Northeast - Coquitlam Strategic Transportation Plan - Working by nyut545e2


									      CITY O COQUITLAM


Working Paper #3 -
 Network Options

           November 200 1
 Transportation   1.                 ........................................................................
                          Introduction                                                                                              1-1
                  2.      Road Network Plan .............................................................                           2-1
        Working           2.1     Range of Improvement Strategies................................................                   2-1
     Paper #3 .           2.2     Major Improvement Areas ...........................................................                2-2
Network Options           2.3     Other Network Improvements ...................................................                    2-39
    Assessment            2.4     Conidor Preservation Measures ................................................                    2-49
                          2.5     Goods & Services Movement ....................................................                    2-53
                          2.6     SUmmary ....................................................................................      2-55

                  3   .   Transit Service Strategy                   .......................................................        3-1
                          3.1     Approach ...................................................................................... 3-1
                          3.2     Strategic Transit lnitiatives.......................................................... 3-5
                          3.3     Short-Term Service lmprovements.............................................. 3-7
                          3.4     Long-Term Transit Services ...................................................... 3-10
                          3.5     Transit Priority Strategies .......................................................... 3-12
                          3.6     Transit Supportive Strategies.....................................................              3-24
                          3.7     summary ...................................................................................     3-34

                  4   .   Bicycle Network Plan                   ..........................................................         4-1
                          4.1     Approach ......................................................................................    4-1
                          4.2     Types of Bicycle Facilities ...........................................................            4-3
                          4.3     Bicycle Network Plan ..................................................................            4-7
                          4.4     SUmmary ....................................................................................      4-18
                          4.5     Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines ...........................................                    4-21

                  5   .   Pedestrian Plan             ....................................................................          5-1
                          5.1     Approach ......................................................................................    5-2
                          5.2     Pedestrian Network Plan ..............................................................             5-5
                          5.3     summary ....................................................................................      5-10
                          5.4     Pedestrian Facility Design Treatments ......................................                      5-14

                  6   .   TDM Strategy             ......................................................................           6-1
                          6.1 What is TDM? .............................................................................             6-1
                          6.2 Guiding Principles .......................................................................             6-2
                          6.3 Regional TDM Initiatives ............................................................                  6-4
                          6.4 Municipal TDM Initiatives ........................................................                    6-10

                  7   .   Implementation and Phasing Strategy                                  .................................     7-1
                          7.1 Implementation Costs .................................................................                 7-2
                          7.2     Phasing Strategy...........................................................................        7-6
                          7.3     Implementation Guidelines ........................................................                7-12

        C/TY Of
     COQUITLAM     1. Introduction
                   This report is the third of three Working Papers that were prepared
                   during the development of the Citywide Strategic Transportation Plan.
                   As described in Working Paper #2 and illustrated below, the process of
                   developing the Road Network Plan component of the Strategic
     Paper #3 -    Transportation Plan includes four key steps. Working Paper #2
Network Options    comprised the first step of this process, whereas this Working Paper -
    Assessment     Network Options Assessment - provides an evaluation of candidate
                   major network improvements and identifies a preferred strategy for
                   long-term network improvements. It also identifies minor road network
                   improvements and guidelines for system management.
                            Figure 1.1: Process for Developing Road Network Plan

                    Future Base
                                  -    Candidate
                                      Major Options
                                                          Preferred Strategy &
                                                             Integration of
                                                                                 -    Other Minor

                   This document also presents comprehensive plans for the development
                   of networks to support travel by non-automobile modes. Strategies to
                   support and enhance long-term transit facilities and services in
                   Coquitlam are identified. In addition, the report presents strategies for
                   cycling and pedestrian networks in the City, and describes a potential
                   approach to Transportation Demand Management (TDM). This report
                   also presents a recommended implementation strategy for providing
                   network improvements in the medium term, such that the ultimate goals
                   of the Plan can be realized over a 20-year timeframe.

              CITY OF
           COQUlTLAM            2. Road Network Plan
         Strategic              This section of the report describes the evaluation and identification of
                                the Citywide Road Network Plan for Coquitlam. The development of
                                the Road Network Plan began with a review of hture base conditions,
                                which was presenrcd in Working Paper #2. This section introduces the
      Paper #3 -
                                candidate major o!itions that were considered for technical evaluation
 Network Options                and presents an evaluation of these improvement options, as well as a
     Assessment                 recommended strategy. This section of the report also identifies a
                                number of additional improvement strategies and guidelines for system
                                management to address congestion issues at other locations throughout
                                the City. Section 2.5 presents a few recommendations for changes to the
                                municipal truck route network. Finally, this section presents a preferred
                                long-range network plan for the year 2021 and an implementatlon
                                strategy to achieve the ultimate long-range plan. It should be recognized
                                that the roadway network recommendations of the Northeast Coquitlam
                                OCP are assumed within this assessment.

                                2.1 Range of Improvement Strategies
                                There is a range of road network improvement strategies that were
                                considered for the Road Network Plan component of the overall
                                Strategic Transportation Plan. Five general approaches were considered
                                in the development of candidate network strategies, as described below.

                                   Corridor preservation may include a wide range of activities with
                                   the general objective of maximizing the use of existing facilities,
                                   thereby deferring the need for major capital projects in the longer
                                   term. Potential corridor preservation activities could include:

                                      access management (such as consolidation of accesses and/or turn
                                      minor intersection upgrading.
                                      identification of new local routes that support local travel and
                                      complement the arterial system.
                                      improved signage.
                                      protection of nght-of-way for new alignments or widening.
                                      pavement rehabilitation.
                                      improved access definition.
UR%NS~STEMS,                          support for compatible land use and development controls.
   Novemkr 20,2001
                    811501'                                                                          2-1
wmklng P . p r U 1 1-Ro.l dol
              CITY OF
           COQUITLAM     0   Intersection improvements. This approach involves minor
                             modifications to intersections to maximize the efficiency of travel on
                             the facility. Intersection modifications could range from turn
                             restrictions to the addition of turn lanes.

                         0   Corridor widening involves the addition of travel lanes over a
          Paper #3 -         longer distance along a roadway. Corridor widening generally
     Network Options         requires intersection improvements as well.
                         0   Transit / HOV Priority. This approach involves modifications to
                             the existing roadway network to accommodate and promote the use
                             of modes other than the single-occupant vehicle (SOV).Examples
                             include the provision of high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes along
                             key corridors, bus-only facilities in major transit corridors, andor
                             transit-priority measures at specific locations or intersections.

                         0   Major improvement strategies. In some cases, the above measures
                             would not provide the needed benefit in terms of reduced delays and
                             congestion. M r significant improvement strategies may be
                             required to accommodate growing travel demands. Examples of
                             major improvement options include the grade separation of one or
                             more intersections and corridor widening.

                         Through consultation with the public, City Council, the Transit and
                         Transportation Advisory Committee, and City staff, improvement
                         strategies comprising all of the above approaches were developed for
                         evaluation in the STP.

                         2.2 Major Improvement Areas
                         This section examines three major problem areas in the City’s road
                         network within which optional solutions that were considered range
                         from intersection improvements through to corridor widening and grade
                         separation. The basic principle is that, because the decisions on these
                         major initiatives could influence the need for other improvements, they
                         should be evaluated first.

                         The improvement options described in this section were developed in
                         response to a number of sources, as follows:
      November 20.2001
          CITY OF   0   existing road network conditions and problems described in
      COQUITLAM         Working Paper # 1.
                    0   issues raised through previous planning studies and/or by City staff,
  Transporfa tion
                        City Council, members of the Transit and Transportation Advisory
            Plan        Committee, and members of the public.
                        future base network conditions described in Working Paper #2.
     Paper #3 -     The three primary areas in which optional improvements have been
Network Options     examined are:
                        Lower Lougheed corridor (North Road to Coleman on-ramp)
                        United Boulevard connections
                        Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway corridor

                    Following the evaluation of these candidate options, preferred strategies
                    are identified. Subsequent to this, other long-term enhancement
                    strategies are identified. For example, strategies and/or design
                    guidelines covering all of the key problem areas (Section 2.3) are
                    identified and evaluated. It should also be recognized that relationships
                    to other modes of travel are also considered as part of the option
                    identification and evaluation process.

                    2.2.1     Evaluation Framework
                    The optional strategies to address the three major problem areas are
                    examined using a common evaluation framework. This ensures that the
                    features, benefits, and impacts of each option are comparable to one
                    another and can be compared against the ‘do minimal’ (future base)

                    The evaluation framework considers the forecast afternoon peak hour
                    traffic volumes and the general features of each candidate improvement,
                    such as the lane configuration, intersection controls, and special
                    provisions for key vehicle movements. At this level of planning, the
                    candidate improvements are defined to a conceptual level of detail to
                    ensure that the solution is feasible and evaluated based on the overall
                    ‘benefits’ and ‘costs’ or impacts. The evaluation criteria include both
                    qualitative and quantitative measures, as illustrated in the following
                    figure and discussed in more detail below.

a             ClTY O
                    F         Figure 2.2.1: Evaluation Criteria for Candidate Major Strategies

                         Benefits                               Costs I Impacts
                         0    Annual travel time savings        0   Capital cost
                         0    Traffic diversion                 0   Property cost (where available)
                              Relief of congestion              0   Community I property impacts
            Working           Opportunity to enhance transit        Environmental impacts
         Paper #3 -                                                 Construction impacts
    Network Optrons      0    Opportunity to enhance cycling
                              and pedestrian facilities and
        Assessment            connections

                        The potential ‘benefits’ of each improvement are evaluated using four
                        primary measures:

                             Travel time savings ($ I year). The overall benefit of an
                             improvement may be measured in terms of annual travel time
                             savings throughout the transportation system. This measure may
                             subsequently be translated into a dollar value representing the value
                             of time. This measure may be used to determine whether the
                             transportation system benefits from the network modification and, if
                             so, by how much on an annual basis. Consistent with regional
                             transportation evaluation, a value of time of approximately $5.00 per
                             hour and a multiplier of 1097 were used to estimate the annual travel
                             time savings benefit for each option. These values enable direct
                             comparison of the system benefits contributed by each candidate
                             improvement versus other strategies, as well as the magnitude of
                             annual savings that may be offered by an improvement relative to
                             the capital investment. It should be recognized that this measure is
                             estimated based on the projected traffic volumes for the year 202 1.

                             Traffic diversion. The transportation model predicts the diversion
                             of traffic resulting from each modification and indicates whether the
                             intended benefit of diversion is likely to be achieved. To identify the
                             amount of diversion anticipated and the potential benefits resulting
                             from diversion, the model results for the modification are compared
                             with the base case condition. The relative benefits resulting from
                             traffic diversion are indicated by qualitative measures. The
                             evaluation is based on whether the improvement option supports
                             other roadway facilities that are currently congested, or whether the
                             option reduces local-area traffic.
~ ~ N S S ~ E M S
     Nowrnber 20,2007
        CITY OF       Relief of congestion. Each candidate improvement is designed to
                      address specific areas of congestion on the road network. The
                      projected impacts of each improvement on volume-to-capacity (V/C)
                      ratios are examined. The degree of relief provided by a candidate
                      improvement - indicated by changes to the V/C ratios as compared
                      to the base case - is represented using qualitative measures.
     Paper #3 -       Opportunity to enhance transit service. The candidate measures
Network Options       may have an impact on transit operations by improving transit travel
    Assessment        time through reduced congestion, and may offer an opportunity to
                      provide transit priority measures to enhance the convenience and
                      reliability of transit. Specific opportunities to implement transit
                      priority measures through these improvement areas are identified
                      within the section on the Long-Term Transit Strategy.

                      Opportunity to enhance cycling and pedestrian connections
                      and facilities. The candidate strategies may provide opportunities to
                      improve facilities for cyclists and pedestrians. For example, there
                      could be an opportunity to provide new facilities to complete a key
                      gap in the bicycle and pedestrian networks. Alternatively, some
                      facilities may simply provide improved local connections or an
                      improved environment for non-motorized modes. These
                      opportunities are evaluated using qualitative measures.

                   The ‘costs’ or impacts of each improvement option are identified in this
                   report and evaluated in terms of the following measures:

                      Capital cost. The capital costs for each option are estimated based
                      on a conceptual level of detail, which are commonly referred to as
                      order-of-magnitude (Class ‘D’) cost estimates. These costs generally
                      include capital cost of construction, but do not account for
                      engineering or property acquisition costs. Because of the conceptual
                      nature of these cost estimates, a 35% contingency is added to the
                      estimates. These cost estimates are not to be used for budgeting
                      purposes. Instead, they are only intended to compare candidate
                      options against each other and against the potential benefits that
                      might be derived through travel time savings.

                      Property cost. Several of the major options would require
                      significant property acquisition, which may add significantly to the
                      overall cost of the options. City staff has identified general costs for
          CIN OF       property acquisition for some of the major options. These estimates
      COQUITLAM        are based on current assessed property values and do not consider
                       additional costs related to business losses. It should be noted that
       Strategic       property cost estimates have not been prepared for all options.
                       Community impacts. The potential impacts of each candidate
       Working         option on local residents and businesses are also examined. The
     Paper #3 -        evaluation identifies potentially impacted properties, as well as
Network Options        access and circulation restrictions that may be created by a particular
    Assessment         option. Other considerations may include, but not be limited to,
                       visual and noise impacts. The relative impacts of each candidate
                       option are assessed using qualitative measures.

                       Environmental impacts. Potential environmental impacts (such as
                       on creeks and/or other environmentally sensitive areas) associated
                       with each candidate option are also identified using qualitative

                       Construction impacts. The construction of some candidate
                       improvements could have significant impacts on the surrounding
                       community (noise, dust, vibration, etc.) and on traffic operations
                       (detours and delays). Moreover, construction could create additional
                       property impacts and be of long duration. The overall impacts of
                       construction are evaluated using qualitative measures.

                    Because the rating of qualitative measures can be interpreted in several
                    ways, it is important to use a consistent framework for the purpose of
                    measuring impacts and comparing options. Table 2.2.1 summarizes the
                    qualitative measures applied to assess the benefits and costs of each
                    candidate option. In general, a ‘high’ rating for those criteria that are
                    considered benefits is a positive impact, and a negative impact for those
                    criteria that are identified as costs or impacts.

  Novemkr 20.2001
          7 F
      COQUlTLAM         Rating                    Measures for                          Measures for ,
                                                Benefits Criteria                 Costs I Impacts Criteria
                        Low           Little or no contribution to the       Minor direct impacts on
                                      desired purpose of diverting trips     community and environment
  Transportation                      or reducing delays, and potentially    Mitigation of impacts is feasible
            Plan                      detracting from the goal. Limited      and cost-effective
                                      opportunities for accommodating
                                      alternative modes, with potential
                                      for disbenefits
     Paper #3 -                       Moderate contribution to desired       Moderate direct impacts on
Network Options                       purpose of diverting trips and         community and environment.
    Assessment                        reducing delays. Moderate to few       Mitigation of impacts is possible
                                      opportunities for accommodating        and should be considered.
                                  I   alternative modes.
                        High      1   Achieves intended purpose of          I Significant direct impacts on
                                      diverting trips and reducing delays    community and environment
                                      andlor provides good                   Mitigation opportunities are limited
                                      opportunities for accommodating        andlor would be very costly.
                                      alternative modes

                        As described in Working Paper #2, a screenline analysis of the existing
                        scenario indicated that, in many cases, the model underestimates base
                        traffic volumes. The discrepancy ranges from less than 1% to over 30%
                        for specific screenlines, but modelled volumes are generally in the range
                        of 20% below actual volumes. In the following discussions, the forecast
                        traffic volumes for the candidate improvements have been analyzed and
                        adjusted to account for potential discrepancies relating to this issue.
                        However, the volume-to-capacity ratios used for analytical purposes (as
                        an indicator of delay on the road network) are generally low and,
                        therefore, understate the delays that could be expected on the road
                        network. As such, the model may understate the benefits (in terms of
                        reduced delays) that could be derived from certain major network

                        Area 1 - lower Lougheed Corridor

                        This area encompasses Lougheed Highway from North Road eastward
URB&NMEMS               to the Cape Horn interchange area. The candidate improvement
  November 20,2001
            IIIs&f# I
wc.?h~ W U II .
           ClJY OF   strategies for this area are intended to address existing and forecast
       COQUITLAM     delays at the Brunette Avenue / Lougheed Highway / Blue Mountain
                     Street intersections, while maintaining critical turning movements
        Strategic    wherever possible. In particular, the focus is on accommodating through
   Transportation    movements on all corridors, the left-turn movement from westbound
            Plan     Lougheed Highway to Brunette Avenue, and the corresponding right-
                     turn movement from northeastbound Brunette Avenue to eastbound
                     Lougheed Highway. The concepts are also designed to improve the
      Paper #3 -
                     overall operation of the Lower Lougheed comdor. It is important to
 Network Options
                     recognize that the analysis of long-term conditions assumes the
                     completion of the United Boulevard extension.

                     There are a number of candidate strategies considered to address delays
                     in the comdor, particularly around the Lougheed Highway / Brunette
                     Avenue intersection, as follows:

                     0   donothing
                     0   minor intersection modifications (such as additional turn lanes)
                     0   grade separation - partial interchange
                     0   tunnel for westbound left turn from Lougheed to Brunette, plus
                         widening of Lougheed to six lanes between North Road and
                         Coleman on-ramp to Highway 1
                     0   combination(s) of the above measures

                     Analysis of the future base conditions at the Lougheed Highway /
                     Brunette Avenue intersection with the existing lane configuration (the
                     do-nothing option) indicates that the intersection would function at an
                     unacceptable level of service (LOS ‘F’)during the afternoon peak hour.
                     Each vehicle would, on average, experience 115 seconds of delay in
                     passing through the intersection. This result is not unexpected, as the
                     intersection already experiences significant delays on a recurring basis.
                     It should be noted that this base condition includes the United
                     Boulevard extension, which would divert a significant amount of traffic
                     away from the Lougheed / Brunette intersection and would defer the
                     need for major improvements for many years. Although the ‘do-
                     nothing’ option would not require any capital investment, it would not
                     address the congestion that is anticipated to occur in future, the cost (in
                     travel time) of which would be significant. These results confirm that
                     the do-nothing scenario is not sustainable over the long term and that
                     some modifications would be necessary to accommodate future traffic
  November 20.2001
        ClN OF
     COQUITLAM     The minor intersection improvements and two major options were
                   subjected to technical evaluation, as discussed below.
  Transportation   a)      Minor Intersection Improvements
                   Although the do-nothing strategy would not address the projected
                   delays over the long term, there are a number of ‘minor’ modifications
     Paper #3 -
                   to the Lougheed / Brunette intersection that could improve the operation
Network Options
                   of the intersection over the medium term. These minor modifications
                   could defer the need to invest in grade separation until later in or even
                   beyond the STP time horizon. In addition, there are other intersection
                   improvements that could be made to improve the operation of the Lower
                   Lougheed conidor over the longer term, as discussed below.

                        Lougheed Highway I Brunette Avenue. Analysis indicates that the
                        provision of a full dual left-turn lane for the westbound left-turn
                        movement from Lougheed Highway to Brunette Avenue would
                        improve intersection operations. The conversion of the shared left-
                        turdthrough lane on eastbound Lougheed Highway to a dedicated
                        through lane would also benefit the intersection. The widening of the
                        westbound approach to Brunette Avenue would be a key first step in
                        the preparation for eventual grade separation of the intersections,
                        which would require additional right-of-way to the north side of
                        Lougheed Highway.

                        In addition to the above improvements, the right-turn lane from
                        Brunette Avenue to eastbound Lougheed Highway should be
                        lengthened to allow right-turning vehicles to bypass queues of
                        through vehicles spilling back from the intersection.

                        Lougheed Highway / King Edward Street. Minor intersection
                        improvements would also be desirable at the Lougheed Highway /
                        King Edward Street intersection to maintain acceptable levels of
                        service at the intersection. This location would benefit from the
                        addition of a northbound right-turn bay on King Edward Street.

                        Lougheed Highway / Schoolhouse Street. A northbound left-turn
                        bay would enhance the northbound approach. The operation of the
                        southbound approach would improve by providing dual left-turn
                        lanes and a shared throughlright-turn lane.
                ClN OF   These minor intersection improvements would ensure the continued
           COQU~JLAM operation of the corridor over the medium term. Although these minor
                         intersection improvements were not modelled, the long-term travel time
            Strategic    savings benefits would be moderate in the short to medium term. Other
       Transportation    benefits - such as traffic diversion and congestion relief - would be low.
                 Plan    In terms of costs and impacts, these modifications would have relatively
                         low impact and costs. The benefits and costdimpacts of these minor
            Working      intersection improvements are summarized below in Table 2.2.2.
          Paper #3 -
     Network Options     Table 2.2.2: Evaluation Summary for Minor Intersection Improvements

                         b)    Lougheed / Brunette /Blue Mountain Grade Separation

                         In this option, Lougheed Highway would drop into an underpass
                         beneath both Brunette Avenue and Blue Mountain Street. A dual left-
                         turn lane would be provided for the westbound left-turn movement from
                         westbound Lougheed Highway to Brunette Avenue. This movement
                         would continue in an underpass beneath Blue Mountain Street and
                         return to grade and merge with Brunette around Bernatchey Street.
                         Brunette Avenue would be widened to three lanes downstream of the
                         merge to the Highway 1 interchange. Signals would be provided for the
                         westbound left-turn movement from Lougheed Highway to Brunette
                         Avenue and for the eastbound left-turn movement from Brunette
                         Avenue to northbound Blue Mountain Street. At these signals, the
                         westbound through movement on Lougheed Highway and the eastbound
                         through movement on Brunette Avenue could be free-flow because they
                         have no conflicting movements. Turns would be prohibited on most
                         movements at the Lougheed / Blue Mountain intersection, although a
                         ramp would be provided from Blue Mountain to westbound Lougheed
                         Highway. In addition, left turns would be prohibited from Brunette
                         Avenue on to Lougheed Highway, as they are today. Left turns would
      November 20,2001
         CITY Of   also be prohibited f o eastbound Lougheed Highway to northbound
     COQUITLAM Brunette Avenue. This concept is illustrated conceptually Figure 2.2.2.
       Strategic     Figure 2.2.2: Lougheed I Brunette / Blue Mountain Grade Separatioi   I

                     I                30
                                      m I
     Paper #3 -
Network Options

                     I=                        0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL


                   The projected afternoon peak hour traffic volumes for this grade
                   separation option are illustrated in Figure 2.2.3. These modelled
                   volumes have been adjusted to compensate for discrepancies within the
                   model. As the figure illustrates, the demand on eastbound Brunette
                   Avenue approaching Blue Mountain Street is projected to approach
                   3600 vehicles, an increase of approximately 900 vehicles over the base
                   condition between Highway 1 and Lougheed Highway. This volume
                   would be diverted from other east-west roadways in the area, but would
                   create no net change to traffic volumes on New Westminster roadways.
                   Demand on Lougheed Highway in the immediate vicinity of the
                   interchange would increase by approximately 300 vehicles. Traffic
                   would be diverted from several other roadways in the surrounding area,
                   particularly United Boulevard, which would experience a decrease of
                   approximately 200-300 vehicles overall. In this regard, this
                   improvement would relieve some of the anticipated congestion on
                   United Boulevard east of Brunette Avenue. There would also be a
                   modest decrease of approximately 150-200 vehicles per hour on North
                   Road. Overall, this option is considered to generate moderate benefits in
                   terms of traffic diversion.

                                                                                       2-1 1
0              ClN Of


          Paper #3 -
     Network Options

                         The modelled afternoon peak hour volume-to-capacity (V/C) indicate
                         that the V/C ratio for eastbound Brunette Avenue approaching Blue
                         Mountain Street would increase over the base condition, primarily
                         because the demand on Brunette is forecast to increase by
                         approximately 900 vph. With the exception of the left-turn movement to
                         Blue Mountain Street, however, eastbound Brunette Avenue would
                         operate with free-flow conditions. Therefore, although delays might
                         increase for the eastbound left-turn movement to Blue Mountain Street,
                         it is anticipated that the overall delay on Brunette Avenue would
                         decline. Analysis indicates that the Brunette Avenue / Blue Mountain
                         Street intersection would operate at LOS ‘C’ for this scenario. Delays
                         are also anticipated to decrease along Lougheed Highway because the
                         signal at Blue Mountain Street would be eliminated and the through
                         movement on westbound Lougheed would operate in free-flow
                         conditions. Intersection analysis indicates that the signal controlling the
                         westbound left-turn movement from Lougheed Highway to Brunette
                         Avenue would operate at LOS ‘D’ during the afternoon peak hour.
                         There would be minimal to modest reductions in delays at other
                         locations in the network, with the largest benefit on the United
                         Boulevard extension. Overall, this improvement is anticipated to
                         provide moderate benefits in terms of relieving congestion.

                         It should be recognized that, although this concept would tend to reduce
                         delays in the immediate vicinity of the interchange for specific through
.URB!&NWEMS.             movements, signalized intersections are located a short distance
      November 20,2001
                  ClTV OF       upstream and downstream of the Lougheed / Brunette intersection.
            COQUITLAM           Therefore, eliminating traffic signals for certain movements at this
                                location would not necessarily address the entire problem. For example,
          Strategic             a key constraint in the local road network is the Brunette Avenue
     Transportation             interchange at Highway 1, which is under the jurisdiction of the
               Plan             provincial Ministry of Transportation. Because this option would offer
                                significant improvements to traffic operations at the Lougheed /
                                Brunette intersection, the City should continue to work with the
           Paper #3 -
                                Ministry of Transportation to improve the Highway 1 interchange, as
 Network Options
                                identified in studies recently completed.

                                Overall, the annual system-wide travel time savings benefit from this
                                grade separation option is estimated to be valued at approximately $1.65
                                million per year.

                                A key benefit of this concept is that it would provide an opportunity to
                                implement transit priority measures, particularly to enhance left-turn bus
                                movements from westbound Lougheed Highway to Brunette Avenue.
                                This would provide an enhanced transit connection from Lougheed
                                Highway to Braid SkyTrain Station to the south, the importance of
                                which is expected to grow In the future. The primary drawback is that
                                transit priority measures at this location would require additional road
                                space for the westbound approach on Lougheed Highway, which would
                                add significantly to the cost of the option. It should be noted that
                                additional costs related to transit priority measures are not included in
                                the cost estimate provided below.

                    This concept also provides opportunities for enhanced facilities for both
                    cyclists and pedestrians, as compared to the existing situation. Although
                    grade separation often presents challenges for non-motorized modes of
                    transportation, there would be opportunities for enhancing the
                    pedestrian and cycling environments around these intersections,
                    particularly along Brunette Avenue and Blue Mountain Street. The
                    existing cycling facilities along Lougheed Highway through these
                    intersections are inadequate. The reconstruction of Lougheed Highway
                    through the underpasses would also offer an opportunity to improve
                    cycling facilities along a key regional roadway. This could be achieved
                    by widening the shoulders along Lougheed Highway to 1.5 m or by
                    providing 1.5-m bicycle lanes. The primary challenge in improving
                    pedestrian and cycling facilities would be to provide safe and
                    convenient crossing locations for users at all intersections, merges, and
U R ~ N S Y S T E M diverges. Specific measures to accommodate non-motorized users
    Novembev 20,2001
 yyorlrlnpP.p.rc1 I I-Fmrldnc
0            CITY O
                  F would be considered at the functional design stage. It should also be
          COQUITLAM recognized that upstream and downstream facilities for non-automobile
                        modes would also be an issue. In this regard, the Highway 1 overpass
           Strategic    south of the Lougheed / Brunette intersection is recognized as a
      Transportation    significant impediment to cyclists.
                        Costs / Impacts
         Paper #3 -     The property and community impacts of this concept would be
    Network Options     significant. Approximately 16 properties - primarily commercial -
        Assessment      around the intersections would be required to accommodate the
                        modification. In many cases, the modification would involve taking
                        entire properties. This includes properties on the north side of Lougheed
                        Highway from approximately Trf Street to Woolridge Street, as well
                        as properties on both sides of Brunette Avenue southwest of Lougheed
                        Highway to beyond Bernatchey Street. In addition, access to
                        commercial properties in the area of the interchange would be
                        significantly restricted if grade separation were implemented. This
                        option would preclude direct access to and from Brunette Avenue and
                        Lougheed Highway throughout the area.

                        In addition to the above permanent impacts, the construction of this
                        facility would also have significant impacts. Traffic diversions and
                        delays relating to construction would also have significant impacts on
                        the surrounding area for the duration of the construction period.

                        Because this is a built-up area and there are no environmentally
                        sensitive areas in the vicinity, it is anticipated that this option would
                        have few environmental impacts.

                        The order-of-magnitude capital cost of this candidate grade-separation
                        option is approximately $1 8 million, not including property and other
                        servicing costs. Property costs are estimated to be between $10.0 and
                        $1 6.0 million, not including business loss.

     November 20.2007
                   F               Table 2.2.3: Evaluation Summary for Lougheed / Brunette / Blue           e

      Paper #3 -
Network Options

                              e)     Lougheed Highway Widening and Tunnel

                              In this option, Lougheed Highway would be widened to a full six-lane
                              cross-section throughout from North Road eastward to the Coleman on-
                              ramp to Highway 1. In addition to six through lanes throughout the area,
                              turning lanes would be provided at all intersections, as is the case today.
                              A two-lane free-flow tunnel would be provided for the left-turn
                              movement from westbound Lougheed Highway to southbound Brunette
                              Avenue. The tunnel would begin just west of Woolridge Street and
                              return to grade near Bernatchey Street. All turn movements would be

                              This candidate strategy assumes that a tunnel is feasible from a
                              geotechnical standpoint. Figure 2.2.4 illustrates this concept.

   November 20,2001
                  6ilWZS l
lybrLl”# Papers3 l.l-FmJMoc
                                                                                                    2-15    .
0           ClTY O
                                       Figure 2.2.4: Lougheed-Brunette Tunnel

         Paper #3 -
    Network Options

                                                   0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL


                       The forecast afternoon peak hour traffic volumes for this candidate
                       option are illustrated in Figure 2.2.3. As the figure illustrates,
                       approximately 900 vehicles would use the tunnel from westbound
                       Lougheed Highway to Brunette Avenue during the afternoon peak hour.
                       This represents very little change from the future base condition. Traffic
                       volumes would increase along Lougheed Highway by almost 500
                       vehicles in the immediate vicinity of the Brunette / Lougheed
                       intersection. This increase is likely related more to the widening of
                       Lougheed Highway than the addition of the tunnel. The additional
                       trafic on Lougheed would be diverted from a variety of parallel east-
                       west routes. Overall, the diversion generated by this option would be
                       relatively insignificant, thereby resulting in a rating of ‘low’.

                 CITY OF                 Figure 2.2.5: Forecast 2021 Volumes for Tunnel   + Widening Option

     Paper #3 -
Network Options

                                                                   0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL

                                       In terms of V/C ratios, this concept generates only marginal changes on
                                       the roadways surrounding the Brunette I Lougheed intersection as
                                       compared to the base condition, and very few improvements elsewhere
                                       in the network. Analysis of the modified Brunette Avenue I Lougheed
                                       Highway intersection with the tunnel in place indicates that the
                                       intersection would continue to function at a poor level of service (LOS
                                       ‘F’), despite the additional through lanes along Lougheed Highway.
                                       Nonetheless, it would represent an improvement in delay from almost
                                       200 seconds per vehicle for the base condition to less than 100 seconds
                                       per vehicle. The analysis indicates that a significant proportion of the
                                       overall intersection delay is associated with the eastbound right-turn
                                       movement from Brunette Avenue to Lougheed Highway. This confirms
                                       the need for significant improvements to the right-turn lane on Brunette
                                       Avenue, which were included in the preceding candidate option. This
                                       improvement would further reduce delay to approximately 64 seconds
                                       per vehicle. Overall, this option is considered to provide moderate
                                       benefits in terms of reducing congestion.

                                       The system-wide travel time savings with this candidate option would
                                       amount to approximately $0.69 million per year.

                                       The widening of Lougheed Highway and the provision of a tunnel for
                                       the westbound left-turn movement from Lougheed to Brunette would
                                       offer limited opportunities for transit priority measures. The addition of
URB&NMEMS                              a bus lane through the tunnel would add significantly to the capital cost
    November 20,2001
                           611S020 1
w b r k l n g P . p v U 1 I-Fhidoc
0            ClJY O
                   F   associated with the project. However, queue jumpers could be added at
                       signalized intersections in several locations as part of the widening
      Transportation   The widening of Lougheed Highway would offer an opportunity to
               Plan    provide improved bicycle facilities along the corridor from the Coleman
                       on-ramp to North Road. Although the design of the tunnel could
                       incorporate a bicycle facility for the left-turn movement from
         Paper #3 -
                       westbound Lougheed to Brunette, the entrance to the tunnel would
    Network Options
                       create a significant challenge for cyclists. It would be difficult and likely
                       uncomfortable for cyclists to cross three lanes of moving traffic on
                       Lougheed Highway to enter the tunnel. In terms of pedestrian facilities,
                       the corridor widening would generally detract from the overall
                       pedestrian environment and would add significantly to the length of the
                       pedestrian crossings across Lougheed Highway. There would, however,
                       be an opportunity to improve pedestrian facilities along the corridor
                       through the provision of improved sidewalks.

                       Costs / Impacts

                       Compared to the preceding candidate option, this option would have
                       fewer significant community and property impacts. The widening of
                       Lougheed Highway would require property to be acquired, primarily on
                       the north side to the east of Brunette Avenue and on both sides to the
                       west of Brunette. Additional property would be required to
                       accommodate the tunnel ramps on the north side of Lougheed Highway
                       from Brunette Avenue to east of Woolridge Street. Property would also
                       be required on the north side of Brunette Avenue from Lougheed
                       Highway to the Highway 1 interchange to accommodate the tunnel
                       ramps and portals, as well as the widening of Brunette Avenue. Overall,
                       approximately seven properties would be required to accommodate the
                       tunnel. The tunnel itself would remove a significant amount of traffic
                       from the Lougheed Highway / Brunette Avenue intersection, which
                       would have generally positive visual, noise, and vibration impacts on
                       the surrounding neighbourhood.

                       Construction impacts for the tunnel depend on whether the tunnel is
                       constructed using a cut-and-cover method or is bored. The construction
                       impacts of cut-and-cover would be significant, requiring road detours
                       and closures. This would have significant impacts on the community
                       and the region as a whole over a relatively long period of time. Boring
                       the tunnel would have much less impact on the community, but would

                                                                                               2-1 8
        CIN OF     be significantly more expensive than the cost estimate provided below.
     COQUITLAM     The construction of additional lanes on Lougheed Highway would have
                   moderate impacts on the surrounding community.
  Transportation   Lougheed Highway crosses several creeks between Brunette Avenue
            Plan   and the Coleman off-ramps. The widening of the highway could
                   potentially impact these creeks, but it is anticipated that all impacts
                   could be mitigated successfully. Therefore, this option is considered to
     Paper #3 -
                   have only moderate environmental impacts.
Network Options
                   The total capital cost for this improvement project would be
                   approximately $25.4 million, including the tunnel and the widening of
                   Lougheed Highway but excluding property and other servicing costs.
                   This cost estimate is based on construction costs for some previous
                   tunnelling projects, but could vary significantly. It is also based on a
                   cut-and-cover construction method. Boring the tunnel would add
                   significantly to the overall cost of the project. Property costs are
                   estimated to be between $7.5 million, not including business losses.

                   The evaluation of this candidate option is summarized below in Table

                   Traffic diversion

                   Recommended Strategy

                   One minor and two major improvement strategies were developed and
                   evaluated to address existing and projected congestion in the Lower
                   Lougheed Highway corridor, which extends from North Road to the
                   Cape Horn interchange area. Table 2.2.5 summarizes the technical
                   evaluation for the three candidate strategies.

          CITY O
               F        Table 2.2.5: Comparison of Improvement Strategies for the lower


      Paper #3 -
 Network Options

                      Capital cost            I   $1.1 mil.      $18.0 mil.   I     $25.4 mil

                      Community impacts             Low            High             Moderate
                      Environmental impacts         Low            Low              Moderate
                      Construction impacts          Low            High           Moderate-High
                      Ranking                        3               1                 2

                     Ultimately, major modifications will be necessary at the Lougheed
                     Highway I Brunette Avenue intersection, as the minor intersection
                     improvements would not be a long-term solution. In the short term,
                     however, minor intersection improvements at the Lougheed Highway I
                     Brunette Avenue intersection would address some issues of delay. Other
                     improvements in the Lower Lougheed corridor would enhance the
                     operation of the corridor over the longer term. All of the recommended
                     minor improvements should be pursued as an interim solution until
                     grade separation at the Lougheed I Brunette intersection becomes

                     As indicated in the table, the full grade separation option would
                     generate the most significant benefits in terms of traffic diversion,
                     relieving congestion, and offering opportunities to accommodate non-
                     automobile modes. In addition, it would cost significantly less than the
                     tunnelling option (not including property costs). It should also be
                     recognized that this option would likely provide benefits over a longer
                     period of time following implementation. This is because it would
                     eliminate the at-grade intersections of Lougheed Highway with both
                     Brunette Avenue and Blue Mountain Street, which represent the critical
                     bottlenecks in this area of Coquitlam. On the other hand, for the
                     tunnelling option, these two intersections would be maintained as at-
                     grade intersections, both of which would continue to function at or near
URBANSSTEMS          capacity. Therefore, additional modifications would likely be necessary
  November 20,2001
                                to maintain the operation of the corridor well beyond the completion of
                                the tunnel.
         Strategic              However, it must also be noted that the grade separation option would
    Transportation              have more significant impacts on the surrounding community because it
              Plan              would require a much larger amount of property. In fact, property costs
                                alone make the overall cost of this option similar to the cost for
     Paper #3 -
Nefwork Options
                                In terms of the tunnelling option and widening of Lougheed Highway,
                                the adjusted future base volumes do not indicate a strong need to widen
                                Lougheed Highway to six lanes between North Road and the Coleman
                                on-ramp. The results suggest that the recent widening of Lougheed
                                Highway between Woolridge Avenue and the Coleman on-ramp will be
                                suficient in the longer term to accommodate hture base traffic
                                volumes. The construction of a third westbound through lane from
                                Schoolhouse Street to King Edward Street will complete this initiative.

                                Of the two major options evaluated above, the grade separation is the
                                preferred long-term improvement strategy for the Lower Lougheed
                                corridor. However, this scale of improvement will not be necessary until
                                late in or even beyond the 20-year timeframe for the STP. In the short
                                term, the recommended minor intersection improvements would
                                maintain the operation of the corridor until the grade separation
                                becomes necessary.

                                It must be emphasized that grade separation at the Lougheed / Brunette
                                intersection is ultimately dependent on significant improvements at the
                                Brunette Avenue interchange with Highway 1, which is under the
                                jurisdiction of the provincial Ministry of Transportation. Unless
                                modifications are undertaken there, it is unlikely that the grade
                                separation of the Lougheed / Brunette intersection is operationally

                                Area 2   - United Boulevard Connections
                                The optional strategies identified in this section of the report are
                                intended to address the need for improved connections between United
                                Boulevard and Lougheed Highway. There are currently only two points
                                of access - King Edward Street and the United Boulevard connection at
                                the Cape Horn interchange. The existing network tends to concentrate
   November 20,2001
wWkingPqJu8Jf I - m H l d o c
                                                                                                   2-2 1
0           ClTV O
                  F    traffic and turning movements at relatively few intersections, thereby
                       causing congestion in the Lower Lougheed corridor.
           Sfrafegic   a)    King Edward Underpass Widening
               Plan    This option would involve widening the existing three-lane Highway 1
                       underpass on King Edward Street (between Woolridge Street and
                       United Boulevard) from three lanes (two southbound, one northbound)
         Paper #3 -
                       to five lanes (three southbound, two northbound). This would be
    Network Options
                       accomplished by installing a second underpass of Highway 1 to the east
                       of the existing underpass. This concept is illustrated conceptually in
                       Figure 2.2.6.
                                     Fieure 2.2.6 Kine Edward Street Widenine


                                                             ,,                HIGHWAY 1
                                         I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ’ 1  I I I I I I I I I I
                                         1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1    l l l l l l l l l l c

                                     0    TRAFFIC SIGNAL
                                                             111 It
                                                                 I                 UNITED


                       The model results indicate that 1300-1400 vehicles would pass through
                       the underpass northbound during the afternoon peak hour, an increase of
                       approximately 350 vehicles per hour over the future base condition.
                       There would be little change to the volume in the southbound direction
                       - approximately 400 vehicles would travel southbound. The increased
                       northbound traffic volume is diverted from both directions along United

                  CITY OF        Boulevard. Apart from this impact on United Boulevard, there would be
              COQUITLAM no significant diversion impacts associated with this improvement.

           Strategic             The concept would provide significant benefits for King Edward Street
      Transportation             by reducing delays through the underpass, according to the VIC results
                Plan             generated by the sub-area model. Even today, congestion is a recurring
                                 problem throughout the day in the King Edward Street corridor and is
         Working                 recognized as a significant constraint on future development in the area.
       Paper #3 -
                                 There would be mixed, but relatively minor, impacts on delays along
  Network Options
                                 Lougheed Highway. A more detailed analysis of intersection operations
                                 indicates that the Lougheed Highway I King Edward Street intersection
                                 would continue to operate at marginal levels of service (average delay
                                 of 73 seconds per vehicle) during the afternoon peak hour. This is partly
                                 because the widened underpass would attract additional northbound
                                 traffic to King Edward Street, which thereby increases the demand for
                                 green time at the Lougheed Highway traffic signal. This results in a
                                 declining level of service for through traffic on Lougheed Highway.

                                 It should also be recognized that this concept would not eliminate the at-
                                 grade railway crossing on King Edward Street immediately south of the
                                 underpass. Delays caused by crossing trains would continue to affect
                                 motorists and have not been accounted for in the analysis. The City may
                                 wish to investigate the potential of grade separating King Edward Street
                                 and the railway, while maintaining at-grade connections at United
                                 Boulevard and Woolridge Street.

                                 It is estimated that the overall system-wide travel time savings would be
                                 in the range of $0.68 million per year.

                                 This concept would provide no particular opportunities to improve
                                 transit facilities along King Edward Street. However, some bus services
                                 would benefit from the overall reduction in delays on King Edward

              It is important to recognize that the option would provide a good
              opportunity to improve cycling and pedestrian facilities through the
              underpass. The existing facilities through the underpass are inadequate
              for both pedestrians and cyclists. Sidewalks and bicycle facilities could
              be incorporated into the design for the wider underpass, as well as for
              the improvements to King Edward Street that would also occur as a
              result of the widening. This underpass represents a key connection in
URB&NSYSTEMS. the networks for both pedestrians and cyclists and users would benefit
      November 20,2001
 ~~       a
               u1l ~ . . d o s
                   substantially from the improvement. In particular, King Edward Street IS
                   identified in the preliminary bicycle network plan, as well as
                   TransLink’s draft regional bicycle plan, as a key north-south cycling
       Strategic   connection.
            Plan   Costs I Impacts
       Working     The community and property impacts of this improvement would be
     Paper #3 -    minimal. The only significant property impact would be a requirement
Network Options    to take a small portion of the existing park-and-ride lot in the southeast
    Assessment     quadrant of the Woolridge StreetKing Edward Street intersection. No
                   adjacent land uses would be adversely affected by the widened
                   underpass or the increased traffic volumes on King Edward Street.

                   Moreover, construction activities would have relatively few impacts on
                   the surrounding area.

                   The addition of a second underpass adjacent to the existing underpass
                   would have very little environmental impact.

                   The estimated capital cost of this improvement is $10.8 million. This
                   estimate was prepared by the City of Coquitlam in a previous
                   planninglcosting exercise and does not include property acquisition or
                   other servicing costs. The provision of enhanced bicycle and pedestrian
                   facilities through the underpass would add to the cost.

                   Table 2.2.6 below summarizes the evaluation of the King Edward
                   underpass widening concept.

         ClTY OF   b)     Schoolhouse Street Overpass
                   In this option, a two-lane overpass would be constructed to connect
       Strategic   Schoolhouse Street with United Boulevard. The overpass would begin
  Transportation   north of Lougheed Highway and pass over Lougheed Highway,
                   Highway 1, and the railway tracks just south of Highway 1. Left turns
                   would be permitted from eastbound Lougheed Highway to northbound
                   Schoolhouse Street and from southbound Schoolhouse to eastbound
     Paper #3 -
                   Lougheed Highway, as they are today. However, there would be no
Network Options
                   connection between Lougheed Highway and the overpass. For example,
                   vehicles could not t r right from eastbound Lougheed Highway to
                   southbound Schoolhouse Street. The concept is illustrated conceptually
                   in Figure 2.2.7 below.
                                   igure 2.2.7: Schoolhouse Street Overpass


                   The Schoolhouse Street overpass is projected to carry fewer than 400
                   vehicles per hour northbound and only 30 vehicles southbound during
                   the afternoon peak hour. This option would have relatively modest
                   diversion impacts. A modest increase in traffic volumes would be
                   experienced on Brunette Avenue ( 100-200 vph) and United Boulevard
                   (50-100 vph). More importantly, however, this option would not divert
                   a significant amount of traffic from the King Edward Street underpass
                   of Highway 1. Therefore, this option is considered to generate low
                   benefits in terms of traffic diversion. It is likely that this concept does
0            ClTV Of
                        not attract a significant amount of traffic because it does not provide a
                        direct connection to and from Lougheed Highway. However, physical
                        constraints (proximity of Highway 1 south of Lougheed) make I t
           Strategic    impossible to provide such a connection.
      Transporta tion
                Plan    Because this is a new roadway that does not attract traffic away from the
                        King Edward underpass, it does not have a significant positive impact
            Working     on congestion. Minor benefits could be realized on Lougheed Highway,
         Paper #3 -
                        but delays would increase along United Boulevard by the addition of a
    Network Options
                        traffic signal at the United Boulevard / Schoolhouse Street intersection.
                        The Schoolhouse Street overpass would provide a modest system-wide
                        travel time savings benefit of approximately $0.1 1 million per year.

                        The Schoolhouse overpass would provide few opportunities for
                        enhanced transit facilities, as the Schoolhouse comdor is not anticipated
                        to be a major transit corridor in the future.

                        This overpass would provide modest opportunities for new pedestrian
                        and cycling facilities. Because there is currently a notable lack of
                        connections for pedestrians and cyclists between the Lougheed
                        Highway corridor and the United Boulevard corridor, this facility would
                        provide an important connection in the pedestrian and cycling networks
                        for Coquitlam. Nonetheless, overpasses with significant grades (as
                        would be the case for this option) are not particularly attractive to
                        cyclists or pedestrians. Moreover, Schoolhouse Street is not recognized
                        as a key pedestrian or cycling corridor in future plans. Therefore, this
                        option is considered to provide moderate benefits for non-motorized

                        Costs / Impacts
                        The community and property impacts of this candidate option would be
                        relatively significant. It must be recognized that the Schoolhouse
                        conidor is currently undergoing revitalization into a significant
                        commercial node in Southwest Coquitlam, with several new and
                        planned developments located adjacent the roadway. Several
                        commercial properties on the north side of Lougheed Highway would
                        have to be expropriated to accommodate the overpass and the parallel
                        connections with Lougheed. In addition, several commercial accesses
                        on Schoolhouse Street and Lougheed Highway would have to be
                        restricted. The addition of an elevated structure in the area would have

        CITY OF    negative visual impacts on this emerging commercial centre. South of
     COQUITLAM     Highway 1 and the CPR tracks, commercial property along United
                   Boulevard would be required to accommodate the overpass.
  Transportation   The construction impacts of this option would be moderate, as traffic
            Plan   flow along Lougheed Highway could likely be maintained throughout
                   construction. There would, however, be negative impacts on traffic flow
                   to the north of Lougheed Highway, as the Schoolhouse Street
     Paper #3 -
                   connection to Lougheed Highway would be disrupted. There would also
Network Options
                   be noise, dust, and vibration impacts on the surrounding commercial

                   The overpass structure would begin well north of Lougheed Highway,
                   requiring one creek crossing to the north of Lougheed. In addition, there
                   is one creek crossing immediately south of Lougheed Highway and
                   another just south of the CPR tracks. The construction of the overpass
                   would therefore have a moderate environmental impact.

                   The Class ‘D’ cost estimate for the Schoolhouse overpass is
                   approximately $20.0 million. Given the low benefits for this option,
                   property costs were not assessed. As described in the following section,
                   this option is not recommended.

                   Recommended Strategy

                   Two candidate strategies were evaluated to address the demand for
                   travel between United Boulevard and Lougheed Highway, and to
                   address existing and forecast delays in the King Edward Street conidor.
                   Table 2.2.8 summarizes the evaluation for both concepts.

              CITY OF     Table 2.2.8: Comparison of Candidate Strategies for United Boulevard
           COQUlTlAM                                  Connections


          Paper #3 -
     Network Options

                         As the table indicates, the King Edward Street widening concept would
                         provide more significant benefits than the Schoolhouse Street overpass,
                         which would attract fewer than 500 vehicles during the afternoon peak
                         hour. The King Edward widening would provide more substantial
                         benefits in terms of annual travel time savings, as well as relief of
                         congestion. It would also offer an opportunity to complete a key
                         connection in the Coquitlam bicycle network, which is described in
                         Section 4.

                         The King Edward Street widening would also be significantly less
                         costly than the overpass, and would have fewer impacts on the
                         surrounding community, including local businesses.

                         For these reasons, the King Edward Street widening is recommended as
                         the preferred concept for addressing the need for improved connections
                         between United Boulevard and Lougheed Highway.

                         It is recognized that this concept would not mitigate the impacts of rail
                         movements across King Edward Street to the south of Highway 1,
                         which can significantly affect trafic operations. The only option to
                         mitigate the railway’s impacts would be to provide grade separation,
                         which could be achieved in two ways. The first method would be to
                         lower King Edward Street into an underpass beneath the railway tracks,
                         similar to the existing underpass beneath railway tracks on Shaughnessy
                         Street in Port Coquitlam. The upstream and downstream connections to
                         Woolridge Street and United Boulevard could potentially be maintained,
.URHkNSEirEMS            as the distances are similar to the Shaughnessy Street underpass. In the
      November 20.2001
          ClTY O
               F extreme, however, this modification could require grade separation at
      COQUITLAM both the United Boulevard and Woolridge Street intersections unless
                 United Boulevard was realigned to the south of its existing location. The
       Strategic second option is to raise the railway tracks over King Edward Street and
  Transportation generally maintain King Edward at its current elevation. Although this
            Plan approach would be preferred from a road design, it would add
                 considerable cost to the widening project. The costs associated with
                 rebuilding the railway tracks were not investigated, but there would be
      Paper #3 -
                 significant design and construction challenges due to the surrounding
Network Options
                 road network and poor soil conditions. Because the impact of the
                 railway crossing on King Edward Street trafic is significant, grade
                 separation of the railway crossing should be considered through fbrther

                   Area 3   - Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway Corridor
                   This area encompasses the Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway
                   conidor from west of Johnson Street to Shaughnessy Street in Port
                   Coquitlam. The primary objective in this area is to accommodate
                   significant growth in traffic in road network that has already been built
                   out and is already experiencing recuning congestion. A number of
                   options have been considered for this area, as follows:

                   0   donothing
                   0   minor intersection modifications (such as additional turn lanes)
                   0   extensive grade separation
                   0   combination of the above measures

                   Level of service analyses of 2021 base conditions at the Barnet
                   Highway / Johnson Street, Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway, and
                   Lougheed Highway / Westwood Street intersections with the existing
                   lane configurations (the do-nothing option) are summarized in the
                   following table. Once again, it should be recognized that this option
                   assumes the provision of two additional crossings of the Coquitlam
                   River north of Lougheed Highway.

0             C / NO

                        1   Intersection                                    2021 Base   Average Delay
                                                                               LOS        (seclveh)
      Transportation    ’ Barnet Hiahway II Johnson Street I PinetreeWay

                                            Lougheed Highway
                Plan        Lougheed Highway I Westwood Street                  F            169

         Paper #3 -
    Network Options

                            The following discussion presents an evaluation of minor intersection
                            improvements and the major grade separation option. It should be
                            recognized that the Barnet / Lougheed corridor may ultimately be part
                            of an overall strategy for buses, high-occupancy vehicles, and high-
                            priority vehicles (such as trucks). Because this would be evaluated as a
                            regional system strategy that may extend between the existing Barnet /
                            Hastings HOV lanes and the planned North-South Crossing between
                            Langley and Maple Ridge, it has not been considered in this analysis.

