renton trails and bicycle master plan

City of Renton

RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN

DRAFT JANUARY 2019

RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN

January 2019

Adopted January 28, 2019

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Executive

Mayor Denis Law

Chief Administrative Officer Robert Harrison

City Council Members

Don Persson, Council President

Carol Ann Witschi, Council President Pro-tem

Randy Corman

Ryan McIrvin

Armondo Pavone

Ruth Pérez

Ed Prince

Parks Commission

Cynthia Burns

Al Dieckman

Larry Reymann

Tim Searing

Shun Takano

Troy Wigestrand

Marlene Winter

Planning Commission

Angelina Benedetti, Commission Chair

Jamian Smith, Commission Vice Chair

Charles Seil, Commission Secretary

Mara Fiksdal

David Fleetwood

Shannon Matson

Michael O'Halloran

Kevin Poole

Robert Reeder

Technical Advisory Committee

Vicky Clarke, Cascade Bike Club

Bob Elliot, Member, Renton Trails Advisory Committee

Robert Foxworthy, King County Parks, Regional Trails Coordinator

Rhubydee Laurencio, Youth advocate

Pete Maas, Member, Renton Trails Advisory Committee

Tim Moore, City of Renton, GIS Manager

Dai’Jana Perry, Youth advocate

Mike Ullmer, King County Parks, Program/Project Manager

Brian VanHouten, Renton Trails, Non-Profit

Jean White, King County Parks, Regional Trails Program Manager

Project Team

Vangie Garcia, Transportation Planning Manager

Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director

Angie Mathias, Long Range Planning Manager

Aaron Raymond, GIS Analyst

Consultants

2018-2019: BERK Consulting

2017: MacLeod Reckord, Fehr & Peers

YOUR IDEAS – CONNECTING US TO OUR BEST FUTURE

A special thank you to the many Renton community members who

provided their time and thoughtful ideas to inspire this 2019 Trails

and Bicycle Master Plan.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary i

Introduction i

Why Plan? i

Benefits of Walking & Bicycling ii

Relationship to Other Plans iii

Plan Organization iii

Plan Approval Process iv

Trail & Bicycle Master Plan iv

1 Vision, Goals, & Objectives 3

Introduction 3

Vision – Renton Connection 3

Goals & Objectives 4

2 Existing Conditions 11

Trails & Bicycle System Characteristics 11

Citywide Context 13

Planning Area Profiles 14

3 Community Involvement 47

Engagement Activities 47

Open Houses 54

Themes 56

4 Demand & Needs Analysis 61

Gaps & Opportunities 75

Benchmarks 80

Level of Service 81

5 Trail & Bicycle System Plan 87

Guiding Principles 87

Network Recommendations 88

Trail & Bicycle Facility Characteristics 93

Shared Use Path 96

Protected Bike Lane 97

Buffered Bike Lane 98

Striped Bike Lane 99

Neighborhood Greenway 100

Signed Shared Roadway 101

Pedestrian Trails 102

Facility Design Guidelines 103

Projects & Priorities 110

6 Implementation Strategies 121

Monitoring 121

Phasing 121

Partnership & Funding Opportunities 122

Requirements & Incentives 124

Community Education & Promotion 126

Future Recommendations 127

7 References 133

APPENDICES

A. Community Engagement

B. Regional Trail Design and Intersections

C. Project Sheets

D. Project Prioritization Documentation

E. Adopting Resolution

TABLE OF EXHIBITS

Exhibit ES 1. Levels of Traffic Stress vii

Exhibit ES 2. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network ix

Exhibit ES 3. Level of Traffic Stress and Proposed Network x

Exhibit ES 4. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles xi

Exhibit ES 5. Proposed Increases in Regional and Local Trail Miles xi

Exhibit ES 6. Proposed Regional and Local System Map xii

Exhibit ES 7. Prioritization Process xiii

Exhibit ES 8. Existing & Proposed Network and Project Map xv

Exhibit 2-1. Existing Trail Network Miles 11

Exhibit 2-2. Existing Trail Network 12

Exhibit 2-3. Citywide Demographic Characteristics 13

Exhibit 2-4. Existing and Proposed Network Miles by Community Planning Area 15

Exhibit 2-5. Community Planning Areas 16

Exhibit 2-6. Benson Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 17

Exhibit 2-7. Benson Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics 18

Exhibit 2-8. Benson Hill Planning Area Community Input 19

Exhibit 2-9. Cedar River Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 20

Exhibit 2-10. Cedar River Community Plan Area Characteristics 21

Exhibit 2-11. Cedar River Planning Area Community Input 22

Exhibit 2-12. City Center Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 23

Exhibit 2-13. City Center Community Plan Area Characteristics 24

Exhibit 2-14. City Center Planning Area Community Input 25

Exhibit 2-15. East Plateau Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 26

Exhibit 2-16. East Plateau Community Plan Area Characteristics 27

Exhibit 2-17. East Plateau Planning Area Community Input 28

Exhibit 2-18. Highlands Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 29

Exhibit 2-19. Highlands Community Plan Area Characteristics 30

Exhibit 2-20. Highlands Planning Area Community Input 31

Exhibit 2-21. Kennydale Demographic Characteristics 32

Exhibit 2-22. Kennydale Community Plan Area Characteristics 33

Exhibit 2-23. Kennydale Community Planning Area Community Input 34

Exhibit 2-24. Talbot Demographic Characteristics 35

Exhibit 2-25. Talbot Community Plan Area Characteristics 36

Exhibit 2-26. Talbot Planning Area Community Input 37

Exhibit 2-27. Valley Demographic Characteristics 38

Exhibit 2-28. Valley Community Plan Area Characteristics 39

Exhibit 2-29. Valley Planning Area Community Input 40

Exhibit 2-30. West Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits) 41

Exhibit 2-31. West Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics 42

Exhibit 2-32. West Hill Community Planning Area Community Input 43

Exhibit 3-1. Walking Problems 49

Exhibit 3-2. Community Input Walking 51

Exhibit 3-3. Biking Problem Spots 52

Exhibit 3-4. Community Input Biking 53

Exhibit 3-5. Outreach Themes Table 56

Exhibit 4-1. Questionnaire 2017 Walking and Biking Frequency 61

Exhibit 4-2. Population Density and Existing Network 63

Exhibit 4-3. Job Density and Existing Network 64

Exhibit 4-4. Existing Trail Access to High-Density Residential and Job Nodes 65

Exhibit 4-5. Level of Traffic Stress Continuum 66

Exhibit 4-6. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network 67

Exhibit 4-7. Parks and Recreation and Existing Network 69

Exhibit 4-8. Low Income Census Tracts and Existing Network 71

Exhibit 4-9. PSRC Opportunity Index and Existing Network 73

Exhibit 4-10. Population Density and Proposed Network 76

Exhibit 4-11. Job Density and Proposed Network 77

Exhibit 4-12. Level of Traffic Stress with ¼ Mile Service Area and Proposed Network ¼ Mile Service Area LTS 1 & 2 78

