at slower speeds 5.5 ft. NACTO reports a good rule of thumb
and have smaller plow blades. Regardless, for estimating the right size plow for a bike
the design of shared use trails and bicycle lane: the biggest one that isn’t too big.4
facilities will need to consider how the
snow removal vehicles will access the Fleet Size and Composition
facility. The downsized street maintenance vehicle
fleet size and composition are different
Small Snow Plow Vehicle
for every city and depend on climate, use
Classes
cases, and existing (and planned) active
Due to their wide ranging application, transportation network size. Boston,
downsized street maintenance vehicles for example, owns 21 compact sweeping
come in many different shapes and sizes. and plowing vehicles from 6 different
Many small utility vehicles such as pick- vendors (each providing unique functions
up trucks, tractors, ATVs, mini-loaders, and utility) - in large part because of the
bombardiers, skid-steers, and even lawn number of pedestrian plazas in the city
mowers can be equipped with snow combined with its bike network. Salt Lake
removal devices. City however, needs only one sweeper
for its protected bike lanes (3 miles) and
Typically these small vehicles are either 2 compact plows and for the rest of its
equipped with snow plows, snow brushes bike network. The City of Waterloo, which
(effective for removing light snow) or snow is similar in size to Rochester, maintains
blowers (effective for heavy snow). Many its network of sidewalks, trails, and raised
small snow removal vehicles can also be cycle tracks with 8 trackless compact
equipped with de-icing applicators as well, plows (in addition to other larger vehicles).
such as briners and drop spreader salters.
Even more specialized attachments Recommendations
can include rotary sweepers and power
When procuring downsized street
washers, which extend the vehicle’s utility
maintenance vehicles, the City should
year round.
consider the following factors.
The combination of vehicle and
4 Ibid.
3 Downsized Street Maintenance Vehicles
Case Studies. 2018. NACTO.
98
Packet Pg. 220
F.1.b
Test Training
• A “try before you buy” strategy is • The City should provide annual vehicle
recommended to make sure the training for operators, and work to
vehicles meet particular needs, both share the vehicles with other
including size, maneuverability, traction, departments to maximize their utility.
capacity, reliability, and attachment This will require sustained and robust
customization and modification. coordination, as some departments
struggle to handle an increased
• Before the acquisition process begins,
volume of clearing work without a
it is important that maintenance staff
corresponding increase of resources.
demo the equipment personally in order
to familiarize themselves with the new
vehicles and gain understanding for
the benefits of compact equipment.
Other cities report that staff buy-in
is particularly important for a smooth
deployment of a winter maintenance
program.
Comfort
• The City should consider features that
make using the vehicles safer and
more comfortable, such as heated
cabs, windshield wipers, and larger
cab interiors to accommodate larger
drivers as this will help staff complete
longer shifts.
Timing
• The City should time the purchase and
delivery of the vehicles (which may take
a significant amount of time) so that
they can be used immediately in the
upcoming winter in order to maximize
their value (i.e., avoid a springtime
delivery).
99
Packet Pg. 221
F.1.b
Vehicle Class Manual Snow Blower Small ATV

Examples
This page describes generic
vehicle classes and names
used by most vendors. The
actual models and names
may differ depending on
the manufacturer. They
are loosely organized
Converted Mower Mini-loader
from smallest to largest
clearance widths.
See reference table on the

following page for details
and source information.
Tracked Snow Vehicle Trackless Tractor Skid Steer Loader
Large ATV/UV Pick-up Truck Tractor
100
Packet Pg. 222
F.1.b
Vehicle Class Examples (cont.)