                            a)      Minor Intersection Improvements

                            Although the do-nothing strategy is not considered to be a sustainable
                            option over the long term, there are a number of ‘minor’ modifications
                            to corridor intersections that would improve the operation of the
                            intersections over the short to medium term. As indicated above, these
                            minor modifications could defer the need to invest in grade separation
                            until later in or even beyond the STP time horizon.

                                 Barnet Highway / Johnson Street. Intersection analysis indicates
                                 that this intersection would benefit from the redesignation of the
0URBUFNMEMS                      southbound approach. The current configuration provides a left-turn
     November 20,2001
              ClTV OF          lane, a shared left-turdthrough lane, a dedicated through lane, and a
           COQUlTlAM           right turn-only lane. Under the future base traffic volumes used for
                               the analysis, the southbound approach would fbnction better if the
          Strategic            second lane (current shared left-turdthrough lane) was converted to
     Transportation            a dedicated through lane. This would benefit intersection operations
              Plan             by eliminating the need for split signal phasing on the north-south
                               direction. It could also be achieved at very low cost.
      Paper #3 -
 Network Options               Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway / Pinetree Way. Although
     Assessment                this intersection is almost built out to its maximum extent, several
                               small modifications would maximize the capacity of the intersection.
                               A traffic impact study prepared in support of the expansion of the
                               Coquitlam Centre Mall recommended that the northbound and
                               southbound approaches to this intersection be expanded to provide
                               dual left-turn lanes on both approaches, in addition to two through
                               lanes and a right-turn lane. Construction on these improvements has
                               already begun. In addition, the report recommended that a third
                               through lane be provided on the eastbound approach and carried
                               through the intersection. These modifications would essentially be
                               the limit of expansion for this intersection. Upon implementation,
                               the Barnet / Lougheed conidor would be 10 lanes wide and become
                               a more significant bamer for pedestrians in particular. This is an
                               important issue given the location of the Coquitlam Station transit
                               exchange to the south. By 2021, this expanded intersection would
                               operate at failing levels of service and grade separation would
                               become necessary. It should be noted that the grade separation
                               discussed below would actually reduce the width of the Barnet /
                               Lougheed comdor from 10 lanes to four or six lanes, plus ramps.

                               Lougheed Highway / Westwood Street. This intersection could be
                               modified by providing dual left-turn bays on all approaches to the
                               intersection. Only the northbound approach now provides fully
                               dedicated dual left-turn bays. Although this modification would
                               enhance the capacity of the intersection In the short to medium term,
                               it would not be sufficient in the long term and grade separation
                               would become necessary. Additional modifications on Westwood
                               Street, such as six-laning of the through movements would not
                               dramatically improve levels of service. Even to achieve LOS ‘E’,
                               triple left-turn lanes would have to be provided on both the
                               northbound and southbound approaches. These results therefore
                               confirm that grade separation would be necessary to accommodate
URB&NMEMS                      the forecast traffic volumes in the Barnet / Lougheed corridor.
    November 20,2001
                    817120 7
 mol*lnp P a w U 7.7-F”l da
                                                                                                2-3 1
          CITY OF
       COQUITLAM     These minor intersection improvements would ensure the continued
                     operation of the conidor over the medium term. Although these minor
        Strategic    intersection improvements were not modelled, the long-term travel time
   Transportation    savings benefits would be moderate in the short and medium terms.
            Plan     Other benefits - such as traffic diversion and congestion relief - would
                     also be low. In addition, they would do nothing to improve the character
                     of the area for pedestrians and cyclists. In terms of costs and impacts,
      Paper #3 -
                     these modifications would have relatively low impact and costs. The
 Network Options
                     benefits and costdimpacts of these minor intersection improvements are
                     summarized below in Table 2.2.10.
                     Table 2.2.10 Evaluation Summary for Minor Intersection Improvements

                     b)    Barnet / Lougheed / Pinetree / Westwood Grade Separation

                     This option would involve extensive grade separation through the
                     Barnet Highway I Lougheed Highway corridor. However, recognizing
                     the ‘urban’ character planned both north and south of Lougheed
                     Highway, design standards would be consistent with a lower-speed
                     conidor. At the Barnet I Lougheed / Pinetree intersection, either a
                     conventional diamond o a single-point diamond interchange could be
                     considered, with the Barnet I Lougheed comdor dropped into an
                     underpass beneath Lougheed I Pinetree. A conventional diamond
                     interchange could also be constructed at the Lougheed / Westwood
                     intersection, with Lougheed Highway dropped into an underpass
                     beneath Westwood Street. All turn movements would be permitted at
                     the interchange. For the purposes of modelling and the following
                     discussion, full diamond interchanges were assumed for both
                     intersections. This implies that two signalized intersections were
                     modelled at each interchange, an increase of one over the existing
                     situation at each location. It was also assumed for costing purposes that
  November 20,2001
        CITY OF    Lougheed Highway was lowered below grade between the two
     COQUITLAM     interchanges.
       Strategic   An alternative to the above concept would be to lower the north-south
  Transportation   cross-streets into underpass beneath the Barnet I Lougheed conidor.
                   This would have different implications for planning and design, but
                   would not significantly affect traffic patterns. In general, it is anticipated
                   that a raised Barnet I Lougheed conidor would create more of a barrier
     Paper #3 -
                   between the north and south sides of the conidor. For the purposes of
Network Options
                   technical analysis, only the base option was evaluated. The alternative
                                  - -
                   concept was presented to the public for comment.
                          Figure 2.2.8: Barnet I Lougheed Corridor Grade Separation

                                 0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL


                   Overall, the model provides an indication of the travel demands and
                   traffic patterns that may result from this improvement. The network
                   configuration illustrated above is generally identified based on these
                   traffic patterns. It is recommended that further review of grade
                   separation concepts be developed using micro-simulation methods if
                   this is a desired improvement option at a conceptual level within the
                   STP. The model results indicate that the grade separations of both
                   Pinetree Way and Westwood Street at Lougheed Highway would result
                   in some diversion of the traffic within the Regional Town Centre and
                   the surrounding area, but that City- and region-wide travel patterns
0            CIN OF
                        would not be significantly altered by the modifications. Compared to the
                        base condition, traffic volumes would increase on Johnson Street by
                        300-450 vehicles during the afternoon peak hour, with the larger
           Strategic    increase occurring north of Barnet Highway. Traffic would decrease on
      Transporfation    Pinetree Way and Lougheed Highway by approximately 450 vehicles
                 Plan   both north and south of Barnet Highway. The results indicate that traffic
                        volumes would decrease on Westwood Street to the north of Lougheed
                        by a marginal amount, but that traffic volumes would increase by over
         Paper #3 -
                        500 vehicles on Westwood immediately south of Lougheed. This result
    Network Options
                        is primarily related to impacts on access to and from Christmas Way,
                        which are discussed below in the section on costs and impacts.
                        Although the results suggest that Johnson Street and Mariner Way
                        would become slightly more attractive and Pinetree Way and Westwood
                        Street less so, these results may be related more to the model calibration
                        than the actual diversion that may occur. Both interchanges were
                        modelled as full diamonds with an additional traffic signal at each
                        intersection. The addition of traffic signals in the model has added
                        sufficient delay to make those cross-streets less attractive, since it does
                        not account for any coordination between signals. Further afield, the
                        model results suggest that a modest amount of traffic would be diverted
                        to the Lougheed Highway crossing of the Coquitlam River and away
                        from the other four crossings of the river included in the future base
                        model. Overall, these results indicate that the addition of interchanges at
                        both locations would have relatively little impact on traffic patterns in
                        the Regional Town Centre area.

                        The grade separation of both Pinetree Way and Westwood Street would
                        generate significant benefits for east-west through traffic along the
                        Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway comdor. The elimination of two
                        traffic signals in the corridor would reduce delays substantially through
                        the corridor. The modelled V/C ratios confirm that the interchanges
                        would reduce delays at several locations around the Regional Town
                        Centre area, particularly along Lougheed Highway, but that several
                        local roadways in the Regional Town Centre area would also benefit.
                        Segments of Pinetree Way, Westwood Street, and Lougheed Highway
                        (south of Barnet) would also experience fewer delays. Delays on the
                        cross-streets could be mitigated through effective coordination of
                        signals at the diamond interchanges. Overall, the model results suggest
                        that the congestion benefits of the two interchanges would be mixed.

               According to the macro-simulation model, the system-wide travel time
    RBQANSYSTEMS of this improvement is estimated to be negligible. However, it is
     November 20.2007
        ClTV OF    emphasized that the model is generally used for estimating travel
     COQUITIAM     demands and trafic patterns on a region- and Citywide network and
                   cannot account for signal coordination that would be provided at the
       Strategic   signalized intersections. To better estimate the travel time benefits that
  Transportation   could be achieved through grade separation, it IS recommended that the
            Plan   analysis be refined through a micro-simulation evaluation.
                   This concept offers a moderate opportunity to provide transit prionty
     Paper #3 -
                   measures at several locations. In particular, facilities could be developed
Network Options
                   to provide priority access to buses at on-ramps and off-ramps. Although
                   this would require additional road space and would likely add to the cost
                   of construction, there are several locations around Coquitlam Station
                   where transit priority should be considered.

                   In general, urban interchanges are difficult for pedestrians and cyclists
                   to negotiate, primarily because there are typically several intersections
                   to cross. Nonetheless, the grade separation concept presented here
                   would mitigate the existing barrier of the nine- to 10-iane cross-section
                   of Barnet and Lougheed Highways. With Barnet and Lougheed dropped
                   into underpasses beneath the cross-streets, the north-south movement of
                   cyclists and pedestrians would be enhanced. There would be an
                   opportunity to incorporate quality facilities for both pedestrians and
                   cyclists into the initial design. Therefore, the opportunities to
                   accommodate non-motorized modes are considered to be moderate. The
                   pedestrian and cycling connections across Lougheed Highway are
                   particularly important at the Pinetree Way intersection because of the
                   transit services offered to the south of Lougheed (West Coast Express,
                   bus exchange, future B-Line and SkyTrain services). In fact, grade
                   separation for pedestrians is already being contemplated for the Pinetree
                   Way / Lougheed Highway intersection as part of the design for the Port
                   Moody-Coquitlam SkyTrain line.

                   Costs / Impacts

                   The community and property impacts of this candidate improvement
                   strategy would be significant. These interchanges would be designed to
                   minimize visual impacts on the community by maintaining both
                   Pinetree Way and Westwood Street at or near their existing elevations.
                   The provision of these two interchanges would require some property
                   taking - primarily commercial properties. One building in the northeast
                   quadrant of the Lougheed / Barnet / Pinetree intersection would have to
                   be demolished. In addition, commercial developments in all four

0            CIN 01
                       quadrants of the Lougheed I Westwood intersection would have to be
                       removed. Segments of several other properties - including the
                       Coquitlam Station transit exchange and park-and-ride - would have to
           Strategic   be expropriated.
                Plan   At a conceptual level of review, it would appear that the impact of these
                       interchanges on property access would also be a significant issue. The
                       overall impacts would depend on whether Lougheed Highway was
         Paper #3 -
                       lowered to a below-grade elevation throughout the area. Many
    Network Options
                       commercial accesses on Lougheed Highway and the cross-streets would
                       have to be relocated. On the north side of Barnet Highway and
                       Lougheed Highway, one access (on Barnet Highway) to Coquitlam
                       Town Centre Mall would have to be closed and one (on Pinetree Way)
                       would have to be relocated. Two accesses to the plazas in the northeast
                       quadrant of the Lougheed I Barnet I Pinetree intersection would have to
                       be closed. The access road from Lougheed Highway to Ponderosa Street
                       (approximately mid-way between Pinetree Way and Westwood Street)
                       would be eliminated, particularly if Lougheed Highway were lowered
                       throughout the area. One access to the plaza in the northeast quadrant of
                       the Lougheed I Westwood intersection would also be eliminated. On the
                       south side of Barnet Highway and Lougheed Highway, one access to the
                       plaza in the southeast quadrant of the Lougheed I Westwood
                       intersection would also have to be relocated.

                       Perhaps the most significant impacts in terms of property access would
                       be to the properties on the south side of Lougheed Highway between
                       Pinetree Way and Westwood Street. These developments - including an
                       auto dealership and Westwood Mall - are presently served by two
                       accesses on Lougheed Highway, both of which are restricted to right-
                       idright-out. One of these accesses is Christmas Way, which is a
                       municipal roadway and extends from Lougheed Highway southeastward
                       to a full-movement intersection at Westwood Street. It serves several
                       other developments on the south side of the roadway. The north end of
                       Christmas Way and the second right-idright-out access on Lougheed
                       Highway would have to be closed to accommodate the interchanges. If
                       Lougheed Highway returned to grade between the two interchanges, it is
                       likely that only Christmas Way would have to be closed or re-aligned to
                       meet the other access. This would have a very significant impact on
                       traffic movement in this area because, with no other mitigation
                       measures, all traffic would have to be accommodated at the Christmas
                       Way / Westwood Street intersection. Plans for the area indicate that this
                       small area is anticipated to grow substantially over the next 20 years,
                                       accommodating much more employment and generating significantly
                                       more traffic. The analysis indicates that it would be impossible for the
                                       Christmas Way / Westwood Street intersection to accommodate all of
         strategic                     the trafic generated by this area. Therefore, a second access point
    Transportation                     would be required to serve the area south of Lougheed Highway. For the
              Plan                     purposes of modelling, it was assumed that Christmas Way would be
                                       extended westward to a right-idright-out intersection on Lougheed
                                       Highway south of Barnet Highway and that Christmas Way would be
     Paper #3 -
                                       widened to four lanes. All of the results discussed above incorporate
Network Options
                                       these assumptions. These results confirm that, if the grade-separated
                                       interchanges were implemented at Pinetree and Westwood, significant
                                       mitigation measures would be required to accommodate access to and
                                       from the commercial developments south of Lougheed Highway.

                                       The construction of these interchanges would have significant impacts
                                       on the community. Construction would likely require detours and road
                                       closures, which would have major impacts on traffic circulation through
                                       and within the Regional Town Centre area. Construction activities
                                       (including noise, vibrations, truck activity, dust, etc.) would also have
                                       negative impacts on the surrounding community for the duration of the

                                       The environmental impacts of these measures are considered to be
                                       minimal. There are no major watercourses within the surrounding area
                                       and no community open space or major treed areas would be affected.

                                       The estimated capital cost of these interchanges is approximately $23.8
                                       million, assuming that both interchanges are constructed as full
                                       diamonds and Lougheed Highway is maintained below grade between
                                       the interchanges. If Lougheed Highway returned to grade between the
                                       interchanges, the capital cost would decrease by approximately $4.3
                                       million. These cost estimates do not include property acquisition, which
                                       is estimated to add approximately $9.0 million to the cost of this

                                       The preceding evaluation is summarized below in Table 2.2.11.

    November 20,2007
~   P   .   p   r   ~
                        #11Wrn 1
                          . rdoc
                               .   ~   ~   f
         CT O
          IY F       Table 2.2.11: Evaluation Summary for Barnet / Lougheed / Pinetree I


     Paper #3 -
Network Options

                   1 The travel time savings benefit could not be specifically measured at a macro level and would
                   necessitate a nucro-simulation analysis to confirm configuration and performance benefits

                   Recommended Strategy

                   One minor and one major option were evaluated for this area of
                   Coquitlam. Table 2.2.12 compares the technical evaluations for each of
                   the candidate strategies.
                       Table 2.2.12: Comparison of Candidate Strategies for the Barnet /

                   Ultimately, major modifications will be necessary in the Barnet /
                   Lougheed corridor, as the minor intersection improvements described
                   previously would not be a long-term solution to the anticipated
                   problems in the corridor. In the short term, however, intersection
                   improvements at the three intersections in the corridor would address
         CllY O
              F    some issues of delay. All of the recommended minor improvements
     COQU~TLAMshould be pursued as an interim solution until grade separation at the
                   Pinetree Way and Westwood Street intersections becomes warranted.
  Transportation   It is recommended that the City pursue grade separation of the Pinetree
            Plan   Way and Westwood Street intersections in the long term. These
                   improvements would improve traffic operations in the Regional Town
                   Centre area, particularly along Barnet and Lougheed Highways. The
     Paper #3 -
                   mitigation of impacts on access to and from nearby commercial
Network Options
                   developments (and future residential developments) must be considered
                   fully in the planning stages. This and further study on the grade
                   separation concepts should be considered more fully through the use of
                   micro-simulation models at a conidor plan or functional planning stage
                   of assessment.

                   Considering the existing conditions and potential minor intersection
                   improvements, grade separation will not likely be necessary until late in
                   or even beyond the 20-year timeframe for the STP. In the short and
                   medium terms, some minor intersection improvements within the
                   conidor will maintain the operation of the corridor until the grade
                   separation becomes necessary.

                   2.3 Other Network Improvements
                   There are a number of other future ‘problem’ areas throughout the City
                   that have been considered for various improvement strategies. These
                   include improvements that have previously been identified by the City
                   of Coquitlam, and improvements that have been identified as part of the
                   Strategic Transportation Plan. The primary distinction between these
                   other areas and the three areas discussed in Section 2.2.2 is that the
                   improvement strategies discussed in this section are less extensive than
                   grade separation or new roadways. In most cases, they simply involve
                   intersection modifications to improve traffic operations. This section
                   identifies the potential modifications in these ‘other’ comdors.

                   Class ‘D’ (order-of-magnitude) cost estimates are provided in this
                   section, where appropriate and available. It should be recognized that
                   these cost estimates are based on 2001 dollars, do not include property
                   acquisition costs, and include 10% engineering costs and 35%
                   contingency. They are only provided for informational purposes and
                   should not be used for budgeting. Property costs are included in the
                   summary table contained in Section 2.6.
0             CITY OF
          COQUITLAM It should be noted that corridor preservation is also a key aspect
                        improvement strategies for most of the major corridors throughout
                                                                                         of the
           Strategic    Coquitlam. However, specific improvements aimed at the preservation
      Transportation    of mobility within these comdors have not necessarily been identified
                Plan    (although many improvements listed here could be classified as corridor
                        preservation measures). Corridor preservation concepts and potential
                        measures are addressed in the section following this discussion.
         Paper #3 -
    Network Options
                        It should also be noted that this section does not include network
                        modifications to accommodate transit priority measures, which are
                        presented in Section 3.5.2.

                        North Road

                        Traffic delays are already a recurring issue along the North Road
                        corridor between Lougheed Highway and Cameron Street. Traffic
                        volumes are high in both the north-south direction and the east-west
                        direction. In addition, most locations throughout the conidor exhibit
                        high turning movement volumes, which further degrades intersection
                        performance. Improvements have been identified for three locations in
                        the corridor.

                           Lougheed Highway. Future base conditions indicate that this
                           intersection would operate at LOS ‘E’ in the afternoon peak hour in
                           2021, with an average delay of approximately 74 seconds per
                           vehicle. Because SkyTrain has recently been constructed on the west
                           side of the intersection, modifications are constrained. Analysis
                           indicates that the provision of dual northbound and southbound left-
                           turn lanes along North Road would improve intersection operation to
                           LOS ‘D’ an average delay of 52 seconds per vehicle. These
                           lanes would have to be constructed by widening the pavement to the
                           east. To accommodate this widening, property would be requited in
                           the northeast quadrant of the intersection. It is estimated that the
                           construction of this improvement would cost approximately
                           $600,000, not including property acquisition or building

                           Austin Avenue. This intersection would function at LOS ‘F’
                           (average delay 84 seconds per vehicle) during the afternoon peak
                           hour in 202 1, assuming the existing lane configuration. Analysis
@URB&NSYSEMS               indicates that this intersection would operate at LOS ‘D’ (average
     November 20,2001
          ClN OF        delay 37 seconds per vehicle) if the eastbound and westbound
      COQUIJLAM         approaches were modified. The eastbound approach would be
                        altered by converting the existing left-turdthrough shared lane to a
        Strategic       dedicated left-turn lane, and by converting the curb lane from a right
   Transportation       turn-only configuration to a shared throughlright-turn configuration.
                        On the westbound approach, a second left-turn lane would be added.
                        This modification would be accomplished by widening the roadway
                        to the south, which would impact two properties on the south side of
      Paper #3 -
                        the intersection. The Class ‘D’ cost estimate for this improvement is
 Network Options
                        $600,000 plus property acquisition.
                        It should be noted that physical transit priority measures have been
                        identified for this location. These measures are discussed in Section

                    e   Cameron Street. The level of service analysis for future base
                        conditions indicates that this intersection would function at LOS ‘D’
                        (49 seconds per vehicle average delay) during the afternoon peak
                        hour, with the northbound and eastbound approaches functioning at
                        LOS ‘E’. improve traffic operations at this intersection, a third
                        eastbound lane would have to be introduced. This would provide a
                        dual left-turn lane and single right-turn lane configuration.
                        Intersection operations would be improved to LOS ‘C’ (average
                        delay of 32 seconds per vehicle). The cost of this improvement is
                        estimated to be $600,000, not including property costs.

                        Transit priority measures have also been identified for the Cameron
                        Street I North Road intersection. They are presented in Section 3.5.2.

                    Clarke Road

                    The Clarke road corridor has been identified as a future ‘problem’ area
                    because of forecast congestion on both Clarke Road and Como Lake
                    Avenue in the Burquitlam area. Two intersections on Clarke Road have
                    been identified for potential improvements.

                    0   Como lake Avenue. The Como Lake Avenue I Clarke Road
                        intersection is anticipated to function at LOS ‘F’ during the 2021
                        afternoon peak hour, with the average motorist experiencing 108
                        seconds of delay. The delays are partly caused by the significant
                        amount of turning movements at the intersection. To alleviate
UR&IUSYSEMS,            congestion, the eastbound approach to the intersection would be
         CITY O
              F        widened to provide a dual left-turn lane and two through lanes. To
     COQUITLAM         accommodate this modification, the road would be widened to the
                       south. On the southbound approach, a right-turn bay should be
       Strategic       added. This would require property in the northwest quadrant of the
  Transporfafion       intersection. The modified intersection would operate at LOS ‘D’,
           Plan        with an average delay of 52 seconds per vehicle. It is estimated that
                       these modifications would cost approximately $900,000, plus
                       property acquisition costs.
     Paper #3 -
Network Options
                   0   Kemsley Avenue. The City of Coquitlam has previously identified
                       that a left-turn bay on northbound Clarke Road should be
                       constructed at Kemsley Avenue. This modification would provide
                       operational benefits for North Road and should be implemented
                       when an opportunity arises. The estimated cost for this improvement
                       is $600,000, exclusive of property acquisition.

                   It should be noted that these modifications have been developed in
                   conjunction with the ongoing Burquitlam Station Area Plan (SAP). It
                   should, however, be recognized that the SAP will consider more
                   localized land uses and transportation improvements that should be used
                   to confirm these improvements.

                   Austin Avenue

                   Although Austin Avenue is not forecast to experience significant
                   congestion and delays in the future, it is included as a problem area
                   because it is already experiencing friction related to the spacing of the
                   intersections and the adjacent commercial accesses. The anticipated
                   growth in medium-density residential uses and mixed-use developments
                   along the comdor may exacerbate access and egress issues along the
                   corridor. Three intersections have been identified for minor
                   improvements that would support future development in the comdor
                   and further preserve mobility through the corridor. These improvements
                   may be reviewed through the Comdor Strategic Plans described later in
                   this Working Paper.

                   0   Blue Mountain Street. It is anticipated that this location would
                       function at LOS ‘E’ (63 seconds delay per vehicle) during the
                       afternoon peak hour in 2021. The intersection operation could be
                       improved to LOS ‘D’ (47 seconds delay per vehicle) through the
                       addition of a northbound left-turn bay. Apart from the operational
                       benefits this would provide, it would also provide safety benefits.
             CITY OF               Because the intersection is located on a curve, a left-turn bay would
          COQUITLAM                permit northbound left-turning vehicles to move out of the through
                                   traffic stream. It is estimated that this modification could be
         Strategic                 constructed at a cost of approximately $100,000 exclusive of
    Transportation                 property costs.
                                   Schoolhouse Street. Although delay is not a significant concern at
     Paper #3 -
                                   this location, it is recommended that the City consider
Network Options                    implementation of eastbound and westbound left-turn bays when an
    Assessment                     opportunity arises. The provision of left-turn bays would improve
                                   the overall operation of the intersection and corridor over the long
                                   term without significant road widening. With left-turn bays in place,
                                   the intersection would function at LOS ‘B’ (13 seconds delay per
                                   vehicle) in 2021. It is estimated that the construction of left-turn
                                   bays at this location would cost approximately $600,000, plus
                                   property acquisition.

                                   Poirier Street. A left-turn bay on eastbound Austin Avenue at
                                   Poirier Street has been previously identified by City staff as
                                   desirable. This improvement is desirable for the long-term
                                   preservation of mobility within the Austin Avenue corridor. The
                                   estimated cost for this improvement is $600,000 plus property costs.
                                   This project should be implemented when an appropriate
                                   opportunity arises.

                               Como lake Avenue

                               The Como Lake Avenue comdor is identified as a problem area because
                               of forecast delays throughout the corridor under future base conditions.
                               The comdor is also intersected frequently by cross-streets and private
                               driveways, which tend to conflict with the through function of the
                               roadway. Four intersections have been identified for minor

                               0   Robinson Street. City staff has previously identified the need for
                                   eastbound and westbound left-turn bays on Como Lake Avenue at
                                   Robinson Street. These improvements would provide an operational
                                   benefit for Como Lake Avenue for the long term and should be
                                   implemented when an opportunity arises. This improvement is
                                   estimated to cost $950,000 plus property costs.

   November 20,2001
WwkwP.p.rU.f l - F h l d o i
0            C T ot
                       Blue Mountain Street. This intersection is forecast to function at
                       LOS ‘D’ the 2021 afternoon peak hour, with the average motorist
                       experiencing 53 seconds of delay. Although this is generally
                       considered an acceptable level of service, a minor reconfiguration of
                       the intersection would reduce delay to 39 seconds per vehicle, on
                       average. This would be accomplished by reconfiguring each of the
                       northbound and southbound approaches from a shared left-
         Paper #3 -
                       tudthrough lane and a right turn-only lane configuration, to a left-
    Network Options
                       turn lane and a shared throughhight-turn lane. Aside from the
        Assessment     operational benefits this reconfiguration would provide, it would
                       also enhance safety by aligning the left-turn lanes directly opposite
                       each other. This significantly improves visibility for left-turning
                       motorists. Furthermore, it separates left-turning vehicles - which
                       generally require more time to turn than other movements - from
                       other vehicles at the intersection, thereby allowing unimpeded
                       through movements reducing the opportunities for rear-end

                       In addition to the reconfiguration of the northbound and southbound
                       approaches, it is recommended that land be preserved for and
                       eastbound right-turn bay approaching the intersection. This would
                       further reduce delay to 3 1 seconds per vehicle (LOS ‘Cy).

                       These modifications would cost approximately $100,000, plus
                       property acquisition costs.

                       Porter Street. Eastbound and westbound left-turn bays on Como
                       Lake Avenue at the Porter Street intersection were identified
                       previously by City staff. They are considered beneficial from an
                       operational standpoint, and would also contribute to long-term
                       mobility within the Como Lake Avenue corridor. The cost of this
                       improvement is estimated to be $600,000, exclusive of property
                       acquisition. These should be implemented when an opportunity

                       Catensbury Street. Although delay is not anticipated to be a
                       significant issue at this intersection over the long term, it is
                       recommended that the City consider the implementation of
                       eastbound and westbound left-turn bays at this location. The
                       provision of left-turn bays would improve the performance of the
                       intersection and corridor, without significant road widening. The
                       intersection would function at LOS ‘B’ (14 seconds delay per
         CITY OF       vehicle) with eastbound and westbound left-turn bays. It is estimated
            M          that the provision of eastbound and westbound left-turn bays would
                       cost approximately $600,000. exclusive of property acquisition
       Strategic       costs.
            Plan   Upper Lougheed Corridor (Cape Horn interchange to Barnet
     Paper #3 -    The future base conditions for this section of Lougheed Highway
Network Options    indicate that it will experience significant growth over the next 20 years.
    Assessment     This will likely increase delays along the corridor - particularly at the
                   signalized intersections. Two locations have been identified for

                   0   Pitt River Road, Although the operation of the intersection itself is
                       anticipated to remain within acceptable levels of service over the
                       long term, this analysis does not consider the impacts of trains
                       interrupting access to and from Pitt River Road. The CP Railway
                       tracks cross Pitt River Road immediately to the east of the Pitt River
                       Road / Lougheed Highway intersection. When trains pass, traffic
                       turning right fiom Lougheed Highway to Pitt River Road generally
                       backs up well beyond the end of the existing right-turn bay, which
                       subsequently causes delays for through moving vehicles on
                       Lougheed Highway. With projected growth in right-turn traffic of
                       250 vehicles and northbound traffic on Lougheed Highway of 400
                       vehicles per hour, there is a need for additional storage on Lougheed
                       Highway for vehicles bound for Port Coquitlam that are delayed by
                       crossing trains.

                       The desired length of the right-turn bay (storage lane) is dependent
                       on the duration of the interruption caused by trains. For a five-
                       minute train, the storage lane would have to be at least 760 m long to
                       store all vehicles. For a 10-minute train, however, this lane would
                       have to be over 1.5 km long. Further design analysis would be
                       required to determine what length of storage lane could be provided,
                       considering physical constraints upstream of the intersection (such
                       as the CP Railway and the Coquitlam River). For costing purposes, it
                       has been assumed that an additional 300 m would be added to the
                       existing right-turn lane at a cost of approximately $2200 per metre of
                       roadway. This includes retaining walls and preloading, but does not
                       consider property acquisition within the rail corridor, which may not

          ClN OF        even be feasible. It is unclear if the widening would encroach on the
      COQUllLAM         CP Rail property line.
       Strategic        Lougheed Highway is identified in the Bicycle Plan in Section 4 as a
  Transportation        bicycle route providing bicycle lanes and paved shoulders. Although
            Plan        it is not anticipated that Lougheed Highway would be fully
                        designated as a bicycle route until further upgrades are undertaken in
                        the long term, the lengthening of the right-turn bay approaching Pitt
     Paper #3 -
                        River Road should include sufficient pavement width to
Network Options
                        accommodate future bicycle facilities (assumed to be 1.8-m paved
                        shoulders). The cost to add this width is not included in the above
                        estimate and would be approximately $100,000 in additional cost
                        (based on 300-m right-turn bay).

                    a   Chilko Drive / Corno lake Avenue. Overall, this intersection is
                        anticipated to operate at LOS ‘D’ (52 seconds delay per vehicle) in
                        the 2021 afternoon peak hour. Although this is considered
                        acceptable as an overall level of service, the eastbound and
                        westbound through movements would hnction at LOS ‘F’, which is
                        generally considered unacceptable for planning purposes. Through
                        movements from Chilko Drive and Como Lake Avenue are already
                        identified as problematic by residents of the area. The operation of
                        the intersection would be improved by widening Chilko and Como
                        Lake to four through lanes for a short distance through the
                        intersection to provide additional through capacity. This would
                        require some physical modifications at the intersection, such as the
                        elimination of channelized right-turn lanes on the eastbound and
                        westbound approaches, but could be achieved relatively easily. This
                        modification would improve the overall function of the intersection
                        to LOS ‘C’ (34 seconds delay per vehicle), and would enhance
                        eastbound and westbound through movements to LOS ‘B’. It is
                        estimated that this modification would cost approximately $3 10,000.

                    Regional Town Centre Corridors

                    There are several corridors within and around the Regional Town
                    Centre area that are expected to accommodate a significant amount of
                    growth in traffic volumes over the next 20 years. Several of these
                    comdors will require some modifications to maintain acceptable
                    operations, as discussed below. One of the modifications is a minor
                    improvement at an intersection, while two improvements would involve
URB&NMEMS           widening of corridors.
 November 20,2001
         CITY O
     COQU~TLAM     Guildford Way / Johnson Street intersection. Although the
                   Johnson Street corridor does not require widening to six lanes, this
                   intersection will require some improvements, as it is expected to
  Transportation   function at LOS ‘F’ (average delay 114 seconds per vehicle). This
                   level of service could be improved by adding a second eastbound
                   left-turn bay, a westbound right-turn bay, and a northbound right-
     Paper #3 -
                   turn bay. The resulting level of service would be LOS ‘D’ (average
Network Options
                   delay 49 seconds per vehicle). The estimated capital cost for these
    Assessment     modifications is $200,000, plus land acquisition costs.

                   Glen Drive / Johnson Street intersection. In previous work
                   prepared by the City and by consultants, there has been an identified
                   need for northbound and southbound left-turn bays on Johnson
                   Street at Glen Drive. These improvements would provide operational
                   benefits, particularly to support growth within the Regional Town
                   Centre area. It is estimated that these modifications would cost
                   approximately $600,000, plus property acquisition costs.

                   Lincoln Avenue. It has been assumed throughout the STP that the
                   southerly crossing of the Coquitlam River would be provided by the
                   2021 time horizon and that Lincoln Avenue would provide a direct
                   connection to the crossing. The transportation model confirms that
                   the section of Lincoln Avenue between Westwood Street and
                   Pipeline Road would have to be four lanes wide to accommodate
                   forecast base traffic volumes. It should be noted that the
                   transportation model assumed that the crossing would also be four
                   lanes wide. The widening of Lincoln Avenue between Westwood
                   Street and Pipeline Road is estimated to cost $980,000 exclusive of
                   property costs.

                   Pipeline Road. A traffic impact study prepared in support of the
                   development application for the Riverwalk development indicated
                   that Pipeline Road would have to be widened to four lanes north of
                   Robson Drive to support the development. The transportation model
                   further confirms that Pipeline Road should be widened to four lanes
                   from Guildford Way to Robson Drive to accommodate future base
                   traffic volumes. The roadway should be widened to meet the City’s
                   arterial road standard. The road cross-section between Pathan
                   Avenue and Robson Drive could already accommodate four lanes of
                   traffic. However, the section between Guildford Way and Pathan
URMLNMEMS.         Avenue would have to be rebuilt. It is estimated that this widening
0                      CITY O
                            F            would cost approximately $1.65 million, exclusive of property costs.
                                         It should be noted that this cost does not include the cost to widen
                                         Pipeline Road to the north of Robson Drive, which is assumed to be
             Strategic                   developer funded.
                                         Robson Drive I Pipeline Road intersection. In conjunction with
                                         the widening of Pipeline Road from Guildford Way to the Riverwalk
                Paper #3 -               development, it is anticipated that the Robson Drive / Pipeline Road
    Network Options                      intersection would require some modifications. The extent of these
        Assessment                       modifications should be examined further at the time that they are
                                         being contemplated further.

                                         Pinetree Way. Throughout the STP, it has been assumed that
                                         Pinetree Way would be extended north from Pathan Way to Robson
                                         Street. This improvement was included in the base transportation

                                      Other Locations

                                      There are two locations outside of the forecast ‘problem’ areas that are
                                      identified for future improvements. In addition, there are several
                                      improvements that have previously been identified through the
                                      Northeast Coquitlam Transportation Plan. These improvements are
                                      identified below.

                                         United Boulevard / Burbidge Street intersection. A traffic signal
                                         is to be installed at this location. In conjunction with the installation
                                         of this signal, it is recommended that a westbound left-turn bay be
                                         installed on United Boulevard. There is a potential need for an
                                         eastbound left-turn bay as well. This modification has been
                                         previously identified by City staff and is estimated to cost $340,000
                                         plus property.

                                         Foster Avenue / Blue Mountain Street intersection. City staff has
                                         previously identified the need for northbound and southbound left-
                                         turn bays on Blue Mountain Street at Foster Avenue. Although not
                                         required strictly for additional capacity, they would provide
                                         operational benefits for the intersection in the long term and should
                                         be pursued when an appropriate opportunity arises. The cost to add
                                         left-turn bays is estimated to be $550,000 plus property acquisition
       November 20,2001
                         0115010.1                                                                           2-48
    YHDlLlng P , P . r U I I-FhLdOs
          CITYOF       David Avenue was assumed to be in place by the 202 time honzon
      COQUITLAM        for all modelling activities completed for the STP. It was assumed
                       that a four-lane roadway would be provided from the Port Moody
        Strategic      boundary to Upper Victoria Drive in Northeast Coquitlam. This
                       would provide a northerly crossing of the Coquitlam and support the
                       development of Northeast Coquitlam. The City should continue to
                       pursue the development of David Avenue as a four-lane facility
      Paper #3 -
                       across northern Coquitlam. This improvement would be funded by
 Network Options
                       development and other forms of cost-recovery.
                       Southerly crossing. The City should continue to pursue the
                       implementation of the southerly crossing of the Coquitlam River to
                       support development in Northeast Coquitlam, to provide an
                       attractive alternative to Lougheed Highway, and to provide an
                       important transit connection to Northeast Coquitlam and North Port
                       Coquitlam. It is assumed that the crossing would be entirely funded
                       through the development of Northeast Coquitlam and other agencies.

                       Coast Meridian Road. The Northeast Coquitlam Transportation
                       Plan recommended that Coast Meridian Road be widened to four
                       lanes from Victoria Drive to David Avenue to support development
                       in the Northeast Coquitlam area. This recommendation was adopted
                       by the City of Coquitlam and is upheld within the STP. This
                       improvement would also be funded by development.

                       Victoria Drive. The Northeast Coquitlam Transportation Plan also
                       recommended the widening of Victoria Drive to five lanes
                       (continuous centre left-turn lane) between Coast Meridian Road to
                       Fremont Street. The Port Coquitlam Master Transportation Plan
                       reaffirmed this recommendation. It is recommended that this
                       improvement be pursued to support development within Northeast
                       Coquitlam. Development would fund this widening project.

                    2.4 Corridor Preservation Measures
                    As previously discussed, the overriding assumption within the base case
                    scenario is that the existing network does not change dramatically. In
                    areas where more significant concentrations of growth are anticipated -
                    such as North Road, Burquitlam, and Austin Heights - mobility will be
                    affected by new intersections and accesses, as well as greater cross-
                    street traffic. As such, several corridors throughout the City of
          ClN OF    Coquitlam have been identified as candidates for the implementation of
      COQUITLAM     ‘corridor preservation’ measures.
       Strategic    Corridor preservation is directed at preserving long-term mobility
  Transporfafion    within major through corridors despite competing pressures to
                    accommodate increasingly local traffic patterns.
                    In this regard, six corridors have been identified as potentially being
      Paper #3 -
                    affected by future development in the surrounding areas, as follows:
Network Options
                    0   Brunette Avenue (Highway to Laurentian)
                    0   North Road / Clarke Road (Highway 1 to Como Lake Avenue)
                    0   Austin Avenue (Blue Mountain Street to Linton Street)
                    0   Como Lake Avenue (Blue Mountain Street to Thermal Drive)
                    0   Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway (Falcon Drive to Westwood
                    0   Pinetree Way (Barnet Highway to Guildford Way)

                    In these areas, the City will need to consider strategies to preserve
                    corridor mobility that are balanced with the preservation of property and
                    accessibility on an ongoing basis. Accordingly, the City will need to
                    undertake the development of Comdor Strategic Plans (CSPs) to
                    proactively address the need to optimize transportation capacity while
                    preserving access to development lands for future growth. CSPs will be
                    integrated with land use strategies and will consider a range of specific

                    Although the intent of the Strategic Transportation Plan is not to
                    provide recommendations on specific measures that should be
                    implemented in certain corridors, this section of the STP provides an
                    overview of the measures that could be considered in the development
                    of preservation strategies for several corridors in Coquitlam. This
                    section of the STP also provides guidance on what corridors should be
                    considered and what priority should be assigned to each. The
                    identification of specific corridor preservation measures should be
                    undertaken through CSPs, as described above.

                    ‘corridor preservation’ may include a wide range of activities with the
                    overall objective of preserving the condition and performance of
                    existing assets over the long term, while also limiting or deferring the
                    need for major capital projects. The following discussion provides some
 November 20.2001
                   background on the types of activities that could be qualified as comdor
                   preservation measures.
                      Access management. In some areas, commercial and residential
                      driveways intersect with the main through roadway at very regular
                      intervals. A high level of Laccessdensity’ means that vehicles may
                      be entering andor exiting the roadway at many locations throughout
     Paper #3 -
                      a corridor. This can have an overall negative impact on the mobility
Network Options
                      of through traffic within the comdor by effectively reducing the
    Assessment        capacity of the roadway. An example of access management is the
                      consolidation of commercial driveways into a single driveway that
                      intersects the through roadway at a major intersection, which is often
                      signalized. Another example would be the restriction of turns into or
                      out of commercial or residential developments through signage or
                      the placement of raised medians.

                      Minor intersection upgrading. The provision of additional turn
                      lanes at key intersections could be considered comdor preservation,
                      because they generally enhance mobility for through movements.
                      Although it was stated that the STP would not identify specific
                      measures, many of the minor intersection improvements identified in
                      Section 2.3 could be considered corridor preservation measures.

                      Support networks. Within some well-developed commercial and
                      residential areas, many auto hips between neighbouring
                      developments cover a relatively short distance. Where these trips
                      occur on the major through roadway, they negatively affect capacity
                      and mobility for through vehicles. In many cases, these trips could
                      be accommodated on other local roadways. The identification and
                      development of a support road network (such as parallel local
                      streets) within these areas contributes to corridor preservation by
                      encouraging motorists to use the local network for short-distance
                      trips. Additionally, the support network may be needed to support
                      access and circulation needs of individual properties and further
                      enhance opportunities for access controls.

                      Improved signage can contribute to conidor preservation by
                      enhancing the flow of traffic within commercial or residential areas.
                      Signage can be used to encourage motorists to use key intersections
                      and the adjacent support roadways - instead of the through roadway
                      - to access certain developments. In addition, signage can be used to
                      alleviate existing or developing safety problems.
                                                                                       2-5 1
0             CITY O
           COQUITLAM        Right-of-way protection. There are two general purposes for right-
                            of-way protection. The first is through the preservation of right-of-
                            way for new roadways, including support roadways and bypass
                            roadways. The second is through the protection of right-of-way
                            within the existing corridor to allow for hture widenings, access
                            control, and/or intersection improvements. Right-of-way protection
          Paper #3 -        ensures that land is available over the long term to provide for future
     Network Options        road improvements.
                            Pavement rehabilitation contributes to corridor preservation by
                            extending the life of the roadway asset.

                            Access definition. In some cases, the access points for commercial
                            developments, including parking areas, are not well defined,
                            meaning that motorists can use many locations along or around a
                            parcel of land to access the site. This has implications for road safety
                            and mobility along the major corridor, as well as the safety and
                            comfort of pedestrians and cyclists on the network. Improved
                            definition of accesses provides a clearer location for motorists and
                            consolidates vehicle movements at fewer locations (as in driveway

                            Compatible land use and development controls. Comdor
                            preservation can be facilitated through the designation of land uses
                            along a corridor that are compatible with the through function of the
                            corridor. As well, specific development controls on issues such as
                            site access can contribute significantly to the preservation of
                            mobility within major corridors.

                         Priorities have been assigned to the six candidate comdors according to
                         the level of future redevelopment that is anticipated in the area, as well
                         as the level of ‘pressure’ that currently exists for redevelopment. The
                         three priority levels and the comdors assigned to each are described

                            High priority. Corridors that are expected to undergo significant
                            redevelopment within the next five to ten years are identified as high
                            priorities for comdor preservation activities. These corridors may be
                            undergoing some redevelopment at the present time or may be under
                            significant pressure to do so, as a result of the planned SkyTrain
       Novemkr 20.2001
            CIN OF       extension or other City-led planning initiatives. The high-prionty
        COQUITLAM        corridors are North Road, Clarke Road, Austin Avenue, and Pinetree
                         Way. With the exception of Austin Avenue, these corridors will be
         Strategic       significantly affected by redevelopment related to the Port Moody-
    Transportation       Coquitlam SkyTrain extension. The Austin Avenue commercial area
              Plan       is anticipated to be redeveloped into a ‘main street’, characterized by
                         higher density residential and mixed-use development.
      Paper #3 -
                         Medium priority. Comdors that are anticipated to undergo
 Network Options
     Assessment          transition in the medium to long term are identified as medium
                         priorities for comdor preservation. There may be some ongoing
                         redevelopment, but transition to higher densities is anticipated to be
                         more gradual than in the high-priority corridors. The City may be
                         anticipating future planning initiatives to encourage more significant
                         redevelopment. The corridors that have been identified as medium
                         priorities include Brunette Avenue and Barnet / Lougheed Highway.
                         Both are anticipated to become more densely developed in the long
                         term, although some redevelopment is already occurring in these
                         areas, particularly along Brunette Avenue.

                         low priority. Corridors that are anticipated to undergo some
                         redevelopment well into the hture are classified as medium
                         priorities for conidor preservation. They are generally characterized
                         by low-density development today, but are anticipated to undergo
                         transition in the long term, likely after other corridors have been
                         largely redeveloped. Como Lake Avenue is identified as a low

                      2.5 Goods & Services Movement
                     The efficient movement of goods and services within the City of
                     Coquitlam is recognized as being critical to the economic development
                     and long-term prosperity of the municipality. The existing truck route
                     network was established in 1974, but has undergone a number of
                     modifications since then. It is focussed primarily on the movement of
                     goods on large trucks weighing more than 30,000 pounds.

                          The truck route network was initially comprised of provincial truck
                          routes, which are the preferred through routes for truck travel, and
                          municipal truck routes, which provide connections to key industrial
                          areas. Since the establishment of the regional Major Road Network in
UREANS~EMS. and 2000, however, several roads have since changed designation.
 November 20,2001
               611W261 u 1 I - m a l ms
         C T OF    Some former provincial truck routes are now part of the MRN, as are
            M      some former municipal truck routes.
       Strategic   The Strategic Transportation Plan supports the continued mobility of
  Transportation   goods and services through the provision of a more efficient road
           Plan    network. The objective of the STP, however, is not to significantly alter
                   the existing truck route network through the designation of additional
                   routes. Minor modifications are recommended, as discussed below.
     Paper #3 -
Network Options
    Assessment        United Boulevard. Only a portion of United Boulevard is currently
                      included in the truck network. It is recommended that all of United
                      Boulevard be designated as a municipal truck route and that, upon
                      completion of the extension to Brunette Avenue, United Boulevard
                      be included as an MRN truck route. In conjunction with this
                      designation, it is also recommended that King Edward Street south
                      of Highway 1 be designated as an MRN truck route.

                      Como lake Avenue. There is a gap in the truck route network
                      between Lougheed Highway and Westwood Street. It is
                      recommended that this small gap be eliminated by designating Como
                      Lake Avenue between Lougheed Highway and Westwood Street as
                      part of the municipal truck network.

                      Johnson Street was added to the municipal truck route network to
                      provide a local connection to Barnet Highway during the
                      development of Westwood Plateau. Now that the construction of the
                      area is essentially complete, it is recommended that Johnson Street
                      be removed from the designated municipal truck network.

                   In addition to the designated truck routes in the City (provincial, MRN,
                   and municipal), all arterial roadways provide an important connection to
                   local goods destinations. This supporting role of undesignated arterials
                   in the movement of goods is recognized in the Truck Route Bylaw.
                   Through the bylaw, truck drivers are required to use the shortest route
                   along the City’s arterial road network from designated truck routes to
                   access local destinations.

                   Although it is not the intention of the STP to designate all arterial
                   roadways in the City as municipal truck routes, it is recognized that the
                   arterial road network has an important supporting role in the movement
                   of goods and services throughout the City. As such, all arterial roadways
                   should be designed and constructed to accommodate large trucks.
              CIN O
           COQUITLAM            Figure 2.5.1 shows the recommended truck route network for
                                Coquitlam. Highlighted in the diagram are provincial/MRN truck
         Strategic              routes, designated municipal truck routes, and all undesignated arterial
    Transportation              roadways. This network of designated and undesignated roadways
              Plan              provides access to all local industrial areas, as well as other local truck
     Paper #3 -
                                It should be noted that trucks are not prohibited from travelling on other
Network Options
                                undesignated roadways (collectors, local streets, etc.) to access
                                residential areas and other destinations. In such cases, according to the
                                Bylaw, drivers are required to use the shortest route possible from the
                                designated truck network and arterials to reach their destinations.

                                2.6 Summary
                                Table 2.6.1 on the following page summarizes the major and minor road
                                network improvement strategies that are included in the Strategic
                                Transportation Plan. The table identifies the estimated construction
                                costs, as well as preliminary property costs for the major options. As
                                well, the table identifies potential hnding partners for each project, as
                                well as the priority for each. The priority for recommended road
                                network improvements is identified based on existing need, or on needs
                                generated by a linear growth rate in traffic volumes. The
                                implementation strategy section presents the phasing of improvements
                                based on other criteria.

                                The costs for some ‘other’ road improvements have not been included in
                                the summary table. These include improvements that would be hnded
                                entirely by development.

                                Figure 2.6.1 summarizes the recommended long-term road network
                                improvements for Coquitlam. Figure 2.6.2 illustrates the long-term
                                Road Network Plan for Coquitlam. With the exception of the new roads
                                planned for the northern areas of Coquitlam, and the United Boulevard
                                extension, the classification system is unchanged from its existing
                                condition. The collector and local road system will continue to play a
                                critical role in the mobility of residents, particularly in Southwest

   November 20,2001
                    8f150N 1                                                                          2-55
M i n i Paper Ul 1 1-Fh.l doc
I Conceptual cost estimates are order-of-magnihrde and do not include property (except where shown) or other servicing costs Conceptual level costs are not typically used
for project budgeting, which is generally based on functional level plans and designs
2 Some costing is based on 1997 DCC denvation, requiring updating etc
4Minor intersection improvements are recommended at these locations in the short term.
N/A - Cost estimate not aveilable
POCO City of Port Coquitlam
    -                                Fed - federal government            COB- City of Burnaby

                   3. Transit Service Strategy
                   Residents of Coquitlam have identified transit improvements as a key
                   priority to support the planned population and employment growth
                   targets of the Regional Context Statement. This desire was re-affirmed
                   in the goals and objectives for the Strategic Transportation Plan.
      Paper #3 -
                   Prioritizing transit movements, encouraging travel by non-SOV modes,
Network Options    and ensuring that transit supports the future growth of the community
     Assessment    are all key objectives of the Plan.

                   This section of the Strategic Transportation Plan presents a long-term
                   vision for transit services in the City of Coquitlam. Achievement of the
                   goals and objectives set out in earlier stages of the Strategic
                   Transportation Plan will depend on the provision of transit services that
                   offer attractive options to driving for various travel markets. It will also
                   depend on the provision of transit facilities and support measures that
                   enhance the performance and reliability of transit services. The Strategic
                   Transportation Plan focusses on the identification of key long-term
                   services and support strategies for transit in the City of Coquitlam.

                   3.1 Approach
                   The demand for transit services is highly influenced by a combination of
                   factors, including the level and quality of transit service and the land use
                   patterns and transportation systems within the community. The
                   development of a transit system that is tailored to the needs of
                   Coquitlam residents and employees involves consideration of these
                   various key components that make up and influence such a system.

                   It is recognized that the existing responsibility for transit planning in
                   Coquitlam rests with TransLink. However, the City must continue to
                   consider the needs and interests of its residents and businesses in the
                   area of transit and represent those interests to TransLink. This will
                   ensure that, in the long term, transit will meet the needs of the
                   community, while also supporting the City’s future growth and
                   development as part of the regional Growth Concentration Area. The
                   approach for the STP was to establish a long-term vision for transit
                   services within the City and to identify those influencing factors over
                   which the City has some or significant jurisdiction.

                                                                                           3- 1
               CITY OF      The following figure and discussion provides a broad overview of the
         COQUITLAM factors that influence the attractiveness of transit. The discussion
                            identifies those factors that are addressed specifically within the STP.
   Transportation                Figure 3.1.1: Factors Influencing the Attractiveness of Transit

     Paper #3 -
Network Options

                               Transit services are a key determinant of the success of transit. In
                               basic terms, transit service must be attractive in order to generate
                               ridership, and must generate sufficient ridership to become cost-
                               effective and justify more resources. The primary contributors
                               toward attractive transit service levels are coverage (amount of
                               community within walking distance of transit), frequency of service,
                               and directness of routing between key destinations. TransLink
                               establishes coverage and service levels in consultation with the
                               municipalities. The Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan - currently
                               under development - is reviewing all aspects of transit service
                               within the Northeast Sector of the region and is anticipated to
                               propose significant changes to the route structure and service levels
                               throughout the area. To guide future development of the transit
                               system in Coquitlam, this section of the Plan presents a long-term
                               vision for transit services in the City of Coquitlam.