Exhibit 4-13. PSRC Opportunity Index and Proposed Network 79

Exhibit 4-14. Miles of Trails per 1,000 Population – Renton and Peers 80

Exhibit 4-15. Miles of Trails per 1,000 (2018 – 2035) 81

Exhibit 4-16. Change LTS 1&2 Trail Miles 82

Exhibit 4-17. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles by Community Planning Area 82

Exhibit 4-18. Percentage of Renton Residents within a Quarter Mile Service Area of LTS 1 & 2 Facilities 83

Exhibit 5-1. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles 88

Exhibit 5-2. Regional and Local System Map 89

Exhibit 5-3. Existing and Proposed Regional Trail Miles 90

Exhibit 5-4. Regional Trail Alternatives 91

Exhibit 5-5. Regional and Local Trail Miles – Existing and Proposed 92

Exhibit 5-6. Regional and Local Trail Miles – Total Proposed Network 92

Exhibit 5-7. Facility Options by Roadway Characteristics 93

Exhibit 5-8. Existing and Proposed Network by Facility Type (Miles and Percent) 94

Exhibit 5-9. Existing and Proposed Trails by LTS Rating (Miles and Percent) 95

Exhibit 5-10. Shared-Use Path 96

Exhibit 5-11. Protected Bike Lane 97

Exhibit 5-12. Buffered Bike Lane 98

Exhibit 5-13. Striped Bike Lane 99

Exhibit 5-14. Neighborhood Greenway 100

Exhibit 5-15. Signed Shared Roadway 101

Exhibit 5-16. Pedestrian Trails 102

Exhibit 5-17. Renton Downtown Civic Core Wayfinding System 105

Exhibit 5-18. Bicycle Leaning Rail 107

Exhibit 5-19. Existing & Proposed Network and Project Map 111

Exhibit 5-20. Prioritization Criteria and Indicators 113

Exhibit 5-21. Prioritization Process 114

Exhibit 5-22. Facility Types by Project Tiers (Miles) 115

Exhibit 5-23. Project Ranking 116

Exhibit 6-1. Potential Monitoring Measures and Targets 121

THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK

CITY OF RENTON � RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN

JANUARY 2019

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

RENTON TRAILS AND BICYCLE MASTER PLAN � CITY OF RENTON



JANUARY 2019 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The City of Renton manages over 30 miles of regional and local

trails and bicycle facilities. Most residents walk or bike in Renton in

their neighborhoods. Yet existing trail and bicycle facilities serve

only about one-third of Renton’s population and about two thirds of

employees. Many neighborhoods have limited and disconnected

facilities.

The City of Renton prepared a Trails and Bicycle Master Plan in

2009, one of few municipalities in Washington State addressing

both pedestrian and bicycle modes in one plan. The 2009 plan

steered several trail and bicycle lane extensions, and acquisitions

for future extensions. (See sidebar.)

Building on the prior plan, this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan will

guide Renton’s Trails and Bicycle system for the 2019-2025

timeframe. With the Plan, the City can seek funding and

partnerships to invest in its historic neighborhoods as well as newer

communities annexed with little trail and bicycle facility investments.

Extensive community outreach has inspired this plan. By 2025 and

beyond, this plan seeks to create one connected diverse system to

support Renton’s growing population and thriving economy. The

system will increase comfort and encourage all ages and abilities to

find destinations, recreate, and commute throughout Renton and the

region.

WHY PLAN?

Eligibility for State Funding

An update to this Plan is required every six years to maintain

eligibility for grants administered by the Washington State

Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO). RCO requires

jurisdictional applicants to have a plan as a criterion for grant

applications. This Plan is intended to comply with all RCO

requirements. This plan can also serve as a foundation to seek other

The City of Renton, alone and in partnership, implemented projects guided by the 2009 Trails and Bicycle Master Plan.

Improvements

Cedar River Trail Turnback Eastside Rail Corridor rail

removal (King County lead) Logan Ave Shared Use Trail May Creek Trail construction

(WRPA Trail and Outdoor Access Award 2015)

Springbrook Trail Boardwalk (WRPA Best Trail Project Award 2010)

Bike Lanes, e.g. NE 4th St and Duvall Ave

Signed Shared Roadways, e.g. Taylor Ave

Acquisition & Funding

Lake to Sound Trail: interlocal agreement, construct segment along Black River Riparian Forest to Green River Trail in Tukwila

May Creek Trail Acquisitions: 6 parcels, 14.7 acres

May Creek Trail Property Donations: 4 parcels, 8.4 acres

Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail: Southport Easement, 4 of 4

Tiffany/Cascade Connector acquisition: 1 parcel

Local grants totaling $1,624,500

State Legislative Direct Appropriation: May Creek Trail, $500,000



ii

regional, state, and federal funding opportunities for non-motorized

transportation improvements.

Articulates a Vision that Directs Practices

This plan includes a Vision for an accessible, diverse, and safe trail and

bike system that offers places for active recreation, community connection,

and equitable access to destinations and opportunities. This Vision is

based on community input and inspired proposed projects intended to

increase user comfort and reduce traffic stress to encourage walking and

biking throughout the community.

Efficiently Manages System

This Plan is designed to efficiently manage the trail and bike system by:

Building on the existing regional and local system,

Providing a variety of facility types and phasing to maintain flexibility

to respond to different route conditions and funding resources,

Connecting residents and employees with job centers, shopping,

recreation, and services to advance economic and community

development, and

Serving a diverse and growing population and addressing increased

demands on the system.

BENEFITS OF WALKING & BICYCLING

Well-designed communities with recreation facilities can help Renton

residents to lead more active lifestyles benefiting their health and well-

being. The built environment can severely constrain routine avenues of

physical activity. It is less attractive to walk or bike in areas with no

facilities, high traffic, or long distances between origins and destinations.

Communities designed for exercise can prevent 90 percent of type 2

diabetes, as well as 50% of heart disease, stroke, and site-specific

cancers. There is a 50% increased likelihood that people who live near

trails meet physical activity guidelines. (University of Minnesota. August

2007; Journal of Applied Physiology and Public Health Institute in Urban

Land Institute 2013)

Current System

The current system (yellow) serves the City Center, Cedar River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek, Honey Creek, and major arterials but does not cover most of the Renton’s higher density population centers (blue).



iii

Those participating in Renton’s online questionnaires in 2017 participate in

walking at a rate of about 85%, similar to state survey information.