Reference Table (see previous page)
Category Approximate Clearance Width Generic Name
SMALL 1 - 3FT MANUAL SNOW BLOWER
SMALL 4 FT SMALL ATV
SMALL 4 FT MINIATURE TRACTOR/CONVERTED MOWER
SMALL 3 - 4.5FT MINI-LOADER
MEDIUM 4.5 - 5.5FT TRACKED SNOW REMOVAL VEHICLE
MEDIUM 5 - 6 FT TRACKLESS TRACTOR/VEHICLE
MEDIUM 5 - 6 FT SKID STEER LOADER
LARGE 5 - 6 FT LARGE ATV/UTILITY VEHICLE
LARGE 7 - 8.5 FT PICK-UP TRUCK
LARGE 8 - 12 FT TRACTOR
(Photo location) Sources from top to bottom:

• Manual Snow Blower, (Philadelphia, PA) Ben Hasty/MediaNews Group/Reading Eagle via Getty Images
• Small ATV, (Philadelphia, PA) Will Cowan, Greater Philiadelphia Bicycle Coalition
• Converted Mower, (Boulder, CO) John Deere 1500 Series TerrainCut, (Location unknown, used in Boulder Colorado)
• Mini-Loader, (Cambridge, MA) City of Cambridge, MA. MassDOT Separated Bike Lane Planning & Design Guide: Chapter 7
• Tracked Snow Removal Vehicle, (Location Unknown) Prinoth SW4S Publiquip
• Trackless Tractor, (Waterloo, ON) City of Waterloo, Alta Planning + Design
• Skid Steer Loader, (Seattle, WA) City of Seattle
• Large ATV/UV, (Waterloo, ON) City of Waterloo, Alta Planning + Design
• Pick-up Truck, (Waterloo, ON) City of Waterloo, Alta Planning + Design
• Tractor, (Boothbay Harbor, ME) Boothbay Register
101
Packet Pg. 223
F.1.b
WINTER MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

Prioritization and scheduling is a key component of a successful winter bikeway program.
For most jurisdictions, keeping all bikeways completely clear during or immediately after a
heavy snow event is infeasible. Clearing major city bikeways as soon as possible provides
the best access to the greatest number of people possible following a heavy storm
event.
The major bikeway network and winter maintenance program need to focus on major local
destinations. If roadway clearing and de-icing begins first thing in the morning, primary
routes leading to schools, commercial corridors and business districts, and other major
destinations should be cleared first.
Snow storage spills out onto a separated bike lane reducing the path of travel along this block in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Coordination between agencies and • Class B routes are plowed within 4 hours
departments responsible for on- of 5 cm of snow accumulation and de-
street bikeways and shared use trails is icing treatments are applied as needed.
necessary to ensure the major bikeway Plowing is done before 7am when
networks are plowed in an organized, snowing at night.
complete, and timely matter. • Class C routes are plowed after class B
In Järvenpää, Finland, Class A routes, the routes and plowing is done before 10 am.
main bikeway routes from residential areas
Sand and road grit is cleared from Class A,
to the city center and through the city
center, are cleared first. This is followed by B and C bikeways in Järvenpää every year
Class B routes, bikeways along other major before the 1st of May.
roads, and Class C routes, those along
residential streets and through parks. Wisconsin DOT offers guidance on the
prioritization of snow removal from shared
• Class A routes are plowed within 4 hours use trails (Wisconsin Bicycle Facility Design
of 3 cm of snow accumulation and de-
Handbook, 2009 p. A-4, A-5):
icing treatments are applied before
7am. Plowing is done before 7am when
snowing at night.
102
Packet Pg. 224
F.1.b
Winter use varies according to local another designated entity) assuming