                               Demographic and socio-economic factors, such as age structure
                               of the population, income, and automobile ownership, have a
                               significant influence on the attractiveness of transit. These factors
                               can influence whether riders are ‘captive’, in that they have no
                               alternative to using transit, or ‘choice’, in that they have other
                               transportation options but choose to use transit. In general, transit is
                               most attractive to captive riders, including young people who cannot
URBA-NWEMS                     drive (such as students) and elderly persons, who may be unable to
  November 20,2007
Mhg4 Pqp.rW.f.1-FH1.l dbs
0            C m OF
                       drive. Furthermore, transit use is typically higher in areas where
                       automobile ownership is relatively low and where there are
                       consequently more captive riders. Income is another significant
           Strategic   factor influencing transit use, as regular transit riders tend to have
      Transportation   incomes below average. Although it is most attractive to captive
               Plan    riders, transit can also be made attractive to choice riders by
                       enhancing its competitiveness with the personal automobile.
                       Measures of competitiveness include cost and travel time, among
         Paper #3 -
                       others. Demographic and socio-economic factors are generally
    Network Options
                       guided through planning initiatives, rather than through the Strategic
                       Transportation Plan. Therefore, they are not specifically addressed
                       within the STP.

                       land use patterns - such as type, density, and form - can
                       significantly influence the overall pattern of travel in a region and,
                       consequently, the success of transit. The relationship between land
                       use patterns and transit service levels is critical. For example, higher
                       density mixed-use areas can typically generate high transit ridership,
                       which, in turn, supports attractive levels of service. Conversely, low-
                       density, single-use areas (such as single-family residential) with
                       curvilinear street patterns typically generate single-purpose
                       tipmaking, directional travel patterns, and increased travel times.
                       These characteristics make transit service more costly to provide and
                       generate low ridership. Low ridership discourages the provision of
                       higher frequency service, thereby further discouraging the use of
                       transit. Land use patterns that are oriented to transit (transit-oriented
                       development - TOD) andor pedestrians (pedestrian-oriented
                       development - POD) provide better opportunities for transit success.

                       The availability and .pricing of parking also has a critical influence
                       on the attractiveness of transit. Transit is generally less attractive
                       when there is an abundance of parking available at a destination at
                       little or no cost to the user, as is common in suburban areas.

                       Although this issue is primarily dealt with by land use planners, the
                       influence of land use patterns on travel patterns and transit usage is
                       addressed in Section 3.6.1 under the topic of transit supportive

                       Transportation system. Roads provide accessibility and mobility
                       for all modes of travel. The layout and classification of the road
                       network can affect the quality and attractiveness of transit service in
        ClN OF     a community. Some road network patterns can result in circuitous
     COQU/TLAM     routing for transit vehicles, thereby dramatically increasing travel
                   time and reducing the attractiveness of transit.
  Transportation   The integration of other modes with transit service is also a key
            Plan   determinant of transit success. Bicycle and pedestrian access can be
                   negatively affected by poor road network facilities and linkages that
                   increase cycling or walking distances to transit.
     Paper #3 -
Network Options
                   Although most of Coquitlam is already established and there is little
                   opportunity to modify the layout of the road network significantly,
                   the Road Network section of the STP used transit accessibility as a
                   key criterion in the evaluation of major road network options. The
                   STP also includes Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans, which explicitly
                   address connections to transit facilities for non-motorized modes.
                   Furthermore, this section of the STP identifies potential locations for
                   transit priority measures within the road network to enhance the
                   attractiveness and reliability of transit.

                   Transit supportive measures. Many transit facilities can be
                   enhanced to improve transit travel time and to provide more comfort
                   and convenience to users. These measures would make transit more
                   competitive with the private automobile to attract new riders and
                   encourage existing riders to continue using transit.

                   Examples of transit supportive measures include bus priority
                   measures, which reduce travel time by favouring the movement of
                   transit vehicles over private automobiles, and safe, secure, and
                   comfortable passenger waiting areas (such as bus shelters with
                   adequate illumination and emergency telephones). Furthermore,
                   transit exchanges and park-and-ride facilities, if properly designed,
                   can intercept vehicle trips generated from the periphery of the transit
                   service area and provide convenient access to transit by all modes.
                   They also serve as major transfer locations between transit services.

                   Transit priority and transit supportive measures are critical aspects of
                   the transit system over which municipalities have a significant
                   amount of jurisdiction and influence. Candidate transit priority
                   measures for Coquitlam are considered in Section 3.5, and transit
                   supportive measures are addressed in Section 3.6.

              CIN OF    0   Travel patterns are influenced by the location of population and
           COQUITLAM        employment and strongly influence the success of transit service.
                            For the purposes of transit planning, it is important to understand the
                            current patterns of travel, including:
                                how much travel is occurring
            Working             why people travel
         Paper #3 -         0   when people travel
    Network Options         0   where people travel
        Assessment          0   how people travel

                            Municipalities can support transit through policy levers that
                            influence travel patterns, encourage the use of non-automobile
                            modes, and discourage travel by single-occupant vehicle. The broad
                            range of measures that can be applied to achieve these objectives is
                            known as Transportation Demand Management (TDM). Many
                            municipalities, as well as TransLink, are developing TDM programs
                            as an alternative to continually providing additional road capacity,
                            which serves to increase the demand for automobile travel.
                            Transportation Demand Management is addressed in Section 5.4 of
                            the STP.

                        3.2 Strategic Transit Initiatives
                        Within the City of Coquitlam, there are several transit initiatives that
                        need to be advanced to ensure the long-term success of transit. All of
                        them are important components of the Strategic Transportation Plan,
                        and overall Oficial Community Plan. These initiatives are described

                        0   Port Moody-Coquitlam SkyTrain. The provision of SkyTrain
                            between Lougheed Station and Coquitlam Regional Town Centre is
                            hndamental to meeting the transportation needs of the City and for
                            achieving growth targets. In addition to the provision of high speed
                            and fiequent service to residents and businesses within the City, the
                            six station areas at Lougheed, Burquitlam, Falcon, Coquitlam
                            Station, Lincoln, and the Town Centre will become key growth
                            nodes for population and employment. Both the STP and OCP are
                            founded on the premise that SkyTrain would be operational within
                            the next ten years.
     November 20.2007
            ClTY OF         Fare structure review. The City is currently outside the fare zone
         COQUI TLAM
                            for Vancouver, Burnaby, and New Westminster. In other words, the
                            cost of a trip to downtown Vancouver for someone residing east of
                            North Road is $1.00 more (cash fare) than for residents on the west
                            side of North Road. The current fare structure is generally referred to
                            as a form of distance-based fare system, but there may be better
                            alternatives that reflect the transportation and land use goals for the
     Paper #3 -             Northeast Sector. The City should encourage a review of the fare
Network Options             structure to reflect similar revenue principles balanced with other
    Assessment              planning goals for the Region.

                            Service delivery review. The residents of Coquitlam have clearly
                            expressed a desire to have a transit system that serves a broader
                            target market economically. Similar to experiences of other suburban
                            North American communities, this cannot be achieved through the
                            provision of only conventional buses operating on fixed routes and
                            fixed schedules. After the completion of the Northeast Sector Area
                            Transit Plan, the City may wish to investigate alternative methods of
                            delivering the range of services needed to attract a growing portion
                            of the travel market either with TransLink or independently.

                            B-Line service. A B-Line service is planned for implementation in
                            2002 to provide a frequent and fast connection between Lougheed
                            SkyTrain Station and Coquitlam Regional Town Centre and Station.
                            The current plan is for this route to operate along North Road,
                            Clarke Road, St. Johns Street, Ioco Road, Ungless Way, Guildford
                            Way, and Pinetree Way. B-Line services offer limited stops, with
                            stops generally located at key activity centres or transfer points with
                            other transit services. In the short term, it is anticipated that this
                            route would operate at a 10-minute frequency throughout the day. It
                            is anticipated that this service would provide an attractive connection
                            to the Millennium SkyTrain line and serve to build transit ridership
                            in the Regional Town Centre and Guilford Way areas.

                            Area Transit Planning. As part of its Strategic Transportation Plan,
                            TransLink implemented the Area Transit Planning process, through
                            which transit services within seven sub-areas of the Greater
                            Vancouver region are reviewed every three years. Two or three sub-
                            areas are reviewed every year, such that the process is repeated over
                            a three-year cycle. The Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan - which
                            includes Coquitlam - was initiated in 2000 and is planned for
  November 20,2007
IvonlpPaparru f 1-FlMldoc
             CIN O
                 F        completion in early 2002. It is anticipated that this process will lead
           COQUITLAM      to significant changes in the structure and delivery of bus services
                          within the City. Some of these changes are described below in
         Strategic        Section 3.3. The City should ensure the implementation of the Plan
    Transportation        as supported by the community, and provide input and guidance on
                          ongoing performance reviews and refinements, as well as future
                          service expansions.
       Paper #3 -
 Network Options
      Assessment       3.3 Short-Term Service Improvements
                       The existing transit services within the City - described in Working
                       Paper # 1 - are the direct result of a series of changes and additions to
                       bus services over a long period of time. The resulting Citywide transit
                       network is not as effective or as efficient as it could be. Residents of the
                       Coquitlam have identified a number of issues as part of the Northeast
                       Sector Area Transit Plan. The issues include:

                          Frequency of service. Members of the public consistently identify
                          service frequency as a serious concern. Of the 23 bus routes
                          operating to, from, and within Coquitlam, only seven operate at a
                          frequency better than 30 minutes during peak periods. Market
                          research confirms that peak period transit service becomes
                          significantly more attractive at frequencies of 15 minutes or better.
                          During midday periods, 11 of 19 routes operate at a frequency of 30
                          minutes or better, which is considered by the public to be the
                          maximum desirable frequency for off-peak service. The remaining
                          eight midday routes operate at 60-minute headways or poorer.
                          Evening service in Coquitlam is generally poorer, with only four of
                          14 routes operating at 30-minute frequencies.

                          Hours of service. Through the Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan,
                          many people identified the hours of operation of several local routes
                          as a concern. Currently, there is very little transit service to northern
                          portions of Coquitlam in the evenings and on Sundays. There is no
                          evening or Sunday service on Westwood Plateau and very limited
                          service to the Lafarge Park and Northeast Coquitlam areas in the
                          evenings and on Sundays.

                          Circuitous routing. Many transit users identified the indirectness of
URSNMMS.                  regional bus routes in Southwest Coquitlam as a significant issue.
   Nowmber 20,2001
              CITY OF    Passengers travelling longer distances prefer routes that are as direct
        COQUITLAM        and fast as possible and do not detour through residential
                         neighbourhoods or double back upon themselves. Several of the
        Strategic        regional routes serving travel to and from Burnaby and Vancouver -
   Transportation        most notably Routes 151 and 152 - are quite circuitous through the
            Plan         Southwest Coquitlam area. For example, Route 152 serves
                         Riverview Hospital and the Dartmoor neighbourhood, as well as the
                         Coquitlam Recreation Centre. Consequently, the route is serving
     Paper #3 -
                         both local and regional travel functions, which may be conflicting.
Network Options
                         Route deviations from the arterial road network to serve local
                         destinations add travel time and reduce the attractiveness of transit
                         for passengers that are travelling regionally.

                         Complexity of service. There are a number of design features that
                         make transit network in Coquitlam relatively complex. For example,
                         all routes serving the northern portions of Coquitlam (Westwood
                         Plateau and Northeast Coquitlam) operate as one-way loop services
                         to and from Coquitlam Station or Port Coquitlam Centre. This can
                         be confusing for users and adds travel time for those that have to
                         travel the long way around the loop to reach their destination. The
                         routes serving Northeast Coquitlam are additionally complicated, in
                         that two routes serve essentially two distinct routes each (two route
                         numbers serving four different routes). In all parts of Coquitlam,
                         many routes operate with variable routing, such that the routing
                         changes depending on the time of day. All of these aspects of
                         Coquitlam’s transit service are complicated for passengers and make
                         transit less attractive to infiequent and non-transit riders.

                         Connections. The reliability of connections between local and
                         regional bus services and between buses and West Coast Express is
                         another significant concern for the public. Missed connections can
                         cause considerable delays, particularly if service frequency on the
                         connecting service is low and the passenger is required to wait
                         outside (unsheltered) for the next bus. The Coquitlam Station
                         exchange is the most commonly identified location where
                         connections are unreliable. Unreliable connections often result from
                         traffic delays encountered on the road network and can be improved
                         by providing transit priority measures (such as bus queue jumpers
                         and/or transit-actuated signals) at locations of recurring network
  Novem&r 20,2001
           aiiwaa i
wonmgp.prui i-F*l.ldoe
0               F
            ClW O
                          Transit vehicles. Many transit users recognize that several transit
                          routes in Coquitlam do not generate sufficient ridership to justify the
                          use of full-size (40-foot) buses. Participants in the public
                          consultation programs for the Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan
                          suggested that the use of smaller transit vehicles, such as mini-buses
                          or shared taxis, in lower density residential areas could improve the
                          chance for the success of transit. Many also recognized that smaller
         Paper #3 -       vehicles could enable TransLink to provide higher frequency service
    Network Options       and more flexible routings on some local services. The areas in
        Assessment        Coquitlam that were most commonly mentioned as potential
                          Community Shuttle areas included Westwood Plateau and Northeast

                       To address the above issues, the Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan will
                       propose significant changes to the bus services in the area. These
                       changes will occur over the next few years. Key areas of improvement
                       will include the following:

                          More direct regional services. Regional bus services - connecting
                          Coquitlam with other municipalities and SkyTrain - will be
                          redesigned to provide more direct service. These services will no
                          longer deviate significantly from the arterial road network to serve
                          residential areas andor local destinations. For examples, route 152
                          will no longer serve Riverview Hospital, the Dartmoor
                          neighbourhood, or the Coquitlam Recreation Centre. Instead, it will
                          operate primarily along Austin Avenue and Mariner Way between
                          Coquitlam Station and Lougheed SkyTrain Station, This
                          modification improves travel time by approximately 10 minutes.

                          Improved frequency. The Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan will
                          propose significant increases in service frequencies on many routes.
                          In particular, frequencies on many regional routes will be doubled,
                          so that service on many routes is provided at least every 15 minutes
                          during peak periods. During off-peak periods, most regional routes
                          will operate at 30-minute frequencies or better. Service frequencies
                          on local routes will also be improved by providing two-way service
                          on many loop routes, as described below.

                          Community Shuttle. All local services - providing service entirely
                          within the City of Coquitlam - will be converted to Community
                          Shuttle services. Most local services would operate on a fixed-route,

        ClTY OF       fixed-schedule basis, using smaller vehicles that are more
     COQUlTLAM        ‘neighbourhood-friendly’.In some cases in northern Coquitlam.
                      evening service would be provided on a ‘dial-a-ride’ basis, whereby
       Strategic      passengers wishing to travel would call a central dispatcher and
  Transportation      request pick-up at a local bus stop. A small vehicle (such as a
            Plan      shared-ride taxi, taxi-van, or mini-bus) would then pick up the
                      passenger and deliver himher to a key transit hub, such as
                      Coquitlam Station.
     Paper #3 -
Network Options
    Assessment        Simpler service design. The Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan
                      will propose a major re-design of services throughout Coquitlam in
                      order to simplify the existing route structure. All one-way loop
                      services will be converted to two-way services, which will
                      significantly improve travel time for passengers who currently have
                      to travel the ‘long way’ around the loop to reach their destination. In
                      addition, variations in routing throughout the day will be reduced
                      and the design of services in Northeast Coquitlam will be simplified.

                   3.4 Long-Term Transit Services
                   Although planning for transit services within Coquitlam is primarily a
                   responsibility of TransLink - such as through the Area Transit Planning
                   process - the City must continue to address long-term transit service
                   needs to support growth and development in the municipality. These
                   needs can then be emphasized with TransLink in ongoing and future
                   transit planning initiatives. In addition to providing guidance on future
                   transit services within the municipality, the City can also identify and
                   plan potential support strategies and measures - such as transit
                   exchanges, bus priority measures, and other support measures - over
                   which it does have some jurisdiction. The Strategic Transportation Plan
                   represents an opportunity to identify such measures.

                   This section of the Plan provides an overview of the types of long-term
                   transit services that may be developed within the City to support
                   planned growth and development.

                   It is anticipated that the short-term changes resulting from the Northeast
                   Sector Area Transit Plan will enhance bus services for local and
                   regional travel markets and will provide attractive options to driving for
                   many residents of the City. In the longer term, however, the City will
                   also see the implementation of rail transit (SkyTrain) to Coquitlam
                   Regional Town Centre. The City will want to further enhance and
0           ClTY O
                       expand transit services and facilities to support the rail extension and to
                       meet the growing demands of the community. In Northeast Coquitlam,
                       for example, the City will want to ensure the provision of attractive
           Strategic   regional and local transit services in the long term, and will want to
      Transportation   provide attractive options to driving as the community expands. Within
               Plan    the existing areas of Coquitlam, the City will want to see significant
                       increases in the levels of service to support further growth in the
                       Regional Town Centre and Southwest Coquitlam areas. Consistent with
         Paper #3 -
                       these changes, Figures 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 conceptually illustrate the long-
    Network Options
                       term transit network that could be provided in the City and highlight the
                       importance of several key corridors in the provision of transit services.
                       Key components of the long-term transit strategy are described below.

                          Activity centres and transit exchanges. The transit system in the
                          City will concentrate on serving the Coquitlam Regional Town
                          Centre, other major activity centres, and major exchange facilities,
                          all of which represent the largest generators of transit trips. In
                          addition to the Coquitlam Regional Town Centre, other commercial
                          areas within which transit trips will be significant in the future
                          include the Burquitlam and Lougheed Station Areas, Maillardville,
                          Austin Heights, and the commercial core of Northeast Coquitlam.

                          In. addition to these major activity centres, the long-term transit
                          services will be concentrated on providing direct and frequent
                          connections to key transit exchanges, primarily at the planned
                          SkyTrain Stations at Braid, Lougheed, Burquitlam, Falcon,
                          Coquitlam Station, Lincoln, and the Town Centre. It should be
                          recognized that, aside from the existing park-and-ride lot at
                          Coquitlam Station, no additional park-and-ride facilities are
                          anticipated within the City.

                          Primary bus corridors provide direct connections along the arterial
                          road network between activity centres and major transit exchanges,
                          including regional transit facilities in other municipalities. Bus
                          services in these corridors would generally be provided at high
                          frequencies and with improved passenger amenities (such as
                          enhanced stops). Primary transit corridors would also be prime
                          candidates for transit priority measures to improve reliability and
                          travel time. The following corridors have been identified as primary
                          transit corridors:

                              Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway
                                                                                             3-1 1
                                Cape Horn interchange / Port Mann Bndge (for service to/from
       strategic                Surrey)
  Transportation                Southerly Coquitlam River crossing to connect Coquitlam Regional
                                Town Centre with Northeast Coquitlam
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options           Conventional transit corridors provide direct connections along
       Assessment            arterial and collector roadways between local and regional
                             destinations. Although frequencies in these corridors would also be
                             high, bus services would generally be provided using conventional
                             vehicles and stop facilities. Limited transit priority measures could
                             be employed in specific locations to enhance reliability and bypass
                             key network bottlenecks. Several corridors through Coquitlam have
                             been identified as conventional transit comdors. These are illustrated
                             in Figure 3.4.1.

                             Neighbourhood service areas. Most of the remaining areas of the
                             City have been designated as neighbourhood service areas. These are
                             areas where transit would be provided using either conventional
                             buses or smaller vehicles, depending on the demand for transit in
                             each area. In some areas, neighbourhood services could be provided
                             on a fixed-route, fixed-schedule basis or a demand-responsive basis.
                             Again, the nature of service is dependent on the demand for transit.
                             Conventional bus services would be provided along arterial and
                             collector roadways wherever possible, whereas smaller vehicle
                             transit services could potentially operate along residential streets and
                             into community centres and/or commercial developments.

                          3.5 Transit Priority Strategies
                          Transit priority strategies are intended to provide priority access for
                          transit vehicles at intersections and bridgeheads, and to reduce delays to
                          transit vehicles by allowing them to bypass congestion. Experience in
                          Greater Vancouver and other communities has demonstrated that transit
                          priority measures can achieve a number of significant operational and
                          customer service benefits. In particular, the provision of transit priority
                          strategies in Coquitlam would serve to make transit more competitive
                          with driving by providing the following benefits:

                             Reduced bus travel times. Transit users and non-users often cite
                             lengthy travel times on transit - as compared to automobile travel -
                             as a significant deterrent to using transit. Transit priority measures
URUNMEMS.                    can reduce bus travel times along a roadway, thereby improving the
      Novunber 2001
            . 1 1 0 ~ 1

                          comnetitiveness of transit versus the automobile. The operational
                          bene'fit of reduced travel time is that the number of buses required to
  Transportation          provide a certain level of service could be reduced.
          Working          Improved reliability. A second significant concern of transit users
Paper #3 Network
                           and non-users is reliability of transit services, particularly where
       Assessment          connections between transit services are involved. Transit pnority
                           measures can improve reliability by reducing the variation in bus
                           travel times along a roadway. A reduction in travel time variations
                           enables transfer connections between services to be made with
                           greater certainty. From an operational standpoint, this improved
                           reliability allows schedules to be 'tightened', which could result in
                           improved efficiency and reduced operating costs.
                        3.5.1      Types of Transit Priority Measures
                        A wide variety of transit priority measures has been developed and
                        implemented in North American transit systems. These measures are
                        designed to provide some form of priority over general purpose traffic
                        for transit vehicles through the use of physical, regulatory, traffic
                        control, or other techniques to achieve the desired operational and
                        service improvements. An overview of transit priority measures that
                        have been considered for Coquitlam is provided below.

                           Bus lanes are a common form of transit priority and have been used
                           successfully in some locations in Greater Vancouver, as well as
                           many other North American cities. There are various configurations
                           for bus lanes, such as 'with-flow' bus lanes, contra-flow bus lanes,
                           and freeway bus lanes.

                           Queue bypass lanes or queue jumpers (Figure 3.5.1) are an effective
                           form of transit priority at heavily congested locations. Examples of
                           queue jumpers include the following:

                                At the approach to a congested intersection, a bus-only lane can be
                                used to allow buses to travel to the intersection and a short bus-only
                                signal phase can be provided to enable buses to proceed through the
                                intersection ahead of general-purpose traffic.

                                At intersections with a free-flowing nght-turn lane, the lane can be
                                designated as 'right-turn only except buses' to allow buses to continue
                                straight through the intersection Some geometnc modifications may
URBANSYSTEMS                    be required to facilitate the through movement.
                                                                                                  3-13    0
       Strategic         At congested freeway interchanges, a bus-only lane can be used to
  Transportation         allow buses to advance to the front of the congested area. Special
                         geometnc modifications, signage, or metenng control signals may be
                         used to enable buses to merge into the general traffic lanes.
Paper #3   - Networ
          Options                                                                Rt
                                                    1N1 T
                                      Right turn only
                                        except bur

                                 - ---          -

                      Traffic signal priority for transit has been used in several cities to
                      improve transit operations through one or more signalized
                      intersections. Examples of traffic signal priority are described below.

                         Existing traffic signals can be retrofitted with bus detectors upstream
                         of the signalized intersections to provide extended green traffic signals
                         for transit vehicles.

                         If a separate transit lane is available, a separate set of signals can be
                         provided for transit vehicles to permit buses to proceed through the
                         intersection in advance of general-purpose traffic.

                         Traffic signals can be linked and be adaptive to real-time traffic
                         conditions in comdors with significant transit volumes. Although such
                         a system may not explicitly recognize transit operations, improved
                         traffic operations overall may benefit transit vehicles as well.

                         Certain traffic signals may be activated only by buses. Detector
                         devices must be installed on the bus or embedded in the approach lane
                         to trigger a signal change. Bus-activated signals may be used to
                         improve access to and egress from off-street transit exchanges.

     ClrVOF COQUWLAM   3.5.2     Transit Priority Locations
  Transportation       The City of Coquitlam should support the development of a
            Plan       transportation system that enhances transit service and makes it a more
           Working     attractive mode for a wider range of trip purposes. Support can be
Paper #3 -Network      provided from a Citywide level down to a corridor- or intersection-
       Assessment      specific level.

                       At a Citywide level, the City should develop a policy to ultimately make
                       all signal controllers compatible with transit priority technology, such as
                       vehicle recognition and signal pre-emption. This would establish some
                       level of transit priority on all transit corridors and bus routes throughout
                       the City.

                       At the corridor or intersection level, the City should develop more
                       advanced measures for transit priority. Several corridors within
                       Coquitlam currently accommodate significant volumes of transit
                       vehicles and are anticipated to carry more transit traffic in the future:
                       These corridors also carry significant general-purpose traffic volumes
                       during peak periods, which can create significant delays for transit
                       vehicles. This negatively affects the reliability and the overall
                       attractiveness of transit as a competitive option to the private
                       automobile. The following discussion identifies potential corridors and
                       intersections throughout Coquitlam for the implementation of transit
                       priority measures.
                       North Road
                       Five bus routes currently operate along North Road between Austin
                       Avenue and Cameron Street. In the medium term, B-Line service will
                       replace one of these routes (route 147) and the service frequency on all
                       routes will increase significantly. The combined frequency of service
                       along North Road immediately north of Austin Avenue will be in the
                       range of 2-3 minutes during peak periods. After completion of the
                       Millennium SkyTrain line, north-south transit services will continue
                       south of Austin Avenue (past the existing Lougheed transit exchange) to
                       Government Place to access Lougheed Station. A traffic signal is to be
                       installed at the Government Place intersection to facilitate bus
                       movements into and out of the station area. However, two additional
                       locations in the corridor have been identified for potential transit
                       priority measures to accommodate the significant volume of bus transit
                       within the corridor.

                     0   Austin Avenue. The Austin Avenue / North Road intersection is
       Strategic         expected to operate at marginal levels of service into the future,
  Transportation         despite modifications identified in Section 2.3. This will create
                         delays for north-south transit services along North Road. Currently,
                         the intersection provides exclusive right-turn ‘drop’ lanes in both the
Paper #3 - Networ
           Optrons       northbound and southbound directions (curb travel lanes become
       Assessment        right turn-only lanes). It is recommended that, at minimum, the
                         exclusive right-turn lanes be made available to buses travelling
                         through the intersection. On the northbound side of the intersection,
                         this might require modifications to the existing parking lane to allow
                         buses to merge back into the centre lane. The cost for this
                         modification would be minimal. However, it should be recognized
                         that pedestrian traffic conflicting with right-turning vehicles would
                         delay transit vehicles using the right-turn lanes.
                         To mitigate the impacts of pedestrian conflicts with right-turning
                         vehicles, it would be desirable to provide bus-only through lanes at
                         the intersection in the longer term. These would be provided by
                         constructing northbound and southbound right-turn bays outside the
                         bus lanes. This modification would require property acquisition and
                         road widening in two quadrants of the intersection. Exclusive of
                         property costs, this modification would cost approximately
                         ! 180,000.

                     0   Cameron Street. The Cameron Street / North Road intersection is
                         also anticipated to operate with moderate delays in the future,
                         particularly if the recommended intersection modifications are not
                         implemented by the City of Burnaby. Because North Road is already
                         constructed as a six-lane cross-section in this area, it is
                         recommended that the curb lanes be used as transit queue jumpers at
                         this location. On the northbound side, on-street parking would have
                         to be restricted in the vicinity of the intersection during peak periods
                         as a minimum. On the southbound side, the curb lane would be
                         designated as a right turn-only lane with an exception for buses. This
                         modification would allow buses to bypass north-south queues on
                         North Road and could be accomplished at low cost.

                         In the longer term, it would be desirable to provide a southbound
                         right-turn bay in addition to a bus-only through lane. This
                         modification would be similar to that described for the Austin
                         Avenue intersection and would require property acquisition and road

     CIiY OF c O Q U X 4 M
                                 widening. The cost of the modification, exclusive of property costs,
       Strategic                 would be approximately $80,000.
                             A hrther option to the above measures would be to convert the existing
           Working           curb parking lanes on North Road to transit lanes between Austin
Paper #3 -Network
           Options           Avenue and Cottonwood Avenue, particularly during peak periods. This
       Assessment            would necessitate the removal of on-street parking on North Road, the
                             effects of which would have to be evaluated in more detail in a separate
                             review. Nonetheless, this would represent a low-cost method of
                             improving transit movements through the North Road corridor.
                             Clarke Road

                             Three bus routes currently travel on Clarke Road south of Como Lake
                             Avenue. In the medium term, Clarke Road will accommodate B-Line
                             service and increased frequencies on other routes. In the longer term,
                             SkyTrain service will replace the B-Line, but other bus routes may be
                             realigned to terminate at Burquitlam Station. Therefore, the provision of
                             transit priority measures at the Clarke Road / Como Lake Avenue
                             intersection will be considered as part of the Burquitlam Station Area
                             Plan, and are not considered further in the STP.
                             Lower Lougheed Highway (Brunette to Coleman)

                             Three bus routes currently travel along Lougheed Highway immediately
                             east of Brunette Avenue. In the medium term, it is anticipated that three
                             routes will continue to use this section of Lougheed Highway, but that
                             service frequencies will be increased. The combined frequency on the
                             three routes in the short term will be approximately five minutes during
                             peak periods. This level of service is anticipated to increase in the long
                             term. It should also be noted that the Lougheed Highway corridor has
                             been identified in the long-term transit strategy as a ‘primary transit
                             corridor’ (see Section 3.3 and Figure 3.3.1). There are four locations
                             along this segment of Lougheed Highway where transit priority
                             measures should be considered, as discussed below. It should be noted
                             that the most significant congestion problems are experienced in the
                             westbound direction on Lougheed Highway, so the measures discussed
                             below are designed to accommodate westbound bus movements.

                             0   Brunette Avenue. All three bus routes on Lougheed Highway will
                                 turn left from westbound Lougheed on to Brunette Avenue en-route
                                 to Braid SkyTrain. As this left-turn movement is the most congested
                                 movement in the area (as discussed in the Road Network Plan), there

                      will be significant delays to transit vehicles until modifications or
      Strategic       transit priority measures are implemented. In the longer term, it is
Transportation        anticipated that transit priority measures would be incorporated into
                      any grade separation measures for this movement, as discussed in
                      Section 2.2.2.
   Assessment         In the medium term, however, consideration could be given to
                      accommodating bus movements on a bus-only ‘jug handle’ (similar
                      to a highway off-ramp loop or ‘cloverleaf ). Westbound buses could
                      turn right off of Lougheed Highway just west of the intersection and
                      subsequently continue across Lougheed southwestbound on Brunette
                      Avenue. This measure would require a significant property
                      acquisition north of the Brunette Avenue I Lougheed Highway
                      intersection. One option would be to wait until the property is being
                      prepared for redevelopment (i.e., existing properties are vacated or
                      put up for sale) and use the transit ramp as an interim measure
                      pending further modifications at the intersection (such as grade

                      Woolridge Street. The addition of a westbound right-turn bay
                      approaching Woolridge Street could enhance westbound bus
                      movements through this intersection. The right-turn lane could be
                      made available to buses travelling through the intersection. It should
                      be noted that the right-turn bay would have to be sufficiently long to
                      allow buses to bypass queues on Lougheed Highway. This
                      modification would require property acquisition on the north side of
                      the roadway and partial removal of the existing raised island for the
                      channelized right-turn lane.

                      King Edward Street. This intersection could be modified in a similar
                      manner to the Woolridge Street intersection, whereby the westbound
                      right-turn bay would be made available to through buses. In this
                      case, the right-turn bay already exists, so modifications would be
                      less extensive and property acquisition would be minimal. The
                      modification would require the partial or complete removal of the
                      raised channelization islands.
                      Schoolhouse Street. The westbound curb lane on Lougheed
                      Highway is dropped as a dedicated right-turn lane approaching
                      Schoolhouse Street. Transit priority could be implemented by
                      partially removing the raised islands for the channelization and
                      permitting buses to use the right turn-only lane to travel through the
   N o m b a r ZOO1

                                intersection. As in the case of King Edward Street, this modification
                                would not be extensive and would not require property acquisition.
             Plan            At the Woolridge Street, King Edward Street, and Schoolhouse Street
                             intersections, westbound buses would benefit from advanced green
                             phases for buses only. This would permit buses to travel through the
         Assessment          intersections in advance of general traffic and allow them to merge into
                             the westbound through lanes downstream of the intersections without
                             delay. To achieve these benefits, stops at these intersections would
                             likely have to be relocated to the near side (upstream) of the
                             Austin Avenue

                             In the long term, it is anticipated that Austin Avenue will become a
                             significant comdor for frequent conventional transit services, providing
                             key connections to Coquitiam Regional Town Centre and Lougheed
                             Station. Because the Austin Heights area is expected to undergo some
                             rejuvenation over the medium to long term, there will be increasing
                             automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic using the Austin Avenue
                             corridor. To ensure that transit is not unduly delayed by other traffic, it
                             is recommended that the Austin Avenue comdor incorporate transit
                             priority measures. Austin Avenue represents an opportunity to
                             implement transit priority measures on a corridor-wide basis. Physical        0
                             transit priority measures are generally not recommended for the
                             corridor. Instead, it is recommended that signal pre-emption measures
                             be considered for all signalized intersections along the comdor,
                             including Blue Mountain Street, Nelson Street, Marmont Street,
                             Gatensbury Street, Schoolhouse Street, Poirier Street, Laurentian Street,
                             and Mundy Street. These measures would extend green time along
                             Austin Avenue or shorten green time on cross-streets to improve transit
                             travel time along the corridor.
                             Upper Lougheed Corridor (Cape Horn to Barnet Highway)

          As mentioned in the preceding discussion on the Lower Lougheed
          corridor, the entire Lougheed Highway comdor has been identified as a
          primary transit corridor in the long term. Extensive transit priority
          and/or HOV measures were considered for the Upper Lougheed conidor
          - primanly through highway widening and/or relocation. However,
          physical constraints - including topography to the west and the CP
          Railway and Coquitlam River to the east - would make modifications
          so costly that the costs would far outweigh any benefits that could be
        November 2001
  Working Paperm
                                                                                                   3-19    0
                     realized. Consequently, only two locations in the corridor have been
       Strategic     identified for transit priority measures.
                        Cape Horn interchange. Currently, no buses use the Cape Horn
Paper #3 - Networ
                        interchange or the Port Mann Bridge. However, a new bus route has
           Options      been included in the South of Fraser Area Transit Plan and the
       Assessment       Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan to connect Coquitlam Station
                        with Surrey City Centre. TransLink has recognized that delays on
                        the approaches to the Port Mann Bridge are a significant constraint
                        to this route, and that transit priority measures should be
                        implemented prior to the route becoming operational. Although the
                        northbound approach (in Surrey) is considered more problematic,
                        there is an opportunity to provide a bus queue jumper on the
                        southbound approach to the bridge (in Coquitlam).

                        A queue jumper would be established by permitting buses to travel
                        westbound on Lougheed Highway beyond the diverge for traffic
                        travelling toward the Cape Horn interchange to access eastbound
                        Highway 1 and the Port Mann Bridge (at the United Boulevard /
                        Cape Hom Avenue intersection). Buses could then access the Cape
                        Horn interchange from Lougheed Highway at the location where
                        general traffic crosses the overpass over eastbound Lougheed
                        Highway (north of Highway 1). This would require the addition of a
                        bus deceleration lane on westbound Lougheed Highway, removal of
                        the existing bamer, and some provision for bus acceleration on to
                        the Lougheed Highway overpass. A bus-activated signal could be
                        used to temporarily stop eastbound traffic to allow buses to enter the
                        traffic flow.

                        Coquitlam Station access. Currently, buses cannot access Coquitlam
                        Station from northbound Lougheed Highway and cannot leave the
                        station by turning left on to northbound Lougheed. This restriction
                        requires northbound buses on Lougheed to travel via Dewdney
                        Trunk Avenue, Manner Way, and Barnet Highway to access the
                        station. Moreover, departing northbound and eastbound buses must
                        travel via Mariner Way and Bamet Highway to reach Pinetree Way
                        or eastbound Lougheed Highway. This results in additional travel
                        time for passengers and reduced effrciency for transit operations.
                        The City may examine the provision of a bus-activated signal at the
                        Coquitlam Station access on Lougheed Highway. This modification
                        would require installation of signals and modifications to the
     Orv OF CoqurrlaM      intersection. This would pemiit full movements for buses at the
       Strategic           intersection and would provide significant benefits, in terms of travel
  Transportation           time, to both passengers and Coast Mountain Bus Company.
                           Because the access is in close proximity to the Barnet Highway /
                           Lougheed Highway / Pinetree Way intersection, signal operations at
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options         the two locations should be coordinated.
                        Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway Corridor
                        The Barnet Highway / Lougheed Highway comdor already
                        accommodates significant transit volumes and is identified as a primary
                        transit corridor for the long term. Because traffic congestion is a
                        recurring issue in the corridor, and will only be alleviated through major
                        improvements, transit priority measures should be considered for the
                        area, for both the short term and the long term. It should be recognized
                        that, although the extension of the Bamet / Hastings HOV lanes through
                        Coquitlam and to the east is considered an important initiative, it should
                        be reviewed as part of a regional assessment with the involvement of
                        neighbouring municipalities. For the purposes of transit priority,
                        however, two locations have been identified.

                           Johnson Street. Many transit vehicles travel eastbound and
                           westbound along Bamet Highway at this location, and a substantial
                           number of buses travel northbound on Johnson Street approaching
                           Bamet Highway as they approach or leave Coquitlam Station.
                           Therefore, this location provides good opportunities for enhancing
                           transit service through priority measures. However, the installation
                           of a bus-activated signal at the east access to and from Coquitlam
                           Station on Lougheed Highway would significantly alter bus travel
                           patterns around the station. For this reason, it is recommended that
                           transit priority at the Barnet Highway / Johnson Street intersection
                           be limited to signal pre-emption measures. These could be
                           implemented at relatively low cost, as compared to physical
                           modifications to the intersection.

                            Lougheed Highway / Pinetree Way. This intersection accommodates
                            a significant amount of transit traffic. Recurring congestion on all
                            approaches to the intersection creates delays for transit vehicles,
                            thereby affecting service reliability and connections to other services
                            at Coquitlam Station. Transit priority measures - such as signal pre-
                            emption measures - should be considered for the intersection in the
                            short or medium term. In the longer term, however, physical transit
                            priority measures should be integrated into the design for grade
                                                                                              3-2 1
                           separation at the intersection. This could include priority access for
       Strategic           buses to and from on- and off-ramps at the intersection, and/or
  Transportation           additional signal pre-emption measures.

Paper #3
            wofkrna Pinetree Way is a primary transit corridor within the Regional Town
           - Networ
          Options            Way
      Assessment        Centre and its importance will increase in the future as the Regional
                        Town Centre is developed and SkyTrain is implemented. Up to seven
                        bus routes will operate along Pinetree Way between Bamet Highway
                        and Lincoln Avenue if the Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan proposals
                        are implemented. It will also become an important transit connection for
                        services to the Northeast Coquitlam area after one or both of the
                        proposed Coquitlam River crossings is completed. Concurrent with
                        development in the Regional Town Centre and Northeast Coquitlam
                        areas, however, will be a significant increase in north-south traffic
                        volumes through the Regional Town Centre area, particularly along
                        Pinetree Way. This growth will advance the need for transit priority
                        measures along Pinetree Way to avoid significant delays caused by
                        general-purpose traffic in the corridor. Two locations have been
                        identified for potential transit priority measures.

                           Lincoln Avenue extends eastward from Pinetree Way and is
                           identified as a primary transit corridor for future services between
                           the Regional Town Centre and Northeast Coquitlam. Extending
                           westward from the intersection is a driveway for the Coquitlam
                           Centre Mall. Pinetree Way at this location is seven lanes wide, with
                           six north-south through lanes plus left-turn bays for both directions.
                           Transit priority could be implemented by dedicating the northbound
                           and southbound curb lanes for right turns only for general traffic,
                           with exceptions for transit vehicles travelling through the
                           intersection. Although this would have a significant impact on traffic
                           operations for north-south through movements, analysis indicates
                           that the intersection would continue to operate at marginal levels of
                           service during peak periods. This modification could be achieved at
                           a low cost.
                           In the longer term, it would be desirable to provide bus-only through
                           lanes at the intersection to mitigate the impacts of pedestrians
                           impeding right-turning vehicles: Bus-only lanes would be provided
                           by constructing northbound and southbound right-turn bays outside
                           the bus lanes. This modification would require property acquisition
                           and road widening in two quadrants of the intersection, thereby
      November 2001
     C m OF CoouiruM       requiring a significant capital investment. The capital cost, exclusive
       Strategic           of property acquisition costs. would be approximately $150,000.
                       a   Glen Drive. Currently, Pinetree Way is seven lanes wide at the Glen
           Working         Drive intersection. On the northbound side, the curb lane becomes a
Paper #3 -Network
           Options         right turn-only lane approaching the intersection with a parking lane
       Assessment          continuing on the north side. On the southbound side, the curb lane
                           is a shared throughlright-turn lane. Transit priority would be
                           implemented by allowing buses to travel northbound through the
                           intersection in the right turn-only curb lane. This would necessitate
                           the elimination of some on-street parking to the north of the
                           intersection. On the southbound side, the curb lane would be
                           converted to a right turn-only lane with an exception for buses.
                           Analysis indicates that the intersection would continue to operate at
                           an acceptable level of service with this modification. This
                           modification represents a very low cost opportunity to implement
                           transit prionty measures.
                       Guildford Way

                       In the short to medium term, Guildford Way will accommodate B-Line
                       service and other conventional bus routes serving the Northwest
                       Coquitlam area. Because B-Line services are intended to offer travel
                       times similar to private automobiles, they often incorporate transit
                       priority measures in the service design. Guildford Way represents an
                       opportunity to implement transit priority measures on a corridor-wide
                       basis. However, because B-Line is only meant to serve the corridor in
                       the medium term (until SkyTrain is implemented), physical measures
                       are not recommended for the corridor. Instead, it is recommended that
                       signal pre-emption measures be considered for the Falcon Drive,
                       Lansdowne Drive, and Johnson Street intersections along the corridor.
                       These measures would extend green time along Guildford Way or
                       shorten green time on cross-streets to improve transit travel time along
                       the corridor.

                       3.6 Transit Supportive Strategies
                       To make transit an attractive mode for a wider range of trip purposes,
                       steps must be taken to address the relationships between land use and
                       transit systems. This level of transit planning goes beyond merely
                       encouraging a certain route structure or service delivery models. It
                       involves creating transit-friendly communities - environments in which
                       transit can operate most effectively, while accommodating customers’
                     needs. The City of Coquitlam is strategically positioned to encourage
       Strategic     transit-supportive development strategies through existing legislative
  Transportation     processes and regulatory instruments.
                     This section of the Transit Strategy describes several transit-supportive
PaDer #3 - Networ
           Options   measures that the City could implement to encourage a more effective
       Assessment    and attractive transit system. Although the intent is not to develop
                     design guidelines for land uses and transit services in Coquitlam, the
                     transit-supportive measures may be seen as strategies to achieve several
                     key objectives, such as:

                         to provide technical information on potential standards and guidelines
                         that are supportive of transit services
                     0   to enhance coordination among private and public sector stakeholder
                     0   to encourage long-range planning for transit
                     0   to advocate transit-supportive policies and decisions
                     0   to educate the general public about transit issues and opportunities to
                         enhance service characteristics.

                     The three primary categories of transit-supportive measure included
                     within this section of the plan are land use, community/site design, and
                     transit facility characteristics. These candidate measures are described
                     3.6.1       Land Use Measures
                     The first approach through which the City can support transit is in the
                     area of land use. Specifically, the City can influence the mixture and
                     density of land uses to encourage more transit-oriented development
                     within the community.

                     0    Land use mixture. A mixture of land uses within a community or
                          neighbourhood increases commuter choice. Transit and other non-
                          SOV modes are more effective and are viewed as more practical
                          within mixed-use areas because trips are shorter. In fact, many needs
                          can be met within a single building or near a transit exchange. When
                          many needs can be met during a single trip, it is often referred to as
                          ‘trip chaining’. A common form of mixed-use development is
                          ground floor commercial with office or residential uses located

       CJ~~OFCO~UITLAMThe          trends in larger commercial areas have histoncally been focused
       Strategic              on a mixture of retail and office uses that are distinctly separated
  Transportation              from residential lands through market and zoning restrictions.
                              Today, we are seeing shifts in these patterns. The integration of
           Working            residential development in close proximity to the Coquitlam
Paper #3 - Network
           Options            Regional Town Centre provides greater opportunity to walk to
       Assessment             obtain most services within the community and to use transit. In
                              Northeast Coquitlam, a mixture of land uses is planned within
                              walking distance of each other.

                              To successfilly stimulate mixed-use developments, the City must
                              provide the means to encourage and allow it to happen. The City
                              must be proactive in the promotion of the mixed-use concept with
                              the development community, financial institutions and community
                              residents. The potential market for mixed-use areas may not be
                              obvious and the requirements may not be flexible enough to permit
                              adjustments to meet market demands. Urban design guidelines and
                              performance standards can be used to allow a wide variety of uses
                              while controlling any impacts on neighbouring uses.

                              Land use density. Higher densities offer several benefits that
                              contribute toward the success of transit. First, routes to a relatively
                              large number of points can be offered to areas with denser levels of
                              development. Second, the costs per rider of operating transit are
                              reduced when transit ridership is maximized. Finally, more frequent
                              transit service can be provided because sufficient demand is
                              available in higher density developments and compact communities.

                              Some general residential thresholds that may be considered
                              appropriate guidelines for supporting a specific frequency of
                              traditional fixed-route, fixed-schedule services are:

                                 at least 7 units per acre to support peak bus service every 30 minutes
                                 at least 20 to 30 units per acre to support peak bus service every 10

                              Additionally, planning for high-density developments and compact
                              communities should ensure that such developments are located in
                              close proximity to roadways envisioned as transit routes, such as
                              arterial and collector streets. As the distance f o transit routes and
                              stops increases, a corresponding reduction in development density
        November ZOO1
  wwkblg PapYrU 9 . 9 . F M                                                                      3-25
     CIWOFCOQLIITLAM       should be encouraged, with lower density developments receiving
       Strategic           lower levels of conventional transit service.
                           To maintain the City’s commitment to densification and compact
            Workrn         neighbourhoods, community development plans and zoning bylaws
Paper #3   - Networf       must be developed to reinforce this priority. In many communities in
      Assessment           the Lower Mainland, average densities are falling below permitted
                           levels. Developers may continue to build single family dwellings on
                           half- or quarter-acre lots even though 7 units per acre may be
                           permitted. Simply zoning for higher densities does not assure that
                           the intended density will be realized. In such cases, additional
                           measures, such as zoning minimums, flexible zoning, or density
                           incentives, may be needed to ensure desired results.
                       3.6.2     Community and Site Design
                       Another measure through which the community can foster and support
                       transit usage is by encouraging transit-oriented developments, which are
                       characterized by redundant road networks, reduced parking
                       requirements, and site designs that are oriented to pedestrians rather
                       than automobiles. This section outlines design measures that the
                       community can use to encourage transit usage.

                       0   Parking reductions near transit and mixed-use / high-density
                           developments. Parking requirements in the City’s zoning bylaw are
                           generally based on statistics that are designed for peak parking
                           demands. Experience has shown that conservatively high parking
                           requirements encourage solo driving and, therefore, reduce the
                           attractiveness of using transit. In addition, plentifid and free parking
                           characterizes much of the development that has occurred in recent
                           decades, producing compelling incentives for choosing the
                           automobile as the predominant mode for most trips.

                           Parking management is recognized as one of the most effective
                           techniques for placing transit travel on a more equal footing with the
                           automobile. While the TDM section of the Transportation Plan
                           discusses several parking management strategies, parking reductions
                           or flexible parking requirements are particularly suitable in areas
                           where the availability of transit, density of development, and mixture
                           of land uses may reduce the need to drive. In the Co uitlam
                           Regional Town Centre, the parking rate of 2.5 stalls/lOOm gross 9
                           floor area is no different than in other parts of the City, except in C-3
                           zones. Parking rates for other town centre areas in the Lower
                         Mainland include 2.2 stalls/IOOm* in Bumaby, 1.5 stalls/lOOm* in
       Strategic         New Westminster, and 1.44 stalls/lOOni* in North Vancouver.
                         Alternatively, flexible standards that allow for parking reductions in
           Working       exchange for improved transit amenities or transit incentives may be
Paper #3 - Network
           Optrons       made available to developers, particularly in employment areas.
       Assessment        Eligible reductions for specific measures should be outlined in the
                         City’s zoning bylaw. Candidate measures are discussed hrther in the
                         TDM section of the Transportation Plan. In cases where sufficient
                         data are not available to determine a suitable reduction in parking
                         stalls, a more gradual phased implementation of measures and
                         monitoring of results should be encouraged.

                         Road network layout. The layout of the street system dictates the
                         routing of buses as well as pedestrian access to transit service. A
                         continuous network of street right-of-ways is important to support a
                         system of pedestrian linkages. Grid road systems or frequent access
                         to arteial / collector comdors provides an effective feeder system
                         for pedestnans and cyclists and other community-based transit
                         services within the community. With an appropriate layout of roads
                         and pedestrian connections, transit services can effectively access all
                         key areas the community, rather than remaining at the periphery.
                         The arterial and collector roadway network should enable transit
                         vehicles to operate within 400-m walking distance of all dwelling
                         units and employment locations within Coquitlam.

                         The use of cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets - as in many recent
                         suburban developments - can greatly increase walking distances for
                         pedestrians. Discontinuous streets also result in circuitous routing of
                         transit vehicles and increase travel times, reducing the overall
                         attractiveness of this travel mode. Where these types of road systems
                         have already been implemented, public walkways and pathways
                         must be provided to reduce walking distances and ensure direct
                         connections to transit.

                         The City’s Subdivision Control Bylaw can be used to limit the
                         conditions in which cul-de-sacs are permitted to maximize access for
                         pedestrians and transit vehicles. Cul-de-sac lengths may be limited
                         to 100 m, except in areas where the slopes are restrictive (such as
                         greater than 20%) or environmentally sensitive areas are impacted.
                         Some municipalities in North America have gone to the extent of
                         limiting the maximum block lengths to as low as 159 m. Under
0        CINOF
                             circumstances where these conditions cannot be met, developers
                             should be required to provide pedestrian connections at suitable
      Transportation         locations.
                             Siting of buildings. Building design and site plan layout can
    Paper #3 - Networ
               Options       contribute to or detract from creating a pedestrian-oriented
           Assessment        environment that provides linkages to the transit system (Figure
                             3.6.1). Measures to enhance these connections are directly related to
                             the urban form of the built environment and may include strategies

                             0   minimize the distance between a main building entrance and the transit
                                 stops and services. Additionally, it is essential to ensure that a direct,
                                 paved and safe pedestnan route between bus stops and building entries
                                 is provided.
                             0   locate retail and ofice buildings adjacent to the right-of-way, with
                                 parking located at the side or rear of the building, facilitating direct
                                 and convenient access to transit routes.
                                 orient buildings toward the pedestrian environment of the street, rather
                                 than toward a parking lot, which often represents an obstacle for
                                 pedestnans accessing the building entrances from the street.
                                         Figu; 3.6.1: Transit-Friendly Site Develo ment

                         0   Development staging plans. The staging of development plans for
                             the developing areas of Coquitlam should be closely coordinated
                             with interim treatments for transit service to encourage early support
                             for transit (Figure 3.6.2). Growing communities represent a good
                                   potential transit market if they are staged and serviced in a
       Strategic                   coordinated fashion. Orderly and strategic staging of development
  Transportation                   will be fundamental to ensuring reasonable service to developing
                                   areas and to encourage early adoption of transit as the preferred
PaDer #3 - Networ
                                   mode of choice. Measures such as early construction of collector
                                   streets, development along both sides of the road and temporary
       Assessment                  turn-around areas would ensure that transit service is incorporated
                                   into the community from the start. This step also reduces local
                                   resident opposition to transit services operating within their
                                   community or on their street. Alternative transit service models -
                                   such as Community Shuttle - may also be incorporated to support
                                   the growing needs of the community.
                                        Figure 3.6.2: Transit Service during Phases of Construction

                               3.6.3      Transit Facility Features
                               Aside from transit priority measures, which were discussed in Section
                               3.5, there are other transit facilities that can be enhanced to make transit
                               more appealing as a travel mode. These features are discussed below.