Improving facilities can help reinforce interest and participation.

Parks and recreation facilities like trails, and access to centers and open

spaces, provide economic value to a community by increasing property

values, attracting long-term residents and employers, and supporting

tourism. (American Planning Association 2001; Trust for Public Land, 2011)

RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS

This Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan is designed to implement

Renton’s Comprehensive Plan Land Use; Parks, Recreation, Natural Areas

and Trails; and Transportation Elements. This Plan establishes the

framework for future improvements and is a source of non-motorized

project improvements for the City’s Capital Facilities Plan Element, Six-year

Capital Investment Program, and the Transportation Improvement Program.

This Plan is a companion system plan to the Renton’s Parks, Recreation, and

Natural Areas Plan. This Plan is designed to be consistent with and

leverage community plans such as the City Center Community Plan, Benson

Hill Community Plan, and the Downtown Renton Civic Core Vision and

Action Plan, and to implement the City Council’s Policy Agenda.

PLAN ORGANIZATION

This plan is organized in seven sections building from a Vision to a Demand

and Needs Analysis to a System Plan with prioritized projects. Community

engagement and input informed each component of the plan.

Implementation strategies complete the plan and identify monitoring and

next steps.

Vision, Goals & Objectives

Existing Conditions

Community Involvement

Demand and Needs Analysis

Trail & Bicycle System Plan

Implementation Strategies

References

Appendices



iv

PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS

Following extensive community and stakeholder outreach in 2017 where

questionnaires and workshops were conducted, this Plan was reviewed and

shaped by the Renton Parks Commission, Renton Planning Commission, and

Renton City Council in 2018 and 2019.

TRAIL & BICYCLE MASTER PLAN

This section highlights major elements of this Plan including the Vision and

Goals, Community Involvement, Demand and Need, Level of Service,

Network Recommendations, Projects and Priorities, and Implementation

Strategies. For details see related Chapters.

2017

•Stakeholder OutreachInventory & Analysis

Winter-Spring 2018

•Project Development

Summer-Fall 2018

•Plan Development

Fall 2018-Winter 2019

•Commission &Council Review



v

Vision & Goals

The Plan Vision and Goals and Objectives directed the development of the

proposed network and projects included in this Master Plan and will

continue to guide planning, funding, and implementing actions in the future.

Community Involvement

The City conducted an extensive public outreach and engagement process

in 2017 to help form this Plan, including:

An online questionnaire with 340 full and partial responses

An interactive online mapping activity attracting 1,380-page views

and 342 data points

Three in-person community open houses

The Plan Vision describes Renton’s ideal future Trails and Bicycle system:

The Trails and Bicycle Master Plan fosters an integrated trail and bicycle system that connects

the City’s neighborhoods, community, and region. Residents, employees, and visitors can

access a diverse system in urban and natural settings that are safe and comfortable for users

of all ages and abilities. People can recreate, exercise, and/or commute for an active,

healthy lifestyle.

Reflecting the Vision, Goals describe desired results of this Plan:

• Improving safety

• Creating an accessible and connected system

• Promoting physical and environmental health

• Achieving equity

• Enhancing the economy and community



vi

Three Technical Advisory Committee meetings, and with regional

stakeholders

Two Interagency Regional Trails planning meetings with King County

Project briefings with the Parks Commission, Planning Commission, and

the Renton City Council

Based on outreach and engagement results, key findings include:

1. Recreation-based walking and biking is still a primary purpose.

2. Respondents preferred to walk shorter distances.

3. Respondents reported longer and more frequent bicycle trips.

4. Respondents preferred to walk and bike on formal facilities, as opposed to

street shoulders.

5. The Cedar River Trail is the most heavily used trail.

6. Addressing pedestrian and bicyclist comfort is necessary to encouraging

more travel and recreation by foot or bike.

7. Connection to transit is an important need.

8. Mountain biking and other more unique forms of bicycling are popular

along lakes, streams, and rivers.

9. Equestrian use was not an identified need.

See Chapter 3 and Appendix A for Community Engagement details.

Demand & Needs for Trails and Bicycle Facilities

To meet state requirements for planning, the City needs to define

community needs and demand for trail and bicycle facilities. By

understanding gaps and trends, the City can develop solutions like projects

and actions. Particular needs and demands are highlighted below.

Discontinuous Trail and Bicycle Network: Renton’s current trail and bike

routes serve several of the highest population and job density areas,

though there are gaps particularly in the northeast and southeast parts of

the city.

Increased Growth and Demand: By 2035, the City has planned to add

16,700 housing units and over 31,000 jobs per the Renton Comprehensive

Plan. The new residents and employees would increase the demand for all

modes of travel including walking and biking.



vii

Limited Low Traffic Stress Routes for Bicycles: Bicycle systems that

provide low traffic stress and high connectivity attract wider usage. Bicycle

routes can be rated based on the level of traffic stress (LTS) a user

experiences. (Mineta Transportation Institute, 2012)

Exhibit ES 1 illustrates that lower LTS facilities serve a broader group of

users because of increased comfort and safety. Renton has some LTS 1 & 2

routes, which are in Kennydale, Cedar River, and the Valley. Most of the

community is not served by LTS 1& 2 routes that offer off-road trails or

dedicated and separated bicycle lanes.

Exhibit ES 1. Levels of Traffic Stress

Source: City of Renton, 2018; BERK, 2018.

Discontinuous Access to Destinations: Schools, parks, and employment

centers are partially linked by trails and bicycle routes. There are missing

links and gaps that deter non-motorized travel.

Limited Access to Opportunities: The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)

has evaluated areas in terms of access to opportunities – education,

economic, housing, transportation, and health/environment. The trail and

bicycle network can increase opportunities by providing access for areas

of lesser opportunity. The existing network is sparser in a few of the

Community Planning Areas of Benson, Highlands, and West Hill (see

sidebar and Chapter 2).



viii

Level of Service

A “level of service” (LOS) refers to the amount and quality of trails and

bicycle facilities that are necessary to meet current and future needs. A

LOS helps establish a capital facility program. Costs and revenue can then

be matched, and projects phased to help achieve the planned LOS. The

City has developed a three-part LOS addressing quantity, quality, and

distribution.

Quantity: Increase the miles of trails per 1,000 persons.

Quality: Increase the extent of LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities to increase

user comfort and participation.

Connectivity and Extent (Distribution):

a. Reduce gaps and increase the coverage of facilities within all

Renton community planning areas.

b. Increase the share of residents and employees within a quarter

mile of facilities.