conditions. In some communities (e.g. responsibility for snow and ice-clearing
Eau Claire, Madison), trails are plowed operations. In many cases, adjoining
regularly due to frequent use. Heavily-used property owners maintain sidewalks and
trails that serve key destinations should shared-use paths. On priority routes not
be considered first for plowing. Trails maintained by the city, the city should
that serve only occasional use should work directly with property owners by
also considered for snow removal when encouraging/enforcing snow removal.
the trail is the only means of making a
Additional consideration is required during
key connection (e.g., crossing a bridge).
design and operation to provide winter
Isolated trails serving recreational users
maintenance on separated bikeways. The
who must travel long distances to use
City’s Winter Maintenance Program should
them may be given lower priority. In these
be updated to include these facilities.
cases, managers may want to allow use
by cross country skiers or snowmobile Major bikeways prioritized for plowing
operators as long as all applicable laws provide direct, predictable, connections
are followed. for people on bike and these routes may
overlap with other designated transit,
To ensure that winter use is properly
freight, or emergency service routes and
accommodated, agencies must clearly
should receive special attention.
understand who will maintain what
trail. For trails along state highways, a In the situation where the main arterial
municipality will have the responsibility or collector has curb-tight sidewalks
for maintenance. Winter use and snow and has not provided a specific snow
removal frequency will be determined by storage location, the bike lane may be
the municipality after considering the used for snow storage when a parallel
following factors: off-street or parallel route is available and
• Expected use by bicyclists and snow operations can keep that parallel
pedestrians; facility ridable. Notification of bike lane
• Parallel options for bicyclists and closure and re-routing to the parallel
pedestrians if the trail is not passable facility should be provided. Temporary
signage, media updates, and routable
A good winter maintenance program mapping notifications need to indicate the
requires a maintenance plan that maintained route.
prioritizes facilities, establishes a
maintenance schedule for frequent As discussed earlier in the use of the
clearing, and sets operational standards buffer of a buffered bike lane being used
for maintenance relating to facility design, for snow storage, the melting from this
equipment, and materials. pile will sheet flow across the parking
protected bike lane and needs to be
As stated with the DMC, The City Loop worked into the overall winter maintenance
should be identified as a priority route operation to ensure adequate traction in
for winter maintenance, with the city (or icy conditions.
103
Packet Pg. 225
F.1.b
Packet Pg. 226


Rochester Active Transportation Plan Draft

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rochester Active Transportation Plan Draft

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SEPTEMBER 2022

Active Transportation Plan

Project Management Team Jeff Feece, Rochester Parks and

Emma Miller-Schindelar, Rochester Sam Budzyna, City of Rochester Public

Jarrett Hubbard, City of Rochester Steve Baumgartner, Pedestrian and Bicycle

Jaymi Wilson, City of Rochester

• Connectivity: People walking and and create more comfortable streets

VISION FOR ALL

7 ST NW Silver Lake Quarry Hill

EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

Cascade Willow Creek

APPENDIX D: DESIGN RESOURCE

WHY CREATE Planning 2 Succeed: Rochester

A VISION FOR WALKING & BIKING IN

Active transportation provides equitable freedom

Goals and Objectives • Expand Safe Routes to School

• Connect people to everyday • I.ncrease year-round usability of active

• Implement projects that center on • Create a continuous system of low-

Priority Performance 6. Miles of sidewalk gaps on pedestrian

Term Meaning in this Plan

Walking Walking is an inclusive term that includes both ambulatory and

Active Human-powered modes of transportation, primarily walking and

COMMUNITY • Gather input on walking, biking, and

Figure 2. Opportunities for public input

Figure 3. Phase 1 Outreach by the Numbers

“I’m so glad this is

Highlights In Phase 2, members of the public were

EXISTING heart disease and poor mental health.

Figure 4. Social Inequality by Census Block Group

7 ST NW Silver Lake Quarry Hill

EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

Figure 5. Concentration of Destinations

EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

PLANNING & POLICY Parks and Recreation

City Loop Study Non-Motorized

Design Resource Guide The design resource guide includes seven

recommendations in the document are

All walkway and bikeway design resource Walking

the minimums set by the Americans Minimum Accessible Width*

*At point of contact

STREET AND TRAIL

Figure 7. Pedestrian Network Prioritization

7 ST NW Silver Lake Quarry Hill

EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

Cascade Willow Creek

More than half of

VISION FOR ALL

7 ST NW Silver Lake Quarry Hill

EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

Cascade Willow Creek

Destinations connected by the network Prioritization

7 ST NW Silver Lake Quarry Hill

EASTWOOD RD SE Eastwood Park

Cascade Willow Creek

Near Term Projects The AAA Bicycle

See Figure 10 for a map of these ten near

Cost estimates for these ten projects,

PROCESS & POLICY • Involve Public Works GIS staff in the

• Regularly report on transportation Network Development

As the City assesses existing shared However, because shared micromobility

5) Identify Program Parameters parking spaces; protected on- and off-

SUMMARY “Biking is a terrific

This memo summarizes Phase 1, beginning • Programs and Policies