                               0   Transit exchanges and park-and-ride facilities. Transit exchanges
                                   are facilities where passengers transfer from one bus route to
                                   another, or even change modes to walk, bike or drive. They are
                                   typically located within the activity centres of the community to
                                   reinforce the synergistic relationship with land use patterns. If
                                   properly planned and designed, transit exchanges can become
                                   effective multi-modal exchanges and pedestrian-oriented sites.
                                   Coquitlam Station is currently the primary transit exchange within
                                   the City, and a secondary exchange is located at the Coquitlam
                                   Recreation Centre. After implementation of SkyTrain to the
                                   Regional Town Centre, the Coquitlam Station exchange will become
                                   an increasingly important transit hub within the region. To support
                                   this, effective pedestrian and cycling connections should be
        November 2001
  workm# Paper U 1 1 F N ,
           m l n d d o s do(
                          considered for the Coquitlam Station area. Also as part of the
            Strategic     SkyTrain extension, exchanges will be created at other stations along
       Transportation     the line. The City is currently developing Station Area Plans for the
                          Lougheed and Burquitlam Station areas. It is anticipated that
     Paper #3 - Networ
                          pedestrian and cycling connections to and from these exchanges will
                          represent a key component of these plans. A transit exchange was
            Assessment    also recommended for the Northeast Coquitlam commercial core.
                          At minimum, transit exchanges in Coquitlam should provide the
                          following amenities:
                          0   weather protection
                          0   transit route and schedule information
                          0   adequate illumination

                          Park-and-ride facilities are generally implemented to intercept
                          vehicle trips generated from the periphery of the transit area and
                          provide convenient access to transit. They can function as an
                          alternative to local feeder bus services and can accommodate
                          parking for bicycles. Park-and-ride facilities are most effective for
                          intercepting travel that is destined to locations where parking is
                          constrained andor where congestion makes the transit trip faster.
                          Coquitlam Station is the primary park-and-ride facility within
                          Coquitlam. It serves the entire Northeast Sector area and
                          accommodates up to 800 vehicles. It is often full. There is a
                          secondary park-and-ride facility located at the Woolridge Avenue I
                          King Edward Street intersection, which accommodates up to 300
                          vehicles, but is lightly used. Park-and-ride facilities have not been
                          recommended for Northeast Coquitlam.

                          Many transit exchanges and park-and-ride facilities incorporate kiss-
                          and-ride areas to facilitate pick-up and drop-off of transit passengers.
                          Parking for bicycles should also be available at all transit exchanges
                          and should be strategically placed for safety. Although these
                          ancillary features should be located as near as possible to the transit
                          services, it is important that they do not isolate the transit exchange
                          from pedestrian accessibility and attraction (Figure 3.6.3). Too often,
                          facilities such as kiss-and-ride areas are placed immediately adjacent
                          to the sidewalk and disrupt linkages for pedestrians. Potential
                          conflicts between pedestrian and automobiles may be minimized by
0   URmNmEMS*
        November 2001
              IllwmI                                                                         3-30
       CfrVOf cogufrm

                                  separating links to adjacent systems and providing buffers from
                                  streets with high traffic volumes.
            Plan                    Figure 3.6.3:Siting of Park-and-Ride and Kiss-and. ride Facilities

Paper #3     - Networ

                                  Security and afety measures should be considered when plannin
                                  all aspects of the -transit system. Planning and design can greatly          0
                                  reduce the potential for both crime and hazards for transit users.
                                  Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED)
                                  techniques can be applied to transit stops and stations, as well as
                                  pedestrian facilities providing access to transit. Maximizing
                                  opportunities for natural or passive surveillance is considered the
                                  most basic and essential element of deterring crime by making
                                  potential criminals feel conspicuous. This is especially effective
                                  against opportunist crime, when the potential offender feels there
                                  are, or may be, people watching. Surveillance and security of transit
                                  and pedestrian facilities can be enhanced by:

                                     Onenting building and dwelling frontages to overlook pedestnan
                                     facilities, including walkways, parking areas and transit stops.
                                     Providing adequate external lighting for non-daylight hours.
                                     Ensunng that landscaping, including planting or fencing, abutting
                                     pedestnan facilities does not obstruct the visibility of pedestrians or
                                     provide secluded areas for potential offenders to hide.
                                     Developing walkways that follow vehicle routes, where pedestrian
         November ZOO1
  Wortrlng Paper #J.f f - R ~ i
             m v k d doc d
                                     traffic and surveillance would be more frequent
                                                                                                       3-3 1   0
     Cirr OF Coqurrm
                              Providing short, l-.rect, and well-lit walkways in cases where vehicle
       Strategic              routes cannot be followed.
  Transportation              Avoiding the need for pedestrian underpasses, which make
                              surveillance difficult.
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options         Providing adequate lighting and ensuring that sufficient separation
       Assessment          from transit vehicles is maintained can maximize passenger safety at
                           transit stops. Transit users waiting at stops should also be separated
                           from bicycle and pedestrian traffic to minimize conflicts between
                           multiple users of the right-of-way.

                       a   Transit shelters and waiting areas. Comfortable seating and waiting
                           areas also encourage transit usage. Zoning and subdivision control
                           bylaws may be used to encourage the provision of amenities that
                           maximize relationships between pedestrian and transit services.
                           Shelters should be provided at a minimum of 50% of all bus stops,
                           particularly at those locations that generate the highest numbers of
                           boarding passengers on a daily basis. For each transit facility or stop,
                           other amenities, such as telephones, newspaper boxes, and garbage
                           receptacles, should be considered (Figure 3 6 4 .
                                    Figure 3.6.4 Transit Stop with Passenger An mities

                           Transit stops should also be located to optimize transit usage
                           wherever practical, with the primary service and support features
                           focused on those sites expected to attract the highest levels of
                           ridership. On-street transit stops may be located on the near-side of
                           an intersection, on the far-side, or mid-block. Although TransLink
                           generally prefers far-side stops, near-side or mid-block stops work
                           most effectively where bus priority measures are in place.

     Cur OF CopuiruM
                       a   lntermodal Facilities. Although pedestrian and bicycle connections
       Strategic           to transit services were addressed in previous sections, the provision
  Transportation           of adequate bicycle storage facilities was not h l l y addressed. No
                           secure, long-term bicycle parking facilities are currently provided at
           Working         any of the City’s park-and-ride or exchange facilities. The provision
Paper #3 - Network
           Options         of secure bicycle parking facilities, in the form of bicycle lockers,
       Assessment          would allow transit users to combine cycling and transit for their
                           trips. Although bicycle lockers can be expensive (approximately
                           $1000 per locker), there are several cost-effective strategies for
                           providing bicycle lockers at Coquitlam transit facilities. For
                           example, some private companies will provide bicycle lockers to the
                           municipality free of charge, collecting only monthly rental fees from
                           users. Other suppliers will provide bicycle lockers free of charge and
                           rent out advertising space on the lockers. Both methods provide a
                            low-cost way of combining cycling with transit.

                           Cycling and transit can also be facilitated through the provision of
                           bicycle racks on buses and by allowing cyclists to take their bicycles
                           on rail transit vehicles. However, these aspects of intermodal travel
                           fall under the jurisdiction of TransLink, which is currently in the
                           process of installing bicycle racks on all Lower Mainland buses. In
                           addition, TransLink is reviewing its policy regarding bicycles on
                           SkyTrain (they are currently not permitted). Bicycles are permitted
                           on West Coast Express trains.

                       3.7 Summary
                       Table 3.7.1 below summarizes the transit priority measures that are
                       included in the STP. The table includes preliminary capital costs for
                       those few measures that require physical alterations to the road network,
                       whereas most recommended measures are limited to signal pre-emption
                       and lane redesignation. It is anticipated that the cost for these latter
                       improvements could be drawn from existing programs.

                       The table also identifies potential funding partners for the measures, as
                       well as the needs-based priority for each measure. These priorities are
                       based on traffic conditions, planned transit services within the next few
                       years, and implementation considerations (for example, where a transit
                       priority measure could be combined with other road improvements).
                       The planned implementation of B-Line service from Coquitlam Station
                       to Lougheed Station - via Pinetree, Guildford, Ungless, St. Johns,

                                                                                            3-33    0
                   Clarke, and North - is anticipated to occur in 2002 in conjunction with
     strategic     the start-up of the Millennium SkyTrain line.


                                                            Table 3.7.1: Summary of Transit Priority Measures
 Project                                     Descriptlon                                  Preliminary Coat          Potential Funding Partners                  Needs-Based Priority
                                                                                             (millions)      I                                              I
                                                                                                                 City       TnnrLin       MOT       Olher       High       Mediu       Low

    interchange                                                                                              I          I             I         I           I          I           I
    Lougheed Highway I Coquitlam Station I Transit     signal   8          intersection        SO 30                           4                                 4
    access                               I improvements                                                      I          I                                   I          1

    Barnet Highway I Johnson Street      I Signal pre-emption                                   NIA          I                 4      I         I           1    4     1           I
                         -        - -
    Barnet Hiahwav I Louaheed Hiahwav II Included in maior option
                                                          . .                                   NIA
                                                                                                                        I      4          4
                                                                                                                                                            I          I                4
I   PinetreeKay     .
    Lincoln Avenueinatree Way            I NB I SB queue iumpers                                0
                                                                                               $ 15                            4                                 4
    Glen Drwe I Pinetree Way             I NB ISB queue jumpers                                NIA                             4                                 4
    Guildford Way IFalcon Drive          I Signal pre-emption                                   NIA                            4                                 4
    Guildford Way ILansdowne Drive       I Signal pre-emption                                   NIA                            4                                 4
    Guildford Way IJohnson Street        I Signal pre-emption                                   NIA                            4                                 4

p t a l cost                                                                            I    $1.48        I
I Conceptual cost estimates are order-of-magnitude and do not include property (except where shown) or other servicingcosts. Conceptual level costs are not typically used
for project budgeting, which is generally based on. functional level plans and designs.
NIA - It i s assumed that, since there are generally no physicalchanges to the roadway to achieve these improvements, the costs could be generated through existing
programs o f TransLink and the City for signal upgrades and transit prionty strategies.

                     4. Bicycle Network Plan
            Plan     Cycling in the City of Coquitlam has gained increasing prominence over
                     the past 20 years. Within the context of the transportation system, the
Paper #3 - Networ
                     role of the bicycle has changed dramatically. Once considered a vehicle
                     predominantly used for leisure and recreation, the bicycle is now seen as
                     a viable mode of transportation for many trip purposes. Environmental
                     concerns, traffic congestion, health and fitness benefits, and the
                     economic appeal of the bicycle as a transportation mode have provided
                     the necessary incentive for more and more people to leave their cars at
                     home and cycle to work or other local destinations. Thus, the City must
                     develop an effective strategy to safely integrate the bicycle into the
                     broader transportation system.

                     T i section of the Working Paper provides general design guidelines
                     for bicycle facilities in the City of Coquitlam, as well as a description of
                     the proposed Bicycle Network Plan.

                     4.1 Approach
                     The plans and recommendations presented in this section of the
                     Working Paper represent a preliminary evaluation of potential on-street
                     bicycle routes and facilities. The existing street network represents a
                     valuable resource for cyclists, as it provides a cost-effective means of
                     linking key destinations throughout the City. It should be noted that the
                     emphasis of the Bicycle Plan presented in the STP is on on-street
                     commuter routes, rather than off-street recreational cycling facilities.
                     Off-street pathways for cycling, which alone cannot provide the same
                     degree of direct access as the street network, are not extensively
                     addressed in the STP. Instead, the recreational component of cycling
                     will be addressed in the City’s Master Trails Plan. Only in cases where
                     attractive on-street options are not available for utilitarian travel are off-
                     street facilities addressed within the STP.

                     Although alignments and cycling corridors have been identified within
                     the Bicycle Network Plan, final route selection and design (including
                     key connections and crossings) will be considered in greater detail
                     through corridor specific strategies. In this regard, it is also anticipated
                     that the City will refine the Bicycle Plan in the future, potentially in
                     collaboration with ICBC’s Safer Bicycle Planning initiative. These
                     initiatives will offer more opportunities for members of the public, as

                                                                                              4- 1
     C m of Coguiruw   well as cycling advisory groups, to provide input on the Citywide
                       cycling network.
                       There were essentially two approaches considered in the development of
                       the on-street bicycle network for Coquitlam, as follows:
PaDer #3 Networ
       Assessment      0   Major Road Bicycle Facilities. This approach uses the major arterials
                           in the City for the purpose of establishing cycling facilities. The
                           provision of bicycle facilities on these roadways would potentially
                           require modifications to the roadway width to meet the facility
                           guidelines presented in Section 4.5. Potential routes could include
                           Lougheed Highway, Guildford Way, David Avenue, and Bamet

                       0   Minor Road Bicycle Facilities. This approach would focus on the
                           provision of bicycle facilities along collector roads and local streets
                           parallel to major roads, particularly where they provide a continuous
                           route. Examples could include Foster Avenue and Rochester

                                        Major Roads (arterlals)          Minor Roads (collectors/
                       Advantages       Direct routes.                   More comfortable for all levels
                                        Connect most regional            of cyclists (traffic volumes,
                                        generators.                      speeds)
                                        Connect many local generators.   Easier to implement.
                                                                         Less costly.
                                                                         Can connect many local
                       Disadvantages    Long time to implement.          May be indirect
                                        High cost.                       May not directly connect
                                        Property impacts.                regional generators.
                                        Less comfortable for cyclists

                       It must be recognized that a minor road focussed bicycle network would
                       likely generate the largest number of new cyclists, but that a major road
                       focussed bicycle network would likely generate the most safety benefits
                       for experienced cyclists. This is because experienced cyclists would

                                                                                                    4-2    0
                     likely continue to use the major roads regardless of the presence of other
       Strategic     on-street bicycle facilities.
                   The STP focusses on the development of an on-street bicycle network
                                                                       identification of routes
                   that includes
           workinf considered theboth major and minor roads. Theeach type of facility and
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options                  advantages and disadvantages of
       Assessment  localized factors were used as the basis for the selection of specific
                   routes. For example, there is a need to provide facilities on some major
                   roads, particularly in areas where no attractive alternatives exist, such as
                   David Avenue in Westwood Plateau. The Plan also identifies the use of
                   off-street facilities in some locations where attractive on-street facilities
                   are not available.

                     4.2 Types of Bicycle Facilities
                    Within the Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines presented in Section 4.5,
                    facilities are categorized as on-street (where they are part of the road
                    network), off-street (where they are separate from the road network), and
                    end-of-trip facilities (which are located at major destinations). Within each
                    category, there are different types of facilities appropriate for different
                    conditions, as described below:

                    0   Shared bicycle routes are generally located on local streets (including
                        local collector and local commercialhndustrial roads). Because traffic
                        volumes and speeds on these roads are generally low, cyclists and
                        motorists are able to safely share the road without the need for
                        significant physical improvements to the roadway. In most cases, the
                        only improvements required are signage the road as a
                        bicycle route, and crossings where the shared routes intersect major
                        mads. T a f c calming measures may also be incorporated on shared
                        routes as appropriate to minimize the impacts of motor vehicle traffic
                        on cyclists.

                        Shared routes are also an appropriate means of designating bicycle
                        routes for an interim period on roads that are not sufficiently wide to
                        provide marked wide curb lanes or bicycle lanes. As narrower
                        sections of roads designated for marked wide curb lanes are
                        widened, shared bicycle routes on these sections would be replaced
                        with marked wide curb lanes.




                    Marked wide curb lanes are used on minor collector, major collector
                    and arterial roads, where higher traffic volumes require that additional
                    space be provided to accommodate bicycles. Wide curb lanes are 4.3
                    m wide, which is 60 cm to 80 cm wider than a typical travel lane. This
                    additional width provides sufficient space for an automobile to safely
                    overtake a bicycle, without crossing into the adjacent or oncoming
                    traffic lane. Wide curb lanes provide a means of accommodating
                    cyclists within existing roadways. On a four-lane roadway, the curb
                    lane can often be widened by moving the lane line to the left and
                    narrowing the width of the centre lane. In Coquitlam, however, the
                    existing road widths (typically 14 m) limit the ability to retrofit
                    existing facilities.

                    Wide curb lanes can be enhanced with the addition of bicycle lane
                    stencils marked on the pavement at regular intervals. The stencils
                    identifjl the right side of the lane as the area used by bicycles, which
                    alerts motorists to the presence of bicycles, and indicates to cyclists
                    where on the roadway they should ride. The absence of a white line
                    separating bicycles from other traffic avoids many of the concerns
                    regarding conventional bicycle lanes. Many motorists - and even
                    some cyclists - interpret the white line of a conventional bicycle lane
                    to mean that cyclists are confined to the bicycle lane. On the other
                    hand, with marked wide curb lanes, motorists and cyclists both
                    recognize that cyclists are free to ride elsewhere on the roadway as
                     necessary (such as to make a left turn or when travelling through an
       Strategic     intersection).
            Plan                     Figure 4.2.2: Marked Wide Curb lanes

Paper #3 - Networ

                     Bicycle lanes are separate travel lanes designated for the exclusive use
                     of bicycles. In most cases, they are located at the right-hand side of the
                     road, adjacent the curb. Bicycle lanes are a minimum of 1.5 m wide,
                     and are identified with a solid white line. Bicycle symbols are painted
                     on the roadway within the bicycle lane at regular intervals.

                         Bicycle lanes are appropriate in certain circumstances - generally on
         Strategic       arterial roads with higher traffic volumes, higher vehicles speeds and
    Transportation       few turning vehicles. Bicycle lanes are not desirable on roads with on-
                         street parking.
  Paper #3   - Networ    Multi-use pathways. Off-street pathways are provided for all non-
        Assessmeni       motorized users - it is usually not possible to restrict the use of
                         pathways to cyclists only. Consequently, multi-use pathways are
                         designed to accommodate cyclists, pedestrians, in-line skaters, persons
                         in wheelchairs, and all other non-motorized users.

                         Pathways are preferably hard-surfaced, using concrete or asphalt. This
                         means that all non-motorized users can be accommodated, including
                         in-line skaters, persons in wheelchairs and cyclists on bicycles with
                         narrow tires. To accommodate all of these users, whose speeds may
                         range from less than 4km/h to over 50km/h, multi-use pathways
                         should be a minimum of 3.0 m wide, and 4.0 m or more in width in
                         high-use areas. Although they are typically located outside of road
                         rights-of-way, pathways may also be located within a road right-of-
                         way, parallel to a highway or major roadway.

                         Trails are off-street facilities suitable only for pedestrians, cyclists
                      on mountain bikes, and equestrians. Trails are unsuitable for persons
                      in wheelchairs and most persons with disabilities, as well as cyclists
                      on road bikes. They are typically dirt, grass, or loose gravel, and are
U R ~ N S Y S T E M S narrow with limited clearances, may be twisty with sharp curves and
     CT OF CWUllUM
                        switchbacks, and can have steep grades. It should be noted that a
       strategic        classification system for trails is being developed by the City’s
  Transportallon        Leisure and Parks Services Department.
                        End-of-trip facilities are provided at major destinations and include
        - workinsi
Paper #3 Networ
                        bicycle parking at commercial, employment and institutional
       Assessment       destinations, and showers and changerooms at employment locations.
                        Cyclists’ parking needs fall into two categories - secure, long-term
                        parking and convenient short-term parking. Secure, long-term
                        parking is needed in locations where bicycles will be parked for
                        several hours at a time and, more importantly, where the same
                        bicycles are parked on a regular basis. Key locations for secure
                        parking include schools, transit stops, multi-family residential
                        buildings, offices, and other employment locations. A common
                        means of providing secure parking is a bicycle locker, which is
                        essentially a large, lockable compartment into which a bicycle and
                        personal belongings can be placed. Where there is a need for a large
                        amount of secure parking, a supervised parking facility is often more
                        cost-effective, and can incorporate other amenities for cyclists, such
                        as showers and repair services. Bicycle racks are used to provide
                        short-term parking in commercial areas, at community facilities, and
                        at public buildings.

                        Showers and clothing lockers should be provided at all major
                        employment locations.

                     4.3 Bicycle Network Plan
                     The Bicycle Network Plan presented in this section of the STP identifies
                     a comprehensive Citywide network of bicycle facilities that link
                     regional and local destinations throughout the City of Coquitlam. A key
                     component of the plan is the provision of connections to the bicycle
                     networks of adjacent municipalities to accommodate regional trip-
                     making by bicycle. Using existing streets wherever possible, the Bicycle
                     Network Plan integrates bicycles with motor vehicles in a manner that is
                     consistent with motor vehicle regulations, and that is predictable,
                     thereby maximizing safety. This shared roadway approach also provides
                     affordable cycling facilities that can be implemented within a reasonable
                     timeframe, with reduced costs for new construction andor
                     reconstruction of roadways.

                   Streets on which traffic volumes are lower and which provide adequate
         Strategic width to safely accommodate cyclists were typically favoured over
  Transportation streets with higher traffic volumes or narrower width, which would not
                   provide the necessary space requirements for bicycle travel. In some
                                                    streets              pavement
           workinf cases, however, higher volume betweenwith adequatethe City. In width
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options provided the only available link         two areas of           these
       Assessment  situations, appropriate measures were proposed to ensure that both
                   cyclists and motorists would be able to share the roadway safely and
                   effectively. Where the on-street bicycle network does not provide
                   connections to some areas of the City, the off-street Trail Network
                   provides the necessary linkages.

                   The layout of the on-street bicycle network ensures that cyclists from
                   almost all areas of the City can easily access a bikeway. It is important
                   to note, however, that designation of a street as a bicycle route does not
                   exclude the use of other streets by cyclists. In fact, all City roads should
                   be considered bicycle streets and all road users should be educated to
                   share the road with each other in a safe manner.

                   The bicycle network recommended in this plan identifies a broad
                   framework of alignments for bicycle routes and does not identify site-
                   specific improvements that may be required to effectively connect
                   individual routes with each other and major destinations. These routes,
                   however, identi6 an optimal series of alignments for providing direct
                   access to all areas of the City and other parts of the region. From this
                   core network, the City can specifically address operation and design
                   issues through subsequent bicycle planning to complete the on-street
                   bicycle network - in co-ordination with off-street facilities - and
                   maximize connections to major destinations.

                   Figure 4.3.1 illustrates the recommended on-street Bicycle Network
                   Plan for the City of Coquitlam. A summary of the recommended core
                   on-street bicycle routes for Coquitlam is outlined below. This summary
                   is organized by facility type, provides a brief explanation as to the
                   function of individual alignments, and also details some of the required
                   improvements for these routes. Once again, it should be recognized that,
                   where the costs andlor impacts of providing the desired standard are
                   prohibitive, the City may wish to consider alternative designs or
                   corridors, as appropriate.

                     Bicycle Lanes / Paved Shoulders
  Transportation     Routes with bicycle lanes typically carry significant traffic volumes at
            Plan     higher operating speeds (above 60 M). are generally limited to
                     roadways with fewer intersections, driveways, and bus stops, and on
Paper #3 - Networ
                     roadways with no curbside parking. On major roadways with no curb
                     and gutter, wide paved shoulders are often used as bicycle facilities.

                     The routes in Coquitlam that are identified for bicycle lanes or paved
                     shoulders are as follows:

                        Lougheed Highway / Pinetree Way.        hs
                                                               T i route represents a key
                        connection across the City from Lougheed Station to Coquitlam
                        Station and the Regional Town Centre area. It also provides a
                        relatively flat roadway for cyclists by skirting the plateau area of
                        Southwest Coquitlam. It .provides connections to several other
                        proposed bicycle routes serving Southwest Coquitlam and the
                        Regional Town Centre area.

                        Within the ‘urban’ sections of Lougheed Highway between North
                        Road and the Coleman Road on-ramp area, it is recommended that
                        bicycle lanes be considered. Bicycle lanes should also be provided in
                        the built-up areas between Dewdney Trunk Road and David Avenue.
                        The remaining ‘rural’ section of Lougheed Highway could
                        incorporate paved shoulder bicycle facilities.

                        Although some portions of Lougheed Highway could incorporate
                        paved shoulder facilities with few modifications to the roadway, it is
                        recognized that this facility would require significant roadway
                        modifications within the built-up areas of Southwest Coquitlam and
                        the Regional Town Centre. The cost of modifications would be
                        significant. Therefore, it is recommended that the Lougheed
                        Highway / Pinetree Way bicycle facilities be examined as a long-
                        term improvement. For costing purposes, it has been assumed that
                        the ‘urban’ areas of Lougheed Highway and Pinetree Way would
                        require full retrofitting of bicycle lanes. In the areas where paved
                        shoulders would be appropriate, it has been assumed that half of the
                        roadway would require retrofitting of additional width to
                        accommodate standard paved shoulders and that the other half
                        already meets the standard and would require no modification.

                         Guildford Way. This route would provide      connection from Port
        Strategic        Moody City Centre to Coquitlam Regional Town Centre along a
   Transportation        relatively flat roadway with few intersecting roadways and
                         driveways. It would also provide connections to several north-south
                         bicycle facilities and the planned southerly crossing of the
 Paper #3 - Networ
            Options      Coquitlam River. This facility would require modifications to the
        Assessment       existing roadway cross-section.
                         David Avenue. This route represents an important opportunity to
                         incorporate quality bicycle facilities into a new municipal roadway.
                         As this will become an important east-west arterial for vehicular
                         traffic, it is recommended that bicycles be accommodated with full
                         bicycle lanes between the Port Moody boundary and the Northeast
                         Coquitlam area. This route will provide connections to several north-
                         south bicycle routes.
                      Marked Wide Curb Lanes

                      Routes with marked wide curb lanes typically carry relatively high
                      traffic volumes of motor vehicle traffic, but also provide adequate
                      pavement width to allow motor vehicles and bicycles to safely share the
                      same road space. They are typically used on municipal arterial and
                      collector roadways that are intersected regularly by other roadways
                      andlor driveways, that allow on-street parking, and that have a high
                      number of bus stops. They generally provide more direct access
                      throughout the City than do signed routes on local streets. Thus, the
                      City’s marked wide curb lanes will function similarly to the arterial and
                      collector street network for motor vehicle traffic, providing direct access
                      to different areas of the City, as well as many local destinations along
                      the way.

                      Key routes identified for marked wide curb lanes are discussed below.

                         Rochester Avenue. This route provides a major east-west connection
                         through Southwest Coquitlam, connecting the Lougheed Station area
                         with residential areas south of Austin Avenue. It provides direct
                         connections to several schools, and to several north-south bicycle
                         routes. A connection to the Dawes Hill / Mundy neighbourhood is
                         possible via the ravine trail between Laurentian Street and Monterey

              There are sections of Rochester Avenue that currently lack curbs and
URB~~NSYSTEMS gutters. Therefore, major roadwork may be necessary to establish
     C~NOFCGQLIITLAM    marked wide curb lanes along this route. The development of
       Strategic        standard marked wide curb lanes could be deferred until Rochester
  Transportation        Avenue is reconstructed as part of the City’s Road Renewal
                        Program. In the interim, the route could be provided as a basic
Paper #3     workinsr
           - Networ
                        signed route.

      Assessmeni        Foster Avenue represents the key east-west route through Southwest
                        Coquitlam, providing a connection between the Burquitlam and
                        Lougheed Mall areas and the residential areas north of Austin
                        Avenue. It provides direct connections to schools and the Pokier
                        Recreation Centre, which is a major local destination. It would also
                        provide a connection to other routes to the east via off-street trails
                        through Mundy Park.

                        Some sections of Foster Avenue currently lack curbs and gutters.
                        Consequently, major roadwork would be required to provide marked
                        wide curb lanes along the entire length of this route. As in the case
                        of Rochester Avenue, the development of standard marked wide
                        curb lanes could be delayed until Foster Avenue is reconstructed
                        through the Road Renewal Program. In the interim, the route could
                        be provided as a basic signed route.

                        Spuraway Drive / Ranch Park Way / Johnson Street. This would be a
                        key north-south route connecting the residential areas of Southwest
                        Coquitlam with the Regional Town Centre area and Westwood
                        Plateau. It would provide a direct connection to Mundy Park,
                        Coquitlam Station, and Coquitlam Centre Mall.

                        The extent of roadway modifications needed to accommodate
                        marked wide curb lanes should be confirmed as part of subsequent
                        bicycle planning. For the purposes of cost estimating, it has been
                        assumed that Spuraway Drive and Ranch Park Way could
                        accommodate marked wide curb lanes through restriping of the road,
                        but that Johnson Street would have to be widened slightly to
                        accommodate bicycle facilities. The connection between Ranch Park
                        Way and Johnson Street is a further issue that would have to be
                        considered in more detail.

                        Chilko Drive / Como Lake Avenue. T i route would provide a
                        connection from Southwest Coquitlam and Mundy Park to Lougheed
                        Highway and Port Coquitlam.

                                                                                         4-1 I
                     There are presently bicycle lanes along most of Chilko Drive from
       Strategic     Mariner Way to Lougheed Highway. In the long term, it is
  Transportation     recommended that these be converted to marked wide curb lanes to
                     be of a consistent standard with other City facilities. It should be
                     noted that Kingsway Avenue in Port Coquitlam is not designated as
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options   a bicycle route within the City’s Master Transportation Plan.
       Assessment    However, it would represent a key connection to the Chilko Drive
                     bicycle facility.

                     Dewdney Trunk Road. This route would provide an alternative to
                     Bamet Highway for travel between Port Moody and the Coquitlam
                     Regional Town Centre andor Coquitlam Station. It would also
                     provide a connection between Port Moody and Port Coquitlam via
                     the Lougheed Highway and Como Lake Avenue bicycle routes.

                     For costing purposes, it has been assumed that Dewdney Trunk Road
                     could accommodate marked wide curb lanes through restriping of
                     the roadway. Should additional modifications be necessary, it is
                     assumed that they will be achieved during road rehabilitation
                     through the City’s Road Renewal Program.

                     Lincoln Avenue is identified as a hture marked wide curb lane route
                     between the Regional Town Centre and Port Coquitlam. This would
                     include wide curb lanes on the planned southerly crossing of the
                     Coquitlam River. It would provide a very desirable alternative to
                     Lougheed Highway for travel between Port Coquitlam and the
                     Coquitlam Regional Town Centre area. Some modifications would
                     likely be required on Lincoln Avenue between Pinetree Way and
                     Westwood Street. Marked wide curb lanes should be incorporated
                     into the design for the widening of Lincoln Avenue between
                     Westwood Street and Pipeline Road, as identified in the Road
                     Network Plan.
                     Falcon Drive / Noons Creek Drive. The City of Port Moody has
                     designated the segment of Noons Creek Drive within that City as a
                     bicycle route. It is included within this STP to complete connections
                     at the north and south ends of the roadway and to provide a
                     connection to the proposed Falcon SkyTrain Station at Bamet
                     Lansdowne Drive. This route represents a key north-south connection
                     in the Eagle Ridge area. It provides a direct connection to the
                      Guildford Way bicycle route, which enables travel to Port Moody
     strategic        and the Regional Town Centre area. Although the extent of
Transportation        modifications have not been determined at this time, this route could
                      be established as a signed bicycle route until such time as any
                      necessary modifications are completed.
   Assessment         Pipeline Road. This route provides a direct connection to the
                      Regional Town Centre area from the eastern portions of Westwood
                      Plateau, the Hockaday area, and the Lafarge Park area. Marked wide
                      curb lanes should be incorporated into designs for widening Pipeline
                      Road to four lanes, as identified in the Road Network Plan.

                      Panorama Drive / Robson Drive. This short east-west route would
                      provide connections to the Johnson Street and Pipeline Road bicycle
                      routes for travel between Westwood Plateau and the Regional Town
                      Centre area. This route could likely be accommodated within the
                      existing road cross-section.

                      Ozada Avenue. This route completes a connection between the
                      Guildford Way bicycle route and the southerly crossing of the
                      Coquitlam River. T i route could be used for regional travel
                      between Port Moody and Port Coquitlam and beyond.
                      Shaughnessy Street. Marked wide curb lanes along this roadway
                      would provide a desirable connection between the River Springs
                      residential areas and Port Coquitlam to the south. It would also
                      provide a connection to Coquitlam River Park. As in other cases, it
                      has been assumed that bicycle facilities could be accommodated
                      within the existing road width, and that additional modifications
                      would be undertaken during road rehabilitation.

                      Northeast Coquitlam. Several roadways in Northeast Coquitlam have
                      been identified through the Northeast Coquitlam Transportation Plan
                      as marked wide curb lane bicycle routes. These routes were
                      approved in the Northeast Coquitlam Official Community Plan and
                      are included in the STP. The designated roadways include Coast
                      Meridian Road, Victoria Drive, and several as-yet-unnamed roads.
                   Signed Bicycle Routes

                   Signed bicycle routes are typically provided on less busy collector roads
                   or local streets. These routes often parallel major arterial routes and
                   often provide greater access to and from residential areas. Because these
     CIlY OF cOQurrL/\M
                          routes carry significantly less motor vehicle traffic than routes
       Strategic          designated with marked wide curb lanes or bicycle lanes, many cyclists
  Transporfation          prefer them for trips through urban areas. Signed route in Coquitlam
                          play an important role in providing access to residential
                          neighbourhoods, as well as providing safe routes for cyclists.
         - Work'nf
Paper #3 Networ
       Assessment         The implementation of signed bicycle routes generally involves the
                          addition of bicycle route signage along the route, as well as directional
                          signage to indicate network linkages. Where signed routes intersect
                          busy arterial or collector roads, crossing improvements - in the form of
                          median refuges or signals - may be required to enhance safety for
                          cyclists. If signals are used, curbside mounted push-buttons are
                          recommended to eliminate the need for cyclists to ride on the sidewalk
                          to activate a pedestrian push-button.

                          The majority of the signed bicycle routes for Coquitlam are located in
                          the Southwest Coquitlam area, as the local road network in other areas
                          of Coquitlam could not provide a connected network of signed bicycle
                          routes. Key signed bicycle routes for Coquitlam include the following:

                             Delestre Avenue / Alderson Avenue. This route provides a
                             connection fiom the residential area south of Lougheed Highway to
                             North Road, Lougheed Highway, and the Maillardville area. It could
                             also represent a desirable alternative to Lougheed Highway for
                             cyclists who are not comfortable on busier roadways.

                             Whiting Way. This route represents a desirable alternative to cycling
                             on North Road and provides connections from the residential areas
                             along Whiting Way to both Lougheed Mall and the Burquitlam
                             Plaza area.

                             Robinson Street provides a connection between the Foster Avenue
                             bicycle route and residential areas to the north, including the
                             Oakdale area. It is a desirable alternative to cycling along Clarke
                             Road through the Burquitlam area. Short signed bicycle routes have
                             also been identified to connect this route to the Burquitlam Plaza
                             (Station) area, and the Miller Park trail, which also connects to
                             Gatensbury Road and Port Moody.

                             Marmont Street / Gatensbury Street. This is a key north-south route
                             within Southwest Coquitlam and provides a direct connection for
                             residents of Southwest Coquitlam to Port Moody, Como Lake, the
                     Austin Heights commercial area, the Maillardville area, and the
       strategic     Pacific Reach industrial area. Although grades are steep in this area,
  Transportation     it represents a complete north-south route through this area and
                     provides connections to several key east-west routes.
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options   It should be noted that the portion of this route south of Brunette
       Assessment    Avenue is designated as a marked wide curb lane. In future, this will
                     provide a key connection to the proposed Waterfiont Trail along the
                     Fraser River.

                     Laurentian Street / Poirier Street / Harbour Avenue. This signed
                     bicycle route provides local connections to the Austin Heights area,
                     Centennial Secondary School, and the Poirier Recreation Centre. It
                     also provides connections to several other bicycle routes, including
                     the Gatensbury Road route to Port Moody. This route would also
                     provide a connection to the Dawes Hill / Mundy neighbourhood via
                     the ravine trail between Laurentian Street and Monterey Avenue.

                     Mundy Street. The section of Mundy Street south of Monterey
                     Avenue is designated as a signed bicycle route to provide a
                     connection from the southern areas of the Dawes Hill / Mundy
                     neighbourhood to other parts of Coquitlam via Monterey Avenue
                     and the ravine trail to Laurentian Street or via Leclair Drive. It
                     would be desirable to provide a connection between Lougheed
                     Highway and this route. This connection and the final selection of
                     facility type for Mundy Street should be considered during
                     subsequent bicycle planning initiatives.

                     Leclair Drive provides a connection between Mundy Street and
                     Hickey Drive, which both provide connections to destinations
                     fiuther afield.

                     Hickey Drive provides a connection to designated bicycle facilities
                     on Riverview Crescent, Leclair Drive, and King Albert Avenue. It
                     also provides a connection to off-street facilities in Mundy Park,
                     which would parallel Austin Avenue and Mariner Way to provide
                     connections to the Chilko Drive and Spuraway Drive bicycle routes.
                     Because this road is designated as a collector roadway and carries
                     bus traffic, marked wide curb lanes could be considered for this
                     route. This should be considered during future bicycle planning.

    c / W OF COQUITbW
                            Hillcrest Street / Wilmot Street / Thermal Drive. T i route provides
       Strategic            a north-south connection on the west side of Mundy Park. It
  Transportation            provides a direct connection to Port Moody at the north end, and
                            Mundy Park and the Foster Avenue bicycle route at the south end. A
                            short segment of off-street facility would be required to connect
         Options            Wilmot Street to Thermal Drive through a school property.
                            King Albert Avenue. This roadway provides a connection between
                            the Hillcrest Street route and the Hickey Drive bicycle route.

                            Riverview Crescent. This facility connects the Riverview residential
                            area and Riverview Hospital to the Hickey Drive and Chilko Drive
                            bicycle facilities. Further afield, it provides an east-west connection
                            between Southwest Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam via the Rochester
                            Avenue and Chilko Drive / Como Lake Avenue routes.

                            Oxford Street. This facility provides a north-south connection within
                            the developed area of Northeast Coquitlarn. It also connects with
                            designated facilities within Port Coquitlam.

                            Northeast Coquitlam. Several roadways in Northeast Coquitlam have
                            been identified through the Northeast Coquitlam Transportation Plan
                            as signed bicycle routes. These routes were approved in the
                            Northeast Coquitlam Official Community Plan and are included in
                            the STP. The designated roadways do not currently exist and are
                        In most cases, these signed routes would not require any improvements
                        beyond the addition of bicycle route signage. However, crossing
                        treatments - such as median refuges and/or signals - may be required
                        where some routes cross major collectors and arterials. These aspects of
                        the Plan should be considered in the near future.
                        Other Network Improvements

                        This section identifies additional considerations to the Bicycle Network
                        Plan that are not provided on the existing road network. They are
                        included here to identifjr them as potential issues, but they will be
                        considered in more detail in other initiatives.

                        e   Local connections. There are a number of ‘undefined’ local
                            connections shown in Figure 4.3.1. These represent locations where
URB&NS/STEMS                connections between cycling facilities or to major local destinations
0        CITYOF
              C0qorrt.w   need to be provided, but where the existing road network could not
           Strategic      support such connections. These local connections may require
      Transportation      special treatments, such as off-street and/or crossing treatments.
                          Examples include a connection across North Road to and from
                          Lougheed Mall and Station, and a connection between the Falcon
    Paper #3 - Networ
               Options    Drive route and the Dewdney Trunk route. Future review of the
           Assessmenl     Bicycle Network Plan should consider these undefined connections
                          in detail and identify potential long-term options for improvement.

                          Off-street   pathways. Figure 4.3.1     identifies several cycling
                          connections on off-street pathways. Most of these pathways are
                          concurrently being identified through the Leisure and Parks Services
                          Recreational Trails Plan. It is recommended that the Leisure and
                          Parks Services Department be encouraged to develop paved multi-
                          use trails where these trails provide critical connections in the
                          Citywide Bicycle Network. Paved multi-use pathways accommodate
                          all types of bicycles and provide a more consistent and predictable
                          surface for cyclists. Where direct cycling connections cannot be
                          safely accommodated on the road network, it is necessary to take
                          advantage of opportunities to provide facilities outside of the road

                          There are two locations where off-street pathways have been
                          identified, but that are not part of the Recreational Trails Plan. One
                          provides a connection from Whiting Way to Regan Avenue through
                          the Burquitlam Plaza (and future SkyTrain Station) area, and the
                          other connects Wilmot Street with Thermal Drive through an
                          elementary school property. The Burquitlam connection may be
                          defined in greater detail as part of the Burquitlam Station Area Plan,
                          which is currently in development. In both cases, however, it is
                          recommended that the City negotiate with the property owners to
                          gain access through each property for a multi-use pathway

                          Waterfront Trail. In the long term, the City proposes to establish an
                          off-street pathway on the banks of the Brunette and Fraser Rivers, to
                          be known as the Waterfront Trail. It will ultimately connect to the
                          POCO Trail in Port Coquitlam and the proposed Central Valley
                          Greenway, which will provide a continuous multi-use pathway to the
                          False Creek area in Vancouver. Because the development of this trail
                          will require property acquisition, it is anticipated that it could take
                          many years to complete. It is included in Figure 4.3.1 as a key link in
                           the Bicycle Network Plan. In the interim, however, it is proposed
       Strategic           that another parallel route be used to provide an east-west
  Transportation           connection across the Pacific Reach industrial area. The interim
                           facility would be primarily located on United Boulevard and Hartley
Paper #3 - Networ
                           Avenue through the industrial area. This facility would then connect
                           to existing trails in Maquabeak Park (under the Port Mann Bridge)
       Assessment          and Colony Farm Regional Park. It is recommended that the interim
                           facility be developed as a shared facility, but that it be upgraded to
                           marked wide curb lanes on United Boulevard if the Waterfront Trail
                           is not to be completed within a reasonable length of time. The
                           remainder of the interim facility can be provided as a shared route.

                       4.4 Summary
                       Table 4.4.1 below summarizes the bicycle network facilities that are
                       included in the STP.The table includes preliminary capital costs for all
                       facilities, which are based on the assumptions discussed below.

                       For retrofitting of bicycle facilities requiring widening of the road, the
                       following unit costs were applied

                       0   Bicycle lane (urban road)      $700,000 I km / direction
                       0   Paved shoulder (rural road)    $300,000 I km / direction
                       0   Marked wide curb lane          $550,000 1 km I direction

                       It should be noted that the actual cost for the implementation of bicycle
                       facilities could vary significantly for each project, depending on various
                       site-specific characteristics. For example, the unit costs used for bicycle
                       lanes and marked wide curb lanes do not include any allowance for
                       driveway reconstruction or landscape restoration, which could add
                       significantly to the cost. These unit costs also do not include any
                       allowances for crossing treatments, such as signals and/or median
                       refuges. For the purposes of costing, it was assumed that arterial
                       roadways would require modifications to accommodate marked wide
                       curb lanes (e.g., Johnson Street).

                       In many cases, marked wide curb lanes could be implemented on
                       collector roadways by restriping the roadway and modifying parking
                       allowances. For costing, it was assumed that no collector road would
                       require widening for marked wide curb lanes and that costs would be
                       limited to restriping and signage. For collectors that require
                       modifications, it has been assumed that bicycle facilities would be
                     implemented at the time of road rehabilitation through the Road
      Strategic      Renewal Program. Because the existing municipal standard for
  Tanspodation       collectors could accommodate marked wide curb lanes, it is assumed
                     that these roads would be built to meet the standard and that there would
            Workin   be no additional cost for bicycle facilities. It is anticipated that parking
paper #3 Networf
                     restrictions would be needed on one side of the roadway to minimize the
       Assessment    need for additional road width. In this regard, the following unit costs
                     were used for marked wide curb lanes on collectors and signed bicycle

                     0   Marked wide curb lanes                 $15,000 I km
                     0   Shared bicycle route                   $4,000 I km

                     The cost to include bicycle facilities on a new road or on a road being
                     reconstructed would be much lower than the cost to retrofit existing
                     roads, because the cost to add bicycle facilities can simply be ‘piggy-
                     backed’ on to construction costs. The following costs were assumed for
                     the addition of bicycle facilities to new or reconstructed roads.

                     0   Bicycle lanes                          $200,000 I km I direction
                     0   Marked wide curb lanes                 $120,000 I km I direction

                     The table does not include costs for facilities that are anticipated to be
                     covered by development, such as the David Avenue conidor and the
                     southerly crossing.

                     The table identifies potential finding partners for the measures, as well
                     as the needs-based priority for each measure. These priorities are based
                     on land use characteristics, bicycle demand patterns, implementation
                     considerations (ease of construction and cost), and the overall
                     connectivity of the bicycle network.

                                                                  Table 4.4.1: Summary of Bicycle Facilities
                                                        I Distance I PtaliminaryCort I         Potential Funding Partners                            I        Needsaard Priority

I Cost estimates are C a s D order-of-magnitude and do not include property acquisition Unit costs for urban and rural retrofits have been used to estimate preliminary
costs for bicycle lanes. For marked wide curb lanes, it was assumed that all collector roads could be retrofitted with bicycle facilities with no need for alterations to the
roadway other than painting and signage For artenals, II was assumed that roadways would have to be widened to accommodate marked wide curb lanes These cost
estimates take account of opportunities to implement bicycle facilities in conjunction with road renewal programs and/or proposed road widenings.

                                         c                          1 . .

                         4.5 Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines
                Plan     This section presents a comprehensive set of guidelines to assist the
                         City of Coquitlam in designing, constructing, and maintaining bicycle
    Paper #3 Networ
                         facilities for the bicycle network. These guidelines reflect current design
           Assessment    practices adopted by the Transportation Association of Canada, as well
                         as innovative designs used in BC and elsewhere in North America. This
                         Plan recognizes that TAC will continue to monitor and update its
                         guidelines. As such, the information in this section should be considered
                         as dynamic rather than fixed.

                         These bicycle facilities design guidelines should be used for the planning,
                         design and maintenance of bicycle facilities throughout the municipality.
                         Although these guidelines are intended to maximize safety and improve
                         access and efficiency for all users, it should be recognized that the
                         consideration of costs and impacts may result in modified designs.
                         However, in areas where costs or impacts are prohibitive to achieving a
                         design guideline, the City may wish to consider alternate routes, rather
                         than using a modified standard.
                         4.5.1       How the Guidelines Were Developed
                         The guidelines identified in this report reflect the state-of-the-art in bicycle
                         planning in North America. They are based on experience in communities
                         across Canada and the United States. Design guidelines adopted by the
                         Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) form the basis of the designs
                         incorporated in the City of Coquitlam guidelines, as provided in the
                         following publications:

                            Regional Bicycle Plan - Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines,
                            TransLink, 2000.
                            Bikeway Traflc Control Guidelines for Canada, Transportation
                            Association of Canada, 1998.
                            Pedestrian Crossing Control Manual, Transportation Association of
                            Canada, 1998.
                            Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood T’raflc Calming, Transportation
                            Association of CanaMCanadian Institute of Transportation Engineers,
                            In-Line Skating Review: Phase 2, Transportation Association of
                            Canada, 1997.
                                                                                                   4-2 1
                        Urban Szqplement to the Geometric Design Guide for Canadian
       Strategic        Roads, Transportation Association of Canada, 1995.
              Plan   In cases where TAC has not provided guidelines for specific situations
                     encountered when planning for bicycles, other key resources were used in
        - workinst
Paper #3 Networ      a supplemental capacity in developing the City of Coquitlam Bicycle
       Assessmeni    Facility Design Guidelines, including:
                        Cycling Guide, Ministry of Transportation and Highways, 2000.
                        Guide for the Development o Bicycle Facilities, American
                        Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 1999.
                        Minnesota Bicycle Transportation Planning and Design Guidelines,
                        Minnesota Department of Transportation, 1996.
                        Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, Oregon Department of
                        Transportation, 1995.
                        Bicycle Blueprint - Creating a Transportation Alternative, City of
                        Surrey, 1993.
                        Community Cycling Manual, Canadian Institute of Planners, 1990.
                     4.5.2     On-Street Facilities
                     On-street facilities described in this section include three types - shared
                     bicycle routes, marked wide curb lanes, and bicycle lanes. Crossings are
                     discussed separately in Section 4.5.4.
                  Shared Bicycle Routes
                     Shared bicycle routes generally make use of local streets, local collector
                     roads and local commercial/industrial roads. Because fewer motor
                     vehicles use these roads, bicycles and motor vehicles can safely share
                     the road space. Consequently, it is not necessary to provide extra width
                     for bicycles or designate specific areas of the roadway for bicycle use.
                     All that is required is ‘bicycle route’ signage, as described in Section
                     Facility design guidelines that apply to shared bicycle routes include:

                        When a roadway that is designated as a bicycle route is
                        reconstructed, widened or overlaid, it is recommended that gravel
                        driveways with significant traffic be paved back a minimum of
                        5.0 my as illustrated in Figure 4.5.1, to prevent loose gravel from
     O n OF CoQU-rLAr   spilling on to the side of the roadway. It is generally not necessary to
       Strategic        pave gravel driveways to single-family residential dwellings, as
  Transportation        traffic on these driveways is low.

         - Workmf
Paper #3 Networ
                        Openings in catchbasins should be oriented at an angle to the
           Options      direction of bicycle travel, so that bicycle wheels are not caught in
       Assessrnenl      the openings. Appropriate catchbasin designs are illustrated Figure
                                        Figure 4.5.1: Paved Driveway Apron

     CIW OF COqUrW                    Figure 4.5.2: Bicycle-Friendly Catchbasins

Paper #3 - Networ

                                       -    ___
                               DIRECTION OF TRAVEL

                     0   Abrupt changes in pavement elevation over drainage outlets, utility
                         covers, and maintenance covers should be avoided. Pavement
                         overlays may require that adjusting rings be used on maintenance
                         covers to bring the covers up to the elevation of the overlay.
                         Alternatively, overlays should taper into outlets and covers to avoid
                         the creation of abrupt edges in the road surface.

                     0   Shared bicycle routes should be adequately illuminated to ensure
                         that both motor vehicles and bicyclists are highly visible during non-
                         daylight hours on these shared route facilities.
                  Marked Wide Curb Lanes
                     A wide curb lane is designed to allow sufficient width for an automobile
                     to safely overtake a bicycle, without crossing into the adjacent or
                     oncoming traffic lane. This shared use of a wider curb lane also helps to
                     assimilate bicycles into the domain of the automobile, fostering a
                     mutual respect between motorists and cyclists. This helps to reduce
                     conhsion and conflicts between bicycles and motorists at intersections,
                     where the majority of problems with conventional bicycle lanes occur.

                  A marked wide curb lane must incorporate bicycle symbols stencilled
     Strategic    on the right side of the lane at regular intervals. This identifies the right
Transportation    side of the lane as the area used by bicycles, which serves to alert
                  motorists to the potential presence of bicycles even when there is no
                  bicycle on the road. Because an area of the roadway is identified for
       Options    bicycle use, marked wide curb lanes are more attractive than unmarked
   Assessment     wide curb lanes to casual and recreational cyclists who may be afraid of
                  traffic. The roadway stencils are also a means of increasing awareness
                  of bicycle facilities and encouraging cycling.

                  Marked wide curb lanes do not include a white line separating bicycles
                  from other traffic, which means that some concerns regarding standard
                  bicycle lanes are avoided. Many motorists - and even cyclists -
                  interpret the white line to mean that cyclists are confined to the bicycle
                  lane. With marked wide curb lanes, on the other hand, motorists and
                  cyclists both recognize that cyclists are free to ride elsewhere on the
                  roadway as necessary (such as to make a left turn or when travelling
                  through an intersection).

                  In the following situations, marked wide curb lanes are the preferred
                  method of providing bicycle facilities:

                     Moderate to high traffic volumes. Marked wide curb lanes are
                     recommended for roads with relatively high traffic volumes,
                     including major and minor collector roads, and arterial roads. The
                     additional road width provided by the wide curb lane and the
                     demarcation provided by the bicycle symbols allow motor vehicles
                     and bicycles to effectively share the curb lane along major roadways.

                     High turning movement volumes. Along corridors with numerous
                     intersections and driveways, wide curb lanes with bicycle stencils
                     are the preferred option. Cyclists are able to use all areas of the
                     travel lane to avoid hazards, anticipate turning vehicles and merge
                     across traffic to make left turns. With conventional bicycle lanes,
                     some cyclists feel as though they must remain within the bicycle
                     lane at all times, and may even feel a false sense of security within
                     the painted lane.

                     On-street parking. The shared-lane concept of the marked wide curb
                     lane works best with on-street parking. If a car door suddenly opens
                     in front of a cyclist, he or she is f e to move into an area of the
                     shared lane where they are not obstructed. With a conventional
      CIW OF CWunuMc
                           bicycle lane, motorists may not be expecting cyclists to leave their
        Strategic          marked lane.
             Plan      0   Frequent bus stops. The wide curb lane allows cyclists to
                           manoeuvre easily around stopped buses. With conventional bicycle
 Paper #3 - Networ
                           lanes, cyclists are often expected to wait behind stopped buses -
        Assessment         which rarely happens. The wide curb lane provides enough width to
                           allow cyclists to pass by stopped buses. There is also less conhsion
                           between cyclists and bus drivers when buses are pulling next to the
                           curb to make a stop.