By implementing these levels of service, the City can close gaps and meet

demands. For example, population and jobs in proximity to LTS 1& 2

network shows nearly all areas of the community would have improved

access. See Exhibit ES 2 and Exhibit ES 3.

Community Planning Areas

The City of Renton has defined 10 Community Planning Areas. Each have different characteristics and needs. See Chapter 2.



ix

Exhibit ES 2. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network



x

Exhibit ES 3. Level of Traffic Stress and Proposed Network



xi

Network Recommendations

Renton’s Trail and Bicycle System is an integrated system that will be

expanded from about 30 miles to 127 miles within the city limits. This

includes approximately 4 miles of existing trail facilities being upgraded

or converted to different facility types. Another 8 miles of new, proposed

trails are planned in areas immediately outside of Renton’s city limits for an

overall plan total of 135 miles. See Exhibit ES 4.

Exhibit ES 4. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles

CITY LIMITS OVERALL PLAN

Existing 30.20 30.20

Proposed 101.94 109.46

TOTAL 127.81 135.32

Source: City of Renton, 2018.

The Trail and Bicycle System features a regional hub where the Cedar

River trail, Lake to Sound Trail and the connection to the Eastside Rail

Corridor connect in the City Center, and an expanded local network of

trails. Regional trails connect Renton to other cities and regional

destinations that lie to the north, east, south, and west. Local Connector

routes tie together multiple Renton neighborhoods to one another and carry

more non-motorized trips. Local Neighborhood routes connect destinations

within the same neighborhood. See Exhibit ES 5 and Exhibit ES 6.

Exhibit ES 5. Proposed Increases in Regional and Local Trail Miles




xii

Exhibit ES 6. Proposed Regional and Local System Map



xiii

Projects & Priorities

Responding to gaps, needs, and community input, this plan promotes trail

and bicycle facilities of all types across all Community Planning Areas.

Eighty proposed projects were identified and scored with the

following Prioritization Criteria developed from Vision and Goals:

Connectivity and Accessibility, Safety and Trail Experience, Equity,

Economy and Community, Construction and Implementation.

In addition, the City used two qualitative criteria to develop the Highest

Priority Projects list (Tier 1): Partnership Commitments and Geographic

equity. Since all proposed projects are important to the City, Tier 2 (High

Priority) and Tier 3 (Medium) Priority were developed to distinguish the

rest of the projects. See Exhibit ES 7 for the overall process.

Exhibit ES 7. Prioritization Process

Source: BERK, 2018.

Once scored, three tiers of projects were developed with Tier 1 identifying

the top priority projects for the City. The other two tiers spanned the

natural breaks in the scores. Since some projects had identical scores, there

were 27 projects in Tier 1, 26 projects in Tier 2, and 27 projects in Tier 3.

These proposed projects added 101.9 miles to the Trails and Bicycle

network via multiple facilities types.