                       Other benefits of marked wide curb lanes include:

                       0   Marked wide curb lanes educate cyclists as to how to share the road
                           with other vehicles. Bicycle lanes, on the other hand, do not
                           encourage shared use. Because bicycle facilities cannot yet be
                           provided on every road, cyclists benefit from learning how to ride in
                           traffic and share the travel lane with other vehicles.
                       0   Marked wide curb lanes do not accumulate debris to the same
                           extent as bicycle lanes. Because motor vehicles are allowed to use
                           all areas of the marked wide curb lane or shared lane, the sweeping
                           motion of vehicles helps to clear the lane of debris that could create
                           hazards for cyclists. With bicycle lanes, debris is often swept from
                           the vehicle lanes into the bicycle lane, creating a need for frequent
                           road sweeping.

                       0   Marked wide curb lanes are more economical than bicycle lanes.
                           Because the marked wide curb lane is a shared-use lane, only an
                           additional 50 to 70 cm of pavement is typically needed to
                           accommodate bicycles. In comparison, a bicycle lane requires 1.5 to
                           1.8 m of additional road width. In some cases, additional right-of-
                           way width may be required to implement bicycle lanes. In some
                           cases, marked wide curb lanes can be established by narrowing the
                           adjacent travel lane(s).

                       Key design guidelines regarding marked wide curb lanes include:

                       e   A width of 4.3 m (not including the gutter) is recommended, as
                           illustrated in Figure 4.5.3. A width of 4.3 m allows a motor vehicle
                           to safely pass a cyclist without having to cross into the oncoming
                           travel lane. Where on-street parking is provided, this standard also
                                                                                            4-26    0
                     allows enough width for cyclists to avoid conflicts with opening car
       Strategic     doors. The width of a marked wide curb lane should not exceed 4.5
  Transportation     m, however, as this would enable vehicles to pass other vehicles on
                     the right.
        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ
                     It is important that the width of the gutter is not included in the 4.3-
       Assessment    m width. For safety reasons, cyclists will not ride in the gutter or
                     even within 20-30 cm of the gutter. Gutters typically collect debris,
                     the surface of the gutter is often not level with the asphalt road

                     surface, and joints in the concrete gutter create bumps.
                                       Figure 4.5.3: Marked Wide Curb Lanes

                         tlA       I            I
                                                    T   I
                                                            m            i



                          GUlTER   \

                     If on-street parking exists along the route, a width of 2.4 m should be
                     allowed for parked vehicles, in addition to the 4.3 m required f r the
                     wide curb lane with stencils. As illustrated in Figure 4.5.3, the 2.4-m
                     width of the parking lane includes the gutter.

                     Any increase in the width of the curb lane is desirable for bicycle
                     routes. However, it is recommended that the widths of other traffic
                     lanes be reduced as necessary to provide a curb lane width of at least
            O WLM
                     4.0 m as an interim condition, until such time as a 4.3-m marked
      Strategic      wide curb lane can be provided.
                     Bicycle symbols, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.4, should be placed at
                     regular intervals (every 200m), as well as in advance of all
        Options      intersections and major driveways on the right side of the wide curb
    Assessment       lanes. The bicycle symbols identify the right portion of the lane as a
                     bicycle facility, and enhance the awareness of road users as to the
                     potential presence of cyclists in the curb lane. In cases where marked
                     wide curb lanes are provided and on-street parking is not permitted,
                     the bicycle stencils should be placed on the pavement next to the
                     gutter pan. Where on-street parking is provided, the bicycle stencils
                     should be placed on the right side of the travel lane, adjacent the
                     parking lane. Figure 4.5.5 illustrates the placement of bicycle
                     symbols with wide curb lanes.
                             Figure 4.5.4 Marked Wide Curb Lane Bicycle Symbol

                           100 m m

                                                                                      4-28    0
                             Figure 4.5.5: Bicycle Symbol Placement in Marked Wide Curb Lanes
  Transportation                                                                            1

        - wofkrnSI
Paper #3 Networ


                     0   Where a wide curb lane ends and the travel lane is reduced to a
                         width of less than the interim marked wide curb lane standard
                         identified in Section 4.5.8, a warning sign should be posted in
                         advance to inform cyclists of the lane narrowing.

                     Notable cases where marked wide curb lanes have been applied include:

                         Transportation Association of Canada recently adopted marked wide
                         curb lanes in its recent Bikeway Traffic Control Guidelines for

                         Denver, Colorado. The marked wide curb lane concept has been
                         applied along Denver bicycle routes, with a modified bicycle stencil
                         design. The bicycle stencil is based on a CalTrans design and has
                         been integrated with an arrow stencil. This approach has been
                         implemented effectively since June 1993.

                         San Francisco, California. Bicycle planners in San Francisco have
                         recently applied the marked wide curb lane concept to their bicycle
                         network. They incorporate the bicycle symbol pavement marking at
                         regular intervals.

     C~WOFCOQUITUM         Hamilton, Ontario. Marked wide curb lanes have been used on a
       Strategic           number of bicycle routes in Hamilton, similar to the design
  Transportation           developed in Denver.
                           Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton. The RMOC will be
Paper #3     workinf
           - Nefwor
          Options          implementing marked wide curb lanes on its regional roads as part of
      Assessment           its Cycling Facilities Improvement Program.

                           Surrey, BC. The City of Surrey currently has several wide curb lane
                           routes, including 64 Avenue from Scott Road to 152 Street,
                           152 Street from Highway 10 to 64 Avenue, and 92 Avenue from
                           Scott Road to 128 Street. Although these routes do not yet
                           incorporate bicycle symbol pavement markings, the City has adopted
                           guidelines for marked wide curb lanes and will be adding the bicycle
                           symbols to new and existing routes in the near future.

                       Marked wide curb lanes have also been recommended for bicycle routes
                       in the following jurisdictions:
                       0   New Westminster
                       0   Delta
                       0   University of British Columbia
                       0   Nanaimo
                       0   Kamloops
                    Bicycle Lanes
                       Bicycle lanes are separate travel lanes on the roadway for cyclists,
                       identified with a solid white line that is dashed at intersections to
                       indicate where motor vehicles may cross the lane for turning
                       movements. Specific guidelines for bicycle lanes include:
                           Bicycle lanes should never be planned for two-way travel - cyclists
                           should always travel one-way in the direction of travel of adjacent

                           At a minimum, bicycle lanes should be 1.5 m wide, excluding the
                           gutter, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.6. On roadways with posted speeds
                           of 70 km/h or more, bicycle lanes should be 1.8 m wide, excluding
                           the gutter. Bicycle lanes should not be wider than 1.8 m, as this
                           encourages two-way bicycle travel and encourages motorists to park
                           in the lane.

     CJnoFCoqLQrm                              Figure 4.5.6: Bicycle Lanes
       Strategic         r                                                                 1
  Transportation         I             -   1            I        I           I   I    1 1
           Plan              GUTTER’

        - workinst
Paper #3 Networ


                                                I                    - -
                     I                                                 I

                                                                     1 Ern
                                               GUTTER \               1
                         I      I              I       -1        I           I   I     1

                     Bicycle lanes should be continuous between intersections. If a
                     section of road between two intersections is improved to provide
                     sufficient width for a bicycle lane without improvements to the
                     remaining sections of road, the lane should not be marked or
                     otherwise identified until the remaining sections are improved to
                     provide sufficient width for the bicycle lane.

                     Bicycle lane lines are white and 10 cm in width.

                     Bicycle lane lines should be dashed for a distance of 15 m in
                     advance of intersections, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.7. This allows a
                     cyclist to exit from the bicycle lane to make a left turn, and allows
                     right-turning vehicles to merge into the bicycle lane. The bicycle
                     lane line should be discontinued through the intersection.

                                                                                       4-3 1
                                  Figure 4.5.7: Bicycle Lane Markings at Intersections

Paper #3 Networ

                     e   Bicycle lanes should be identified with a painted bicycle symbol and
                         may include an arrow indicating the direction of travel, as illustrated
                         in Figure 4.5.8. Bicycle lane symbols should be spaced at
                         approximately 350-111 intervals for roadways with a posted speed
                         limit of 50 km/h (symbol spacing = posted speed in km/h x 7), and
                         should be located after intersections, as illustrated in Figure 2.6. This
                         alerts drivers and bicyclists entering the roadway to the existence of
                         the bicycle lane.

                     e   Where bicycle lanes are to be provided adjacent to on-street parked
                         vehicles, the combined width of the bicycle/parking lane should be
                         at least 3.9 m. This provides 2.4 m for the parking lane and 1.5 m for
                         bicycles, and provides adequate clearance for cyclists to avoid
                         opened car doors. The preferred approach, however, is to provide
                         marked wide curb lanes adjacent to parked vehicles, as the absence
                         of the white bicycle lane line allows cyclists to manoeuvre
                         throughout the entire curb lane to avoid parked cars and other
                         hazards as necessary.

                     0   Special treatment is required at intersections to minimize conflicts
       Strategic         between cyclists and right-turning vehicles, as illustrated Figure
  Transportation         4.5.9. The optional double right-turn-only lane is not desirable
                         unless there are no alternatives, as it is difficult for cyclists to cross a
                         lane of moving traffic in advance of an intersection.
Paper #3 Networ
                               Figure 4.5.9: Right-turn Lane Configurations for Bicycle Lanes

                    Paved Shoulders
                     On roads with rural cross-sections, where there are no curbs or gutters,
                     cyclists are accommodated on paved shoulders. Specific design
                     guidelines regarding paved shoulders include:

                     0   Shoulders should be a minimum of 1.5 m in width, as illustrated in
                         Figure 4.5.10. On roadways with a posted speed in excess of 70
                         km/h and daily traffic volumes greater than 5,000 vehicles, a paved
                         shoulder width of 2.0 m is recommended. For roadways with posted
                         speeds in excess of 80 km/h and daily traffic volumes greater than
                         10,000 vehicles, a minimum width of 2.5 m is recommended.

                     0   Paved shoulders should never be planned nor designated for two-
                         way travel - cyclists should always travel one-way in the direction
                         of travel of adjacent traffic.

     ClWOF COQUrrLaM                        Figure 4.5.10: Paved Shoulder

        - WofkinSt
Paper #3 Networ

                                    Paved Shoulder

                       Shoulders shouldbe paved and free of obstructions, such as drainage
                       aprons. If rumble strips are used to prevent motor vehicle drive-off
                       accidents, these should be located on the far left of the shoulder,
                       immediately adjacent the white fog line, and should be a maximum
                       of 30 cm wide, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.1 1. The remainder of the
                       shoulder should be a minimum of 1.8 m wide.

                                _   _   _   _   ~

                                 Figure 4.5.11: Paved Shoulder with Rumble Strip

                       Shoulders should incorporate a 2.0% crossfall to provide adequate
                       drainage, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.10. The crossfall of the
                       shoulders should not exceed 5%.

                                                                                       4-34    0
0        rv
         o w COpurnmM    0   Non-emergency parking or stopping should be prohibited on the
           Strategic         shoulder at all times.
                         0   Where possible, shoulders should be                continuous between
            - workinf
    Paper #3 Networ
           Assessment        Where a paved shoulder ends and cyclists must ride within a traffic
                             lane, a warning sign should be posted in advance to advise cyclists
                             that the shoulder ends, and to advise motorists that cyclists may be
                             present on the roadway.
                         4.5.3      Multi-Use Pathways
                         Off-street facilities include multi-use pathways. It is recommended that
                         multi-use pathways be constructed where off-street facilities have been
                         identified in the Bicycle Network Plan, because all pathways, even those
                         built solely for bicycles, will attract pedestrians, runners, wheelchair users,
                         people with strollers, in-line skaters, equestrians, dogs and other animals.
                         This Plan recognizes that most multi-use pathways identified in the
                         Bicycle Network Plan will fall under the jurisdiction of Leisure and Parks
                         Services, which is currently developing a trail classification system. The
                         purpose of this section is to provide guidance on the design of multi-use
                         pathways where they are intended to accommodate cyclists as part of the
                         City’s Bicycle Network.

                         The primary design challenge is accommodating all users of multi-use
                         pathways, whose speeds may range from less than 4km/h to over
                         50 km/h. Key design considerations are identified below:

                             Pathways should be designed for two-way travel, as it is difficult to
                             ensure compliance with one-way designations.

                             Separated pathways should be avoided. In communities that have
                             attempted to separate users, pedestrians frequently use the pathways
                             designated for cyclists and in-line skaters, and vice versa, defeating
                             the purpose of. separated pathways. The preferred approach is to
                             construct a single pathway of sufficient width to accommodate all

                             Painted centrelines should not be used to separate directions of travel
                             on a multi-use pathway. Centrelines can contribute to conflicts that
                             arise when faster-moving pathway users cross the centreline to pass
     Cin OF C o w r m       slower-moving users. Many pathway users also disregard
       Strategic            centrelines, which also creates conflicts. The use of centrelines
  Transportation            should be restricted to horizontal curves with limited sight distances,
                            as described later in this section.
Paper #3 Network
                        a   Multi-use pathways should be hard-surfaced, using asphalt or
       Assessment           concrete, as hard surfaces accommodate all users (including persons
                            in wheelchairs and in-line skaters). Compacted aggregates (such as
                            crusher dust) may be used where softer, porous surfaces are
                            necessary to minimize environmental impacts. Figure 4.5.12
                            provides an illustration of the minimum requirements for pathway
                            structure for asphalt, concrete, and aggregate.

                                                                                              4-36    0
     QN OF Cwm~


Paper #3 - Networ
       Assessmenl                  1. 50 mm. weanng wuse asphalt
                                   2. 100 mm. I 9 mm minus uushed stone base
                                   3. Compact subrade
                                   4 IQ minus crushed stone base or turf shoulder


                         ///I II\\\l I1///1   I1\\\1 II/// 3 \\\I II///l II\\\l II///l II\\\
                                   I 100 mm concrete with joints spaced at 2 5 m
                                   2 100 mm, sand
                                   3. Compact subgrade
                                   4 I g mrn minus crushed stone base or turf shoulder

                         ... ...1. ..... ........... .......-..=.-
                         .. ..    ...................:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.f-li i
                                                      . .........


                            GRANULAR SUBGRADE                    GRANULAR SUBGRADE
                             1. 100 mm aggregate surfacing       1 100 mm aggregate surfaang
                                                                 2 100 mm. 19 mm minus Crushed
                                                                     stone base

                            3 Compacted subgmde
                            4 19 mm minus CNShed stone base or turf shoulder

                      The guidelines identified in Figure 4.5.1 2 reflect minimum
                      standards, and are sufficient to accommodate occasional use by
                      lightweight vehicles such as automobiles and pick-up trucks for
                      which single axle loads do not exceed 1000 kg. If a pathway is to be
                      used by heavier service vehicles, the dimensions should be increased
                      as summarized in Table 4.5.1.

      ClnoFCoQu~      Table 4.5.1: Increased Pathway Structures to Accommodate Heavier Vehicles
                                                         I Asphalt             [ Concrete
        Strategic          Medium trucks                 I 75 mm asphalt       I 125 mm concrete
   Transportation          (single axle load c 3.000 kg) 150 rnm crushed gravel 150 mm sand
             Plan          Heavy trucks                    100 mm asphalt        150 mm concrete
                           (single axle load c 6,000 kg) 150 mm crushed gravel 150 mm sand

 Paper #3 - Networ
        Assessment      All vegetation, including roots, should be removed in the preparation
                        of the subgrade. To control new growth, soil sterilant or lime
                        treatment of the subgrade may be used. Plants that can cause other
                        problems - such as plants with thorns that can puncture bicycle tires
                        - should be controlled. Paths located adjacent to trees are at risk of
                        damage from tree roots. Preventative methods include removal of
                        vegetation, realignment of the path away from trees, and placement
                        of root barriers along the edge of the path, as illustrated Figure
                        4.5.13. An effective barrier is created with a 300-mm deep metal
                        shield. Greater depth is required for some trees such as cottonwoods.
                                 Figure 4.5.13: Root Barrier along Multi-Use Pathway

                        Multi-use pathways should be a minimum of 4.0 m wide, as
                        illustrated in Figure 4.5.14. It is recognized that the actual width may
                        be constrained by right-of-way, topography, or other competing

                        The horizontal clearance from the edge of the pathway to a fixed
                        object greater than 0.15 m in height (tree or signpost, for example)
                        should be a minimum of 1.0 m, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.15. Next
                        to side slopes, a minimum of 0.5 m clearance should be provided,
                        with the area between the pathway and the side slope no steeper than
URB&NMEMS               1:6. Where railings are provided along a pathway, a minimum of 0.5
                         m clearance should be provided. Thus, a pathway that is 4.0 m wide
       strategic         would have a clear width of 5.0 m from railing to railing.
            Plan                    Figure 4.5.14: Multi-Use Pathway Dimensions

Paper #3 Networ

                                                                           0 5m
                                                 rhoulder                shoulder

                                     Figure 4.5.15: Minimum Pathway Clearance

                     0   Where a pathway is located parallel to and adjacent to a roadway, a
                         minimum horizontal separation must be provided as illustrated in
                         Figure 4.5.16. Where pathways are adjacent roads with rural cross-
                         sections (no curb and gutter), a minimum separation of 3.0 m should

                     be provided where posted roadway speeds are 60 km/h or less, and a
                     minimum of 7.0 m where posted roadways speeds are 70 km/h or
  Transpottation     greater. These horizontal separation requirements for rural cross-
                     sections can be reduced to the dimensions illustrated in Figure 4.5.16
        - workins
Paper #3 Networ
                     with the addition of a concrete curb 150 mm or less in height,
                     anchored to the roadway.
                                  Figure 4.5.16: Pathway Clearance from Roadway

                       Low-Volume Roads (local streets, neighbourhood collector roads)
                       Low Speed (mid awed s 50 krmhf              M,n   fm
                                                               I              I
                               Roadway                                        1                   I
                         I                        I     C I
                                                  cum and

                                                  cum and

                     In cases where a multi-use pathway is located parallel and adjacent
                     to an existing railway line, railway companies will typically have
                     minimum separation requirements to minimize the potential for
                     conflicts. Figure 4.5.17 provides an example of the many design
                     requirements for consideration in the design and construction of
                     pathways adjacent to railways.

                                                                                                      4-40   a
     CinwCoqurrm                     Figure 4.5.17: Multi-Use Pathway Adjacent to Railway
Paper #3     workinf
           - Networ

                            M L.                               -9.-   .*.pIIwIcpc   **)Ltr**m'maKK.a..-V.F
                                        . . FgZ.%%$$Z-2p-i,

                        0     If si& slopes are steeper than 1:4, the pathway edge should be a
                              minimum of 1.5 m from the top of the slope. According to several
                              American facility design standards (including the AASHTO Guide
                             for the Development o Bicycle Facilities, safety railings should be
                              provided on pathways adjacent steep slopes in the conditions
                              illustrated in Figure 4.5.18. In all cases, safety railings should be a
                              minimum of 0.5 m from the edge of pathway.
                        0    The vertical clearance to tree branches and other objects should be a
                             minimum of 2.5 m above the multi-use pathway surface, as indicated
                             in Figure 4.5.15. In underpasses and under structures more than 2.0
                             m in length, the minimum vertical clearance should be 3.0 m.

                                                                                                             4-4 1
      CINOF CopwrLaM              Figure 4.5.18: Safety Railing Adjacent to Slope

 Paper #3 Networ
        Assessment                       I    ;
                                             y -I


                       Safety railings provided along a bicycle facility should be a
                       minimum 1.4 m high. A rub-rail or safety rail, as illustrated in Figure
                       4.5.19, should be included to prevent bicycle handlebars from
                       catching the vertical supports of the railing. The rub-rail or safety
                       rail should be a minimum 20-cm strip that provides a smooth surface
                       along the length of the railing between the heights of 0.90 m and
                       1.1 m.

                                                                                        4-42     0
                                      Figure 4.5.19: Safety Railing with Rub-rail

        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ

                     0   Where multi-use pathways accommodate in-line skaters, a minimum
                         width of 4.0 m is required. The width required by an in-line skater is
                         determined not only by the skating stride, but also a manoeuvring
                         allowance, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.20. Guidelines presented in the
                         Transportation Association of Canada’s In-Line Skating Review -
                         Phase 2 for in-line skating facilities identify a minimum pathway
                         width of 3.0 m for two-way exclusive use by in-line skaters and 4.0
                         m for two-way pathways shared with pedestrians and cyclists.

     CmoFCopulrm            Figure 4.5.20: Dimensions Occupied by In-Line Skater


Paper #3 - Networ


                     Pathway surfaces should incorporate a 2% cross-slope in order to
                     provide positive drainage, with maximum 3% superelevation on

                                       3%                      Sustained
                                       5%                     30m or less
                                       10%                    15m or less

                     Where grades exceed the maximum grades specified in Table 4.5.2,
                     ‘Steep Hill’ warning signs should be placed at the top of steep
                     sections to advise pathway users travelling downhill of the steep
                     grade. This and other warning signs are described in Section 4.5.6.

                     Sight distances are determined based on minimum design speeds of
                     35 k d h for pathways on level ground, and 50 Iunlh for pathways
                     with grades of more than 3%. Table 4.5.3 provides a summary of
UR~NSYSEMS           minimum sight distances for various conditions.

                        Table 4.5.3: Minimum Sight Distances for Multi-Use Pathways
                                                     I                                                   1
       Strategic    Min.SSD=     V2      + 0.695V        SSD = stopping sight distance
  Transportation               255 (f+g)                 V = bicycle design speed, kmlh
            Plan                                         f = coefficient of friction = 0.25
                                                         g = grade mlm (rise or descentlrun)
        - Workin$
Paper #3 Networ

                                Min R =     Vz
                                                             V = bicycle design speed kmlh
                                                             e = superelevation of bikeway
                                  127.5 (e*                  f = coefficient of tiction
                            V (kmlh)                       f                         Min. R (m)
                               35                        0.26                           35
                               40                        0.25                           45
                               50                        0.22                         80
                                60                       0.18                        140

                     Where horizontal curves are less than the required minimum radius,
                     the pathway should be widened by at least 1.0 m through the curve
                     so as to provide additional room for pathway users to manoeuvre
                     through the curve.

                     Where barrier posts are used along multi-use pathways to restrict
                     motor vehicle access, a single barrier post is preferred. Where
                     multiple bamer posts are used, they should be used in odd numbers
                     and spaced wide enough (min. 1.5 m) to allow passage by cyclists,
                     bicycle trailers and wheelchair users. The use of odd-numbered posts
                     ensures that pathway users travelling in opposite directions pass
     ClN OF COQUrrUrnr       through different gaps between barrier posts, rather than attempting
                             to pass through the same centre gap as would occur with an even
  Transportation             number of posts. Additionally, bamer posts should be placed a
                             minimum of 8 m from the curb or the edge of the sidewalk, and
                             should be painted with bright, light colours for visibility.
PaDer #3   - Networ
                         0   Where cyclists would be required to climb or descend stairs to reach
                             a pathway, a ramp should be provided on both sides of the stairs to
                             enable cyclists to roll their bicycles up or down the stairs, as
                             illustrated in Figure 4.5.21. Ramps should not exceed a 25% slope.
                             Handrails should be provided as specified in the BC Building Code.
                             However, care should be taken to provide a railing design and
                             placement that dues not make it difficult for cyclists to push their
                             bicycles up or down the ramp.
                                            Figure 4.5.21: Bicycle Ramp on Stairs

                         0   When bollards are installed at locations where multi-use pathways
                             intersect roadways, they should be set back a minimum of 6.0 m
                             f o the roadway to allow service vehicles to park at the entrance of
                             the pathway to avoid removal of the bollards or encroachment on to
                             the adjacent roadway.

                         Generally, illumination of multi-use pathways is not necessary, and may
                         not be considered desirable by residents adjacent to a pathway.
                         Locations where illumination is essential include intersections with
                         roadways, underpasses and locations where night-time security is
                         considered an issue.
       Strategic     The following illumination levels are recommended for multi-use
  Transportation     pathways. Horizontal illumination is measured at pavement level, and
                     the uniformity ratio is calculated by dividing the average illumination
                     level by the minimum illumination level.
        - wOrkinSt
Paper #3 Networ
       Assessmeni            Illumination levels at intersections with arterial roads and
                             collector roads should be a minimum average horizontal
                             illumination level of 15 lux, with a minimum uniformity ratio of

                             Illumination levels in pedestrianhicycle underpasses should be a
                             minimum average horizontal illumination level of 45 lux, with a
                             minimum uniformity ratio of 4: 1.

                     At intersections with roadways, pathways should be illuminated for a
                     distance of 25 m on either side of the roadway. In all cases, light
                     standards should be located no closer than 1.0 m from the edge of the
                     pathway and, if positioned over the pathway, should provide a minimum
                     2.5 m vertical clearance (or 3.0 m if used in an underpass).
                     4.5.4      Crossings
                     The critical locations on a bikeway or pathway are where these facilities
                     intersect major roadways. Crossing treatments can be used to assist
                     cyclists, pedestrians and others in crossing major roads, and to minimize
                     potential conflicts with motor vehicles. This section provides an
                     overview of crossing treatments, including markedsigned crossings,
                     median refbges and signalized crossings.
                  Bicycle Routes
                     Where on-street bicycle routes intersect major roads, a variety of
                     crossing treatments can be applied, including:

                     0   Signed crossing. Where bicycle routes intersect major roads with
                         relatively low traffic volumes or regular gaps in traffic flow, all that
                         may be required are signs indicating the presence of the bicycle

                     0   Raised median island. In situations where the interruption of traffic
                         flow on a major road is not warranted, but traffic volumes are too
                         high to rely on a signed crossing alone, a raised median island can be
     C m OF Cwuirm
                         provided. The median island, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.22, allows
                         cyclists to cross one direction of traffic at a time, rather than having
  TranspoH a t b                                                                      hs
                         to wait for a gap in both directions of traffic flow. T i reduces
                         delays to cyclists, and improves safety for cyclists by increasing the
                         visibility of the crossing to motorists.

Paper #3 - Networ
           Options        Figure 4.5.22: Raised Median Island for Shared Bicycle Route Crossing

                              Major Street

                            Medm Refuge Taper
                  wlth Road W l h
                                                     Culb Ramps


                         The installation of a raised median island may result in the loss of
                         some on-street parking spaces on the major road to accommodate the
                         taper of the median islands.

                     0   Signalized crossing. Where high traffic volumes on a major road do
                         not permit a bicyclist to safely cross the road, even with a median
                         refuge, a traffic signal may be required. The signal can be activated
                         by either a cyclist push-button located adjacent the curb
                         (supplementing the pedestrian pushbuttons), or by an in-pavement
                         loop detector. Loop detectors that are most easily activated by
                         bicycles are illustrated in Figure 4.5.23. Some municipalities have
                         recently begun using circular detectors ( ) and have found that
                         these have the greatest sensitivity to bicycles. Other designs include
                         the diagonal quadruple loop (A), which can detect bicycles over its
                         entire area, and the quadruple loop (B), which is most sensitive in
                         the centre. In all cases, it is recommended that loops used to detect
                         bicycles be accompanied by pavement markings that identify the
                         'hot-spot' on which cyclists can situate their bicycle to activate the
                         signal, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.24. Where bicycle sensitive loops
     Crro~Copwru~         are not provided along a bikeway, push button activation should be
       Strategic          provided adjacent the curb.
           Plan                         Figure 4.5.23: In-Pavement Loop Detectors

Paper #3   - Networ

                                      Figure 4.5.24 Loop Detector Pavement Marking

                               position dicycle
                               wheels on lines
                                    to activate
                                  the detector

                     Multi-Use Pathways
                      Multi-use pathway crossings can be located at intersections and mid-
                      block, as described below.

                      0   Where pathways are located parallel to a roadway, crossings should
                          be located as close to an intersection as possible. Figure 4.5.25
     Cirv OF Copuirm
                       illustrates how a pathway should be accommodated at a signalized
       Strategic       intersection in order to maximize the visibility of approaching
  Transportation       pathway users to motorists. Figure 4.5.26 illustrates a similar
                       crossing at an unsignalized intersection.
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options     As illustrated in Figure 4.5.25 and Figure 4.5.26, it is preferable to
       Assessment      use standard traffic control signage (such as stop signs) to regulate
                       the movement of pathway users at intersections. Cyclists in
                       particular should be treated as vehicles and should, therefore, be
                       controlled by the same signage as motorists. In some cases, however,
                       there may be a desire to supplement the signage with physical
                       devices to reinforce the need for cyclists to stop at intersections. If
                       such devices are used, bollards are preferable. These should always
                       be installed in odd numbers (typically one or three). Bicycle baMes
                       (two staggered ‘gates’ that create a tight chicane through which
                       cyclists must pass) are another, less desirable, option for slowing
                       cyclists. BaMes represent a significant barrier to cyclists and are
                       often impassable for bicycles pulling trailers and tandem bicycles.
                       Unless baMes are highly visible, there is also a potential risk for
                       cyclists hitting them, particularly at night. Although they achieve the
                       effect of slowing cyclists down, they discourage the equal treatment
                       of cyclists as vehicles on the road network and discourage the use of
                       bicycles for utilitarian travel. For these reasons, they are the least
                       desirable physical device for encouraging cyclists to slow and their
                       use is discouraged.

                       To minimize potential safety concerns associated with mid-block
                       crossings, these should be located so as to maximize visibility for
                       approaching motorists, and should be adequately signed and
                       illuminated as described in this section. The addition of a median
                       island - as described in this section - also helps to maximize
                       visibility for motorists and awareness of the crossing.

                       Where pathways approach a mid-block section of a roadway at an
                       angle, it is recommended that the pathway be reconfigured to
                       intersect the roadway at or close to perpendicular, as illustrated in
                       Figure 4.5.27.

                                                                                        4-50     0
     Qn OF Copurrmu    Figure 4.5.25: Multi-Use Pathway Crossing at Signalized Intersection

Paper #3 - Networ

                      Figure 4.5.26: Multi-Use Pathway Crossing at Unsignalized Intersection


                                                        I    /

                         88 n q u r d                   I

                                                                                          4-5 1
     Cin OF C O Q U ~ M          Figure 4.5.27: Typical Alignment for Diagonal Pathway Crossing

         - work’nf
Paper #3 Networ


                          Common crossing treatments for multi-use pathways include:

                          e   Marked crossings are provided where multi-use pathways cross
                              major roads with relatively low traffic volumes and consistent gaps
                              in traffic flow, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.28. As illustrated, bollards
                              (placed in odd numbers) are the preferred treatment for slowing
                              pathway users approaching the crossing, and for preventing
                              motorized vehicles from entering the pathway. As described
                              previously, baffles are another option, but should be used very
                              sparingly if they are used at all.

     November 2001
             ~1lWze.l m1.1.RrUl-
                                                                                                  4-52     0
     c / l Y O f COQWTIAM                                             -
                                         Figure 4.5.28: Marked Crossing Multi-Use Pathway
            Plan                @-                   '-n                    n
Paper #3     WorkinSt
           - Networ
                                e WGIS




                            e   Raised median island crossings allow pathway users to cross one
                                direction of traffic at a time at major roadways. An illustration of a
                                pathway median island crossing is provided in Figure 4.5.29.


Paper #3 - Networ

                                                                                ~    ~-

                                                                                    Not lo Scale

                       Signalized crossings. Where high traffic volumes and a consistent
                       flow of traffic make it difficult for pathway users to cross a major
                       roadway, pedestriadcyclist activated signals can be provided. In
                       most cases, it is recommended that a 'hot' pedestrian button be used
                       to activate the signal immediately for pathway users, unless traffic
                       conditions necessitate the coordination of signal timings along the
                       roadway in question.

                       Grade-separated crossings. Where it is not possible to provide an at-
                       grade crossing facility, such as with a freeway, major highway,
                       railway, or waterway, cyclists and pedestrians can be provided with
                       a grade-separated crossing. Overpasses and underpasses, as
                       illustrated in Figure 4.5.30 and Figure 4.5.31, can be constructed to
                       maintain access for cyclists and pedestrians across barriers to travel.
                       Because grade-separated crossings can be very expensive, it is
                       recommended that more innovative and cost-effective options be
                       initially considered. Routings for bikeways and pathways can be
                       planned and designed to take advantage of existing grade-separated
                       crossings, where available. Innovative at-grade crossings can also be

                                                               I   ..

                     designed to minimize delays to traffic and maximize safety for
       strategic     cyclists and pedestrians.
            Pian            Figure 4.5.30: Grade-Separated Bicycle/Pedestrian Crossings

Paper #3 - Networ

                                        Skyelelpedestrian overpass

                                        Bicyclclpedestrlan underpass

                                       Figure 4.5.31: Underpass Dimensions
                       I                                                                  1

                        I                              5.0 m
  CIlV OF cO@Jl7ldM
                   Railway Crossings
Transportation        Special care should be taken at locations where a bicycle route crosses
         Pian         railway tracks at grade. Where possible, at-grade crossings of railway
                      tracks should be designed to allow the cyclists to cross at right angles to
                      the rails. A wide curb lane or bicycle lane should be widened to permit
   Assessment         crossings to approach the tracks at 60 to 90 degrees, as illustrated in
                      Figure 4.5.32. Where it is not possible to cross at an angle of at least 60
                      degrees, rubber track guards with a compressible flange filler are
                                  Figure 4.5.32: Widened Shoulder at Railway Crossing

                                           I    *

                                                                            URGE RADII

                      4.5.5     End-of-Trip Facilities
                      Design guidelines for specific end-of-trip facilities are presented in this
                      section. Also, recommended development guidelines are provided,
                      which describe desirable numbers of parking spaces, showers, and
                      lockers for new developments, and which can be incorporated into
                      Coquitlam’s development requirements. Developers should be
                      encouraged to provide end-of-trip facilities through bonusing,
                      reductions in parking requirements, and other development incentives.

                                                                                            4-56    0

Paper #3 - Neiwor
           Options   Use                               Number of Bicycle Parking Spaces
       Assessment                         Secure, Long-Term             Short-Term
                                          Parking                       Parking
                     Residentml           1 stall for every residential 0.2 bicycle parking stalls per
                                          unit                          residential unit
                     Non-Residential      10% of required off-street    To be determined on case-
                                          vehicle parking               by-case basis during
                                                                        development application
                                                                        process Primarily based
                                                                        on building use and size.

                     Relevant design guidelines for bicycle racks (short-term parking
                     facilities) include:

                        Minimum rack height of 0.75m.
                        Each bicycle stall should be accompanied by a secure bicycle
                        parking device, which enables the user to lock the frame and at least
                        one wheel with a 'U'-style locking device (without having to remove
                        a bicycle wheel).
                        Avoid bicycle racks that support the bicycle by a wheel rather than
                        the frame, or support the bicycle below its centre of gravity. These
                        designs are difficult to use, provide inadequate protection against
                        theft, and may trip pedestrians when not in use.
                        Racks should accommodate a minimum of three bicycles. Double-
                        sided designs are preferred, whereby bicycles may be locked to the
                        rack from two sides rather than just one side.
                        Racks should be easily identifiable as a bicycle rack - avoid unusual
                        or artistic designs.
                        Racks should not present any potential hazard to pedestrians due to
                        low projections.
                        Rack should not have any sharp edges or projections where clothing
                        could be caught or where users might suffer injury.
                        Materials and paint should resist rusting, corrosion, and vandalism.

                       0       Colours may be specified in beautification areas. Otherwise, colours
       Strategic               can match awnings, faqades, or other street furniture.
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options     0       Racks should be located within street allowances where a suitable
                               off-street area is not available.
                       0       Generally, racks located within the street allowance should be placed
                               adjacent to the curb in the utility strip, where other street furniture,
                               poles and trees are located.

                       0       A bicycle parking stall is defined as a space measuring 1.8 m in
                               length by 0.6 m in width, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.33. Vertical
                               parking is allowable for up to 40% of the total required number of
                               stalls and should be 1.1 m in length by 0.6 m in width.
                                       Figure 4.5.33: Dimensions for Bicycle Parking Stalls

                       0   Aisles between parked bicycles should be 1.2 m wide.
                       0       Vertical clearance should be a minimum of 1.9 m.
                       0       Racks should be oriented so that when placed in the rack, bicycles
                               are positioned parallel to the curb.
                                                                                                  4-58    0
                         Racks should be located so as to maintain a minimum of 1.75-m
  Transportation         clearance to the property line or nearest obstruction for pedestrian
            Plan         movement.

Paper #3 - Networ
                         Racks should not be placed in fire zones, loading zones, bus zones,
                         taxi zones, etc.
                         Racks should not be placed so as to conflict with other street
                         Racks adjacent to parallel curb parking should be placed so as to
                         avoid expected locations of opening car doors.
                         Racks should be bolted to the sidewalk or footings.
                         Racks located on public property cannot be designated for the
                         exclusive use of patrons of one or more establishments.
                         Owners assume all liability for bicycle racks that they install.
                         Owners must maintain bicycle racks that they install.

                     Design guidelines for secure long-term parking facilities can vary
                     because of the many different types of long-term parking, including:

                     0   Controlled access parking typically takes the form of a locked r o
                         or cage that is only accessible to the owners or operators of the
                         bicycles. The room or cage may also contain bicycle racks to
                         provide extra security against theft.

                     0   Bicycle lockers only allow access to individual bicycle owners or
                         operators. This type of facility is used where bicycles are commonly
                         left unattended for an extended period of time. An example of
                         bicycle locker parking is provided in Figure 4.5.34.

                     0   Attended bicycle parking facilities provide an element of
                         surveillance by having an attendant check in and check out bicycles
                         for owners and operators. The bicycles are typically stored in a mom
                         or fenced-off area with an attendant monitoring the stored bicycles.
                         A form of identification or ticket is presented to the attendant in
                         order to retrieve a bicycle.

     CIWOFCOQU~UM                          Figure 4.5.34: Bicvcle Lockers
                                                                                 n r r bllp -I
                                       A                       . .-. . .   - .   /

Paper #3 Networ

                  Showers and Clothing Lockers

                     Showers and clothing lockers are. required at workplaces to
                     accommodate cyclists and runners. Relevant development guidelines for
                     showers and lockers include:

                     0   The number of clothing lockers should be equal to or greater than
                         1.4 times the number of required bicycle parking spaces. Fifty
                         percent of clothing lockers should be provided for women, and 50%
                         for men.
                     0   Generally, one shower is required for each gender for every 30
                     0   Wash basins should be provided equalling the number of showers

                     Design guidelines for showers and clothing lockers include:
                     0   Clothing locker facilities should be located no more than 60 m from
                         bicycle parking. Additionally, the locker room should be located
                         within the building in which the employee works.
                     0   Clothing lockers should be a minimum of 45 cm deep, 30 cm wide
                         and 90 cm high. Clothing lockers should preferably be 50 to 55 cm
     clnw C o w w
                        in depth to accommodate business clothes stored on hangers, and
       Strategic        should be 180 cm in height so that pants and dresses can be stored
  Transportation        without wrinkling.
                        For non-residential locations with two or fewer secure long-term
        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ         parking spaces, no showers or lockers are required, but may still be
       Assessment       provided for employees. A location required to have three to six
                        secure long-term parking spaces, as specified in Table 4.5.5, must
                        have at least one shower and associated locker room for each gender.
                        Any location required to provide seven or more secure long-term
                        parking spaces must have one locker room per gender and at least
                        one shower for each gender for every six secure long-term bicycle
                        Showers should be located in separate men’s and women’s locker
                        rooms. Locker rooms also require the following elements:
                                  -   lockers
                                  -   mirror
                                  -   basin
                                  -   countertop
                                  -   electrical outlet
                        All locker rooms should be secure and accessible solely to
                        appropriate personnel.

                        Where possible, lockers may be vented with forced air or heat-traced
                        to dry cycle clothing for return trips home.
                     4.5.6    Signs and Pavement Markings
                     The application of signage and pavement markings to bikeways and
                     pathways must be done in a uniform and consistent manner to ensure
                     that they enhance safety and convenience for all users. Signage and
                     pavement markings must be warranted by use and need. An over-
                     abundance of signage and pavement markings may create a distraction
                     and may be too confusing for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. The
                     application of too many signs is also unattractive when placed along
                     roadways and pathways.
                     Provided in this section are some key guidelines for the use and
                     installation of signage and pavement markings for bicycle facilities.

                                                                                       4-6 1
  Transportation      There are three types of signs used on bicycle routes and multi-use
            Plan      pathways, as identified below. The codes used to identify these signs are
                      taken from the Transportation Association of Canada’s Bikeway Traflc
Paper #3 - Networ
           Workin!!   Control Guidelinesfor Canada.
                         Regulatory signs indicate traffic regulations. Examples of regulatory
                         signs are illustrated in Figure 4.5.35, and include stop signs, yield
                         signs, ‘Do Not Enter Except Bicycles’ signs and ‘No Parking’ signs
                         along roads with bicycle lanes.

                                         Figure 4.5.35: Example Regulatory Signs

                                  4 RBI1
                                600 mmx 75(1mm

                                                     800 mm x 600 mm
                                                                           600 mm x 600 mm

                                                                            800 mm x 900mm

                                                      6w mm x 750 mm

                         Warning signs advise cyclists and motorists of potential hazards or
                         significant changes in conditions on roads and pathways. Warning
                         signs are important for cyclists, as bicycles are more susceptible to
                         poor road conditions than motor vehicles. Warning signs are also
                         important in advising motorists of approaching bicycle and
                         pedestrian crossings. Examples of w a d n g signs include ‘Railroad
                         Crossing’, ‘Steep Grade’, and construction detour signs. These and
                         other warning signs are illustrated in Figure 4.5.36.

                                                                                             4-62   a
                                       Figure 4.5.36: Example Warning Signs


Paper #3 Networ

                         Information signs provide direction and information for cyclists and
                     others, and include:

                     - Guide signs indicate routes to major destinations, as well as
                            parking locations, crossing locations and bicycle routes. Guide
                            signs incorporate white text and arrows on a green background,
                            as illustrated in Figure 4.5.37.

                     -      Educationa I signs provide information regarding appropriate use
                            of bicycle and multi-use facilities. Examples of educational signs
                            are illustrated in Figure 4.5.38. Although these signs are
                            officially categorized as ‘warning’ and ‘regulatory’ signage, they
                            also serve a purpose in educating the public as to the rules of the
                            road. ‘Share the road’ signage should be used on roadways where
                            interim bicycle facilities are provided, as discussed in
                            Section 4.5.8. Other signs should be used in locations where sight
                            distances or roadway configurations require that motorists and
                            cyclists use caution.

     ClrYOF COQUrrLaM                    Figure 4.5.37: Example Guide Signs

Paper #3 - Networ

                                           16-23                    IC19
                                     450 m m x 450 m m         450 mm x 450 mm

                                     460 mm x 300 m m

                                       Figure 4.5.38: Example Educational Signs

                                       600 m m x 600 m m

                        Where applicable, the shape, colour and content of regulatory and
                        warning signs should be consistent with standards specified in the
                        Manual of Unijbrm TraBc Control Devices for Canada (MUTCDC).
                                                                                      4-64   0
                       The size of signs used on multi-use pathways can be smaller than
             Sirateaic specified in the MUTCDC - typically, signs on pathways are 45 cm by
                       45 cm rather than 60 cm by 60 cm. In addition, signs along multi-use
                       pathways should be situated at a height of 2.1 m from the bottom of the
               wOrkinfsign to the pathway surface, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.39.
    Paper #3 - Networ
                                   Figure 4.5.39: Vertical Placement of Pathway Signage

                                                            2.1 m

                        Placement of Signs
                                                  Pathway Surface

                        The appropriate placement of signage along a designated bikeway is an
                        important component of the implementation of bicycle facilities.
                        Regardless of how effective the signs themselves are in conveying a
                        message, if they are not placed in the proper locations, they can prove to
                        be ineffective, confusing or even hazardous for cyclists.

                        In general, signs are placed along the right side of a bikeway. However,
                        in some cases, signs can be placed on a raised median island, on the left
                        side of the bikeway, or overhead, depending on the circumstances (such
                        as visibility and sight lines). For specific sign types, other general
                        guidelines apply, as follows:

                      0   Location
  Transportation             Warning signs should be placed in advance of any hazard or
                             condition to which they apply. In some cases, it is also necessary
                             to place a sign at the point of the condition.
        - work'nSt
Paper #3 Networ
       Assessmenl             Regulatory signs, such as stop signs, should be placed as close as
                             possible to the location where the regulation is in effect. In some
                             cases, as with stop signs that are not visible due to horizontal or
                             vertical curves, advance notice of regulatory signs may be

                             Guide and information signs are required both in advance of and
                             at locations where conditions apply. In many cases, it may be
                             warranted that guide and information signs are also used to re-
                             affirm that a cyclist is on the correct route or path, particularly
                             after a conhsing intersection or junction. T i practice is
                             common with the Bicycle Route Marker Sign (IB-23), as
                             illustrated in Figure 4.5.40, which is used to keep cyclists aware
                             of the changes in route direction, as well as remind motorists of
                             the presence of cyclists.
                                        Figure 4.5.40: Directional Bicycle Rout1 Sign


                          All signs should be placed in such a way that they are facing
                          approaching cyclists at right angles to the direction of oncoming
     November 2001
                                                                                           4-66    0
0        C I r v o F C ~      traffic. If the signs are reflectorized, they should be placed at an angle
                              slightly away from approaching traffic. In cases where the alignment
      Transportation          of the road or pathway is curved or winding, the angle of placement
                              should be determined by the angle of approaching traffic, rather than
                              the angle of the bikeway edge where the sign is located.
    Paper #3 Networ
           Assessment         Frequency

                             Although it is important not to clutter a transportation conidor with
                             signs, signage must appear frequently enough to provide a clear
                             message to cyclists. In the cases where regulatory or warning signs
                             are going unnoticed, additional signs at different locations may be
                             required. For guide signs, such as the Bicycle Route Marker Sign
                             (IB-23), signs should be placed at intervals frequent enough to keep
                             cyclists aware of the changes in route direction and to remind
                             motorists of the presence of cyclists on the road. Bicycle route
                             signage should appear along a route at least every 100-200 metres,
                             depending on specific circumstances. For example, an urban street
                             with commercial uses and numerous driveways would necessitate a
                             more frequent use of route signage than every 100 m. However, a
                             rural cross section roadway with few driveways would only require a
                             route sign every 200 m. These intervals do not include signage placed
                             in advance of and after intersections.

                             It is important to note that signage can be used with bicycle stencils
                             to enhance the awareness of a bicycle route at the same location.
                             However, in most cases, the two methods can be used separately,
                             thereby making more efficient use of resources.

                              Lateral Placement

                              Signs should be placed near the edge of the nearest traffic lane, with
                              the near sign edge no less than 2.0 m, but no more than 4.5 m, away
                              from the nearest traffic lane. With multi-use pathways, the minimum
                              distance can be reduced to 1.O m.
                        Pavement Markings
                           Pavement markings are used to delineate bicycle lanes, to identify
                           crossings on roadway surfaces, to separate directions of travel on multi-
                           use pathways, and to complement regulatory and warning signs.
                           Relevant guidelines regarding pavement markings are provided below.

     CITY O C W U R M
           F            On-Road Bicycle Facilities
  Transportation        Pavement markings for on-road bicycle facilities can define bicycle
           Plan         lanes, separate opposing flows, designate lane usage, identify stop lines
             Workin     and supplement regulations or warnings of other devices such as traffic
Paper #3   - Networf    signals or signs. Overuse of pavement markings for on-road bicycle
          Options       facilities is not recommended primarily because of the slippery
                        conditions created during times of wet weather. Guidelines for on-road
                        bicycle facility pavement markings include:

                           Bicycle lanes are designated with a 10 cm white strip, bicycle
                           symbols, and directional arrow stencils, as illustrated Figure 4.5.41,
                           provided on the pavement.
                                       Figure 4.5.41: Bicycle Lane Pavement Symbol

                           Bicycle symbols should be placed at regular intervals (every 200 m),
                           as well as in advance of all intersections and major driveways on the
                           right side of the wide curb lanes. Bicycle symbols should be placed
                           after most intersections not only to identify the facility to cyclists,
                           but also to indicate the presence of cyclists to motorists.

                           Bicycle symbols should not be placed in an area where motor
                           vehicles are expected to cross a bicycle lane, such as adjacent to

                           For marked wide curb lanes, bicycle symbols should be placed on
                           the pavement adjacent the gutter or parking lane as illustrated in
                           Figure 4.5.42.

                                                                                             4-68    0
                       Figure 4.5.42: Bicycle Symbol Placement in Marked Wide Curb Lanes
  Transportatior;          I      I    I T

               Piat                   2.4m

Paper #3     workins
           - Networ


                           rt-.           .
                                                                                 #             1

                                      KID                             4.3m

                                       GUTTER \
                           r      I    I       1 -   I     I      I          I       I

                       For marked wide curb lanes, bicycle symbols may also be
                       accompanied by ‘Shared Use’ text, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.43.
                       Optional ‘Shared Use’ text should only be used as an interim
                       educational measure on newly-implemented marked wide curb lanes
                       - when bicycle symbols are subsequently repainted, the ‘Shared
                       Use’ text should not be repainted.

                       Bicycle lanes should be striped to a marked crosswalk or a point
                       where turning vehicles would normally cross them, as illustrated in
                       Figure 4.5.44 and Figure 4.5.45.

          Coquirm                 Figure 4.5.43: 'Shared Use' Text in Marked Wide Curb Lanes
                      b             I                I       I       I       I       I       I        I        I
             Plan     e is                                                   43-
         - workinSi
 Paper #3 Networ
                            t Z

                                                  Text                               rn
                                                  m                                  T
                      I                                              I                                    0

                      I       I         I     1          I
                                                                  +      I       I       I
                                                                                                      =I  I

                                            Figure 4.5.44: Bicycle Lane Markings at Intersections

                                                                                                              4-70   a
                                                                                    ht-Turn Lane
            Plan                           I
Paper #3   - Networ


                                                 I     I

                                                 I     I

                        Hazard Markings

                        Surface irregularities and obstructions should be clearly marked to
                        gain the attention of approaching cyclists, as illustrated Figure
                        4.5.46. Signs, reflectors, object markers (WA-36) or other treatments
                        may be appropriate to alert cyclists to potential obstructions.
                                           Figure 4.5.46: Hazard Pavement Marking
                          Mer. 8Cxrtment. amto
                          o trthpK obewLw3ioa

                                                       -            Dtrecuon ot hcvcle waw
                                  L = 0.62 WU, where V Is &cyde design speed (kmlh)

                        Multi-Use Pathways

                        Pavement markings for multi-use pathways are not as commonly
                        used as with on-street bicycle facilities. Attempts to separate
                        pedestrians from cyclists with a painted line have proven
                                                                                                   4-7 1
                     unsuccesshl and are not recommended. Centreline stripes used to
       Strategic     separate directional flows of traffic on multi-use pathways are only
  Transportation     recommended where curves create poor sight distance, as illustrated
                     in Figure 4.5.47. Pavement symbols or words may be used to alert
                     pathway users of upcoming stop signs, railroad crossings, bollards
        - Work'nf
Paper #3 Networ
                     (Figure 4.5.48), or other potential hazards.
                                Figure 4.5.47: Pathway Centreline Marking on Curve

                                    Figure 4.5.48: Pavement Marking at Bollards

                                                                                  Blke Path
                                                                                  Center Line
                             $ m (1 rt)

                                          100 mm (4 in) Yellow Stripe
  CIW OF COQUTLAM   4.5.7      Maintenance
Transportation      Maintenance of bicycle facilities is neglected in many communities. Not
          Plan      only does this discourage cycling and walking, but it also creates a
                    significant liability concern for municipalities.
   Assessment       With proper design and maintenance, liability is not an issue with
                    respect to bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Liability concerns have been
                    successfilly addressed for automobiles and other motorized vehicles by
                    developing appropriate design and signage standards, and implementing
                    maintenance programs and public reporting processes. In doing so,
                    jurisdictions have minimized the numbers and amounts of claims that
                    might be attributed to negligence on the part of a municipality

                    Municipalities’ potential liability regarding bicycle facilities can be
                    minimized by the following actions:

                       Apply design guidelines that accommodate cyclists on all roads, and
                       all users on off-street facilities.
                       Install appropriate signs, including warning signs where necessary,
                       and ensure that signs remain visible at all times.
                       Establish a regular maintenance program for bicycle facilities.
                       Sufficient resources should be allocated to respond to requests that
                       require unscheduled maintenance, as well as carrying out regular,
                       scheduled maintenance. Key maintenance activities are as follows:

                            For all facilities, regular inspection and surface repair activities
                            should be undertaken as needed to eliminate cracks, potholes and
                            For bicycle lanes and multi-use pathways, regular sweeping of
                            debris is required to maintain the surface quality of these
                            facilities and minimize the potential for slippage and punctured
                            The repainting of pavement markings must be periodically
                            undertaken to ensure visibility and clarity. Additionally, bicycle
                            mute signage should be periodically inspected to ensure that
                            signs have not been damaged, stolen, or oriented the wrong way.
                            For multi-use pathways, the periodic pruning of adjacent
                            vegetation is required to maintain the clear width of the pathway,
                            as well as sight distance. Pruning of vegetation is also important
                        for maintaining visibility at intersections along on-street bicycle
       Stategic         routes.

                      - Pavement overlays on bicycle routes should ensure that no ridges
                        are left in the area where cyclists ride.
                      - Drainage facilities along bicycle routes should be periodically
PaDer #3   - Networ     inspected to ensure that they are properly diverting storm water
      Assessment        and not creating a hazard for cyclists.
                      - Snow removal should be undertaken on all bicycle facilities, as is
                        done with motor vehicle facilities, to permit use of bicycles in
                      It is possible that the level of effort required for sweeping, repainting
                      of pavement markings, pruning and snow clearing of bicycle
                      facilities would exceed the City’s current capabilities, and would
                      require additional budget allocation. As well, sweeping and snow
                      clearing priorities might need to be revised to incorporate bicycle
                      facilities. As with many items identified within the Bicycle Facility
                      Design Guidelines, adequate fbnding may not be available in the
                      short term for implementation of these initiatives. However, it is
                      important that these initiatives be included as part of the Guidelines
                      as opportunities for hnding are made available in the future.
                      Designate responsibilities for maintenance of specific bicycle
                      facilities. Maintenance of on-street facilities should be the
                      responsibility of the Operations Department, for example, whereas
                      maintenance of off-street facilities would be the responsibility of the
                      Leisure and Parks Services Department.
                      Establish a reporting procedure that enables cyclists to notify the
                      municipality of maintenance needs. Methods of reporting
                      maintenance problems include a dedicated telephone ‘hot-line’, e-
                      mail contact and pre-paid ‘maintenance request’ postcards, which
                      are illustrated in Figure 4.5.49.

                                                                                         4-74     0
     CIWOF cOQIJlTu\M              Figure 4.5.49: Pre-paid Maintenance Request Postcard

Paper #3 - Networ

                           Respond quickly to maintenance requests. Once a municipality has
                           been advised of a hazardous situation, it has a duty to address the
                           problem. Prompt follow-up avoids potential liability.

                           I       TC-70U
                                450 mm x 450 mm
                                                       450 mm x 450 mm
                                                                               450 mm x 450 mm

                        4.5.8      Interim Conditions
                        In most cases, designating a roadway as a bicycle route does not require
                        significant changes to the roadway. On local streets, local collector
                        roads, and local commerciaVindustrial roads, no roadway changes are

                     required to incorporate a shared bicycle route. On arterial roads and
     Strategic       major and minor collector roads, the roadway is often wide enough to
Transportation       incorporate marked wide curb lanes, sometimes with changes to other
                     lane widths.

       Options       In a few cases, however, it may not be possible to provide a bicycle
   Assessment        facility that meets the guidelines described in this document. This
                     situation might arise where the roadway is not wide enough to
                     incorporate wide curb lanes, for example, and therefore the only way to
                     do so would be to reconstruct the roadway. If funds are not available for
                     roadway reconstruction or if reconstruction is planned for a later date to
                     coincide with other projects, then there is a need to do something in the
                     interim to accommodate bicycles. In this case, an ‘interim’ condition
                     can be created in order to establish a bicycle route.

                     Interim conditions apply to marked wide curb lanes and multi-use
                     pathways. For these facilities, the interim conditions are simply facilities
                     that are not as wide as the recommended minimum guidelines. Because
                     of the reduced width, additional signage and design features are
                     typically required. These are described on the following pages.
                     Marked Wide Curb Lanes

                     Most cyclists would consider any increase in the width of a curb lane to
                     be an improvement. However, to provide sufficient width for cyclists
                     and motorists to share the road, a minimum lane width of 4 3 m to the
                     curb face (this dimension includes the gutter if one exists) is necessary
                     as an interim condition. In situations where the wide curb lane is
                     adjacent to on-street parking or a paved shoulder, the required minimum
                     lane width can be reduced to 4.0 m as an interim condition, reflecting
                     the reduced shy distance as a result of the absence of a curb. Where the
                     lane is adjacent a banier (such as no-post concrete, a railing or a wall), a
                     minimum lane width of 4.5 m is required as an interim condition, to
                     incorporate additional shy distance required by a roadside banier more
                     than 150 mm high.

                     Figure 4.5.51 provides an illustration of lane widths specified by the
                     design guidelines in Section 4.5.2 and the interim conditions described
                     above, for all applicable conditions. It should be noted that these interim
                     dimensions for marked wide curb lanes meet the guidelines contained in
                     the Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads published by the
                     Transportation Association of Canada (TAC). The design guidelines

                    described in Section 4.5.2 meet or exceed TAC guidelines, and are
       Strategfc    consistent with current state-of-the-art practices in North America.
            Pian              Figure 4.5.51: Interim Conditions for Marked Wide Curb Lanes
                                               Marked Wide Curb Lane
       - work'nf
Paper #3 Networ
          Options               W i n Guidelines         Applications       interim Condition

                                                                           A -A -

                                                             M1 o
                                                               I r
                                                         (0.g. Nogost.

                          No extra space required        aR turn I n
                                                                 m .
                                                         IgM trrn lanes.
                               for Mcycier               wxlllary bnes

                    Roadways with curb lanes narrower than the interim dimensions can be
                    designated as bicycle routes and can be signed as bicycle routes, but
                    should not be marked with bicycle symbols on the roadway. Bicycle
                    route signage along roads with narrow unmarked lanes should be
                    supplemented with 'share the road' signage, as illustrated in Figure

        Coquirw     Wide curb lanes should only be marked on roadways where they are at
       Strategic    least 100 m in length and comprise the majority of a section of roadway.
  Transportation    This means that, on a roadway with travel lanes that alternate between
                    the interim marked wide curb lane condition and widths that are less
                    than the interim dimensions, it would be preferable not to mark bicycle
Paper #3 Networ
                    symbols on the pavement on any of the sections, rather than create a
       Assessment   potentially confusing situation where bicycle symbols appear
                    sporadically. In all cases, however, a designated bicycle route should be
                    signed with Bicycle Route signs along its entire length.
                                     Figure 4.5.52: ‘Share the Road’ Signage
                        I                                                               3

                                     wc-47                         wc-47s
                                600 mm x 600 mm              600 mm x 300 mrn

                    Where a marked wide curb lane on a designated bicycle route transitions
                    to a narrower unmarked travel lane, a ‘Road Narrows’ sign should be
                    used as appropriate in advance of the narrower lane, as illustrated in
                    Figure 4.5.53.

                                        gure 4.5.53: ‘Road Narrows’ Signag

                                               750 mm x 750 mm

                    Where a narrow bridge exists on a roadway with a designated bicycle
                    route, and the lane widths are less than 4.0 m, the bridge becomes an
                     interim condition until it is replaced at a future date. A ‘Narrow
       Strategic     Structure’ sign should be used to alert both motorists and cyclists, as
  Transportation     illustrated in Figure 4.5.54.
                                     Fi ire 4.5.54 ‘Narrow Structure’ Sign,
Paper #3 - Networ

                                                7 5 0 mm x 750 mrn

                     Bicycle Lanes

                     It is not desirable to create an interim bicycle lane of reduced width.
                     Rather, where this situation arises, a marked wide curb lane should be
                     Where a bicycle lane transitions to a marked wide curb lane, or where a
                     bicycle lane ends and the bicycle route continues without a marked lane,
                     a ‘Bicycle Lane Ends’ sign should be used as illustrated in Figure
                     4.5.55. T i sign should be located approximately 30 m in advance of
                     the end of the bicycle lane as illustrated in Figure 4.5.56.
                                     Figure 4.5.55: ‘Bicycle Lane Ends’ Signal   !

                                                 600 mm x 750 mm

      CINOF Coqwrm             Figure 4.5.56: Location of ‘Bicycle Lane Ends’ Signage

 Paper #3 Networ

                                                         Mimmwn        ,
                                                               Cptmnal dash
                                                                 or no line
                                    I                   100 rn                        I

                      imilarly, where a marked wide curb lane or an unmarked lane
                      ansitions to a bicycle lane, a ‘Bicycle Lane Ahead’ sign should be used
                      s illustrated in Figure 4.5.57.
                               Figure 4.5.57: Location of ‘Bicycle Lane Ahead’ Signage


                                                                              O B C

                                                60 m Minimum
                                                               30 m Minimum-.

                      lulti-Use Pathways

                      lulti-use pathways should be a minimum of 4.0 m wide. In some cases,
                      nwever, it may not be possible to construct a pathway to a 4.0-m
                      fidth, due to physical constraints, property issues or financial
                      mitations. In these cases, it is acceptable to construct a pathway to a
                      mower width as an interim condition.

                      Iareas where pathway usage is not anticipated to be higher than 200
                      zrsonshour even during peak periods, a pathway can be constructed to
                      minimum width of 3.0 m. Short sections of pathway may be as narrow
                                                                                          4-80   0
                   as 2.4 m where there are physical constraints on the pathway width.
     Strategic     ‘Pathway Narrows’ signs should be installed in advance of narrow
Transportation     sections of pathway, as illustrated in Figure 4.5.58.
                                   F   ire 4.5.58 ‘Pathway Narrows’ Sign


                                              750 mm x 750 mm

                   Multi-use pathways should be hard surfaced to accommodate the widest
                   range of users. If funding or environmental considerations do not permit
                   asphalt or concrete surfacing, a hard compacted aggregate can be used
                   as an interim condition. Where a pathway transitions from a paved
                   surface to an aggregate surface, a ‘Pavement Ends’ sign should be used
                   as illustrated in Figure 4.5.59.
                                    Figure 4.5.59: ‘Pavement Ends’ Signage

                                             750 m m x 750 mm

                                                                                      4-8 1
                    5. Pedestrian Plan
           Plan    Walking is the most fundamental form of transportation. Walking can
                   be the mode of choice for an entire trip, and it can comprise a portion of
           workinfa trip to connect with other modes such as an automobile or transit.
Paper #3 - Networ
           Options Even though the pedestrian mode is so prevalent in our everyday life,
                   policies and designs that encourage and facilitate walking as a mode of
                   transportation within a community have often received lower priority
                   than other improvements. By ensuring that a comprehensive network of
                   sidewalks and walkways is in place and sound planning and design
                   principles are followed, the City of Coquitlam can provide an
                   accommodating environment for pedestrians and increase the range of
                   transportation choices for residents.

                    This section of the Strategic Transportation Plan provides a strategy for
                    enhancing connectivity to, from, and within key City-serving pedestrian
                    activity areas, such as commercial areas, City-serving parks, and
                    recreation facilities. Because sidewalks and walkways serve as the
                    primary facilities for accommodating pedestrian travel, steps must be
                    taken to ensure that a continuous network is in place throughout the
                    City. The objective of ensuring linkages to commercial areas and parks
                    and recreation facilities is a top priority of the Pedestrian Plan because
                    these activity areas serve the widest range of pedestrians, both young
                    and old, providing maximum value for residents.

                    Although pedestrian access to and from elementary schools and
                    neighbourhood parks is also a high priority for the City, specific
                    locations for improvements are not identified since these improvements
                    are more suited to a local area o neighbourhood plan review. However,
                    this Plan does identifjl a comprehensive set of pedestrian facility design
                    guidelines and treatments that can be applied to improve pedestrian
                    access and safety to and fiom these specific areas and at other locations
                    tiequented by pedestrians. Because even subtle improvements to the
                    pedestrian environment can significantly enhance safety and comfort for
                    pedestrians, the principles, guidelines, and treatments included in the
                    Plan play an important role in supporting the overall sidewalk and
                    walkway network.

     Cin OF C o g w m ~
                          5.1 Approach
  Transoortation          Planning for pedestrians is much different than planning for automobile,
               Plan       transit, and bicycle transportation. All of these modes typically rely on
                          designating specific networks, routes and rights-of-way for travel.
Paper #3 - Nefwor
           Options        Walking can and will occur almost anywhere in Coquitlam - alongside
       Assessment         the roadway, on sidewalks, along pathways, through trails, within
                          parking lots, and on private lands. Consideration of all of these
                          pedestrian environments in significant detail is beyond the scope and
                          resources ofthe Strategic Transportation Plan.

                          To ensure that all modes of transportation are considered equally and to
                          avoid overlooking important details at a local or neighbourhood level,
                          this Pedestrian Plan focusses on pedestrian areas and generators that
                          serve a Citywide function. Although pedestrian access to and from
                          elementary schools and neighbourhood parks is also a high priority for
                          the City, these aspects of the pedestrian network are suited to a more
                          detailed local area or neighbourhood review. Table 5.1.1 below
                          describes the types of pedestrian areas and roads that have been
                          included in this Citywide review, as well as those local or
                          neighbourhood uses that are more appropriately considered in a local
                          area plan. Figure 5.1.1 illustrates the key pedestrian areas and roadways
                          (all arterials and collectors within the City) that have been included in
                          the Pedestrian Plan.

                          The approach taken within this STP with respect to City-serving
                          pedestrian areas and roadways is to identify critical gaps in the existing
                          sidewalk network, particularly along arterial and collector roadways.
                          The objective is to identify gaps where no sidewalks are provided and
                          where a sidewalk should be provided on at least one side of the street.
                          Within pedestrian areas, deficiencies have been identified on local
                          streets because greater pedestrian activity is anticipated within these
                          areas. Subsequent to this, sidewalk facilities in the vicinity of City-
                          serving pedestrian areas are considered and deficiencies identified.
                          Rehabilitation of existing sidewalks has not been considered.

                          It should be noted that this assessment is based on sidewalk inventory
                          information that was provided by City staff. Apparent gaps in the
                          sidewalk network along collector and arterial roadways have been
                          confirmed through field observations. Gaps in the local street network
                          have not been confirmed.

     CInoFCoQurnaM        Table 5.1.1: Pedestrian Areas for      Citywide and Local Area Review
                     Citywide Review                             I Local Area I Neighbourhood Review
       Strategic     Key Pedestrian Areas:
  Transportation     1. Commercial Areas                          1. Commercial Areas
                         Speaal mmmem'al area                        Local commemal
                         Centralbusiness                             Neighbourhood mmmemal
        - wo'kinf
Paper #3 Networ          Arterial mmmem'al                           Highway commercial
           Options       Shopping centre
       Assessment    2. Schools                                   2. Schools
                         PostSecondary                               Primary
                         Secondary Schools                           Middle
                     3. Transit Stops I Exchanges                 3. Transit
                         Major transit stops for several mutes       Localstops
                         Transit exchange
                     4. Parks & Greenways                         4. Parks 8 Greenways
                         City serving parks                          Community Parks
                         Cily serving greenways                      Neighbourhood greenways & paths
                     5. EmDlovment Uses                           5. Employment Uses
                                                                     Office development

                         Arterialmads                                Localstreets

                     Although the objective of the STP is to identify key locations where a
                     sidewalk should be provided on at least one side of the street, the
                     ultimate goal of the City should be to provide the following level of
                     sidewalk coverage throughout the municipality:

                            Artenals:      Both sides
                        0   Collectors: Both sides
                            Local streets: One side

                     The following discussion identifies the approach that was taken to
                     prioritizing pedestrian improvements throughout the City. Many
                     municipalities have developed much more comprehensive evaluation
                     criteria that consider such measures as pedestrian demand (based on
                     land use), pedestrian safety (based on road classification and traffic
                     volumes), and implementation considerations. Furthermore, some of
                     these municipalities have quantified the 'value' of individual evaluation
                     criteria and created complex scoring systems for rating individual
                     pedestrian improvements. However, it is not necessary at this time for
                     Coquitlam to undergo such a process. It is only necessary to identify
                     key gaps in the existing sidewalk network and assign priority based on
                     the following criteria.

                       Pedestrian areas. Table 5.1.1 above identifies areas that are
       Strategic       considered City-serving pedestrian areas. These represent major
  Transportation       community facilities that have the potential for generating
                       significant pedestrian traffic from a broader area of the City. Eleven
Paper #3     ""'""st
           - Networ
                       City-serving pedestrian areas were identified, as follows:

      Assessment           Burquitlam
                       0   Lougheed Station
                       0   Maillardville
                       0   Lougheed corridor (Brunette to Schoolhouse)
                       0   Austin Heights
                       0   Como Lake Village
                           Mundy Park
                       0   Towncentre
                           Town Centre Park
                       0   Northeast Coquitlam

                       Within these areas, a high priority was assigned to all roads -
                       including local streets - that currently lack sidewalks on at least one
                       side of the road.

                       Within 500 rn of pedestrian areas. Walking to and from the key
                       City-serving pedestrian areas should be encouraged and facilitated
                       through the provision of safe walking routes. A high priority was
                       assigned to all arterials and collectors located within 500 m
                       (approximately five minutes walking distance) of all of the above
                       pedestrian areas.

                       Bus routes. Because all transit passengers are required to walk at
                       both ends of their trips, it is very important to provide sidewalks on
                       at least one side of all bus routes within Coquitlam. This enhances
                       the safety of pedestrians on bus routes, and makes transit more
                       attractive as a transportation mode. For the purposes of assigning
                       priority within the STP, sidewalks along bus routes were considered
                       'medium' priority.

                       Other arterials and collectors. This category includes all other gaps
                       in the sidewalk network along arterials and collectors and that do not
                       fall into the preceding three categories. Within the STP, these gaps
                       were identified as a 'low' priority. This is not to imply that they
                                                                                          5 -4
      ClrVOF Cwmm
                          should be deferred indefinitely. On the contrary, all gaps in the
        Strategic         sidewalk network should be completed as soon as possible.
   Transportation         However, it is recognized that, given the financial constraints of the
                          municipality, priorities for completion must be assigned.
         - ""'""si
 Paper #3 Networ
                      a   Installation standard. As described above, the City should have as its
        Assessment        ultimate goal the installation of sidewalks on both sides of all
                          arterials and collectors in the City, and on one side of all local
                          It is recognized that it would likely take longer than 20 years to
                          upgrade all roads in the City to meet this sidewalk standard. For this
                          reason, segments of roadway that do not meet this standard have not
                          been identified as part of the STP. However, there may be
                          opportunities throughout the 20-year time horizon of the Plan to
                          upgrade sidewalks to meet the standard in locations that have not
                          been identified through the STP. In this regard, this standard should
                          be considered when roadways are being upgraded through the Local
                          Improvement Program, the Road Renewal Program, or through other
                          programs or aspects of the STP. For example, sidewalks could be
                          installed to meet these standards as part of projects to widen
                          roadways for bicycle facilities.

                      5.2 Pedestrian Network Plan
                      As described in Section 5.1, the Pedestrian Network Plan focusses on
                      enhancing connectivity to, from, and within City-serving pedestrian
                      areas - such as major commercial areas, recreation centres, and the
                      Regional Town Centre - and on the provision of sidewalks along at
                      least one side of all bus routes and collector and arterial roadways
                      within the City. Neighbourhood sidewalk needs will continue to be
                      addressed through Local Improvement Programs.

                      Provided below is a description of many of the individual network
                      improvements recommended for improving pedestrian facilities within
                      these areas.
                      5.2.1      Pedestrian Areas
                      A high priority has been assigned for the provision of sidewalks within
                      the 11 City-serving pedestrian areas identified in Section 5.1. The
                      following discussion identifies the sidewalk needs within the 11 areas,
URE&NSYSTEMS          as well as along collectors and arterials within 500 m of these areas.
                     A. Burquitlam
  Transportation     The sidewalk network within Burquitlam is relatively well developed. A
            Plan     small number of improvements are required to support future
                     development within the area and to support pedestrian connections to
        - ""'"9
Paper #3 Networ      the future Burquitlam Station. Sidewalks are needed along Emerson
           Options   Street and North Road (between Clarke Road and Como Lake Avenue.
                     B. Lougheed Station

                     The sidewalk network around Lougheed Mall and Lougheed Station are
                     also well developed. A sidewalk on one side of Appian Way would
                     provide a connection fiom the residential areas east of North Road to
                     North Road and the station area.
                     C. Maillardville

                     The sidewalk network within the Maillardville area is underdeveloped
                     and requires additions on many local, collector, and arterial roadways. It
                     should be noted that, in many cases, sidewalks have been developed
                     along portions of these streets, but gaps may need to be filled. Most
                     importantly, Lougheed Highway lacks sidewalks in many locations.
                     Alderson Avenue and Bernatchey Street are collector roads that require
                     some additional sidewalks. Local streets within Maillardville that
                     require sidewalks include:

                        Henderson Avenue
                        Gauthier Avenue
                        Roderick Avenue
                        James Avenue
                        Allard Street
                        Boileau Street
                     D. Lougheed Corridor

                     The developing commercial area along Lougheed Highway needs to be
                     supported through the provision of additional sidewalks along several
     Qn OF Coqurrm   roadways. Most importantly, large segments of Lougheed Highway
       strategic     currently lack sidewalks altogether. Other roadways within this area that
  Transportation     require additional sidewalks include:

Paper #3     wOrkinf
           - Networ
                        Tupper Avenue
                        Sherwood Avenue
      Assessment        San Daniel Avenue
                        Woolridge Street
                     E. Austin Heights

                     The sidewalk network within the Austin Heights commercial area is
                     well developed along Austin Avenue itself, but adjacent roadways
                     require sidewalks to support pedestrian travel to, from, and within this
                     growing commercial area. In several locations, parking facilities
                     adjoining the street network preclude the provision of sidewalks.
                     Parking arrangements should be modified to accommodate a complete
                     sidewalk network throughout the area. Examples of this can be found
                     along Austin Avenue and Ridgeway Avenue. Other streets that need
                     sidewalks include:

                        Charland Avenue
                        Haversley Avenue
                        King Albert Avenue
                     F. Poirier

                     The Poirier area encompasses a major community facility (community
                     centre, arena, library) and Centennial Secondary School. Sidewalks
                     need to be completed along Beny Street, King Albert Avenue, Sargent
                     Street, and Linton Street to support pedestrian travel by local residents,
                     including Centennial students.
                     G. Como Lake Village

                     Sidewalks are currently provided on Como Lake Avenue, but additions
                     are needed on Linton Street and Regan Avenue to support pedestrian
                     travel to and from the shopping plaza.
                     H. Mundy Park

                     The sidewalk network on the west side of Mundy Park is relatively
                     underdeveloped. Sidewalks are needed on the following local streets:
       strategic         Firdale Street
            Plan     0   Crane Avenue
                         Orland Avenue
Paper #3 - Networ
           workin$       Midvale Street
                         Draycott Street
                     0   Winslow Avenue
                     0   King Albert Avenue
                     0   Haversley Avenue

                     In the long t r ,it would be desirable to provide a complete sidewalk
                     system west of Mundy Park to provide connections between the three
                     pedestrian areas here - Mundy Park, Poirier, and Como Lake Village.
                     1. Town Centre

                     The Town Centre sidewalk network is relatively well developed and
                     few additions are needed at this time. A small gap along Glen Drive
                     needs to be completed. As well, a sidewalk should be provided along
                     Lincoln Drive between Westwood Street and Pipeline Road when that
                     roadway is reconstructed as part of the Road Network Plan.
                     J. Town Centre Park

                     A sidewalk is needed along Pipeline Road between Guildford Way and
                     Dunkirk Avenue to support pedestrian travel around Town Centre Park.
                     K. Northeast Coquitlam

                     The pedestrian network is currently undeveloped in the Northeast
                     Coquitlam area. As the area develops, sidewalks should be provided as
                     identified in the Northeast Coquitlam Official Community Plan. It is
                     anticipated that all sidewalks in the area would be funded through
                     5.2.2     Bus Routes
                     It is the objective of the Pedestrian Plan to provide sidewalks along at
                     least one side of all existing or proposed bus routes within Coquitlam.
                     The following discussion identifies gaps in the sidewalk network that
                     need to be filled to support pedestrian travel to and from bus routes.

                           Rochester Avenue currently lacks sidewalks along much of its
       Strateaic           length. Approximately 1.4 km of sidewalks are needed between Blue
  Transportatron           Mountain Street and Laurentian Street.

                           Cape Horn Avenue currently lacks sidewalks between Coleman
Paper #3 Networ
                           Avenue and Mundy Street. As this is anticipated to become an
       Assessment          important transit corridor in the future, a sidewalk should be
                           provided on at least one side of Cape Horn Avenue in this area.

                           Mundy Street. Sidewalks are not provided along segments of Mundy
                           Street between Cape Horn Avenue and Leclair Drive. These gaps
                           should be completed to support transit service along Mundy Street.

                           Foster Avenue. There is no sidewalk on Foster Avenue between
                           Porter Street and Gatensbury Street.

                           Cottonwood Avenue. Segments of Cottonwood Avenue between
                           Robinson Street and Blue Mountain Street do not provide sidewalks.
                           As bus service is anticipated to continue along this section of
                           Cottonwood Avenue, a sidewalk should be provided on at least one
                           side of the street.

                           Dewdney Trunk Road. There is currently no sidewalk along
                           Dewdney Trunk Road between Hull Street and Hansard Crescent.

                           Barnet Highway currently lacks a sidewalk along a small portion of
                           the roadway between the Port Moody boundary and Falcon Drive.
                           As this is a major roadway and a significant transit corridor, a
                           sidewalk should be provided to support pedestrian travel.
                       5.2.3     Other Locations
                       In the longer term, the City should strive to provide a sidewalk on at
                       least one side of every collector and arterial roadway in the
                       municipality. The following discussion identifies other gaps in the
                       City’s sidewalk network that do not fall within the preceding categories.

                       0   Laurentian Street. There is currently a gap in the sidewalk along
                           Laurentian Street between Cutler Street and Thomas Avenue, a
                           distance of approximately 300 m.

                    Robinson Street. Sidewalks need to be provided along Robinson
     strategic      Street between Foster Avenue and Como Lake Avenue.
                    Gatensbury Road. There are currently no sidewalks on Gatensbury
                    Road north of Bartlett Avenue. A sidewalk should be provided on at
       Optrons      least one side from Bartlett north to the Port Moody boundary.
                    Thermal Drive lacks sidewalks between Pinecrest Drive and the Port
                    Moody boundary.

                    Pipeline Road. There are currently no sidewalks provided for a
                    distance of approximately 380 m north of Robson Drive. As
                    development proceeds in this area of Coquitlam, sidewalks should
                    be provided to enable a pedestrian connection to transit services at
                    the Robson Drive / Pipeline Road intersection.

                 5.3 Summary
                 Figure 5.3.1 summarizes the priority sidewalk needs through the City of
                 Coquitlam. Table 5.3.1 below also summarizes the sidewalk facilities
                 that are included in the STP. The table includes preliminary capital costs
                 for the sidewalk facilities, based on a unit cost of $150 per metre of
                 sidewalk. This includes curb and sidewalk construction, but does not
                 account for significant driveway rehabilitation or landscaping.

                 The table also identifies potential hnding partners for these measures,
                 as well as the needs-based priority for each sidewalk. As described in
                 Section 5.1, the highest priority is assigned to sidewalk gaps on roads
                 within pedestrian areas and on collectors and arterials within 500 m of
                 the pedestrian areas. A medium priority is given to sidewalks along bus
                 routes, and the lowest priority is assigned to gaps along collectors and
                 arterials that are well outside of pedestrian areas and are not located
                 along bus routes.

5-1 1
I       Cost estimates are Class D order-of-maenitude and do not include costs to reconstruct intersectine dnvewavs or undertake sirnificant landsc:aping A
unit cost of $150 per metre of sidewalk was assuked

                                  '   I

  Transportation     5.4 Pedestrian Facility Design Treatments
                     This section provides recommended treatments for pedestrian facilities
Paper #3 Networ      in Coquitlam. Although specific designs for various facilities are
           Options   presented in this section, they are not intended to replace, or serve as
                     amendments to, the Subdivision Control Bylaw. These designs have
                     been presented to supplement existing practices in Coquitlam and
                     further enhance the environment for pedestrians. The guidelines have
                     been assembled from a variety of sources, including:

                        Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities, Institute of Transportation
                        Engineers, 1998.
                        Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads, Transportation
                        Association of Canada, 1999.
                        Pedestrian Facilities Guidebook: Incorporating Pedestrians into
                        Washington 's Transportation System, otak, 1997.
                        Portland Pedestrian Design Guide, City of Portland OR, 1998.
                        Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood Traflc Calming, Transportation
                        Association of CanaWCanadian Institute of Transportation Engineers,
                        Pedestrian Facilities Users Guide, Providing Safety and Mobility,
                        Draji Final Report, Federal Highway Administration, 2000.
                        NJDOT Pedestrian Compatible Planning and Design Guidelines,New
                        Jersey Department of Transportation,date unknown.
                        Pedestrian Facilities: Best Practices I999 Guide, Mid-Ohio Regional
                        Planning Commission, 1999.

                     The most recent version of the Transportation Association of Canada's
                     Geometric Design Guidefor Canadian Roads introduced the concept of
                     'design domain'. Essentially, this concept means that practitioners can
                     and should use their judgement to determine the most appropriate
                     design treatments for specific circumstances, rather than simply
                     designing to a fixed standard. The concept of design domain allows
                     practitioners to consider the needs of pedestrians as well as other road
                     users, and modifL designs accordingly.

     CllYOF CCQUllLaM

       strategic   Practitioners should recognize that in any design project, the competing
  Transportation   needs of various road users might result in conflicts between design
            Plan   guidelines for pedestrians and design guidelines for automobiles, trucks,
                   bicycles and other vehicles. The practitioner should objectively assess
           workinf the relative importance of various conflicting design issues to determine
Paper #3 - Networ
       Assessment  which guidelines should take priority, or whether a compromise solution
                   can be used. If in doubt, the practitioner should always err on the side of
                   the most vulnerable road users, which are generally pedestrians.

                        The treatments reviewed in this section include core pedestrian facilities
                        - such as sidewalks and pathways - that provide pedestrians with a
                        defined facility and route for travel, as well as support facilities that not
                        only facilitate access, but also maximize safety, comfort, and
                        convenience for pedestrians. Support facilities and treatments include:

                                   Intersection treatments
                                   Crosswalks and stop lines
                                   Raised medians and refuge islands
                                   Curb cuts and ramps
                                   Street hardware and furniture
                                   Parking facilities
                                   Grade separated crossings
                                   Bus stops and transit stations
                                   School zones
                                   Construction site treatments

                        When applied in an appropriate manner, this combination of facilities
                        and treatments will contribute to the evolution of a more pedestrian-
                        friendly environment in the City of Coquitlam.
                        5.4.1      Sidewalk Installation
                        Since pedestrians travel to the same destinations as motorists, sidewalks
                        provide access along the same direct routes used by automobiles.
                        Sidewalks also supplement other modes of transportation, such as
                        automobiles, transit and bicycles, by providing local access from
                        parking facilities and transit stops. Although there are no pedestrian or
                        vehicular traffic based warrants for the provisions of sidewalks,

       Strategic      guidelines may be used to ensure that appropriate sidewalk treatments
  Transportation      are provided throughout a municipality. These guidelines should be
           Pian       based on a range of factors including land use category, roadway
                      classification and development density.
        - wo'kinsT
Paper #3 Networ
       Assessment     The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has published
                      recommended guidelines for sidewalk installation. The ITE
                      recommendations regarding sidewalk needs are consistent with the
                      requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and are based on
                      land use, roadway functional classification and residential densities.

                      Table 5.4.1 summarizes the ITE sidewalk guidelines, which are
                      provided as a recommended installation guideline for the City. It is
                      recognized that the City's Subdivision Control Bylaw already meets
                      these guidelines, although the City's guidelines do not consider
                      development densities. However, it is also recognized that many
                      existing arterials and collectors do not meet these guidelines and that, in
                      the longer term, the City should strive to install sidewalks on both sides
                      of existing collectors and arterials. Although Table 5.4.1 suggests that
                      sidewalks should be installed on both sides of some local streets, it is
                      recommended that the City have as its ultimate goal the provision of a
                      sidewalk on one side of all existing local streets, unless of course
                      sidewalks have already been installed on both sides.

                                     Table 5.4.1: Guidelines for Sidewalk Installation
     Strategic        Land Use and           New                         Existing
Transportation        Roadway                Urban and Suburban          Urban and
          Plan                                                                        tet
                                                                         Suburban S r e s
                      Classification         Stre&
                      Commercial and Industrial
                      All Streets            Both sides.                 Both sides. Every effort should
        Options                                                          be made to add sidewalks
    Assessment                                                           where they do not exist and
                                                                         complete missing links
                      Arterials              Both sides                  Both sides.
                      Collectors             Both sides.                 Multi-family - both sides
                                                                         Single family - prefer both
                                                                         sides, require at least one side.
                      Local Streets
                      > 4 upa                Both sides                  Prefer both sides; require at
                                                                         least one side.
                      1 to 4 upa             Prefer both sides; require At least 4 feet shoulder on both
                                             at least one side           sides required.
                      c 1 upa                One      side    preferred, One side preferred, at least 4
                                             shoulder on both sides feet shoulder on both sides
                                             required                    required

                      5.4.2       Sidewalks
                      Properly designed sidewalks are essential to increasing pedestrian
                      mobility, safety, and accessibility. This is especially true for persons
                      with disabilities, the elderly, and children. Recommended widths for
                      sidewalks depend on the locations where they are installed and the
                      anticipated usage. Recommended minimum widths typically refer to
                      ‘clear widths’ - the width free from all obstructions such as utility poles
                      and fire hydrants. Wider sidewalks not only provide a more comfortable
                      pedestrian environment for persons of all abilities, but they also send a
                      positive message to the community regarding the status of pedestrians
                      within the transportation system. If sidewalk widths are reduced or
                                                                                                    5-16     0
     Qn OF Copurruu
       Strategic      sidewalks are not provided at all in a residential neighbourhood,
  Transportation      regardless of the anticipated volumes of pedestrians, residents may not
            Plan      feel encouraged to walk for either transportation or recreation.
Paper #3 Networ

                      The Transportation Association of Canada’s (TAC) Urban Supplement
                      to the Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads recommends a
                      desirable clear sidewalk width of 1.8 m, which is based on two
                      pedestrians passing each other with a ‘no-touch’ zone of 0 9 m for each
                      pedestrian. Although TAC indicates that the typical minimum clear
                      sidewalk width should be no less than 1.5 m, they also provide the
                      following guidelines:
                            Sidewalk width should be increased by a minimum of 0.5 m where
                            sidewalks are placed directly against the curb, allowing for street
                            hardware placement, the opening of car doors and additional
                            separation from moving traffic.
                            In areas of hospitals and nursing homes, minimum sidewalk widths
                            should be increased to 2.0 m to accommodate persons in wheelchairs
                            (Figure 5.4.2).
                            In commercial areas, widths of 2.4 m or more are common to allow for
                            higher pedestrian volumes, the opening of car doors at the curb, street
                            hardware, lateral clearances to buildings, and storefront window
                            shopping (Figure 5.4.2).
                            Additional width is also recommended for lateral clearance where
                            sidewalks abut retaining walls, fences or similar structures.

                                      Figure 5.4.2: Minimum Sidewalk Widths


                    I1         2.4        -   I                2.0
                                                                     9 flv
                                                                         4        1.8de.
                                                                                  1.5 mh.
                    Pedestrian capacity analysis techniques provided in the Highway
                    Capacity Manual (HCM)can be used to determine sidewalk widths
                    required to accommodate higher levels of pedestrian flow, such as in
                    Town Centre areas. It should be noted that the ‘effective sidewalk
                    width’ does not include obstructions along the sidewalk, such as curbs,
                    building walls, and point obstructions (hydro poles, street signs, etc.).
                    The HCM provides guidance on the reduction in effective sidewalk
                    width attributable to various components of the pedestrian environment.
                    5.4.3     Boulevards
                    Although the boulevard strip (Figure 5.4.3) within a road right-of-way is
                    not considered a pedestrian facility, its presence significantly
                    contributes to the enhancement of the pedestrian environment. In
                    addition to providing a location for surface and underground utilities,
                    street furniture, traffic signs and other control devices, boulevards - the
                    area between the curb and the sidewalk - provide an important buffer
                    zone between pedestrians and vehicular traffic along roadways.
                                              Figure 5.4.3: Boulevard Strip


                                                                                            5-18   0
       Strategic     Boulevards are desirable for the following reasons:
                             They provide increased safety for pedestnans and children at play by
                             separating them from vehicular traffic.
        - WorkinSt
Paper #3 Networ
                             The probability of vehicle/ pedestrian collisions is reduced in the
       Assessment            instance that a vehicle travels outside the roadway and up onto the
                             The boulevard provides an area in which to store street hardware such
                             as utility poles, signs, transit shelters, fire hydrants, and newspaper
                             boxes, thereby maintaining minimum clear distances for pedestrians
                             on sidewalks.
                             Landscaping can be added to the boulevard to enhance the walking
                             environment for pedestrians.
                             Where driveways intersect the sidewalk, the boulevard provides an
                             adequate slope zone for driveway ramps between the curb and the
                             sidewalk. Where sidewalks are provided right up to the curb, sloped
                             driveways create an inconvenience and potential hazard for wheelchair
                             users and elderly pedestrians.
                             In situations where sidewalk widths are insufficient to allow a number
                             of pedestrians or wheelchair users to pass, boulevards provide
                             additional width to allow users to comfortably pass each other.
                             An area is provided for the storage of snow plowed off of the roadway
                             and sidewalk.
                             Pedestrians are less likely to be splashed by passing vehicles in wet
                     As with sidewalks, recommend widths for boulevards vary with street
                     classification and land use designation. TAC recommends boulevard
                     widths of 3.0 m along arterial streets and 2 0 m along collector and local
                     streets. Along streets with design speeds of 60 km/h or greater, TAC
                     indicates that the incorporation of boulevards is particularly important.
                     In areas where space is limited and sidewalk widths need to be
                     increased to accommodate high volumes of pedestrians - such as in
                     commercial areas - boulevards may be narrower than the recommended
                     5.4.4      Intersections

                     Due to the complexity of movements, problems with sight distance and
                     interaction of different modes travelling at different speeds,
                     intersections will always be a relatively uncomfortable environment for
                     pedestrians. A variety of measures and treatments, however, can be
     C i n OF COQU~LW

       Strategic        applied to new designs or existing arrangements to minimize the
  Transpotfation        potential for conflict between pedestrians and vehicles where these
            Plan        modes intersect. Provided below are the key components of
                        intersections that can be improved through specific treatments:
Paper #3 - Networ
       Assessment          Sight distance. The provision and maintenance of adequate sight
                           distance is a key element in the planning and design of intersections.
                           While adequate sight distance is important in minimizing vehicle-
                           vehicle and vehicle-pedestrian conflicts from the perspective of
                           drivers, it is equally important to maintain adequate sight distance
                           for pedestrians. It is important to remember that many features
                           associated with the design and operation of intersections can
                           contribute to a reduction in visibility and sight distance. Items such
                           as signal poles, signage, landscaping, utility poles, and bus shelters
                           can block the sight lines between pedestrians and motorists. Parked
                           cars situated too close to the intersection can also reduce visibility
                           and create a hazard.

                           Although many of these measures are associated with horizontal
                           sight distance, vertical sight distance is also a major consideration at
                           intersections. Vertical sight distance can be a problem in cases where
                           intersections are located on steep grades, and where drivers of large
                           trucks may have their line of sight to pedestrians obscured by tree
                           branches, signage, or street banners. Therefore, it is important to
                           consider sight distance not only during the initial design phase of an
                           intersection, but also during its operational life to maintain visibility
                           as other features are added.

                           Alignment. Guidelines for the design of intersections recommend
                           that intersecting roadways meet at 90-degree angles to minimize
                           conflicts between roadway users. This standard provides optimal
                           sight lines and crossing distances for pedestrians. In situations where
                           this alignment standard cannot be achieved, extra precautions must
                           be taken to ensure that potential sight lines are unobstructed.

                           Turning Radii. The dimensions of curb radii at intersections have a
                           significant effect on the speed of turning vehicles and pedestrian
                           crossing distance. The design of curb radii does not typically
                           consider the needs of the pedestrian; often curb radii are designed to
                           allow for high volumes-of traffic to turn quickly. For ;isually
UR~NSYSTEMS                impaired pedestrians, smaller radii are preferred to give them a better
                                                                                             5-20      0
       Strategic     indication of direction at the intersection, as well as to slow speeds
  Transportation     of turning vehicles. However, curb radii that are too small may result
            Plan     in vehicles mounting the curb, endangering pedestrians waiting to
           Workine   cross at the comer and creating maintenance problems over the long
Paper #3 - Networl   term as deterioration of the curb is accelerated. Thus, a balance must
       Assessment    be achieved that serves both pedestrians and motorists.
                                   Figure 5.4.4 Effect of Reduced Curb Radii

                     Large comer radii encourage higher speeds by turning vehicles and
                     increase the distance pedestrians must travel to cross the roadway at
                     an intersection. Larger curb radii are typically used to provide for the
                     turning paths of large trucks and buses.

                     Reduced curb radii improve the pedestrian environment by:

                     0   Slowing nght-turning vehicles, minimizing the potential consequences
                         of vehicldpedestrian collisions.
                     0   Reducing the crossing distances for pedestrians, minimizing
                         pedestrians' exposure to vehicle/pedestrian collisions.
                     0   Improving sight distance between pedestnans and motonsts,
                         decreasing the risk of vehicle/pedestnan collisions.
                         Providing more pedestrian area at the comer.
                         Allowing more flexibility in the placement of curb ramps.

                     Other benefits include:

                                                                                        5-2 1

       Strategic        0   Decreasing the length of the pedestnan phase at signalized
  Transportation            intersections.
            Plan            Decreasing the time a turning vehicle has to wait for a pedestnan to
                            cross at unsignalized intersections.
Paper #3 - Networ
           Optrons      0   Enabling street-sweeping operations.
                        In many cases, large corner radii are not necessary - as long as
                        motorists can make the turn comfortably without driving over the
                        curb or travelling outside their lane - and should be reduced to
                        provide for pedestrians. Reductions in curb radii should be
                        considered on local and collector residential streets, particularly
                        where there are significant pedestrian crossing volumes. This
                        principle can also be applied when designing driveways. However, it
                        may not be appropriate to reduce curb radii where there are
                        significant numbers of large vehicles turning, such as on designated
                        truck routes, at right-turn locations on bus routes with Frequent
                        service, and on primary emergency vehicle routes.

                        The Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood Traffic Calming provides
                        curb radius reduction design details, as shown in Figure 5.4.5. The
                        radius chosen should be the smallest possible for the circumstances.
                        The smallest radius required to accommodate a passenger vehicle is
                        3.0 m to 5.0 m. As noted above, the implications of the smallest
                        radius on the operation of larger vehicles should be considered.
                        Factors that influence the selection of a turning radius include:

                            Available width of departing lane@):Low frequency encroachments
                            into opposing lanes by larger transit, service, or emergency vehicles
                            may be tolerable in some areas depending on the volume of opposing
                            Effective curb radius: As shown on Figure 5.4.6, if a parking lane is
                            provided, the effective curb radius may be sufficient for larger turning
                            Impact of larger vehicles off-tracking onto the curb: If insufficient
                            turning radii are provided, larger vehicles - particularly articulated
                            trucks - may off-track on to the curb. The frequency at which this
                            might occur, sight distances and numbers of pedestrians should be
                            considered in determining whether this would present an unacceptable
                            risk to pedestnans, as compared with the additional nsk associated
                            with a wider curb radius. Where it is determined that it is acceptable
                            for large vehicles to infrequently off-track on to the curb, the sidewalk
                            should be sloped so as to reduce to the curb height at the corner to 75
                      mm or less, and the sidewalk should be constructed to support heavier
  Transportation      vehicle weights.
                               Figure 5.4.5: Curb Radius Reduction Guidelines

Paper #3 Networ

                                                H I         I

                                                                                NOT To SCALE
                       ill dimmuonsem n mebg u n h olkw3sa mbd.
                       8urcc Fieure 4.7..Canadian Guide t Neighbourhood T a f c Calming,
                                                            o             rfi
                     Transportation Association of Canada, December 1998.

     cln OF coourrLA4
                                                @re 5.4.6:      Effective Curb Radiu!

         - WorkrnSi
Paper #3 Networ
                                                 J                  m

                                                here there ts an .Hedm curb radius ruflrcien
                                                w brnina vehicles. h e adual curb radius mor

                                                        be as small as I 5 m (5 hj
                                 Source: Portland Pedestrian Design Guide, Ct of Port1 md, June 1998.
                        0   Channelized right turns. Channelized right-turn lanes are intended to
                            reduce traffic delays by allowing right-turning traffic to bypass a
                            signalized intersection. A raised triangular island, sometimes called
                            a 'pork chop' separates the right-turn lane from the originating
                            street. Channelized right-turn lanes are typically designed for
                            unimpeded vehicular movement, and automobiles can often turn
                            right at a reasonably high speed.

                            The benefits of channelized right-turn lanes are as follows:

                                Reduced traffic congestion for heavier nght-turn movements
                                Reduced pedestrian crossing time for the intersection traffic signals

                            The drawbacks of channelized right-turn lanes include:

                            0   Increased speeds for right-turning vehicles, increasing the potential for
                                and consequences of vehicle-pedestnan collisions
                                Decreased visibility of pedestrians
                                Increased crossing distance for pedestrians
                            0   Only minor benefits to vehicles when the storage length for the right-
                                turn lane is minimal. Access to channelized nght turn lanes can be
                                blocked by traffic in the outside through lane.

                            Channelized right-turn lanes are not recommended in urban areas
                            and other areas of significant pedestrian use. However, channelized
       Strategjc     right-turn lanes may be necessary to alleviate significant traffic
  Transportation     congestion, or when curb return radii of larger than 9.1 m are
            Plan     unavoidable. If channelized right-turn lanes are provided, they
                     should be designed so that high-speed turns are discouraged, thereby
        - WorkrnB
Paper #3 Nefwor      improving pedestrian safety, while accommodating trucks and buses.
       Assessmenl    Methods of improving channelized right-turn lanes include the
                     techniques illustrated in Figure 5.4.7 and described below.

                        Providing raised pedestnan crossing islands within the intersection as
                        a rehge island for pedestrians, ensunng that sufficient curb ramps are
                        Optimizing right-turning motorists' view of the pedestrian and the
                        vehicles to their left by onenting the 'pork chop' so that the tail points
                        to approaching traffic.
                        Ensuring that the right-turning traffic must yield to the cross-street
                        traffic, reducing vehicular speeds.
                        Providing pavement markings to indicate the crosswalk location in the
                        right turn lane.
                        Placing the crosswalk where the dnver has good visibility of the
                        pedestrian, and is still looking ahead, rather than looking to the left for
                        a gap in traffic.

     CIW OF C Q T A
             G ULM
                                        Figure 5.4.7: Channelized Right-Turn Design
            Plan          I   C m n t MSHTO Standard

        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ

                                                                                a .

                                                            ISG le. Providine Safetv and Mobiliw, Draft
                              Final Report, FHWA, McLean, VA, Augus; 2000, P&land Pedesman D& Guide,
                              City of Portland, June, 1998.

                      0   Islands provide a place of refbge for pedestrians where crossing
                          distances are wide. They protect pedestrians in cases where there
                          may be complicated or confusing traffic flow patterns or segregated,
                          high-volume vehicle movements, such as with turn lanes. At wide
                          signalized intersections, where crossing times are constrained,
                          median refuges allow slower pedestrians to cross one direction of
                          traffic each interval (Figure 5.4.8). It is important to provide
                          adequate ramping or cuts in the islands to allow use by persons in
                          wheelchairs. Additional information on median islands is provided
                          in Section 5.4.8.

                                                                                                  5-26    0
                                        Figure 5.4.8: Median Refuge

Paper #3 - Networ

                     Sidewalk extensions. Intersections are typically designed so that
                     vehicles are given priority over pedestrians. To make pedestrian
                     crossings more prominent, sidewalks can be extended across local
                     street intersections. Sidewalk extensions can be either raised (road
                     raised to level of sidewalk) or unraised (sidewalk lowered to level or
                     roadway). Raised sidewalk extensions have the additional benefit of
                     reducing vehicle speeds.

                     Sidewalk extensions are most suitable on local street intersections
                     with collector or arterial streets. Design details for sidewalk
                     extensions are provided in the Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood
                     Traffic Calming, as shown on Figure 5.4.9.

                                                        Figure 5.4.9: Sidewalk Extension
       Strategic         I

PaDer #3 - Networ

                             All dimensions are in mires unless otherwise noted                 NOT TO SCALE

                         Source Figure 4 3, Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood Traffic Calming, Transportation
                         Association of Canada, December 1998

                         5.4.5           Driveways
                         Sidewalks that cross driveways are often sloped. This leads to the
                         potential for wheelchairs to become unstable and tip over, and for other
                         pedestrians to lose their balance. In addition to getting injured by

                                                                                                          5-28   0
       Strategic      falling, pedestrians could tumble into the roadway, exposing the
  TranSDOrtatiOn      pedestrian to the potential of a vehicle/pedestrian collision.
                      When driveways cross sidewalks, it is recommended to maintain the
Paper #3     Workrnf
           - Networ sidewalk level across the driveway, maintaining the two percent cross-
      Assessment      slope, as per the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. To make
                      the sidewalk more prominent, the sidewalk material should extend
                      across the driveway rather than the driveway material extending across
                      the sidewalk.

                      Two design options are shown in Figure 5.4.10. As shown, the preferred
                      driveway condition is to maintain the sidewalk cross-slope across the
                      driveway, and score the sidewalk with a pattern to make the sidewalk
                      more prominent. When sidewalk widths are more constrained, a
                      dropped driveway may be used, typically where the sidewalk conidor
                      width is less than 2.4 m. The third option is to provide a bypass walk at
                      the top of the driveway. However, this results in a slight detour for the
                      pedestrian, and should only be considered where there are problems
                      with the dropped driveway, such as steep grades, or when the dropped
                      driveway results in stormwater drainage problems. Three alternative
                      design treatments to maintain the 2-% cross-slope are provided in
                      Figure 5.4.1 1.
                                         Figure 5.4.10: Driveway Crossing Options


                                                                       Dropped dnvel4y o constmined wdh
                                                                    sltuotion (rmnng should cOntmve Dcross dnnl
                      Source Portland Pedesman Design Guide, Ct of Portland, June 1998.

                                     Figure 5.4.11: Driveway Crossing Design Treatments
Paper #3 - Networl

                                        T k . c ~ d I & g l l ~ L o l ~ * F v m d
                                 Source. Portland Pedestnan Design Guide, Ct of Portland, June I 9

                        5.4.6      Signals
                        In addition to assigning right-of-way to motor vehicle traffic, signals
                        provide an interruption in motor vehicle traffic to allow pedestrians to
                        cross at intersections or at mid-block locations. Where installed
                        properly, traffic signals can provide an effective means of controlling
                        and managing vehicle and pedestrian flows at intersections. However, if
                        a signalized intersection is complex and conhsing for motorists and/or
                        pedestrians, or an unwarranted traffic signal is installed, the potential for
                        collisions is heightened. Treatments at signalized intersections must not
                        only be easily understandable to both pedestrians and motorists, but
                        they should also encourage predictable behaviour on the part of all

                        The lack of pedestrian signals at certain signalized intersections can
                        serve as a bamer to pedestrian access by forcing some individuals to
                        take unnecessary risks to cross traffic. Pedestrian signals include the
                        white ‘walking person’ and red ‘stopping hand’ symbols to control
                        pedestrian movements in conjunction with traffic signals. The steady
                        ‘hand’ message indicates when pedestrians should not be in the
                        crosswalk. The flashing ‘hand’ is a clearance interval - pedestrians are
                        informed not to step into the crosswalk, but they may finish crossing if
                        they are already in the crosswalk. The ‘walking person’ symbol
                        indicates that pedestrians may cross the street in the direction of the
                        signal. Pedestrian signal indications are recommended in the Manual on

                                                                                                     5-30   0
       strategic     Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) under the following
  Transporfatlon     conditions:
                            Multi-phase signals are being used
        - workinst
Paper #3 Networ
           Optrons          Complex intersection geometry (more than four legs, wide streets,
       Assessment           refige islands)
                            Elderly pedestnans and young children are present
                        0   Pedestrian push-buttons are in use

                     Studies have shown that many pedestrians do not understand the
                     meaning of pedestrian signals and indications, particularly the flashing
                     ‘stopping hand’. Some municipalities have used educational pedestrian
                     signs (Figure 5.4.12), although no formal sign of this kind has been
                     incorporated into the MUTCD. In areas where pedestrian signals are not
                     provided, and pedestrians are required to obey vehicular traffic signals,
                     visibility of the vehicular signal heads may be obscured due to the
                     geometry of the intersection. To maximize pedestrian compliance with
                     signals at these locations, pedestrian signals should be provided.
                               Figure 5.4.12: Educational Pedestrian Crossing Signage

                                                         WATCH FOR
                                                        TURNING CARS

                                                       flNlsH CROgslNQ
                                                       IF IN CROSSWALK

                                                        WAlT ON CURB

                                                 TO CROSS
                                               PUSH BUllON

                     Pedestrian signal timings should allow sufficient time for pedestrians to
                     cross from one end of a street to the other, without feeling unnecessarily
                     rushed. While the MUTCD recommends at least a 4 to 7 second walk
                                                                                          5-3 1
     c7 OF CWllLAM

       Strategic   interval, some intersections may require significantly more walk time.
  Transportation   Pedestrian signal timings are typically based on a walking speed of 1.2
            Plan   d s e c (4 Wsec). However, not all pedestrians, including elderly persons
                   and small children, have the ability to walk at this speed. Pedestrian
           workinf signal timings of 0.9 to 1.1 d s e c (3 to 3.5 Wsec) should be applied to
Paper #3 - Networ
       Assessment  reflect the speed of the slowest pedestrians, and not a ‘typical’
                   pedestrian. At wide intersections, where pedestrian crossing times may
                   vary, median rehges should be provided to allow pedestrians to cross
                   one direction of traffic per signal interval.
                     5.4.7      Crosswalks and Stop Lines
                     Crosswalks are areas of the roadway designated for use by pedestrians
                     in crossing the street. Crosswalks may be marked or unmarked, yet there
                     is no legal difference between these two treatments. At intersections,
                     where sidewalks meet the street, a legal crosswalk is defined, regardless
                     of whether or not it is marked. Where crosswalks are marked, a number
                     of different treatments may be used. The standard crosswalk markings
                     consist of two parallel white lines, but diagonal and longitudinal lines
                     have been used to enhance visibility of the crosswalk.