Define & Weight Priorities

Define & Score Indicators

Rank Projects

Consider Partnerships & Geographic

Equity

Develop Prioritized List

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

Hoquiam Ave NE

Talbot Rd

S

SEJonesRd

SPug

etDr

Lind Ave SW

Monroe Ave NE

Edmonds Ave NE

S 7th St

Newcastle Way

116th Ave SE

87th Ave S

WellsAve

S

148th Ave SE

128th Ave SE

SE 216th St

Benson Rd S

SE183rdSt

SW 41st St

SE 168th St

Union Ave NE

SW 7th St

Lake

WashingtonBlvd

SE

Puget Dr SE

SEMayValleyRd

SW 34th St East Valley Rd

SW 27th St

E Valley Hwy

84th Ave S

S 216th St

SouthcenterBlvd

SE 192nd St

S 228th St

154thPlSE

S 132nd St

N3rdSt

64th Ave S

Island Crest W

ay

TukwilaPkwy

SE 208th St

68th Ave S

Duvall Ave NE

S129thSt N 4th St SE 128th St

Interurban Ave S

Rainier Ave S

124th Ave SE

NE 4th St

Rainier

Ave

N

4thAve

N

CoalC

reekPkw

ySE

S212thW

ay

NE3rd

St

EMercerW

ay

140th Ave SE

OakesdaleAve

SW

RentonAve

S N

ParkDr

SW 43rd St SE

CarrRd

BeaconAve

S

LoganAve

N

Forest Dr SE

S212thSt

SGradyW

ay

Park Ave N

132nd Ave SE

156th Ave SE

S124thSt

148th Ave SE

Lakem

ont Blvd SE

116th Ave SE

S 180th St

66th Ave S

164th Ave SE

AirportWay

SWGrady

Way

SE 204t

h Way

WMerce

rWay

Monster

Rd

SW

SEMayValleyRd

140thWaySE

SE Petrovitsky Rd

NewcastleGolfClubRd

68thAveS

S 133rd St

UV169

UV900

UV515

UV900

UV181

UV167

¥405

¥405

¥405

27

38

45

S 7th St

SunsetBlvd

N

NE 23rd Pl

NESun

setBlvd

SE 160th St

NE 6th St

NE 19th St

N 30th St

NE 10th St

NE27thSt

SE 164th St

Park Ave N

Main Ave S

NE 24th St

Jericho Ave NE

NE 10th St

TalbotRd

S

NE6thSt

NE 7th St

MontereyAve

NE

125th Ave SE

N 8th St

NE 10th St

NE 4th St

SE 184th St

NE9thStBeacon

W

ayS

NE 2nd St

RentonAveS

Garden Ave N

Nile Ave NE

GrantAveS

SE 164th St

108th Ave SE

HarringtonAve

NE

NE12thSt

Kirkland Ave NE

BensonDrS

SE Petrovitsky Rd

Lake

WashingtonBlvd

N

Talbot Rd S

Black RiverRiparianForest

Cascade Park

Cavanaugh PondNatural Area

Cedar River Natural Area

CedarRiverPark

Cedar River toLake Sammamish

Trail Site

Cedar RiverTrail

Cedar RiverTrail Park

Cleveland /RichardsonProperty

CoalfieldPark

Cougar MountainRegional

Wildland Park

EdlundProperty

Fort Dent

FosterGolf Course

FutureSW AthleticComplex

Gene CoulonMemorial Beach

Park

GreenRiverTrail

Honey CreekGreenway

LakeridgePark

MaplewoodCommunity Park

MaplewoodGolf Course

MaplewoodHeights Park

MayCreek

/ McAskill

May CreekGreenway

MayValley County

Park

McGarveyPark OpenSpace

MetroWaterworkPark

NARCOProperty

Panther CreekWetlands

PetrovitskyPark

Renton Park

RentonWetlands

Riverview Park

Ron RegisPark

SkywayPark

SoosCreek Park andTrail

SpringbrookTrail

SpringbrookWatershed

1

1

2

3

4

4

5

5

6

6

7

8

8

9

9

10

10

11

11

12

12

13

14

14

15

15

16

17

18

19

19

20

20

21

22

23

24

24

24

2526

28

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

39

40

41

42

43

44

46

47

47

4848

49

50

51

52

52

54

55

56

56

5758

59

60

61

62

62

63

63

64

65

65

66

66

67

67

67

68

68

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

74

75

76

77

77

78

79

79

80

63

3

53

53

Existing & Proposed Trails and Bicycle Network

Lake Washington

Existing TrailsShared Use Path

Striped Bike Lane

Signed Shared Roadway

Pedestrian Trail

Proposed TrailsShared Use Path

Protected Bike Lane

Striped Bike Lane

Neighborhood Greenway


Pedestrian Trail

Parks & Open Space

^ Community Center

Library

Potential Transit Hub

n School°0 0.5 1Miles

Proposed Project Number, Name

1, 116th Avenue SE Bike Lanes



4, Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path

5, Benson Neighborhood Greenway

6, Benson Road/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes

7, Cascade Waterline Spur Trail

8, Cedar to Sammamish Trail

9, Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lanes

10, East Valley Road Shared Use Path

11, Eastside Rail Corridor

12, Edmonds Avenue Connector

13, Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path

14, Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway

15, Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway

16, Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path

17, Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway

18, Highlands Hillclimb

19, Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway

20, Honey Creek Trail Extensions

21, Houser Way and Factory Avenue

22, Houser Way N Shared Use Path

23, Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes

24, Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway

25, Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway

26, Kenyon-Dobson Trail and Trailhead

27, Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment

28, Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment

29, Lake Washington Loop Trail

30, Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb

31, Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path

32, Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway

33, May Creek Hillclimb

34, May Creek Trail

35, May Valley Trail

36, Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway

37, Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes

38, N 4th Street Connector

39, N 6th Street Bike Lanes

40, N 8th Street Shared Use Path

41, Naches Avenue Shared Use Path

42, NE 3rd Street

43, NE 4th Street Bike Lanes


45, NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway

46, NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path

47, Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes

48, North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway

49, North Southport Drive Shared Use Path

50, Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes

51, Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail

52, Panther Creek Trail

53, Powerline Trail

54, Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway

55, Renton Connector

56, Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway

57, S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes

58, S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway

59, S/SW 7th Street Transit Connector

60, Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail

61, SE 168th Street Protected Bike Lanes

62, SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway

63, SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path

64, Seattle Waterline Spur Trail

65, Seattle Waterline Trail

66, Shattuck to Airport Connector

67, Soos Creek Trail

68, South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway

69, Springbrook Trail

70, Springbrook Trail Extension

71, Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb

72, SW 16th Street Shared Use Path

73, SW 27th Street Connector

74, Talbot Road S Bike Lanes

75, Thunder Creek Trail

76, Tiffany-Cascade Connector Trail

77, Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway

78, Tukwila Station Trail

79, Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes

80, Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway

Highest Priorty Project



xvii

Implementation Strategies

A plan is meaningful when it is implemented. This Master Plan identifies

several strategies and future recommendations to develop a unified trail

and bicycle system for the Renton community.

Monitoring: The City will track its performance periodically to determine

progress on plan implementation and to adaptively manage its resources.

The Performance measures can potentially include:

Percentage of bicycle facility network completed in gaps, to schools,

to parks.

Percentage increase in LTS 1or 2 network.

Percentage of households within ¼ mile of network. Percentage

increase in network serving children, elderly, households in poverty.

Percentage increase in access to high density residential or commercial

zones, transit, or services. Percentage progress on Tier 1 Projects.

Projects programed and completed in six-year CIP.

Phasing and Fee in Lieu: Renton may phase improvements and consider

alternative trail and bicycle facility types and cross sections. The City could

implement development requirements for trail or bicycle facilities or a fee

in lieu.

Partnerships: Continue existing and seek new partnerships to

advance funding for design and construction of priority

projects.

Current and Future Funding: Continue existing funding

sources and pursue other funding sources that would be

dedicated to the provision of trails and bicycle facilities.

Requirements: Update city regulations to reference this plan

and adopt new regulations that require trail easements for

areas where key local or regional trails have been identified

in this plan.

Incentives: Continue incentive programs, like Commute Trip

Reduction programs by large employers develop incentives for developers

when amenities for transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians are included in

their plans.

Eastside Rail Corridor in Renton, ceremonial spike-pulling event, Renton Reporter, October 2017



xviii

Events & Promotion: Promote community engagement and healthy

lifestyles by:

Promoting awareness of the trail and bicycle system by advertising its

system,

Marketing recreation and community events in association with trails

and bicycle facilities including fun runs, races, and other activities,

Supporting guided walking and biking tours, and

Working in partnership with King County Metro on expanding its

transit to trail program.

Safety & Awareness: Develop traffic safety materials and pursue

implementing design standards that help enforce safe and responsible for

all traffic modes.

Future Policy Explorations: There are many policies and trends the City

can further explore, including but not limited to:

Multimodal transportation levels of service for use in transportation

concurrency standards and mitigation fees.

Sidewalk plan integration with this Trails and Bicycle Plan to

coordinate planning and implementation of its non-motorized system.

Whether and how to implement a Vision Zero program that sets a

goal of zero traffic deaths or severe injuries through holistic,

integrated action strategies.

Renton will determine the best combination of monitoring and

implementation strategies based on available resources and needs.


JANUARY 2019

CHAPTER 1

VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES




JANUARY 2019 VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES

3

1 VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES

INTRODUCTION

The Plan Vision, Goals, and Objectives describes the future the community

aspires to achieve and how the City will act to achieve the Vision. The

Vision articulates the ideal future the Plan wishes to achieve. Goals address

outcomes encapsulated in the Vision. Objectives define specific actions that,

if completed, will accomplish a certain goal. The Vision, Goals, and

Objectives together provide a road map for the City to achieve Renton’s

best Trails and Bicycle facilities system.

VISION – RENTON CONNECTION

The Trails and Bicycle Master Plan fosters an integrated trail and

bicycle system that connects the City’s neighborhoods, community, and

region. Residents, employees, and visitors can access a diverse system

in urban and natural settings that are safe and comfortable for users of

all ages and abilities. People can recreate, exercise, and/or commute

for an active, healthy lifestyle.

Source: City of Renton



GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Five goals and related objectives are stated in the following pages.

Goal A: Improving safety

Improve safety for non-motorized use and facilities.

Objective A.1: Invest in the development and maintenance of high

quality walking and bicycling infrastructure.