                     Because an overuse of marked crosswalks can reduce motorist
                     compliance and, hence, the effectiveness of the crosswalk, this
                     treatment should be used sparingly and strategically. Marked crosswalks
                     are generally recommended in the following situations:

                             Signalized intersections where pedestnan access is accommodated
                             with pedestnan signal indications or pedestnan crossings.
                        0    Where a marked crosswalk can concentrate or channel multiple
                             pedestrian crossings to a single location.
                             Where confbsing geometncs or traffic operations necessitate the
                             delineation of the optimal crossing location and path.
                        0    At approved school crossings or along recommended safe school
                             At specific locations with significant pedestnan crossings and
                             pedestriadvehicle conflicts.

                     At locations where marked crosswalks are being considered for
                     installation, the following issues should be considered:

                             Adequate sight lines between motonsts and pedestrians should be
                             maintained. This may involve an examination of on-street parking,
       Strategic              street hardware (utility poles, mailboxes, trash receptacles, etc.), and
  Transportation              landscaping.
           Plan               Crosswalks should not be situated immediately downstream from bus
        - Workrnf
Paoer #3 Networ               Illumination at the location of the crosswalk should be evaluated to
       Assessment             ensure that adequate visibility is provided for non-daylight hours
                              (Figure 5.4.13).
                              Crosswalks should be marked at 90 degrees to vehicle traffic to
                              designate the shortest path for pedestrians and to avoid having
                              pedestrians’ backs turned to oncoming traffic.
                                         Figure 5.4.13: Illumination at Crosswalks
                          I                 n

                     Stop lines are used to indicate the desired stopping point at a crosswalk
                     for motorists. They should be installed 1.2 m (4 ft) in advance of and
                     parallel to the nearest crosswalk line. In some jurisdictions, stop lines
                     have been placed well in advance of the crosswalk - by as much as 12
                     m (40 ft) for a mid-block crosswalk - to improve visibility between
                     pedestrians and vehicles approaching the crosswalk. This is especially
                     important on multi-lane roads where a vehicle in one lane stops and
                     obscures the sight lines of other oncoming motorists in the adjacent
                     5.4.8       Raised Medians and Refuge Islands
                     Raised medians and refuge islands (Figure 5.4.14 and Figure 5.4.15)
                     enhance a pedestrian’s ability to cross a roadway by allowing the
                     pedestrian t cross one direction of traffic at a time. At wide signalized
                     intersections, median refuges may be provided where one signal interval

       Strategic        cannot accommodate walking speeds, thereby allowing pedestrians to
  Transportation        cross the entire roadway - one direction at a time - over the duration of
           Plan         two signal intervals. At unsignalized mid-block crossings, median
                        refuges simplify the crossing procedure by allowing pedestrians to look
                        in one direction at a time to identify an acceptable gap in traffic before
     Assessment         crossing. A number of studies have shown that pedestrians crossing an
                        undivided, multi-lane street may experience delays up to 10 times
                        longer than that incurred crossing a street with a median refuge.
                                       Figure 5.4.14 Median Refuge Design Features

                        Planning and design considerations for median rehges should include
                        the following:

                               At signalized intersections, where a large number of elderly
                               pedestrians and/or persons with disabilities will be crossing, median
                               refuges should be installed.
                           0   Medians refuges should have cut-through ramps at pavement level or
                               curb ramps for wheelchair users (Figure 5.4.14).
                               Median refuges should be at least 1.5 m wide (absolute minimum
                               width 1.2 m) and no less than 3.7 m long or the width of the crosswalk
                               - whichever is greater (Figure 5.4.16). Where median refuges will be
                               accommodating bicycles in addition to pedestnans, design dimensions
                               should conform to standards for bicycle median refuges. If the median
                               island can only be installed on the upstream end of the crosswalk (at
URJZ&NSYSEMS.                  intersections), the island should be at least 2.0 m long (Figure 5.4.17).
    November 2001
       Strategic     A tapered approach nose, offset from the edge of the traffic, should be
  Transportation     provided in accordance with local standards for medians. A minimum
            Pian     30: 1 taper is recommended.
                     Object markers should be provided on the island approach noses to
Paper #3 - Networ    indicate the presence of a raised curb. The signs must not obstruct
       Assessment    sight lines for pedestnans using the island.
                     At signalized intersections, pedestnan push buttons and associated
                     signage should be provided with median refuges.
                     Unsignalized, mid-block median rehge ramps should be cut through at
                     45 degrees so that crossing pedestrians are facing in the direction of
                     approaching traffic.
                     Any potential obstructions to visibility, such as foliage, signage (aside
                     from Object markers), or barriers, should not be included in the design
                     of median refuges.
                               F   ire 5.4.15: Median Island Configuratil      1s

                                   7ypi.r m r d m n dad cat mrdbhb wft~
                                          argrade~s~ogec r o r r d
                      Source: Pc   and Pedestrian Design Guide, City of Ponlan , June 1998.

     O n OF COWUM
                                Figure 5.4.16: Median Island on Both Sides of Crosswalk
                                                               ipplowjl .nd twrtnwl

Paper #3 - Networ


                     burce: NJDOT Pedesman Compatible Planning and Design Guidelines, New Jersey
                     Department of Transportation.

                                 Figure 5.4.17: Median Island on One Side of Crosswalk

                     There are a few situations where median islands would not be
                     beneficial, and should not be used, including:

                         0   On narrow streets where the island would be narrower than 1.2 m.
                         0   Where the island would interfere with a high turning volume of large
                         0   Where roadway alignment obscures the island so it is not easily seen
                             and motorists might drive into it.
                         0   In areas where the presence of a safety island hampers snowplowing.

                     5.4.9      Curb Cuts and Ramps
                     Sidewalk curbs are barriers to some pedestrians. However, sidewalk
                     curb ramps eliminate this barrier by providing a transition in grade
     CITY Coquirum

       Strategic     between the street and the raised sidewalk. Curb ramps expand the
  Transportation     walking opportunities available to people and make walking a more
            Plan     viable means of transportation.
        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ      Currently, single curb ramps are often provided at each comer of an
       Assessrnenl   intersection, producing a total of four ramps per intersection. However,
                     a single curb ramp directs pedestrians directly into the intersection,
                     which can be hazardous, particularly to visually and physically
                     challenged pedestrians. In addition, if a single diagonal curb ramp is
                     provided, turning vehicles approach pedestrians from the rear, making it
                     more difficult for pedestrians to see the vehicle. As shown on Figure
                     5.4.18, if two separate ramps are installed, the turning vehicle
                     approaches the pedestrian from the side, where it is more visible to the

                     Yurrting *.h&uppwrheipdeikmn from      h
                                                            t            S k b h R a m P J o r . p.Pcmlsd*
                             FMT QtaSI@          r
                                        ~ c n a tonyr
                     Source: Portland Pedesman Design Guide, City of Portland, June 1998

                     Curb ramps provide the following benefits to pedestrians:

                         0     Provide access to persons in wheelchairs.
                               Provide access to pedestnans with mobility problems who find it
                               difficult to step up and down curbs.
                         0     Provide access to pedestrians using strollers, walkers, carts and
                               bicycles, and to in-line skaters.
                         0     Reduce the injuries resulting from trips and falls due to vertical
                               changes in a pedestrian route.

                     There are two basic types of curb ramp systems as shown in Figure

                         0     Perpendicular ramps: have a ramp into a crosswalk
                               Parallel ramps: have a ramp into a dropped landing that is flush with
                               the street surface
    c Y OF cOQurru\M
                                  Figure 4.19: Perpendicular and Parallel Curt Ramps


                                                  ond bolromd worj mmp.
                               Source. PI and Pedestnan Design Guide, Ct of Portlanc ,June 1998.
                       In addition to parallel and perpendicular curb ramps, there are diagonal
                       curb ramps, which are located at the midpoint of a curb and projected
                       curb ramps, which have a curb ramp that is extended into the gutter.
                       Regardless of the ramp type, as shown on Figure 5.4.19, every ramp
                       must have a landing at the top and at the bottom.

                       Perpendicular curb ramps are the preferred method of accommodating a
                       grade change, provided that adequate right-of-way is available for its

                       Sidewalk curb ramps should be designed in accordance with the
                       Americans with Disabilities Act, which include the following

                             Flare curb cuts into the street surface - any sudden drop-off in a ramp
                             descent by as little as one-quarter inch may cause a wheelchair to tip
                             Minimum width of curb ramp: 0.915 m
                             Maximum running slope of any curb ramp: 1 :12
                             Maximum cross slope: 150
                             Surface: should contrast visually with the adjoining sidewalk and
                             roadway surfaces, and have surface treatment on ramps to allow
                             visually challenged people to detect the ramps
                             Maximum rise for any run: 0.760 m
                                                                                                   5-38   0
       Strategic            Landing at the top and bottom of ramps: at least 1.220 m long and at
  Transpofiation            least the same width as the ramp itself

          Work'nfAdditional guidelines for curb ramps at intersections include:
Paper #3 - Networ
       Assessment           Align curb ramps in the direction of crosswalks.
                            Locate curb ramps in the centre of the crosswalk when possible.
                        0   Provide a smooth transition so the low end of the curb ramp meets the
                            grade of the street with a smooth transition, without a lip.
                            Provide curb ramps at channelization islands in an intersection and
                            median refuge islands, unless full cut-through openings are provided
                            at-grade with the street.
                            Provide good drainage at intersection comers so that water and ice do
                            not accumulate within the crossing area.

                     Although the current tendency is to install a single ramp per comer, it is
                     recommended that two ramps be installed on each comer to help
                     pedestrians cross the street more safely. Installing two ramps on each
                     comer will help reduce the risk of vehicle/pedestrian collisions,
                     particularly for people in wheelchairs. As shown in Figure 5.4.20, the
                     following guidelines are recommended:

                        0   Two ramps per comer: separate sidewalks are constructed and the
                            road skew angle is large enough to make a single ramp difficult to
                            install safely
                            One ramp per comer: in very low traffic situations, or where
                            geometrics and physical constraints do not allow the construction of
                            two ramps in retrofit situations


  Transportation                                                            ACCEITMLE
                                 UNNACCEPTABLE                               L-mcurvadclh
                                   No curb m m p
Paper #3 - Networ


                              CantiedIN&   uumwfk

                       5.4.10    Street Hardware and Furniture

                       Street hardware and furniture have created many problems for
                       pedestrians - especially pedestrians with disabilities. The design and
                       location of these items determines not only how well they are used, but
                       also whether or not they add to or detract from the pedestrian

                       Street hardware consists of regular fixtures found along and within a
                       street right-of-way, including:

                          0   Traffic signs and signals
                          0   Utility and lighting poles
                          0   Utility cabinets
                          0   Mail boxes
                          0   Newspaper vending boxes
                              Parking meters

                       Examples of street furniture, which are objects intended to enhance the
                       pedestrian environment, include:

                          0   Contrasting and decorative surface matenals

       Strategic              Benchedseating areas
  Transportation              Trash receptacles
Paper #3 Networf              Bollards and fencing
           Options            Pedestrian lighting
                              Transit shelters
                              Phone booths
                              Information kiosks
                              Bicycle racks
                              Sculptures, fountains and other architectural features
                              Sidewalk cafes

                       Placement of street furniture should be tailored to specific locations and
                       not placed in a regimented pattern (such as every 20 or 30 m along a
                       street). This practice will ensure that these items are provided to serve
                       the needs of pedestrians, rather than creating an obstruction to
                       pedestrian mobility and visibility. This is especially important at
                       intersection locations, where sight lines must be maintained and access
                       to pedestrian push-buttons should not be obstructed.

                       For persons with disabilities, improper placement of street furniture can
                       create a significant obstruction to mobility, as well as a potential hazard.
                       The following guidelines are recommended for the placement of street
                       hardware and furniture:

                              Place hardware/fumiture out of the normal travel path in the
                              'furnishings zone', providing a clear travel way for pedestrians. This is
                              particularly important for visually impaired people and people in
                              Maintain walkways so that hazards (such as debns, tripping hazards
                              and areas of water accumulation) do not impede pedestrians.
                              Ensure that hardwandfurniture is far enough away from on-street
                              parking so that access to vehicles is not blocked. This IS particularly
                              important for people in wheelchairs and for wheelchair lift-equipped
                              Where street furniture infringes on the pedestrian path, high contrast
                              colours such as yellow, red and black should be used whenever
                              possible to increase visibility of these objects.

                                                                                                 5-4 1
       Strategic     Figure 5.4.21 and Figure 5.4.22 illustrate the placement of street
  Transportation     hardwadfurniture in the ‘hrnishings zone’, and the provision of a clear
           Plan      travel way for pedestrians.
PaDer #3 Networ                                          ‘.21:The Furnishings Zone

                     Source: Portland Pedestrian Design Guide, City of Portland, June 1998.

                                             Figure 5.4.22: Pedestrian Travel Way

                      ource. Figure 56, Pedestnan Facilities Guidebook Incorporating Pedestrians into
                     Washington’s Transportation System, otak, September 1997.
                     The ITE Design and Safety of Pedestrian Facilities handbook provides
                     additional guidelines for the positioning of street furniture:
  Transpottation            No street furniture should hang less than 80 inches high over a
            Plan            circulation path.
                        0   No object mounted on a wall or post should have a clear open area
Paper #3 - Networ           under it higher than 27 inches off the ground.
       Assessment           No object higher than 27 inches, attached to a wall, should protrude
                            from that wall more than four inches.
                        0   No protruding object should reduce the clear width of the circulation
                            path to less than 36 inches.
                     5.4.11 Parking
                     Parking facilities are designed to provide for efficient access and egress
                     by motor vehicles. Pedestrian considerations in parking lot design are
                     typically an afterthought, leaving pedestrians to walk amidst relatively
                     unpredictable vehicle movements. In parking lots, motorists often turn
                     comers and back out of parking spaces abruptly. With no walkways
                     provided, pedestrians are forced to fend for themselves. Site plans for
                     parking lots should minimize the need to walk in vehicle spaces, thus
                     minimizing the potential for conflict between backing or turning
                     vehicles and pedestrians. Where possible, parking areas should
                     incorporate the following features:

                            Provide sidewalk median access to parking to provide pedestrians with
                            walking space outside of the vehicle travel lanes.
                            Arrange parking aisles to work in pairs (one-way streets shaped to
                            form a ‘U’) when near buildings or other destinations.
                            Create one-way parking aisles to allow for simpler crossing by
                            Place parking spaces at an angle to provide greater visibility for
                            motorists and pedestrians and reduces the potential for pedestrian
                        0   Where pedestnan volumes are high, use raised pedestrian crossings
                            and illuminate the crossings.

                     In addition to safety considerations, the security of pedestrians within
                     parking facilities must be maximized. Design of facilities that
                     maximizes opportunities for natural andlor passive surveillance
                     contributes towards enhanced security in parking facilities. Off-street
                     parking facilities should be provided under well-lit conditions, as close
                     to associated buildings and uses as possible. They should be blended in
                     with the street where possible rather than screened or obscured behind
           WUL M
  Cll'VOF C L T A

     Strategic      dense landscaping. In situations where covered or multi-level parkades
Transportation      are used, if security patrols or video cameras cannot be provided to
         Plan       monitor the facility on a regular basis, multiple exit opportunities should
                    be provided to allow individuals to escape from potential assailants.
   Assessment       Although the placement of parking lots between the street and the
                    buildings can enhance security through natural surveillance, it can also
                    create large building setbacks, increasing the distance people must walk
                    to reach a destination. Thus, people who drive their car and park it are
                    given preferential treatment over people who walk. Additionally, a
                    street that is lined with parking lots rather than buildings creates a less
                    attractive streetscape where the pedestrian looks and feels out of place.
                    Locating parking lots alongside, behind, or under buildings provides a
                    better environment for pedestrians. However, this situation may not
                    provide an adequate degree of security for patrons. The balance between
                    providing an aesthetically appealing pedestrian environment and a high
                    degree of personal security must be treated on a site-specific basis. If
                    adequate surveillance can be provided in situations where parking
                    facilities are located to the side or rear of a building, it may be
                    appropriate to site the building at these locations. However, in situations
                    where the probability for crime is higher and the level of surveillance is
                    limited, parking facilities should be located in full view of passing
                    pedestrians and motorists, as well as surrounding buildings.
                    5.4.12    Grade Separated Crossings
                    Pedestrian overpasses and underpasses are used in high pedestrian
                    demand areas where acceptable gaps in traffic are not provided or where
                    intemptions in traffic - through the use of signals - cannot be
                    accommodated. Grade separated facilities not only maximize pedestrian
                    safety, but also minimize vehicle delay and maximize roadway capacity.

                    Grade separated crossings are typically used in situations where high-
                    volume and/or high-speed roadways obstruct pedestrian travel to
                    significant pedestrian destinations such as shopping centres, recreational
                    facilities, schools, or parking facilities, for example.

                    If grade separated crossings are not planned and designed appropriately,
                    they may not be used by pedestrians. Because these facilities do not
                    typically provide as direct a crossing as a conventional at-grade
                    crossing, they must be applied under very specific circumstances to be
                    effective. Studies have shown that grade separated crossings should be
                                                                                       5-44       0
       strategic     located along, and constructed to reflect, the normal path of pedestrian
  Transportation     movement. Where an overpass or underpass provides a less direct
            Plan     crossing of a roadway, fences, medians, railings or other barriers may be
                     required to prevent pedestrians from crossing at-grade.
        - ""'"T
Paper #3 Networ
       Assessment    Overpasses are more commonly used than underpasses, due to the
                     complications and concerns that are involved with the construction and
                     use of an underpass. Construction of an underpass may involve
                     relocation of utility lines and possible drainage problems. In addition,
                     underpasses are generally viewed as presenting security problems, and
                     are often avoided by pedestrians, especially during non-daylight hours.
                     5.4.13     Transit Stops
                     Because all transit users are pedestrians at either end of their transit trip,
                     transit stop planning and design must be pedestrian friendly. To
                     complement transit-oriented land use patterns, transit stops should be
                     located and designed to provide maximum comfort, security, and
                     convenience for users. From bus stops to commuter rail stations,
                     pedestrian treatments play a significant role in an individual's decision
                     to take transit over another mode of travel.

                     Guidelines for the spacing of bus stops should reflect the need to
                     provide a balance. Too many bus stops spaced too close together cause
                     delays that discourage transit ridership. Conversely, long distances
                     between bus stops discourage ridership by making pedestrian access to
                     bus stops difficult. Thus, bus stops should be located so as to minimize
                     delays and maximize pedestrian access. Ideally, stops in residential
                     areas should be located to ensure that 90% of residents are within 400 m
                     walking distance to transit, and that 65% of residents are within 200 m
                     walking distance to transit.

                     Because all round-trip bus passengers have to cross the street at least
                     once, either to catch the bus or get to their destination, bus stops should
                     be located as close as possible to pedestrian crossings, either marked or
                     unmarked. At intersections, far-side stops are usually preferred because
                     they provide fewer traffic delays, provide optimal auto and pedestrian
                     sight distances, and result in fewer conflicts between buses and
                     pedestrians. Studies have shown that converting to far-side stops can
                     significantly reduce hazardous pedestrian crossing behaviour.

     CINOF Coqurrm
       Strategic     For pedestrian convenience and safety, paved landing surfaces are
  Transportation     recommended at all bus stops. At locations where more than 50
            Plan     passengers board per day, or where high concentrations of elderly
                     pedestrians or persons with disabilities exist, bus shelters should be
        - Workinft
Paper #3 Neiwor      provided. Other amenities, such as newspaper boxes and trash
       Assessmenl    receptacles, should be located to provide adequate space for waiting and
                     boarding passengers. Lighting should also be sufficient at all transit
                     stops to deter criminal activity and maximize safety of pedestrians.

                     For exclusive right-of-way transit, such as commuter trains, subways,
                     light rail, and rapid busways, station and platform areas should be
                     designed to accommodate peak pedestrian loads. Another important
                     consideration in the design of these facilities is the creation of a secure
                     environment for pedestrians. Lighting should be adequate, and waiting
                     areas should be open, inviting, and easily accessed by both pedestrians
                     and police or security personnel.
                     5.4.14    School Zones

                     Because schools generate a significant number of pedestrian trips and
                     increasing pick-up and drop-off automobile trafiic, special care must be
                     taken to ensure that the potential for pedestrian-vehicle conflicts is
                     reduced. Child pedestrians do not possess the ability to judge vehicle
                     speeds and acceptable gaps in traffic, and their peripheral vision is not
                     as well developed as adults’. Physical treatments, together with special
                     safety programs, should be used to maximize child pedestrian safety
                     around schools.

                     Physical treatments that can be used to maximize child pedestrian safety
                     around schools and along designated school routes are discussed below.

                           On streets with high traffic volumes and high vehicle speeds, standard
                           traffic signals may be used to create adequate gaps in vehicle traffic to
                           allow school children to cross safely. Crossing signals may still
                           require the use of adult crossing guards to ensure that signals are used
                           Sight distance at intersections must be maintained, taking into
                           consideration the smaller stature of child pedestnans. Improvements
                           may involve restncting on-street parking near intersections, relocating
                           street hardware or ‘bulbing’ out curbs to improve visibility.
                           Traffic calming measures such as speed humps, raised crosswalks, and
                           curb extensions may be used in the vicinity of schools to reduce
     Cinw Copwrm
       Strategic            vehicle speeds, and raise the awareness of motonsts as to the presence
  Transportation            of child pedestrians. Although reduced speed limits and marked
            Plan            crosswalks are typically used for school zones, these measures are not
                            often complied with and require a consistent police presence in order
Paper #3 - Networ
                            to be effective. Self-enforcing measures, such as the ones indicated
                            above, have proven to be a more cost-effective means of calming
       Assessmenl           traffic.

                     Many programs have been developed to provide safe pedestrian routes
                     to school, promote awareness and education, and provide alternative
                     methods of getting children to school safely. Provided below is a list of
                     some of the programs that are being used throughout Greater Vancouver
                     and North America to increase safety for school children:

                        Safe Routes to School.      hs
                                                   T i program involves the designation of
                        specific routes for child pedestrians to use on their way to and from
                        school. Developed in co-operation with school officials, parents and
                        local police, a Safe Routes to School program can provide students
                        with pedestrian network plan designed to route children to low
                        volume streets and designated crossing locations. Safe Routes to
                        School programs also include significant awareness and education
                        components directed towards school children.

                        School Safety Patrols. Adult guards     or members of a school safety
                        patrol may carry out supervision of crossing school children.
                        Organized by the administration of a school, the school safety patrol
                        also provides a way of extending traffic safety education beyond the

                        Parent Parking Patrol. Developed in Edmonton, Alberta by a former
                        police officer, the Parent Parking Patrol provides a means of
                        controlling drop-off and pick-up traffic at schools through an
                        educational and non-confrontational approach. In this program,
                        groups of parents work as a patrol to ensure that unsafe driving
                        practices are monitored and discouraged. The main intent of this
                        program is safety prevention and driver education. It has been found
                        in many schools throughout BC and Alberta that, once drivers
                        become aware of the Parent Parking Patrol, their driving habits
                        significantly improve.


       Strategic           Walking School Bus.     hs
                                                  T i program was developed to provide an
  Transpottation           alternative means of getting young children to and from school. In
                           the program, parents, police, and school officials map where each
                           participating child lives in relation to the school, and identify the
PaDer #3 - Networ
           Options         safest routes for these children to use on their trips to and from
       Assessment          school. Volunteers (including senior citizens) are asked to become
                           walking school bus 'drivers' that walk a fixed route, similar to a
                           conventional school bus, collecting children along the route and
                           delivering them safely to school. The driver would also be equipped
                           with a first aid kit, a reflective vest, and a walking cart to hold
                           school bags.
                        5.4.15    Construction Sites
                        Accommodating the needs of pedestrians at or near work sites is an
                        issue that cannot be treated lightly. When one considers the wide range
                        of pedestrians that may encounter a work site, including the visually
                        impaired, the hearing impaired, and persons in wheelchairs, the
                        provision of a safe, smooth and clearly delineated pathway becomes a
                        significant challenge. Every effort must be made to adequately separate
                        pedestrian traffic from both work site activity and adjacent traffic.
                        Provided below is a list of key measures that must be undertaken to
                        maximize pedestrian safety:

                              Pedestrians should be appropriately diverted from direct encounters
                              with work site activity by advance signage, as provided for in the
                              MUTCD. For mid-block location work sites, signs should be placed at
                              intersections so that pedestrians are not forced to cross the street mid-
                              block (Figure 5.4.23).
                              Where pedestrian routing must be provided through a work site, a
                              separate, safe footpath should be constructed free of any abrupt
                              changes in grade or terrain.
                              Movement across designated pedestrian paths by work vehicles and
                              other equipment must be kept to a minimum. Where necessary, such
                              movements should be controlled by a flagger or temporary
                              At work sites where equipment and materials are being used above the
                              ground floor level, it may be necessary to create a canopied walkway
                              to protect pedestrians from falling debris. These structures should be
                              sturdy and sufficiently illuminated for non-daylight hours.

                                                                                                 5-48     a

     Strategic       Where pedestrians are in danger of being impacted by errant vehicles
Transportation       from the work site or adjacent traftic lanes, paths must be separated
          Pian       and protected by appropriately sturdy longitudinal bamers.
                  Figure 5, 23: Pedestrian Facilitie   i t Construction Sites (S attle WA)

                               BARRICADE LENOTH
                                 EOUAL TO FULL
                               WIDTH OF SIDEWALK

                               SIDEWALK CLOSURE           TEMPORARY WALKWAY

                     6. TDM Strategy
                     This section discusses initiatives that Coquitlam can undertake to
PaDer #3 Networ
          workin$    manage travel demand, both for trips within the municipality and for
           Options   trips to and from Coquitlam. There are many benefits to managing
       Assessment    travel demand, including reduced demand and costs for new
                     transportation facilities, reduced congestion during peak periods on
                     existing facilities, reduced delays and costs for goods movement,
                     improved air quality, and reduced noise pollution.

                     6 1 What is TDM?
                     Travel demand management (TDM) describes programs intended to
                     restrain the demand for travel, particularly travel by single-occupant
                     vehicles (SOVs). TDM programs are used in communities throughout
                     North America as a means of increasing transportation choices,
                     reducing air quality impacts, and avoiding the need for new road

                     The following three goals of a TDM program are each intended to
                     reduce travel demand and traffic volumes at critical times and at critical
                     locations in the transportation system, thereby reducing the costs of
                     maintaining and expanding transportation facilities.

                        Change the amount of travel by encouraging trip-makers to combine
                        two or more purposes into a single trip, by encouraging employees
                        to telework and avoid commute trips, and by reducing the length of

                        Change the mode of travel by encouraging the use of non-SOV
                        modes, such as walking, bicycling, carpooling, and transit, andor by
                        discouraging the use of the SOVs as a travel mode.

                        Change the time of travel t reduce the growth in peak period travel
                        by encouraging employers and employees to adopt flexible work
                        arrangements, and by encouraging a shift in discretionary trips from
                        peak to off-peak times.

                     The majority of existing TDM programs focus on trips to work and to
                     school, as these trips are a significant component of peak period travel,
                     and can be targeted through employers and educational institutions. In
                                                                                          6- 1
      CinOF Copuirm
        Strategic     the US., federal and state laws require employers and employment
   Transportation     centres to implement TDM programs, which are often referred to as
             Plan     ‘employee trip reduction’ programs. The common purpose of trip
                      reduction legislation is to require large employers to establish employer-
 Paper #3 - Networ
            work‘n&   sponsored trip reduction strategies that encourage employees to use
        Assessmenl    alternatives to the SOV for commuting. Typically, trip reduction
                      regulations apply only to employers with at least a threshold number of
                      employees at a single worksite. Despite their apparent success. in
                      reducing SOV commuting, trip reduction laws in several states have
                      recently been scaled back under political pressure from large employers
                      affected by the regulations.

                      6.2 Guiding Principles
                      The following discussion presents five guiding principles for the
                      development and implementation of TDM measures in Coquitlam.
                      These principles will ensure that TDM measures are effective in
                      achieving transportation objectives, and remain so.

                         Principle I: TDM is a regional initiative. Although there are several
                         opportunities for TDM programs to be developed locally, the
                         effectiveness of local programs will be limited unless they are
                         supported by regional TDM initiatives. TransLink - the regional
                         transportation authority - has a legislated responsibility to manage
                         TDM programs in the Greater Vancouver area.
                         Because of the significant amount of inter-municipal travel in the
                         region, TDM initiatives developed at the local level would not
                         encourage local trip-makers to consider alternatives if residents and
                         employees of other communities are not encouraged to do the same,
                         and if alternative transportation choices are not provided region-
                         wide. Some TDM measures - particularly disincentives to
                         automobile use - must be managed on a regional basis to maintain a
                         ‘level playing field’ among local municipalities. Otherwise,
                         municipalities would be reluctant to implement local TDM measures
                         in the absence of regional TDM initiatives, in the face of opposition
                         from residents and local businesses.

                         Principle 2: The City of Coquitlam should lead         by example.
                         Although most TDM initiatives should be managed on a regional
                         basis, there is an opportunity for certain programs to be developed
URB&IUSYSEMS.            and implemented at the local level in support of regional initiatives.

       Strategic     Coquitlam can become a leader in the community as practitioners of
  Transporlatlon     TDM, providing a basis for encouraging others in the community to
           Plan      implement TDM measures. A number of measures - such as
                     preferential parking, flexible work arrangements and teleworking -
Paper #3 - Networ
                     could be implemented at City Hall and other municipal employment
       Assessment    locations to encourage municipal employees to alter travel
                     be haviour.

                     Principle 3: TDM must be flexible. One of the most significant
                     deterrents to using non-SOV modes of travel is the real or perceived
                     lack of flexibility in choosing alternative means of travel. Few
                     people can or are willing to commit to a single non-SOV mode for
                     all of their trips, whether they be commuting trips or personal
                     business trips. Many people would be willing to use non-SOV
                     modes the majority of the time, if they could choose different non-
                     SOV modes as needed, and if they could use their cars as necessary.
                     Consequently, TDM programs should provide flexibility of choice
                     for travellers to make use of more than one non-SOV mode, and to
                     drive alone on occasion.

                     Principle 4: Implementation of disincentives should be linked to
                     incentives. TDM measures include incentives to use non-SOV
                     modes (often called ‘carrots’) and disincentives to SOV travel (often
                     called ‘sticks’). People will generally accept disincentives to SOV
                     travel (such as tolls, parking charges, and so forth) if they know that
                     there are viable alternatives available. This means that, prior to or at
                     the same time that disincentives are introduced, incentives (such as
                     improved transit service, bicycle facilities, ridematching, and so
                     forth) should be introduced to increase the attraction and ease of use
                     of non-SOV modes.

                     Principle 5: TDM programs must be monitored. Following
                     implementation, TDM programs must be regularly monitored to
                     identify and correct potential problems before they become
                     significant, and to ensure that the goals of the TDM program are
                     achieved. Experience elsewhere indicates that failure to monitor
                     TDM programs leads to inefficiencies in the delivery of TDM
                     programs and poor performance, and ultimately leads to program
                     failure as trip-makers switch back to SOV travel. A comprehensive
                     monitoring program requires ongoing data collection and
                     stakeholder and agency liaison.
     Cirv OF Cwuirm
       Strategic      6.3 Regional TDM Initiatives
            Plan      TransLink is the regional transportation authority with responsibility for
                      major regional roads and the regional transit system. TransLink is also
Paper #3 - Networ
                      responsible for developing and managing a region-wide Transportation
       Assessment     Demand Management strategy. This means that the majority of the
                      TDM programs to be implemented within Coquitlam will be initiated
                      and funded by TransLink, and Coquitlam's role will be to incorporate
                      and support these programs with a number of locally developed

                      TransLink's Strategic Transportation Plan (STP) describes the actions
                      that TransLink will take over the next three to five years to address
                      transportation needs in the Greater Vancouver region. In addition to
                      significant expenditures on transit facilities and services, and
                      development of a number of regional roads, the TransLink STP also
                      establishes a transportation management strategy, which includes the
                      development of TDM measures.

                      Three distinct TDM areas are identified in the TransLink STP for
                      inclusion in the regional strategy, including:

                      0   Transportation pricing and revenue generation
                      0   Alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle
                      0   Parking management

                      The following discussion highlights the key components of the regional
                      TDM strategy outlined in TransLink's STP.
                      6.3.1     Transportation Pricing
                      Charging for the use of the transportation system can be a powefil tool
                      for the overall management of the transportation network, and can
                      provide revenue for the continued development and operation of the
                      transportation system.

                      TransLink has determined that the most effective pricing mechanisms
                      are those that are related to the direct use of the transportation system
                      (such as tolls and parking charges), rather than charges that indirectly
                      relate to the use of the system (such as annual licensing fees). Generally,
                      transportation pricing measures are considered 'sticks', in that they act
                      to discourage SOV travel rather than encourage the use of non-SOV
       strategic     modes. Variable pricing mechanisms can be used as an incentive to
  Transporfation     shifi the time of travel to off-peak periods and to reduce the amount of
            Pian     travel overall. The TransLink STP identifies several pricing mechanisms
                     that should be implemented, as discussed below.
Paper #3 - Networ
       Assessment       Road pricing. TransLink would like to move toward road pricing,
                        with tolls on new facilities to recover costs. Ultimately, system
                        tolling is identified as a goal for managing the overall use of the road
                        system. Road pricing that varies by time of day andor congestion
                        levels is an effective tool to discourage travel during peak periods.

                        Annual vehicle levy. TransLink approved the implementation of a
                        $75 average annual vehicle charge in 2000. However, the provincial
                        government rehsed to facilitate the collection of the fee through
                        ICBC. At this time, it is unlikely that an annual vehicle levy will be

                        Parking tax. Parking charges -which are discussed in more detail in
                        Section - are an effective means of discouraging automobile
                        use, particularly in Regional Town Centres. TransLink proposes to
                        implement a parking tax on all paid parking in the region.

                        Transit fares. TransLink proposes to increase transit fares to reflect
                        the benefit that users receive from the transit system. The objective
                        is to recover at least 50% of operating costs from the farebox, while
                        maintaining fares at a level that will continue to promote transit use.
                        Transit fares can be varied throughout the day as a means of shifting
                        the time of travel and ‘flattening’ the traditional peaks in transit
                        demand. Other than the zone fare system, no time-variable pricing
                        mechanism is currently in use in the Vancouver region.

                     As described in Section 6.2, public acceptance of the above pricing
                     mechanisms would increase if they were introduced in conjunction with
                     incentives for transportation alternatives. One potential incentive is a
                     universal transportation pass program, such as that being investigated
                     for the University of British Columbia. ‘U-Passes’ are in use in several
                     regions in North America and provide incentives to use non-SOV
                     modes. For example, they can include unlimited use of the transit
                     system, free parking for carpools and vanpools, guaranteed rides home,
                     and other incentives. TransLink plans to examine more widespread use

     CITY OF cOC)lJl~

       Strategic        of such innovative pricing products for major institutions and employers
  Transportation        across the Region.
                        6.3.2     Alternatives to the SOV
Paper #3 Networ
           Options      The second key method with which TransLink intends to discourage
       Assessmeni       SOV travel is through the expansion and promotion of alternatives to
                        drive-alone travel. The primary motorized alternatives to SOV travel are
                        transit and ridesharing, as described below.

                        In addition to expanding the transit system and ridesharing programs,
                        TransLink plans to expand the existing Employer Services program (Go
                        Green Choices), through which larger employers are contacted and
                        encouraged to support voluntary employer-sponsored trip reduction
                        programs. TransLink will also pursue legislative and policy changes that
                        would support the growth of the ridesharing market and other non-
                        traditional arrangements, such as car sharing.

                        Transit is a key alternative to the SOV in a large urban region, such as
                        the Lower Mainland. A well-developed transit system offers regularly
                        scheduled connections between key local and regional destinations at a
                        cost that is typically lower than the cost of driving alone. TransLink is
                        responsible for the regional transit system and, through its STP and the
                        Area Transit Planning process, has proposed a significant expansion of
                        the system. The expansion, however, is dependent on the resolution of
                        the ongoing funding issue.

                        The TransLink STP offers an expanded range of transit services that are
                        better suited to the diverse needs of the region’s communities. Transit
                        service will be expanded in key markets where transit can be
                        competitive with the automobile to include more frequent and faster
                        services, including limited-stop B-Line and longer-distance Express
                        Coach services. In areas outside these key markets - including some
                        areas of Coquitlam - transit services will be modified to include a
                        combination of conventional services and new and innovative forms of
                        transit, such as Community Shuttles. ‘Community Shuttle’ is a generic
                        description for services that could include 30-foot mini-buses andlor
                        demand-responsive, shared-ride taxi services. Community Shuttles are
                        suited to areas such as north Coquitlam, where conventional buses are
                                                                                             6-6    0
0        cmwcopur~
                         expensive to operate (because of low ridership), ineffective, and
      Transportation     unwelcome by residents.
                         To accommodate this increase in service, the TransLink STP calls for
            - workinf
    Paper #3 Networ      the regional bus fleet to be expanded 48% from the current level of 1 100
           Assessmenl    buses to over 1600 buses (including Community Shuttles) by 2005. This
                         fleet expansion is currently on hold pending the outcome of TransLink’s
                         consultation on finding. It is projected, however, that the proposed
                         service enhancements could increase regional transit ridership by up to
                         29% within five years. The expansion of bus services is in addition to
                         the construction of the Millennium and Port Moody-Coquitlam
                         SkyTrain lines.
                         Ridesharing includes both carpooling and vanpooling, and is facilitated
                         by ridematching.

                            Carpooling, which includes formal @re-arranged) and informal
                            (spontaneous) carpooling, represents the second-most common
                            method of travel, after the SOV.Carpools can include members of a
                            single family or household or can include several people that were
                            unacquainted before the carpool was formed, but were matched by a
                            ridematching agency because they share similar commute
                            characteristics. Although there are some third-party carpools (where
                            the vehicle is owned by a ridesharing agency or employer), the
                            majority of carpools are private and unmonitored, making it very
                            difficult to estimate the actual number of carpools operating on a
                            regular basis, even in a localized area. It is estimated that over
                            80,000 carpools currently operate in the Lower Mainland during the
                            typical afternoon peak hour.
                            Vanpooling. A vanpool is    a pre-arranged group of seven to 15
                            commuters who travel together to and from work each weekday in a
                            passenger van, and who share all commuting expenses. Vanpooling
                            was begun in the mid-1960s and grew substantially until the early
                            1980s, after which the number of vanpools in operation dropped
                            significantly (by as much as 50%, by some estimates). Unlike
                            carpools, vanpools are generally composed of unrelated passengers
                            who use a third-party vehicle for commuting purposes.
                            Consequently, they are easier to monitor. There are currently almost
                            150 vanpools in operation in the Lower Mainland.
     CITY Coouirm

  Transportation     0   Ridematching facilitates the introduction of commuters with similar
            Plan         home-to-work travel patterns so that carpools and vanpools can be
                         more easily formed. It is usually achieved through the use of a
Paper #3 - Networ
                         computerized database of commuters who have expressed an interest
                         in ridesharing. The most basic ridematching systems use geographic
                         information, such as postal codes, to match interested commuters.
                         Other match criteria can include work hours, ridesharing interest
                         (type of pool), employer, and the length of time a commuter has
                         been in the database. Advanced databases can generate personalized
                         commute information, including a listing of nearby park-and-ride
                         lots, a list of potential carpools and vanpools, and transit
                         information, to encourage the use of alternative modes of
                         transportation. The effectiveness of regional ridesharing initiatives
                         increases tremendously as the number of potential participants in a
                         ridematching database grows.

                     As described above, carpooling and - more particularly     - vanpooling
                     and ridematching can be administered by a third-party agency. In the
                     Lower Mainland, the Jack Bell Foundation (JBF) administers the vast
                     majority of vanpools, a small number of third-party carpools, and a
                     region-wide ridematching database containing almost 4000 names. JBF
                     owns the pool vehicles and offers them to pre-arranged groups of
                     commuters who share similar travel characteristics. Participating
                     commuters pay a monthly fare based on mileage, which covers the
                     capital and operating cost of the vehicles.

                     TransLink, through its STP, intends to expand the existing carpool and
                     vanpool programs, as well as the regional ridematching program,
                     through contracts with JBF.
                     6.3.3      Parking Management
                     The supply, price, and regulation of parking can significantly influence
                     individual mode choice. Parking management was a central element in
                     the TDM strategy of the Greater Vancouver Regional District’s
                     Liveable Region Strategic Plan and its transportation component,
                     Transport 2021. Consequently, TransLink’s STP identifies the
                     development of a regional parking management strategy as a key
                     element of the TDM program.
       Strategic       There are three mechanisms by which parking management can be used
  Transportation       to influence travel behaviour. These mechanisms are introduced below,
           Plan        and are described in more detail in Section 6 4 3
Paper #3     workinf
           - Networ
                          Parking supply strategies are a hndamental component of an overall
      Assessment          parking management strategy because of the link between the
                          availability of parking and the choice to use an automobile for travel.
                          They aim to limit the oversupply of parking to discourage the use of
                          automobiles in congested areas. Potential areas of applications
                          include large shopping centres and industrialhusiness parks.

                          Pricing strategies. The primary goal of pricing strategies is to
                          discourage SOV travel by increasing the total cost of travel to trip
                          makers. Parking pricing strategies attempt to reduce the extent of
                          subsidies provided to automobile users by attaching a price to
                          parking that is closer to the real cost of providing it. It must be
                          recognized, however, that much of the parking in Coquitlam and the
                          Vancouver region is provided at no cost to the user.
                          Support strategies. Parking supply and pricing strategies must be
                          accompanied by support strategies, which, on their own, would not
                          reduce automobile travel. As complementary measures, however,
                          they are necessary to maximize the effectiveness of supply and
                          pricing strategies. Examples of support strategies include timed curb
                          zones and parking permit districts.
                       Although TransLink has not yet implemented any of the above parking
                       management mechanisms, it intends, through its STP, to develop a
                       comprehensive regional parking management strategy within the next
                       few years. The plan might include any of the above strategies for
                       influencing travel behaviour through the management of parking supply
                       and/or pricing, and could include some measures that are not described
                       above. The overall objective, however, will be to develop a parking
                       management strategy that will influence travel choices on a region-wide
                       basis. The implementation of regional parking management would
                       require the co-operation of the member municipalities of the Greater
                       Vancouver Regional District, including Coquitlam, who have the
                       authority to implement parking management strategies at the local level.
                       Specific strategies are discussed in more detail in Section 6 4 3

     cn-rOF COQurLAM
       Strategic       6.4 Municipal TDM Initiatives
            Plan       Although TransLink will be the regional leader in developing and
                       administering the majority of TDM programs, Coquitlam can encourage
         - workinf
Paper #3 Networ        and support the implementation of TDM by developing several local
       Assessment      TDM programs. This section of the TDM Plan identifies several ways in
                       which Coquitlam could increase the travel choices available to travellers
                       to shift the time of travel and to promote the use of non-SOV modes.
                       6.4.1      TDM Program for Municipal Employees
                       Section 6.2 described five guiding principles for Coquitlam’s TDM
                       program, the second of which was that the City should lead by example.
                       This could be accomplished through the implementation of TDM
                       measures for municipal employees at City Hall, and then expanded to
                       municipal employees at other work locations. As well as setting an
                       example for other employers, a municipal TDM program would provide
                       practical experience in the implementation of TDM measures, which
                       could be used to assist employers and others in establishing similar
                       TDM programs.

                       To develop an effective TDM program at City Hall, the City should
                       commit to support TDM initiatives for the long term. This commitment
                       would begin with the creation of a TDM Co-ordinator staff position
                       (part-time or full-time). TDM co-ordinators at other municipalities and
                       employers in the Lower Mainland are known as ‘Go Green Co-
                       ordinators’, because they are trained through the Go Green Choices
                       employer outreach program. Go Green Co-ordinators are currently
                       active at the following public and private agencies, among others:

                               City of Burnaby
                          a    Greater Vancouver Regional District
                               Insurance Corporation of Bntish Columbia
                          a    Cambie Conidor Consortium (an organization of employers -
                               pnmarily public-sector - in the Cambie Street comdor)
                          a    Bentall Property Management
                          a    Rogers Communications

                                                                                           6-10    e
       Strategic     nhere are a number of specific measures that could be implemented at
  Transporlation     1
                     c ity Hall in support of a successfbl TDM initiative. These measures are
            Plan     di scussed below.
Paper #3 - Networ
           workin$       Ridesharing Support
                     As described in previous sections, TransLink is ultimately responsible
                     folr the development and management of a regional ridesharing program.
                     C urrently, the management and operation of regional ridesharing
                     Pragrams, as well as the regional ridematching database, is contracted to
                     the Jack Bell Foundation. This arrangement is likely to continue for the
                     foIreseeable future.
                     CIoquitlam could promote and support employee ridesharing in a
                     niimber of ways, as follows:

                        Ridematching. Although      JBF operates a regional ridematching
                        database, Coquitlam’s TDM co-ordinator could develop and
                        promote an internal ridematching system to find municipal
                        employees who share similar commute characteristics. An internal
                        ridematching program might be more successful in encouraging the
                        formation of carpools and vanpools because municipal employees
                        may feel more comfortable commuting with each other than with
                        strangers found through the regional database.

                        Guaranteed Ride Home. A Guaranteed Ride Home program is a
                        common component of many employer-based ridesharing programs.
                        The program provides a free ride home (usually by taxi) for people
                        who rideshare, take transit, or bicycle in the event of a family
                        emergency, illness, working late, or other unexpected occurrences.
                        Guaranteed Ride Home programs are generally simple and
                        inexpensive for any employer to implement. The requirements
                        include an account with one or more local taxi operators and a few
                        simple rules for employees describing what circumstances are
                        acceptable for a ride home and how to use the program.

                       Surveys of travellers in the Lower Mainland and throughout North
                       America indicate that offering a guaranteed ride home eliminates a
                       significant deterrent to ridesharing participation. For example:

                                                                                         6-1 1
      CT OF copurrL/uc

         Strategic           -    Twelve percent of vanpoolers surveyed in the Seattle area reported
    Transportation                that they had switched From driving alone to ridesharing after
              Plan                hearing about Metro’s Guaranteed Ride Home program. In another
                                  Seattle s w e y , 47% of vanpoolers reported that the work for
 Paper #3 - Networ
            Options               employers who offer Guaranteed Ride Home programs.7
                             -    A Guaranteed Ride Home pilot program in Bellevue, Washington
                                  found that 69% of surveyed commuters indicated that a guaranteed
                                  ride home was somewhat or very important in their decision to
                                  rideshare. It is interesting to note that program registrants indicated
                                  a strong willingness to contribute to the cost of the ride home -
                                  58% indicated that they would pay about 10% of the cost out-of-
                                  pocket. After the program was initiated, HOV use increased by

                             -   The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments launched a
                                 Guaranteed Ride Home Program in January 1997. Before the
                                 program was launched, there were 6900 commuters registered in
                                 the regional ridematching database. In the five months following
                                 the proym’s launch, the database grew over loo%, to 14,000
                                 records. It should be noted that a significant promotional effort
                                 coincided with the launch of the program, which likely also
                                 contributed to the growth of the database.

                             Experience with guaranteed rides home - primarily in the U.S. -
                             indicates that use of the service is generally very low and that abuse is
                             rarely a factor. Guaranteed rides home are quite inexpensive, as
                             illustrated in the following examples:

                             -   The Montgomery County, Maryland, county government offers free
                                 taxi rides to ridesharers in case of emergency. In its first year of

                         ’ SeattlepWA, April 1994. Research and Market Strategy Division, King County Metro,
                           V a n / Rider Survey Report,

                         ’ Elder, Transportahon Research Record Programfir HOV Users, EileenBoard,Washington
                           Guaranteed Ride Home An Insurance
                                                                12 Transportation Research
                                                                                             Kadesh and Laurie

                          Commuter Connections Regional Guaranteed Ride Home Program, Chnstopher Arabia,
        1997 ACT International Conference Proceedings, Chicago, IL,September 1997.
     CIlV OF ~ O Q U l l l A M

       strategic                           operation, the Guaranteed Ride Home program cost the county less
  Transportation                                     S
                                           than $50 U:
                                       -   The Bellevue, Washington pilot program set a limit on the number
Paper #3 Networ
          workin!                          of miles that would be subsidized during a one-year period - 40
       Assessment                          miles for CBD-based registrants and 60 miles for suburban
                                           registrants. A study determined that only 2% to 4% of the allotted
                                           number of subsidized miles were actually used during the pilot test
                                           because many participants were saving their allotment for true
                                           emergencies. Less than half of the budget for the program was
                                           actually spent. Of the program expenditures of $3500 US, only
                                           $385 US was spent on taxi rides for program participants in six
                                       -   In Southern California, an analysis of a wide range of Guaranteed
                                           Ride Home programs found that usage rates ranged fiom one trip
                                           per year per 100 eligible employees to 15 trips, with a ‘typical’ rate
                                           being eight trips per year per 100 eligible employees.6

                                      Based on the usage rates described above, it has been estimated that, in
                                      the Lower Mainland, the annual cost of a Guaranteed Ride Home
                                      program - using taxis entirely - would be $3 to $4 per year per
                                      vanpooler for the JBF vanpool program. This amounts to a cost of less
                                      than $0.35 per month per ridesharer. It is anticipated that the cost for a
                                      Guaranteed Ride Home program administered by the City of Coquitlam
                                      would be similar - approximately $0.35 per month per eligible

                                 0     Preferential parking. To encourage more ridesharing, some
                                       employers and government agencies provide designated parking
                                       stalls for carpools and vanpools close to building entrances. In
                                       addition, carpools and vanpools often park for reduced rates or for
                                     Examination of I I Guaranteed Ride Home Program Nationwide, Cosene Polena and L.
                                     Jesse Glazer, Transportation Research Record 1321, Transportation Research Board,
                                     Washington DC, 199 I .
                                 ’ GuaranteedRide Home. Insurance Programfor HOV Users, EileenBoard, Washington
                                   Elder, Transportation Research Record 12 12, Transportation Research
                                                                                                        Kadesh and Laurie

                                     DC, 1989.
                                     Guaranteed Ride Home: Tahng the Worry Our OfRidesharing,Commuter Transportation
                                     Services Inc.. Los Angeles CA, date unknown.

       Strategic           free at pay parking lots. Priority parking can be a strong incentive to
  Transportation           rideshare, particularly where employee parking lots are relatively
            Plan           large and/or parking is costly, as described by the following
                            -   An Ontario study found that up to 60% of commuters that
                                already pay for parking would consider ridesharing if preferential
                                parking were made available. Sixty percent would also consider
                                ridesharin if pay parking were made cheaper for carpools and/or

                            -   A number of surveys of drive-alone commuters in Washington,
                                DC, found that 50% to 75% of commuters would switch to
                                ridesharing if it were the only way to get a guaranteed parking
                                place at work.8

                            Examples of preferential parking programs in the Lower Mainland

                            -   At the Scott Road SkyTrain park-and-ride lot in Surrey, where
                                the walk from the farthest comer of the lot can be more than 10
                                minutes, TransLink has reserved the parking stalls closest to the
                                station for carpools and vanpools.