Objective A.2: Promote bicycling and pedestrian safety through

educational programs and community outreach.

Objective A.3: Minimize obstructions and conflicts along high speed, high

traffic streets that restrict the movement of non-motorized users.

Objective A.4: Provide safe and convenient storage and parking

facilities for non-motorized users.

Objective A.5: Promote design and maintenance practices that deter

crime including appropriate visibility and comfort through lighting,

proper placement of plantings, access control, and other techniques.



5

Goal B: Creating an accessible and connected system

Develop an inter-connected trail network.

Objective B.1: Enhance non-motorized connections between

neighborhoods, schools, public transit, recreation facilities and other

community destinations.

Objective B.2: Complete the connections between the regional trails within

Renton.

Objective B.3: Continue to connect to non-motorized networks in adjacent

jurisdictions.

Objective B.4: Mitigate barriers in the non-motorized network, including

freeways, busy intersections, steep slopes, railways, and waterways.

Objective B.5: Fill in gaps and missing links.

Objective B.6: Identify easily accessible trail head and access points

throughout the network.

Objective B.7: Coordinate with citywide planning efforts.

Objective B.8: Balance new acquisition and development with the

sustained maintenance of existing facilities.

Objective B.9: Ensure Renton’s codes and standards advance the

implementation of the Trails and Bicycle Plan cross sections through

appropriate requirements, phasing, and incentives.



Goal C: Promoting physical and environmental health

Improve the health of the community through sustainable design and increase the rates of walking, running, and bicycling.

Objective C.1: Increase access to the recreational and non-motorized

trail network.

Objective C.2: Promote non-motorized travel as a viable means of

transportation and as an important method for maintaining overall

health and fitness.

Objective C.3: Provide facilities that accommodate users of all ages and

abilities.

Objective C.4: Utilize Complete Streets to provide increased

opportunities for non-motorized access and use and promote improved

air and water quality.

Objective C.5: Increase awareness of the non-motorized and

recreational trail network.

Objective C.6: Support education and appreciation of the natural

environment while protecting wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and

cultural resources.

Objective C.7: Minimize impacts to the environment by employing best

management practices.



7

Goal D: Achieving equity

Ensure that all members of the community have equitable access to walking and bicycling facilities.

Objective D.1: Employ strategies to include underserved populations in

community outreach.

Objective D.2 Invest in non-motorized facilities across the Renton

community.

Objective D.3: Develop the network to enable a diverse range of

experiences and activities in natural and urban settings.

Objective D.3: Support, encourage and promote active transportation

for users across a wide range of age, income, and physical abilities.

Objective D.4: Ensure signage and informational materials are accessible

and comprehensible by a wide range of users.

Objective D.5: Plan for land use densities and mixed-use development

patterns that encourage walking, hiking, biking and other non-motorized

uses and connectivity.

Objective D.5: Implement a multimodal level of service that maximizes

mobility.

EQUITY

Equal means two or more things are exactly the same, whereas equitable means "fairly" or "with equity" in the sense of fairness.

Renton has a 2017 Policy Agenda with an inclusion and wellbeing policy to be an inclusive city with an opportunity to live a healthy, active, safe, and sustainable lifestyle.



Goal E: Enhancing the economy and community

Enhance the economy and vibrancy of the community by increasing walking and bicycling.

Objective E.1: Support and promote a non-motorized transportation

culture to attract more businesses and residents.

Objective E.2: Leverage Renton’s position at the convergence of regional

trails to promote the economic vitality of the city.

Objective E.3: Capitalize on the natural area trail systems to promote

outdoor nature activities.

Objective E.4: Implement improvements to promote Renton as a walkable

community.

Objective E.5: Provide secure bicycle parking at community destinations

and incentivize provision of bicycle facilities in private development.

Objective E.6: Continue to develop and nurture partnerships to leverage

resources and implement projects, programs and activities that increase

the reach and effectiveness of the bicycle and trail network.

Objective E.7: Identify and secure a wide variety of funding sources.

Cedar River Trail, City of Renton


JANUARY 2019

CHAPTER 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS




JANUARY 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS

11

2 EXISTING CONDITIONS

TRAILS & BICYCLE SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS

The City currently has approximately 30 miles of trails of different types –

shared use paths that accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, dedicated

bike lanes, and dedicated pedestrian trails. See Exhibit 2-1. Trails are

located chiefly along water bodies and major routes but are not fully

connected and there are major population centers that are not currently

being served. See Exhibit 2-2.

Exhibit 2-1. Existing Trail Network Miles

FACILITY EXISTING

Shared Use Path 7.67

Protected Bike Lane -

Protected Bike Lane -

Two-Way Protected Bike Lane -

Striped Bike Lane 9.70

Striped Bike Lane 9.70

Buffered Bike Lane -

Neighborhood Greenway -

Signed Shared Roadway 2.47

Pedestrian Trail 10.36

Boardwalk 0.26

Hard Surface Trail 6.32

Soft Surface Trail 3.79

TOTAL 30.20




12

Exhibit 2-2. Existing Trail Network



13

CITYWIDE CONTEXT

The City of Renton has seen growth and change in the past three decades

Population increased from 50,052 in 2000 to 104,100 in 2018, partly

through annexations. The City added jobs in the same period, with

employment growing from 55,519 jobs in 2000 to 61,920 in 2018.

Median household income has risen to $66,050 today. As the City has

grown the proportion of older and younger residents remained relatively

constant, hovering at roughly 10% and 23% respectively. Rates of vehicle

ownership have also remained steady citywide, with 90-95% of city

households having access to a car. However, mirroring regional and

national trends, the city has become more racially diverse. The proportion

of non-white residents increased from 35% in 2000 to 54% in 2018.

Exhibit 2-3. Citywide Demographic Characteristics

Source: OFM, 2017; King County Assessor, 2017; PSRC, 2017; On The Map (OTM) (US Census), 2015; 2016 ACS (US Census), 5-Year Estimate; BERK, 2018.



14

PLANNING AREA PROFILES

The City of Renton and its Potential Annexation Areas are comprised of

many distinct communities, each with their own unique districts and

neighborhoods. Given the need to plan effectively for this diverse set of

communities, the City of Renton and its Potential Annexation Areas are

divided into ten geographically distinct Community Planning Areas as

shown in Exhibit 2-5. Community Planning Areas share community identity,

schools, existing infrastructure, and physical features. Through the

Community Planning process, residents, businesses, and other stakeholders

develop a local vision and establish policies that address issues of growth,

quality of life, design, and capital improvements in their respective

planning area.

Thus far, Community Plans have been adopted for two Community Planning

Areas (City Center and Benson Hill) while others are planned for the future.