                            -   Canadian Airlines offers priority parking to vanpools and
                                carpools at its operations centre at Vancouver International

                            -   At the Telus head office in Bumaby, all employee parking in the
                                building is reserved for carpools and vanpools. Other employees
                                must park up to one kilometre away and walk.

                           Although preferential parking can encourage participation in
                           ridesharing, it must be recognized that it would not likely be a
                           significant incentive for Coquitlam employees. T i is because
                           parking at municipal employment sites is currently free and parking

                        ' Propmiryfor Rideshoring. 1994. Key Facrors, Bassam G Hamwi and John P Braaksma,
                          unpublished paper, January

                         Guidelinesfor Using Vanpools and Carpools as a TSM Technique,Transportation Research
UR~NSYSEMS               Board, Washington DC,December 198 1
    NolnmkK 2001

       Strategic           lots are not large enough to make walking distances particularly
  Transportation           long.
                     Non-Motorized Transportation
Paper #3 Networ
           Options      Walking and bicycling are growing in popularity as practical and
                        healthy alternatives to driving alone, and are an important component of
                        any TDM strategy. The Coquitlam Strategic Transportation Plan
                        identifies a network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities throughout the
                        municipality. Coquitlam should promote and support the use of these
                        facilities by municipal employees for the commute to and from work.

                        The primary means of support for non-motorized commuting to and
                        from City Hall and other municipal worksites would be end-of-trip
                        facilities. One of the major obstacles preventing more people from
                        cycling to and from work is a lack of bicycle facilities at the worksite.
                        Secure bicycle parking is a key consideration for encouraging
                        employees to cycle. Secure bicycle lockers are a strong incentive to
                        cyclists, although their provision can be costly (approximately $2000
                        for a two-bicycle locker). A less expensive option for secure bicycle
                        parking is to convert a storage mom within a building into a locked
                        bicycle room (approximately $75 per bicycle for indoor racks). Other
                        desirable end-of-trip facilities for both cyclists and pedestrians are
                        shower facilities, change rooms, and clothing lockers. These facilities
                        allow employees to shower, change into work clothes, and store their
                        gear after riding, walking, or running to work, and can be a significant
                        incentive to use non-motorized modes.
                    Alternative Work Arrangements

                        Inflexibility of work hours was rated as the most significant obstacle to
                        vanpooling in a 1994 survey of Lower Mainland vanpoolers. Employers
                        - including the City of Coquitlam - can play a key role in influencing
                        travel behaviour by enabling flexibility in work arrangements, including
                        work hours andor place of work. Alternative work arrangements can
                        achieve all three TDM goals by encouraging a reduction in travel,
                        encouraging commuters to shift their time of travel, and encouraging
                        travellers to consider non-SOV modes. A survey of five employers in
                        the San Francisco Bay Area that adopted flexible work hours showed

     CIW OF C O Q W I A M

       Strategic            that carpooling and vanpooling increased by between 5% and 28%, with
  Transportation            one site achieving a mode share for ridesharing of 55%’.
                            Alternative work arrangements must be carefully evaluated in order to
Paper #3 Networ
          Workin$           avoid disparities among employees, co-ordination problems, and
       Assessment           problems arising from lack of supervision. There are several ways in
                            which the City of Coquitlam could initiate alternative work
                            arrangements to promote a reduction in peak-period SOV travel on the
                            region’s roads, as follows.

                               Teleworking    - formerly known as telecommuting - enables
                               employees to work at home or at remote work locations and reduces
                               the amount of travel on the road network. Communications can be
                               maintained via telephone or the Internet. The former BC Tel, now
                               Telus, established a remote worksite in Langley for 20 employees
                               who lived in the area, rather than having them commute to the head
                               office in Burnaby. It is important to recognize that teleworking only
                               reduces, but does not eliminate, the need for an employee to
                               commute to the workplace. Experience in the United States indicates
                               that employees who telework do so an average of 1.8 days per week.
                               On other days, they commute to and from the primary worksite. The
                               benefits of teleworking extend beyond the reduction of vehicle trips.
                               Teleworking programs have demonstrated productivity gains of up
                               to 20% and absenteeism reductions of over 50%.
                               Variable work hours. Variable work hours, which provide
                               alternatives to the traditional 9:00 AM to 5:OO PM work day, enable
                               employees to adjust their working hours to take advantage of
                               alternative means of commuting to and from work and to shift their
                               time of travel to off-peak periods. The simplest option is flex-time,
                               whereby employees choose their own start, lunch, and finish times
                               (within specified limits) to accommodate their commute schedules.
                               Another option, which has been used by the City of Vancouver, is
                               the compressed work week, whereby employees work the same
                               number of hours per week over a period of four days rather than
                               five. It can also be implemented on a bi-weekly or monthly basis. By
                               spreading employees’ days off among all five weekdays, vehicle
                               trips can be reduced by up to 20% on any given day.

                            ’Board,Washington DC,December Curpools
                             Guidelinesfor Using Vonpools
                                                                     a o TSM Technique,Transportation Research

       Strategic            Financial Incentives
            Plan     Some employers provide a monthly transportation allowance to
                     employees for transportation purposes. Typically, this allowance is
        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ      provided in lieu of free parking at the workplace, and the amount of the
                     allowance is set at a level comparable to the cost of parking at or near
                     the workplace. An employee then can choose how he or she wishes to
                     use the allowance. It could be used to purchase a monthly parking
                     permit, such that parking is effectively free. But, it could also be used
                     for the purchase of a monthly transit or vanpool pass, bicycle
                     maintenance, or walking shoes. Any remaining allowance is the
                     employee’s to keep. The objective of an allowance is to permit
                     employees to choose their mode of commuting themselves, rather than
                     encouraging them to drive by providing free parking.

                     In the United States, a monthly transportation allowance of up to $60
                     US may be provided tax-free. In Canada, however, transportation
                     allowances are considered a taxable benefit, whereas free unreserved
                     parking is not. Consequently, transportation allowances are more
                     common in the U.S.than in Canada. The Canadian government is being
                     lobbied to amend the tax legislation to reverse the existing situation.

                     Experience in the U.S. indicates that transportation allowances can be
                     successful at reducing the occurrence of SOV commuting at individual
                     worksites. One study found that transportation allowances could reduce
                     drive-alone commuting at specific worksites by 5% to lo%.’’

                     Nonetheless, because parking is abundant and free at municipal
                     worksites in Coquitlarn, a transportation allowance would not likely
                     encourage municipal employees to consider alternative commute
                     6.4.2          Employer-Sponsored Trip Reduction
                     Because a significant amount of traffic on the road network during peak
                     periods consists of people travelling to and from work, implementing
                     TDM programs at individual worksites and at major employment
                     centres (such as office andor industrial parks) is an effective way of
                     reducing vehicle trips. Because many of these trips are repetitive, in

                               Review of TromportotionAllowonce Programs, Transportation Research Record
                          1321, Transportation Research Board, Washington Dc,1991.


       strategic        that they generally have the same origins and destinations and are made
                        at the same time each day, opportunities to promote new travel routines
            Plan        are achievable. Employer-sponsored trip reduction programs combine
                        various TDM measures that may be integrated to form a broader TDM
Paper #3   - Networ
             work'n.$   strategy. They can consist of a wide range of TDM measures, including
      Assessmeni        all of those described in the previous section.
                    Mandatory vs. Voluntary Trip Reduction
                        In some parts of the United States, large employers are required by
                        local, state, andor federal legislation to implement trip reduction
                        programs to reduce the number of employees driving alone to work. The
                        employers to whom the legislation applies are usually determined by the
                        number of employees that work at a single worksite. In most cases,
                        employers are required to submit trip reduction plans to a regional
                        reviewing agency, which either approves the plan or returns it to the
                        employer for modifications. Regulated employers are generally required
                        to monitor their own progress toward achieving their published trip
                        reduction targets, but could face fines if they do not meet their goals.

                        Despite their demonstrated effectiveness at reducing the amount of SOV
                        commuting at individual worksites, employer trip reduction plans are
                        politically unpopular and there has been a recent trend toward 'watering
                        down' the requirements in many states.

                        Provincial or federal trip reduction legislation has not yet been
                        introduced in Canada. At this time, only municipalities have the ability
                        to impose restrictions on new development to encourage developers to
                        implement trip reduction programs. However, these opportunities are
                        very limited.

                        Through the zoning process, municipalities can offer reduced parking
                        requirements (which translate into reduced construction costs for the
                        developer) with a commitment from a developer to implement trip
                        reduction measures (see Section 6.4.3). For example, the Gateway
                        development in Surrey was granted a 25% reduction in the amount of
                        parking to be constructed in return for implementing a trip reduction

                        The primary obstacle for municipalities is that such opportunities only
                        apply to new developments as part of a rezoning application, because
                                                                                           6-18    0
0        c/nwcogu,naM
                         zoning conditions cannot be applied retroactively to existing
      Transportation     developments. Consequently, trip reduction programs cannot be
                Plan     mandated for existing developments by any level of government at the
              Workin     present time.
    paper #3 Networf
           Assessment    Instead, municipalities (and regional agencies) can promote the concept
                         of voluntary trip reduction to larger employers. This is achieved through
                         outreach programs, such as the Go Green Choices program administered
                         by TransLink. As described in Section 6.4.1, municipalities such as
                         Coquitlam should take the lead in developing employee trip reduction
                         programs so that other local employers are encouraged to participate.
                         Many regional employers - such as VanCity, Bentall Property
                         Management, and Rogers Communications - have already demonstrated
                         a willingness to participate in trip reduction for various reasons. The
                         promotion of trip reduction is primarily up to TransLink, but Coquitlam
                         can play a role in encouraging Coquitlam employers to alter travel
                         behaviour within the municipality. Without encouragement from either
                         TransLink or the municipality, however, voluntary participation in
                         employee trip reduction programs is less likely.
                     Transportation Management Associations
                         Another concept that is popular in the U.S. is that of Transportation
                         Management Associations (TMAs). TMAs are typically formed by
                         several employers in a specific geographic area, particularly where
                         individual employers are too small to appoint TDM co-ordinators
                         themselves. Potential areas for TMAs within Coquitlam include the
                         Pacific Reach Industrial Area and the Regional Town Centre area. The
                         Cambie Corridor Consortium - an organization of mainly public sector
                         employers, including several major hospitals - is the largest local
                         example of a TMA. It was formed voluntarily by its member agencies
                         and actively promotes the reduction of SOV travel by employees and
                         the general public. One of its primary programs is the operation of a
                         shuttle service between the member hospitals.

                         In the U.S.,TMAs are commonly provided with start-up hnds from
                         federal, state, andor local sources. Typically, however, they are
                         sustained through a combination of annual fees from their members and
                         grants from upper levels of governments. In many cases, membership in
                         a TMA is mandatory for employers that locate within the boundaries of
                         that TMA.

      C m OF Coquiru\M
         Strategic       Typically, the role of TMAs is to assist the regional ridesharing agency
   Transportation        with localized marketing of ridesharing services and ridematching
            Plan         assistance. TMAs are also often involved in business outreach with
                         employers within their jurisdiction. Other common activities for
 Paper #3 - Networ
                         American TMAs include:
                                 Guaranteed Ride Home services
                                 Transit pass sales
                                 Parking management strategy development
                                 Development of alternative work schedules for individual employers

                         With limited resources usually available, regional ridesharing
                         organizations (such as JBF and Go Green Choices) often focus their
                         marketing energies on the largest employers in a given region. Where
                         there are very few large employers in a region, however, TMAs can
                         perform a valuable hnction by reaching out to numerous smaller
                         employers. Besides targetting their marketing efforts to certain
                         characteristics of the localized market, TMAs can often provide more
                         personalized support to employers that wish to implement trip reduction
                         at their worksites. In areas where few large employers exist - such as in
                         Coquitlam - TMAs can expand the potential market for ridesharing by
                         establishing an association between several smaller employers.

                         It is most likely that, if TMAs were to be created in the Vancouver
                         region, TransLink would take a leadership role in their formation and
                         administration and act as a central resource andor co-ordinator for the
                         regional TMAs. Nonetheless, the City of Coquitlam can encourage
                         TransLink to develop the concept of TMAs and, if they come into
                         existence, facilitate the formation of TMAs within the municipality
                         through general support or with start-up funding.
                         6.4.3      Parking Management
                         As described above, the supply, price, and regulation of parking can
                         significantly influence individual travel behaviour. TransLink will lead
                         a regional effort to develop a comprehensive parking management
                         strategy for the Greater Vancouver area. After this strategy is finalized,
                         the City of Coquitlam should support the plan through the
                         implementation of local parking management initiatives.

                                                                                                6-20   0
       Strategic     Section 6.3.3 introduced three areas that can influence the mode choice
  Transporfation     of commuters. These three mechanisms are described in more detail in
            Plan     the following sections. In most cases, municipalities have the authority
                     to influence andor regulate parking through the zoning process and
        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ      through municipal bylaws.
                  Parking Supply
                     Parking supply strategies are a fundamental component of an overall
                     parking management strategy because of the link between the
                     availability of parking and the choice to use an automobile for travel.
                     When the parking supply exceeds the demand for parking, the market
                     value of this good is reduced well below the actual cost, and may even
                     be free, as in many suburban areas such as Coquitlam. The overall
                     impact is that travel by SOV will likely increase, thereby contributing to
                     traffic congestion and air pollution. Parking supply strategies address
                     the issue of the oversupply of parking by narrowing, or even
                     eliminating, the gap between the price paid for parking and the real cost
                     of providing parking.

                     There are three general areas in which parking supply can be affected,
                     as discussed below.

                     0   Parking maximums limit the amount of parking that developers are
                         permitted to construct in order to ensure that an overly abundant
                         supply of parking is not provided. Conditions suitable for the
                         application of parking maximums include areas where some or all of
                         the following conditions are present:

                            Mixed uses that support shared parking policies
                            Limited availability for displaced parkers on adjacent on-street or off-
                            street parking facilities
                            Reasonable transportation alternatives (such as transit, bicycling,
                            andor pedestrian facilities) with sufficient capacity
                            Incentive programs for alternative commute options

                         Parking maximums are relatively simple to implement and involve
                         no additional cost to the municipality. The primary limitation is that
                         they can only be applied to new and expanding developments. There
                         is generally no opportunity to reduce an oversupply of parking in

                                                                                              6-2 1

      Strategic      existing developments. Potential areas of application include major
Transportation       retail developments and ofice/industrial parks.
                     Reduced minimums and flexible requirements are designed to
                     provide developers with an opportunity to reduce the amount of
   Assessment        parking in return for agreements to support local or on-site TDM
                     initiatives. The best environments for realizing reductions in
                     automobile use through reduced minimums are in urban and suburban
                     settings, including office, retail, and institutional land uses. For
                     example, a 30% reduction in parking might be approved if ridesharing
                     programs are offered, a 20% reduction for subsidized transit passes,
                     and a 5% reduction for bicycle facilities, all to a maximum reduction
                     of 50% in high-density areas. The amount of the reduction generally
                     corresponds to the anticipated reduction in vehicle travel for the
                     respective TDM measures. The potential savings attributed to the
                     reduction in parking stalls and increased leasable building area can far
                     outweigh the costs associated with other TDM support initiatives. The
                     general conditions appropriate for the application of parking
                     maximums would also apply to reduced miminums. The Gateway
                     development in Surrey provides an example of the application of
                     flexible parking requirements.

                     Restriction of principal-use facilities is designed to gain better
                     control of the parking supply in defined areas. Of primary importance
                     is the impact of temporary parking facilities on the overall supply of
                     parking, particularly in concentration areas, such as the Regional
                     Town Centre, Austin Heights, and the Lougheed Mall area. Vacant
                     sites awaiting development are often used for surface parking.
                     Stronger restrictions on the establishment and operation of all parking
                     facilities could be applied to better control the temporary parking
                     supply on non-bylawed lots. In the interest of the overall
                     transportation system, operator permits would be restricted to
                     principal-use facilities where a parking deficiency is demonstrated
                     and the provision of additional supply supports an overall plan. A
                     permit with a specified time limit (such as two years) would be
                     required to operate a temporary parking facility. At the end of the two
                     years, the operator would be required to again demonstrate that there
                     is still a shortage of parking in order to renew the permit.

     Strategic       Pricing Strategies
         Plan    The primary goal of pricing strategies is to discourage SOV travel by
                 increasing the total cost of travel to trip makers. Parking pricing
                 strategies attempt to reduce the extent of subsidies provided to
                 automobile users by attaching a price to parking that is closer to the real
                 cost of providing it. To be effective, increases in the price of parking
                 must be directly passed on to the automobile user to ensure that the user
                 is the ultimate decision maker when it comes to selecting a mode of

                 Three specific pricing strategies are described below.

                    Rate regulations and parking permits are a means of increasing
                    parking costs for single-occupant vehicles. Rate regulations would
                    involve establishing minimum parking charges for commercial
                    parking facilities and leased parking stalls. Similar to the regulation of
                    taxi rates, a ‘regionally’ regulated system would be required to
                    designate minimum parking rates within different areas. Rates would
                    need to be set high enough to influence mode choice, while ensuring
                    that parking supplies and demands are not merely shifted to other
                    locations. Therefore, a rate regulation system must be monitored
                    closely in order to ensure that the desired travel reductions are

                    Permits provide an alternative means of increasing parking costs for
                    SOVs. Vehicles parked in designated facilities and areas would be
                    required to display a permit. Fees for permits could vary by location.

                    Revenue-based taxes are applied to both user-fee and enforcement
                    revenues and are designed to provide an equitable system of
                    influencing rates charged on parking. Because parking charges vary
                    tremendously by location, applying a tax to only the user fee would
                    merely emphasize the differences in parking charges throughout a
                    municipality and would have limited impact on travel behaviour to
                    areas with lower rates. Under a revenue-based tax, the user-fee
                    portion of the parking tax could be applied to various categories,
                    including daily, weekly, and monthly parkers. Enforcement revenues
                    would be taxed at all parking facilities, including public and private
                    commercial operations, as well as at other employment sites.


       Strategic            Several features of the revenue-based tax make this approach more
  Transportation            suitable than other forms of parking taxes for the following reasons:
                            0   There is a higher likelihood that the tax would be passed on to the
Paper #3 Networ
          workin$               long-term Parker.
       Assessment           0   The method of taxing may be designed to ensure reinvestment into
                                transportation improvements or other TDM programs.

                            For this system to be effective, all municipalities in the Vancouver
                            region would need to adopt similar policies with an overall pricing

                        0   Cash-out parking is an incentive program designed to give employees
                            the choice of receiving a free monthly parking stall, or the cash
                            equivalent. Most employees who drive to work receive a subsidy from
                            their employers in the form of ‘free’ or reduced-cost parking. A 1996
                            survey in the Greater Vancouver area found that 55% of those
                            surveyed receive a parking subsidy at work. Transport Canada
                            estimates that 85% of all commuters in urban areas park for ‘free’ at

                            A cash-out program enables an employee to give up his or her
                            parking stall, and receive a cash payment equivalent to the amount
                            of the parking subsidy. This enables the employee to apply the
                            money to another mode of travel, by purchasing a transit pass, for
                            example, or contributing to carpool costs.

                            Implementing a cash-out program would require changes to
                            Canadian tax laws in order to make the offer attractive. Under
                            current legislation, a cash payment in lieu of parking would be
                            considered a taxable benefit.

                      Support Strategies
                        Parking supply and pricing strategies must be accompanied by support
                        strategies, which, on their own, would not alter travel behaviour. As
                        complementary measures, however, they are necessary to maximize the
                        effectiveness of supply and pricing strategies. The following measures
                        to discourage spillover of long-term parking into neighbourhoods are
                        examples of support strategies.

                                                                                              6-24    0
       Strategic     Timed curb zones are intended to prevent parking ‘spillover’ from
  Transportation     areas where parking management strategies are in effect. Typically,
            Plan     on-street parking in commercial areas would be limited to one or two
                     hours to accommodate shoppers and other short-term parkers, yet
        - workinI
Paper #3 Networ      prevent people from parking all day. Parking meters may also be used
       Assessmeni    as an additional means of identifying overtime parkers, as well as
                     generating revenues. In some cases, residents with permits can be
                     exempt, and may park as long as they wish.

                     For timed curb zones to be effective, consistent enforcement and
                     significant fines are required. In order to minimize enforcement
                     costs, several municipalities in the Greater Vancouver region have
                     contracted enforcement to operators of parking facilities.

                     Parking permit districts are similar to residential parking programs
                     operated by many municipalities, in which permits are provided to
                     residents to enable them to park on the street. The difference with a
                     parking permit district is that employees of businesses in the area are
                     also eligible to purchase permits, at a rate comparable to charges for
                     off-street facilities. This provides revenues for the community, which
                     could be directed to street improvement and traffic calming programs,
                     for example. Essentially, parking permit districts establish a value for
                     on-street parking, and generate a financial benefit for the community
                     from that value.

                     Similar to timed curb zones and other parking regulations, bylaws
                     are used to establish parking permit districts. Regulations and
                     penalties are consistent with those elsewhere in the municipality.
                     The primary administrative challenge would be the sale of permits,
                     which could occur through City Hall or at private distribution

                     Tax exemptions. Currently, reserved parking subsidized by an
                     employer is considered a taxable benefit, unless the employee requires
                     a vehicle for business purposes. This exemption is commonly used by
                     employers, as it is difficult to demonstrate otherwise. Therefore, while
                     the parking space is declared as a non-taxable benefit, accepting the
                     cash equivalent through a cash-out would not.

                     In order to discourage automobile travel, tax regulations could be
                     modified to either extend exemptions to parking cash-out payments,
       Strategic         as described earlier, or to eliminate the exemption for business use.
  Transportation         Either strategy would reduce the difference in cost to employees
            Plan         between ‘free’ or subsidized parking and the costs of other modes.
        -   Workina
Paper #3 Networ
                         These changes could be made relatively easily by the federal
       Assessment        government amending the Income Tax Act. In 1992, laws
                         were amended to allow employers to provide up to $60 US per
                         month tax-free as a transportation allowance to employees, in lieu of
                         subsidized parking. Although this is not within the jurisdiction of
                         Coquitlam, the City could become involved in lobbying the federal
                         government for changes to the taxation system.

     November 2001
                                                                                         6-26    0

       Strategic        7. Implementation and Phasing
            Plan           Strategy
Paper #3     workinst
           - Networ
                        The Strategic Transportation Plan is intended to provide long-term
      Assessment        direction for the City’s transportation system. In this regard, it outlines a
                        vision for the City’s roadway network, transit services, bicycle facilities,
                        and pedestrian networks, and identifies TDM strategies to meet the
                        overall goals and objectives outlined in the Plan. In support of achieving
                        the vision of the Plan, this section of the STP provides the framework
                        for implementation and phasing of specific transportation
                        improvements, and for furthering individual concepts through more
                        detailed review and analysis, and through discussions with partner

                        It should be recognized that the STP and implementation strategy are
                        not intended to be the definitive picture of the long-term transportation
                        system. The STP provides a long-term vision for the transportation
                        system in Coquitlam and the ‘map’ for achieving the goals of the Plan.
                        In fact, there are a number of factors that will continually shape and
                        influence the ultimate development of the City’s transportation system
                        over time. Some of these factors will be choices made within the City,
                        and others will be influenced by external factors such as growth and
                        development and decisions of other agencies. In this regard, although
                        the implementation of the Plan may be affected by unforeseen changes,
                        the basic direction and balance of the transportation system should not
                        be significantly altered.

                        Although the STP provides a comprehensive list of transportation
                        improvements to achieve the goals for all modes of travel, it is
                        important to recognize that this is only a portion of the City’s
                        investment in transportation facilities. A balanced investment strategy
                        over the next 20 years will ultimately consider all transportation
                        improvements, as well as ongoing costs for the rehabilitation of existing
                        assets, as illustrated below. Additionally, the transportation systems
                        identified and approved as part of the Northeast Coquitlam OCP have
                        been assumed within the STP and not accounted for in the overall costs
                        for implementation. Finally, the City will also want to continue to invest
                        in managing existing systems through comdor preservation strategies,
                        which are also an important long-term investment in the transportation
                                                                                                 7- 1


Paper #3 Networ
          Workin$              Reha bi IItat1on

                                                      20.Year Investment

                           7.1 Implementation Costs
                           Previous sections of the STP identified several improvements and
                           strategies needed to achieve the vision for the transportation system.
                           Although the implementation of these improvements will be influenced
                           by several factors, affordability is a fundamental goal of the STP. This
                           section of the STP reviews the affordability of the Plan and identifies a
                           range of strategies to minimize overall costs for the City.

                           The costs for the improvements presented for each mode in Sections 2
                           through 4.5 of the STP are based on a conceptual level of detail and
                           include a general indication of potential property costs, which may be
                           significantly different at the time of undertaking the project. While this
                           level of costing is not typically used for budgeting purposes, it provides
                           a framework for defining overall costs and considering alternative
                           strategies based on different levels of affordability. Within the cost
                           summaries for each mode of travel, funding partners have also been
                           identified based on current agency responsibilities, as well as alternative
                           finding sources. The following assumptions have been used to estimate
                           the City’s portion of the long-term costs for the range of transportation
                           improvements identified in the STP.

                           0   TransLink currently finds 50% of the cost of roadway capacity
                               improvements on the Major Road Network to a maximum dollar
                               value, with the remainder of the cost absorbed by the City or other
                               funding sources. Using the current hnding arrangement and
                               expectations, it is assumed that the annual funding from TransLink
                               would be limited to a maximum of $750,000 for the years 2002 to
                               2006, and $1,000,000 through to the year 2021. Over the next 20


       Strategic      years, this would amount to approximately $18.75 million. For the
  Transportation      City to maximize available cost-sharing from TransLink, it would
            Plan      need to spend a total of $37.5 million over the 20-year period on
                      capital improvements.
Paper #3 - Networ
       Assessment     Transit priority measures, such as queue jumpers, are assumed to be
                      funded 100% by TransLink. The cost estimates for these
                      improvements do not include the City’s current equipment upgrades
                      for signal controllers, installation of fibre optic networks, or
                      provision of signal progression. TransLink is expected to fund the
                      costs to develop and implement special signal pre-emption for transit

                      In recent years, the Province has provided funding to municipalities
                      for the provision of bicycle facilities, as long as the municipality has
                      approved a Bicycle Plan. Although the program makes
                      approximately $2 million per year available to all municipalities for
                      application, the City may anticipate support for approximately
                      $100,000 per year. Assuming that the program continues for the next
                      20 years, the City could be eligible for $2 million over the period of
                      the Plan. TransLink has provided cost-sharing for bicycle facilities
                      on a one-time basis. Assuming that this program is extended, then
                      the City could expect equivalent cost-sharing from TransLink.

                      Funding from federal and provincial sources has been made
                      available through Infrastructure Grant programs. Although the future
                      of these programs is uncertain, it is assumed over the next 20 years
                      that the City would seek to obtain grants for the major projects
                      identified in the STP,such as the King Edward Underpass widening,
                      the Lougheed I Brunette grade separation, and the Barnet I Lougheed
                      grade separation. For the purpose of identifying the City’s costs, the
                      City’s portion has been conservatively assumed at 50% for each of
                      the above-noted projects.

                      On those projects that are shared with neighbouring municipalities, it
                      is assumed that the City would fund anywhere from 25% to 75% of
                      the cost, depending on the relative benefits and costs to each City.
                      The actual cost-sharing agreement would be project-specific and is
                      subject to further analysis and negotiation with the affected

     cl OF COgLRMM

       Strategic     0     Transportation facilities and strategies identified to support growth
  Transportation           in Northeast Coquitlam - including the David Avenue and southerly
           Plan            crossings of the Coquitlam River - are assumed to be funded
                           through sources directly related to the development of the area. In
Paper #3 Networ            this regard, the costs for these improvements are not considered
       Assessment          within the evaluation of affordability.

                         Category of Improvements      Total         Other           city
                                                       Cost         Agencies         cost
                         Roadway Network               $96.1         $47.3           $48.8
                         Transit Pnority                $1 5           $1.5          $0.0
                         Bicycle Facilities            $15 4          $4 0           $11 4
                         Pedestrian Facilities          $3.0          $0.0            $3.0
                         Total                         $116.0         $52.8          $63.2

                     As summarized above, the total cost to implement all of the
                     improvements within the STP is estimated at over $116 million. The
                     roadway network improvements contained in the STP account for
                     approximately 83% of the total costs. Additionally, bicycle and
                     pedestrian facility costs account for approximately 13% and 2.5% of the
                     total improvements, respectively. It should be recognized that these do
                     not include other regional and provincial costs, which are beyond the
                     scope of the STP.

                     Based on the cost-sharing assumptions previously described, it is
                     anticipated that the City would need to contribute approximately 54% of
                     the total cost estimates. Of that $63.2 million, road improvements
                     account for 77%, or $48.8 million. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
                     account for 18% and 5% ofthe total City-allocated costs, respectively. It
                     should be recognized that the City’s 50% portion of the King Edward
                     widening, Brunette / Lougheed grade separation, and Barnet / Lougheed
                     grade separation projects account for over $38.8 million of the roadway
                     improvement costs. If the City’s portion of these costs was reduced to
                     25%, the total cost to the City for the transportation improvements could
                     be reduced by $19.4 million, to $43.8 million.

Transportation     The City’s current expenditure for capital improvements on the arterial
         Plan      road network is under $2 million per year. These projects generally
                   include roadway capacity expansion initiatives, such as physical road
                   improvements, traffic signals, and ITS enhancements. Assuming that
   Assessment      $1.5 million of the allocation for capital projects was for road
                   improvements, and approximately $0.2 million was for bicycles and
                   pedestrian facilities, the City’s available resources for STP improvement
                   projects would be approximately $34 million over the 20-year period.

                   It is evident from this broad assessment that the City’s assumed
                   resources for capital expenditures fall approximately $29 million below
                   the City’s share of the total cost for all STP-related improvement
                   initiatives. Even with additional cost-sharing resources from other
                   agencies on the major improvement projects, the City’s resources under
                   the current expenditure scenario fall slightly below the total costs. These
                   results suggest that the City should continue to explore alternative
                   finding strategies, particularly for the major roadway improvement
                   projects, as summarized below.

                      Increase other agencies’ portion of cost sharing. Over time, the City
                      may be successfil in lobbying for additional support from other
                      agencies through future infrastructure programs that enable the City
                      to reduce its portion of the cost from the assumed 50%.

                      Accept higher levels of congestion in some areas. Considering the
                      costs of the roadway network improvements primarily rest with the
                      three major projects, the City may wish to simply accept a higher
                      level of traffic congestion in those areas. Based on the analysis of
                      existing and fiture base conditions, it is anticipated that other major
                      projects, such as the United Boulevard extension and the crossings
                      of the Coquitlam River, could support the forecast travel demands in
                      those areas for several years into the Plan. As indicated in the base
                      case conditions, however, these improvements do not address long-
                      term congestion through these areas.

                      Defer implementation to beyond 20 years. The City may simply
                      wish to defer the implementation of the major options beyond the
                      20-year horizon to maintain the affordability of the STP.

       Strategic        Increase development cost charges or taxes to offset costs. The City
  Transportation        may wish to consider increasing development cost charges or
           Plan         general taxes in order to afford the improvements outlined in the
        - work'nf
Paper #3 Networ
       Assessment       Offset costs through local development initiatives. The City should
                        continually explore opportunities to offset costs as part of local
                        growth and development along key comdors. As described in
                        Section 0, redevelopment can be used to significantly reduce City
                        costs for the implementation of many improvements.

                        Examine alternative funding sources and project delivery methods.
                        Alternative funding and methods of delivery of projects have
                        provided governments and the development community with greater
                        leverage to achieve common goals. In other words, the City may
                        wish to explore ways in which costs for the taxpayers of the
                        community could be significantly reduced through design-build and
                        development opportunities.

                     7.2 Phasing Strategy
                     The rate of growth within the City not only impacts the overall timing
                     of demands for the transportation system, but also affects the
                     affordability of the improvements. For example, most of the roadway
                     network improvements identified in the STP may be delayed with a
                     reduced growth rate or advanced with accelerated growth. Similarly, the
                     revenue from development cost charges to offset improvement costs is
                     also affected by the rate of growth. For these reasons, it is important that
                     the City link the phasing of transportation improvements to growth of
                     the community on an ongoing basis. The following section summarizes
                     the phasing strategy for implementation of the STP projects in the five-,
                      10- and 20-year time horizons.
                     7.2.1     Five-Year Horizon (2006)
                     Over the next five years, the population of the City is expected to grow
                     from 118,000 to 136,000 based on a 2.8% rate of annual growth.
                     Assuming that the City's budget allows for expenditures on the STP of
                     approximately $8.5 million over five years, Table 7.2.1 below
                     highlights the high-priority projects to be implemented within the first
                     five years, as illustrated in Figure 7.2.1.
                     Lower Lougheed corridor intersection improvements           $0.55
Paper #3 - Networ
                              Second WB left-turn by at Brunette
                             Lengthen EB right-turn by on Brunette
                              NB right-turn bay on King Edward
       Assessment        -    NB left- and right-turn bays on Schoolhouse
                         -   Second SB left-turn bay on Schoolhouse
                     Barnet ILougheed corridor intersection improvements         $0.42
                         - Third EB through lane at Pinetree
                         -   Second EBMlB left-turn bays at Westwood
                         -    Redesignate SB approach at Johnson
                     Austin Avenue I  North Road                                 $0.45
                         -   Second EBMlB left-turn bays
                     Como Lake Avenue I    Clarke Road                           $0.60
                         -    NBlSB left-turn bays
                         -   Second EB left-turn bay
                         -   SB right-turn bay                              1
                     Lougheed Highway I River Road                               $0 38

                     Guildford Way bicycle lanes                                 $4.20
                     Foster Avenue marked wide curb lanes                        $0 06
                     Spuraway Drive marked wide curb lanes                       $0.03
                     Delestre Avenue I Alderson Avenue shared route              $0 01
                     Whiting Way shared route                                    $0.01
                     Marmont I  Ridgeway I   Gatensbury shared route             $0.02
                     King Albert IHillcrest IWilmot shared route                 $0.01
                     Thermal Drive shared route                                  $0.01
                     Hickey Drive IRiverview Crescent shared route               $0 01
                     Less Provincialand Regional Cost-Sharing                   ($1.00)

                     Linton Street                                              $0 0150
                     Sargent Street                                             $0.0675
                     Berry Street                                               $0.0480
                     Emerson Street                                             $0 0255
                     Nelson Street                                              $0.0450
                     Lebleu Street                                              $0.0225
                     Woolridge Street                                           $0 0195
                     Boileau Street                                             $0 0195
          C I T V O F C ~


     Paper #3 - Networ

                            7.2.2      5- to 10-Year Horizon (2006 to 2011)
                            Between 2006 and 2011, the population of Coquitlam is anticipated to
                            increase at a similar rate to the first five years with a forecast population
                            of 156,000 in 201 1. Assuming that the anticipated short-term growth is
                            realized within the first five years of the Plan and that the City can
                            continue to spend approximately $8.5 million on STP-related projects,
                            the medium-priority projects to be implemented by 20 1 1 are highlighted
                            in the table below and in Figure 7.2.2. It should be recognized that the
                            implementation of the King Edward widening, which adds $5.40
                            million to the medium-term costs, might not be completed if other
                            finding sources are not available.
                                         Table 7.2.2: 5. to 10-Year Horizon Capital Projects
    U R ~ N M E M S 1 Project
                                                                               I city Cost (t millions)     I
                @llWm.l                                                                              7-8

     Cinw Cwurm

           Plan      King Edward Street widening                  $5 40
                     Louaheed Highway I    North Road             $0 45
                        -- Sewnd NBISB left-turn bays
        - Work'nf
Paper #3 Networ      Cameron Street I   North Road            I   $0.23
                         -    Second EB left-turn bay
                     Austin Avenue I  Blue Mountain Street        $0 08
                         -    NB left-turn bay
                     Austin Avenue I Schoolhouse Street           $0 45
                         -    E W B left-turn bays
                     Como Lake Avenue I    Gatensbuw Street       $0.45

                     Guildford Way IJohnson Street                $0.20
                         -    Second EB left-turn bay
                         -    WBlNB right-turn bays
                     Johnson Street IGlen Drive                   $0 45


                         7.2.3     10- to 20-Year Horizon (2011 to 2021)
            Plan         The population of Coquitlam is anticipated to grow from 156,000 to
                         206,000 between 20 1 1 and 202 1, an increase of 32%. Assuming that the
                         forecast growth to the year 2011 is realized, the following table and
          Options        Figure 7.2.3 summarize the projects that may be implemented in the
                         long term. It should be recognized that the implementation of the grade
                         separation options at Brunette I Lougheed and Barnet I Lougheed might
                         not be completed if alternate funding sources are not available.

           Plan      Laurentian Street   $0.0465
                     Robinson Street     $0.0630
                     Gatensbury Road     $0.0270
        - workinf
Paper #3 Networ      Thermal Drive       $0.0255
           Optrons   Pipeline Road       $0.0567
       Assessment    Total                $42.93

                                                   7-1 1
  Transportation     7.3 Implementation Guidelines
                     As part of the recommended long-term plan for the City’s roadway
        - WorkinI
Paper #3 Networ      network, there are several inter-related activities that should be
           Options   undertaken to advance the implementation of long-term transportation
                     facilities and services. This section of the report is intended to provide
                     guidance on those activities and the overall approach toward the
                     implementation of the Plan.

                        Lougheed / Brunette grade separation and intersection
                        improvements. The long-term strategy for the Lougheed Highway /
                        Brunette Avenue intersection is to advance the concept of grade
                        separation, with minor intersection improvements in the immediate
                        area as part of the interim strategy. To implement the long-term
                        strategy for grade separation, the City and TransLink would need to
                        undertake further functional planning and design of the interchange
                        area, in connection with the identification of land use planning
                        strategies for impacted properties and the surrounding area. It should
                        be recognized that the Highway 1 / Brunette interchange must be
                        upgraded with a six-lane overpass consistent with the long-term
                        direction of functional planning work for the Highway 1 corridor. In
                        this regard, the City and TransLink should continue to advance
                        discussions with the Ministry of Transportation to address existing
                        and long-term issues at the interchange. As indicated in Section 7.1,
                        the City should investigate alternative funding strategies for this
                        project through potential development opportunities.

                        Barnet / Lougheed grade separation. The STP identifies the grade
                        separation of Lougheed Highway through the intersections of
                        Pinetree Way and Westwood Street as the long-term strategy to
                        address projected growth in east-west and north-south travel through
                        the Regional Town Centre area. In general, the costs and impacts of
                        the grade separation option are significant. Because the STP
                        examined this strategy at a conceptual level of detail, the City will
                        want to investigate and confirm optional functional configurations
                        through the area, as well as associated impacts on adjacent
                        properties, at a more detailed level. As part of the review, the City
                        will want to consider alternative access and circulation strategies for
                        those affected properties and begin to define the functional
                        requirements for the grade separation concepts. This review should

     CllV OFcOQUlTu\M

         Strategic      be incorporated into an overall land use planning strategy for the
   Transportation       intersection areas to ensure that transportation capacity is optimized
            Plan        while access to development lands is also preserved for future
                        growth. As part of the functional review, the City and TransLink will
                        also want to consider opportunities to enhance mobility for transit
       Assessment       vehicles through priority measures at the interchanges, particularly
                        near Coquitlam Station. As indicated in Section 7.1, the City should
                        investigate alternative funding strategies for this project through
                        potential development opportunities.

                        King Edward Street widening. The STP identified a medium-term
                        need for the widening of King Edward Street between Lougheed
                        Highway and United Boulevard. Based on previous work undertaken
                        by the City, this option includes an at-grade crossing of the rail
                        tracks immediate south of Highway 1 underpass. Prior to advancing
                        this initiative, the City will want to investigate the additional costs of
                        a grade-separated crossing of the railway tracks, similar to the
                        underpass of Shaughnessy Street in Port Coquitlam. This would
                        obviously avoid the considerable delays to vehicles accessing the
                        Pacific Reach area created by the at-grade crossing, but would add
                        considerable cost to the project. It is also recommended that future
                        design reviews consider the provision of pedestrian and cyclist
                        facilities along the corridor.

                        Cost estimates.     The STP provided cost estimates for all
                        improvement projects based on a conceptual level of detail, as well
                        as property costs based on an approximate value for land from
                        general experience in the affected areas. For budgetary purposes, it
                        is recommended that the City work to refine all cost estimates based
                        on a functional level of planning and design. These costs should be
                        reflected in capital planning and supplemented with preliminary
                        designs for project-specific budgeting.

                        Corridor Strategic Plans (CSPs). The STP identifies several corridors
          throughout the City in which to advance various forms of
          preservation strategies. The basic intent is to maximize the use of
          existing roadway network facilities by maintaining mobility for
          primary modes of travel along those key corridors. This preservation
          of corridor mobility also needs to be balanced with the preservation
          of property and area access on an ongoing basis and, therefore,
URB&NMEMS requires that CSPs be closely related to land use planning initiatives
0        CinOF COQW
                         undertaken within each of the areas identified for CS i. Although
      Transportation     most improvement strategies outlined in the STP involve the
                Plan     implementation of specific improvements, CSPs may be
                         implemented in a variety of forms, ranging from a framework to
    Paper #3 - Networ
                         maintain mobility on an ongoing basis to specific initiatives to
           Assessrnenl   manage land use and transportation mobility needs along particular
                         corridors. The specific locations identified within the STP for CSPs
                         include Brunette Avenue, North and Clarke Roads, Austin Avenue,
                         Como Lake Avenue, Pinetree Way, and Bamet and Lougheed
                         Highways. In these areas, an integrated approach to corridor
                         preservation in coordination with area land use strategies needs to be
                         advanced to be successful. The discussion below highlights the
                         general process for developing CSPs.

                         a. Project initiation is designed to establish and confirm the
                            framework for undertaking a location-specific CSP, and includes
                            the collection of background information needed to re-affirm the
                            process, as well as the input needed to initiate the assignment. It
                            is anticipated that land use issues and opportunities, as well as
                            the multi-modal transportation needs within and through the area,
                            would shape the framework and approach for each CSP.

                         b. Establish corridor roles and functions to generate a basic
                            agreement on the specific transportation vision for the corridor,
                            based on localized information and land use characteristics along
                            the conidor and in the surrounding area. In addition to the
                            establishment of clear roles and functions, it is important to
                            identify performance goals against which to compare current and
                            forecast conditions.

                         c. Define problems relative to the performance goals. In areas
                            where the desired performance is not achieved based on existing
                            or hture conditions, a range of strategies may be identified to
                            explore in subsequent stages of review.

                         d. Options generation and evaluation defines optional strategies to
                            address problem areas and evaluates these strategies based on
                            established criteria suited to localized conditions. It is anticipated
                            that these criteria would be based on a typical multiple account
                            evaluation (MAE) framework, with other supportive concerns
                            that need to be considered.
  Transportation     e. Preferred corridor strategy and staging is based on the
           Plan         evaluation of options and the implementability of the preferred
                        strategy over time. In some cases, complete implementation of
Paper #3 - Networ
           Workin$      the CSP may take several years as the area is redeveloped.
                     Truck routes bylaw. The City will want to update the truck route
                     bylaw to reflect modified designations for truck routes, which
                     recognize the role of the Major Road Network, as well as the
                     comdors recommended for changes as part of the STP. In addition
                     to designating specific truck routes, the bylaw should continue to
                     reinforce the role of the arterial roadway system in providing direct
                     connections between truck routes and local truck destinations.

                     Development applications. The STP presents a range of
                     transportation improvements that can be achieved in a variety of
                     ways. The most practical and economical approach is to ensure that
                     elements of the STP are reflected in the City’s ongoing process of
                     development applications and approvals. Because many of the
                     improvements are identified at a conceptual level of detail, the
                     challenge will be to maximize opportunities for transportation
                     improvements immediately, while future efforts are spent on refining
                     specific improvement strategies, such as through CSPs. The steps
                     that may be taken to incorporate the transportation improvements
                     within the development review process are outlined below.

                     1. Intersection improvements and corridor preservation. The STP
                        identifies several intersection improvement strategies and
                        conidor preservation areas that will ultimately serve to maximize
                        the use of the existing roadway system through a range of
                        measures. As part of the development review process,
                        opportunities may arise to protect lands where additional right-
                        of-way is required, and perhaps to construct many of the
                        improvements needed to address long-term mobility and
                        operational needs. Although the STP identifies these
                        improvements at a conceptual level of detail, the City may wish
                        to simply identify where and approximately how much additional
                        right-of-way may be needed to achieve some of the intersection
                        improvements in an effort to guide the development review
                        process. Additionally, the City may decide that the planned

                        improvements (which may or may not be attributed to the
                                                                                     7-15    0

       Strategic       specific development application) be constructed at a time that
  Transportation       may not correspond with the needs-based assessment described
            Plan       in the STP due to the potential cost ‘savings.

                       In addition to intersection improvements, the City will also want
     Assessment        to initiate Corridor Strategic Plans (CSPs) in those areas outlined
                       in the STP. As described previously, CSPs are designed to
                       maintain the long-term mobility of specific corridors by
                       considering strategies ranging from access control through to
                       intersection improvements and support networks. Although the
                       City will be undertaking corridor strategies in several high-
                       priority areas over the next few years, it is anticipated that the
                       development review process could begin to encourage developers
                       to support CSPs consistent with the intended function of the
                       corridor. For example, the long-term need to maintain mobility
                       along several four-lane arterial roadways may lead to more
                       access controls (such as right-idright-out configurations, as
                       opposed to full movement driveways, for smaller properties).
                       Since corridor preservation is an ongoing process, the City will
                       want to work with developers at the time of application to
                       explore and implement the range of corridor preservation
                       strategies in those areas designated in the STP. It is anticipated
                       that the CSPs to be undertaken by the City will provide a more
                       systematic approach to guide the long-term form of the key
                       corridors identified in the STP.

                    2. Bicycle facilities. The STP identifies several roadway corridors
                       as candidate routes for bicycle facilities. These routes consist of
                       shared bicycle facilities along local roads where no additional
                       road space is required, and wide curb lanes and bicycle lanes
                       along collector and arterial roads where additional road space
                       may be necessary to achieve the desired outcome. Although it is
                       anticipated that the Bicycle Plan contained within the STP will
                       be refined in future based on more detailed cross-section
                       information for each route, the City may receive development
                       applications along the identified bicycle routes before this work
                       is complete. To capitalize on opportunities to protect for bicycle
                       facilities through the development review process, the City will
                       want to confirm the general need for additional right-of-way or
                       designated road space along each bicycle corridor to ensure a
UR~NSYSTEMS            consistent standard along the route. The standards for bicycle

     Strategic          facilities presented in the STP should be used to guide the review
Transportation          process. In this regard, it is anticipated that all collector routes
          Plan          with 11.0 m of roadway would be sufficient for a wide curb lane
                        for bicycles, assuming that parking is permitted on only one side
                        of the roadway. In cases where the roadway is less than 11.O m,
   Assessment           the City may require that any frontage changes to properties
                        along sub-standard roadways be upgraded as part of the
                        development improvements. Additionally, the provision of wide
                        curb lanes and bicycle lanes along arterial roadways may require
                        more road space and right-of-way, which should be explored as
                        part of the development application process. It is anticipated that
                        bicycle facilities would not be implemented along roadways
                        requiring additional road space or right-of-way until the City is
                        able to construct the full facility. In some cases, the City will
                        want to consider interim standards for bicycle facilities as long as
                        they are seen to be safe and reasonable for cyclists. The City
                        needs to undertake further analysis of the approach through the
                        Subdivision Control Bylaw review.

                     3. Pedestrian facilities. The STP identifies standards for the
                        provision of sidewalks along two sides of collector and arterial
                        roadways, and one side of all local roads. Although this will take
                        several years to achieve on a Citywide basis, the STP outlines
                        high-priority areas and roadways where sidewalks should be
                        implemented. As part of the development application process, it
                        is expected that sidewalks would be provided to meet the
                        standard for a given roadway classification, consistent with
                        current City practices.

                     4. TDM strategies. In support of the City’s efforts to increase the
                        use of non-SOV modes of travel, the City will want to encourage
                        developers to implement various forms of TDM programs. At a
                        minimum, the City will want to ensure that on-site pedestrian
                        facilities are provided that are integrated with the adjacent
                        pedestrian network. Additionally, the City may also encourage
                        the implementation of more comprehensive initiatives, such as
                        trip reduction programs. These and other TDM strategies should
                        be explored as part of all development application reviews.

                     Major transit services and facilities. Major transit services and
                     facilities are fundamental to not only the transportation system, but
       Strategic     also the growth and development goals of Coquitlam. In this regard,
  Transportathn      the City will want to continue to advance short-term and medium-
           Plan      term commitments for improved transit services and facilities in the
                     City. Once the Millennium SkyTrain is operational, TransLink has
Paper #3 - Networ    also committed to the implementation of B-Line service between
       Assessment    Coquitlam Station and Lougheed Station via Guildford Way, St.
                     Johns Street, Clarke Road, and North Road. The City will want to
                     work closely with TransLink on the implementation of the service
                     and associated facilities. In the medium term, the provision of
                     SkyTrain between Coquitlam Regional Town Centre and Lougheed
                     Station is also required to support forecast travel demands and to
                     reduce growth in SOV travel. The City should continue to work with
                     TransLink and other Northeast Sector municipalities to ensure that
                     SkyTrain and five planned stations in Coquitlam are implemented
                     within a reasonable timeframe.

                     Transit fare structure review. In an effort to encourage growth and
                     development patterns and reduce growth in SOV travel to and from
                     Coquitlam, the City will want to encourage TransLink to review the
                     current fare structure system, which places Coquitlam residents in a
                     different fare zone than other communities that are also part of the
                     Growth Concentration Area.

                     Area transit planning and implementation. The City should
                     encourage active and regular reviews of the transit services provided
                     to residents of the community to maximize the attractiveness of
                     services for local and regional travel markets. Additionally, the City
                     will also want to monitor the implementation of the soon-to-be-
                     completed Northeast Sector Area Transit Plan to ensure that
                     TransLink is able to provide more attractive services in the short
                     term. In this regard, the City may wish to explore other
                     implementation and/or service delivery strategies if there are
                     significant delays to the implementation program outlined in the
                     Area Transit Plan.

                     Transit priority strategies. The City will want to work with
                     TransLink to identify and implement a range of transit priority
                     measures. As part of the program to upgrade signal systems, the City
                     should place priorities on those ‘primary’ transit corridors outlined
                     in the Transit Service Strategy section (Section 3) of the STP.

      CIN OF COQUfTldM

        Strategic          Bicycle network planning. The Bicycle Plan presented in the STP is
   Transportation          intended as a framework to guide the implementation of bicycle
             Plan          facilities over the short term. The City will want to work with
                           cycling interest groups to refine the Bicycle Plan and to identi@
 Paper #3     wofk'nf
            - Networ
                           strategies to deal with key crossing locations at major roads, as well
       Assessment          as connections with off-street facilities. The City may wish to
                           involve regional and provincial agencies in refinements to the
                           Bicycle Network Plan.

                           Bicycle facilities implementation and roadway rehabilitation. The
                           cost of bicycle facilities can be dramatically reduced when
                           incorporated as part of an ongoing program. The City's Road
                           Renewal Program provides an opportunity to implement bicycle
                           facilities on the collector roadway system at a nominal cost. In
                           locations where the current cross-section does not meet the 11.0-111
                           standard, the Road Renewal Program provides an opportunity to
                           construct the necessary cross-section to implement bicycle facilities.

                           Pedestrian facilities implementation. The STP outlines several high-
                           priority pedestrian areas in which to implement sidewalks to enhance
                           their walkability. In those areas where redevelopment is not
                           anticipated in the short term, the City will want to define location-
                           specific improvements and review the direction with neighbourhood
                           residents and businesses.

                           Pedestrian facility design treatments. Pedestrian facilities on private
                           property are needed to support and enhance the walkability of the
                           community. The STP outlines a range of design treatments for
                           pedestrian facilities and should be used to provide guidance during
                           the development review process.

                           TDM programs for municipal employees. In an effort to reduce     SOV
                           travel, the City may consider re-initiating a modest trip reduction
                           program for City employees, which explores strategies to encourage
                           the use of transit, carpooling, vanpooling, and/or cycling among
                           municipal employees.

      N o v M l k r 2001
                                                                                             7-19    a

To top