Overall, existing trail miles in the city limits indicate a concentration of

facilities in the City Center which includes a hub of regional trails like the

Cedar River Trail, Lake to Sound Trail, connection to the Eastside Rail

Corridor, and waterfront park pedestrian trails and bike lanes. An

additional concentration of existing facilities is situated in the Valley where

the Springbrook Trail is located. See Exhibit 2-4. Recognizing the need for

geographic equity, and to address the County’s limited historical investment

in large annexation areas such as Benson Hill, this Trails and Bicycle Plan

will increase trail miles in all Community Planning Areas. The greatest

increases are planned in Benson Hill and Highlands Community Plan Areas

– two areas that are currently largely underserved.

The following section summarizes demographic and Community Planning

Area Characteristics of nine Community Planning Areas within the City and

places it in the context of the City as whole. Demographic data shown

reflects only those portions of the respective Community Planning Areas

that are located within Renton’s city limits. As a result, the Fairwood

planning area is excluded as it resides entirely outside the City.



15

Exhibit 2-4. Existing and Proposed Network Miles by Community Planning Area




16

Exhibit 2-5. Community Planning Areas



17

Benson Hill Community Plan Area

The Benson Hill Community Plan area is a predominantly

residential area over four square miles in size. Population for the

entire Community Planning Area is 25,140 people as of 2018.

Benson Hill houses 24% of Renton’s population, and 27% of its

households. Exhibit 2-6 summarizes selected demographic

characteristics of Benson Hill and places it in the context of the

city as whole. Exhibit 2-7. summarizes key Community Plan Area

Characteristics that influence travel patterns and mobility.

Exhibit 2-6. Benson Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits)


The Benson Community Planning Area is similar to Renton overall in its age and racial makeup. It is slightly less affluent and has a smaller proportion of households with access to a car than the city as a whole. It has very limited trails and bicycle facilities (3 miles) and lacks other complete streets and parks given different standards in King County prior to annexation.



18

Exhibit 2-7. Benson Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY

Neighborhood Assets and

Destinations

Assets and destinations include:

Tiffany Park, Cascade Park, and Renton Park (King County) provide walking trails, children’s play areas, and recreational opportunities to area residents. Philip Arnold Park is immediately north of this planning area and is accessible to Benson residents via an unpaved road right-of-way owned by Seattle Public Utilities. The Cedar River Natural Area is along the northern boundary of the area. To the east, the Soos Creek Corridor (King County) and Boulevard Lane Park (King County park) offer large natural areas.

There is a future Family First Community Center on 116th. The commercial areas, including Cascade Village are key destinations. The Renton School District operates seven schools in the area. Several major utility corridors cross the area, providing informal trails, recreation links, and views.

Existing Travel Routes

116th Avenue SE is the central spine of Benson Hill, connecting neighbors to Cascade Village, Cascade and Benson Hill Elementary Schools, and several informal trail networks.

140th Ave SE (existing bike lanes), Benson Road South, and Talbot Road South are used for biking. Puget Drive SE and hiking/walking trails in Cedar River Natural Zone, are heavily used routes. In addition, the City of Seattle water pipeline corridors provide walking routes in the area.

Transit Routes

Major transit routes are along 108th Ave SE, 116th Ave SE, Puget Drive SE, SE 168th Street, SE Carr Road, SR 169 Renton-Maple Valley Road, and Talbot Road South.

Buses 169, 148, 102, and Dart 906 serve the area.

Community Input

Community input identified the need for walking improvements at the following problem spots for walking: 116th Ave, SE 181st St, SE 182nd St, near Soos Creek Park and trail, areas south of 108th Ave SE south of SE Carr Road, and near Thunder Hill Creek Trail. Locations identified as bicycling problem spots include: Benson Road S, SE 192nd St, 108th Ave SE. Finishing the Soos Creek Trail was also identified as a need. An area west of Benson Way S was identified as a popular location for mountain biking. See Exhibit 2-8.



19

Exhibit 2-8. Benson Hill Planning Area Community Input



20

Cedar River Community Planning Area

The Cedar River Community Planning area is a predominantly

residential area with a population of 4,210 people as of

2018. This is 4% of Renton’s population, and 16% of its

households. Exhibit 2-9 summarizes selected demographic

characteristics and places the area in the context of the city as

whole. Exhibit 2-10 summarizes key Community Plan Area

Characteristics and community input around destinations, travel

patterns, and overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-9. Cedar River Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits)


Compared to the City as a whole, the Cedar River Community Planning Area is more affluent and slightly less racially diverse. It has a slightly larger proportion of older residents and residents with access to a car.



21

Exhibit 2-10. Cedar River Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations


Maplewood Golf Course Ron Regis Park Cedar River Park (includes a non-motorized boat launch as well as other picnic and park facilities).

Renton Community Center Henry Moses Aquatic Center Carco Theatre


The Cedar River Trail (CRT) follows the Cedar River from where it enters Lake Washington in the City of Renton upriver to Landsburg, the boundary of the City of Seattle’s Cedar River Watershed. The trail follows a historic railroad route along State Route 169, and passes through the City of Renton, City of Maple Valley, and unincorporated King County. It offers views and access to Lake Washington, downtown Renton, Cedar River Park, Maplewood Golf Course, Ron Regis Park, Cedar Grove Park (King County park), and Maple Valley. The CRT is popular with pedestrians, runners, bicyclists, and skaters and provides both recreational and non-motorized commuting opportunities.

Transit Routes

Maple Valley Highway is a bus route for Metro Transit 143, 102, and Dart 907.

Community Input

Community input identified the following locations as a walking problem spots: 154th Pl SE and unofficial dirt trails in the Cedar River Natural Zone. The following location was identified as a bicycling problem spot: 136th Ave SE. An additional three locations along Maple Valley Highway were identified as walking and bicycling destinations. See Exhibit 2-11.



22

Exhibit 2-11. Cedar River Planning Area Community Input



23

City Center Community Planning Area

The City Center Community Planning Area includes a

population of 13,030 people as of 2018. This is roughly 13%

of Renton’s population, and 16% of its households. City Center

is a major employment center for Renton with 27,850 jobs or

roughly 45% of the city’s employment. Exhibit 2-12

summarizes selected demographic characteristics and places

the area in the context of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-13

summarizes key Community Plan Area Characteristics and

community input around destinations, travel patterns, and

overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-12. City Center Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits)


Compared to the City as a whole, the City Center Community Planning Area is less affluent and less racially diverse. It has a lower proportion of families with children and a higher proportion of older residents. A smaller proportion of residents have access to a car.



24

Exhibit 2-13. City Center Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations

Downtown Renton with a traditional retail “main street” on S 3rd Street. The Downtown Library, Senior Center, Renton Pavilion Event Center and Piazza Park are popular community gathering places.

A regional commercial cluster is located primarily in the southern portion of the City Center and serves as a retail hub.

Parks and destinations include Burnett Linear Park, Cedar River Trail, Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, Jones Park, Kiwanis Bicentennial Air Park, Liberty Park, Philip Arnold Park, Piazza Park, Downtown Park, Skate Park, Tonkin Park, Veterans Memorial Park, and the Renton Memorial Stadium.

Historic Renton High School and STEM-focused Sartori Elementary School are important to community identity.

The northern portion of this community planning area includes Renton Boeing manufacturing facilities, and mixed-use communities of the Landing and Southport.


Major existing travel routes include:

Cedar River Trail Lake Washington Blvd. Logan Ave N. Rainier Ave N.

Transit Routes

Currently, the Renton Transit Center existing in the center of downtown, but the South Grady Park and Ride will become the city’s major transit center with future Sound Transit and WSDOT improvements. Metro Transit bus routes 101, 105, 106, 107 143, 148, 153, 167, 169, 240, 342, 907, 908, Sound Transit routes 560, 566, and Rapid Ride F route serves the area. There is also a Park & Ride at Fred Meyer.

Community Input

Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: S 7th St, Houser Way S, near Logan Street bridge, Logan Avenue N, Lake Washington Blvd, and Burnett Avenue N. A connection from the Cedar River Boathouse to Coulon Park was also identified as a need. The following locations were identified as bicycling problem spots: SW 7th St, Rainier Ave S, Houser Way S, Logan Ave N, N 6th St, Lake Washington Blvd., and N Park Dr. A Boeing/Airport bypass trail connecting Coulon Park with Perimeter Road/Rainier and bike racks near stores in the Landing were identified ideas for the future. See Exhibit 2-14.



25

Exhibit 2-14. City Center Planning Area Community Input



26

East Plateau Community Planning Area

The East Plateau Community Planning Area includes a

population of 9,770 people as of 2018. This is roughly 9% of

Renton’s population, and 9% of its households. Exhibit 2-15




community input around destinations, travel patterns and

overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-15. East Plateau Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits)


Compared to the City as a whole, the East Plateau Community Planning Area is the most affluent and less racially diverse. It has a higher proportion of families with children and older residents. A larger proportion of residents here have access to a car.



27

Exhibit 2-16. East Plateau Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations

Schools in the Planning Area include Hazen High School, Apollo Elementary, Maplewood Heights Elementary, Liberty High School, Maywood Middle School, and Briarwood Elementary.

The one-acre Maplewood Park (King County park), Coalfield Park (King County park), and the Hazen Community Pool are other neighborhood assets and destinations.

NE 4th St and Duvall have active commercial areas.


NE 4th Street, May Valley Road, and SR 900/Sunset Blvd are major travel corridors. 156th Ave SE/154th Pl SE is important connector to SR 169 and Cedar River Trail.

Transit Routes

NE 4th Street is a major bus route.

King County Metro bus routes 111 and Dart 908 serve the area.

Community Input

Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: along Hoquiam Ave NE, Nile Ave NE, along NE 2nd St, along Jericho Ave SE, along NE 4th St, along Duvall Ave NE, along 144th Ave SE and along156th Ave SE. The following locations were identified as problem spots for bicycling: Hoquiam Ave NE, NE 4th St and near 154th Pl SE. See Exhibit 2-17.



28

Exhibit 2-17. East Plateau Planning Area Community Input



29

Highlands Community Planning Area

The Highlands Community Planning Area includes a

population of 29,800 people as of 2018. This is roughly

29% of Renton’s population, and 30% of its households.

Exhibit 2-18 summarize selected demographic characteristics

and places the area in the context of the city as whole.

Exhibit 2-19 summarizes key Community Plan Area

Characteristics and community input around destinations,

travel patterns, and overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-18. Highlands Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits)


Compared to the City as a whole, the Highlands Community Planning Area is slightly more affluent. It is similar to the city overall in racial makeup; however, it contains a larger concentration of Hispanic residents. It has a slightly smaller proportion of families with children and older residents. It has a slightly larger proportion of residents with access to a car.



30

Exhibit 2-19. Highlands Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations

Schools in the Planning Area include McKnight Middle School, Highlands Elementary, Sierra Heights Elementary School, Meadowcrest Early Learning Center, Rainier Christian School, and Honeydew Elementary School. Open space and park assets include Honey Creek and May Creek Natural Areas, Sierra Heights King County), North Highlands and Meadowcrest Playground, and Glencoe Parks. Phase I of Sunset Park recently opened, Phase II will be completed in 2020. Community centers are also located on both sides of SR 900 at Highlands and North Highlands Parks.

The Renton Technical College, Kennydale Memorial Hall, and the Renton Highlands Library.

The Renton Sunset mixed-use neighborhood.


Sunset Blvd/SR 900 and NE 3rd St/NE 4th St are main east-west routes. Union Avenue NE and Edmonds Ave NE are key north-south routes. Trails near Honey Creek connect to May Creek Natural Area

Transit Routes

Sunset Blvd. and Duvall Ave NE are major transit routes

King County Metro routes 240, 105, 111, and Dart 908 serve the area.

Park & Rides are at St. Matthew’s Lutheran Church and Renton Bible Church.

Community Input

Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: SE 16th St, NE 20th ST, SE 95th Way, and an area near SE 104th St. The following locations were identified as bicycling problem spots: NE 3rd St, Sunset Blvd, and Duvall Ave N. Connections from Honey Creek to Lake Washington and to Union Ave were identified as ideas for the future. See Exhibit 2-20.



31

Exhibit 2-20. Highlands Planning Area Community Input



32

Kennydale Community Planning Area

The Kennydale Community Planning Area is a predominantly

residential area that includes a population of 7,570 people as

of 2018. This is roughly 7% of Renton’s population, and 8% of

its households. Exhibit 2-21 summarizes selected demographic




patterns and overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-21. Kennydale Demographic Characteristics


Compared to the city as a whole, the Kennydale Community Planning Area is more affluent and the least racially diverse. It has a slightly larger proportion of older residents and a smaller proportion of households with children. A slightly larger proportion of residents have access to a car.



33

Exhibit 2-22. Kennydale Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations


The Kennydale Elementary School Kennydale Beach Park Kennydale Lions Park May Creek Natural Area and Trail Eastside Rail Corridor Lake Washington Loop Trail Virginia Mason Athletic Center? (VMAC)/Seattle Seahawks Headquarters Commercial area on NE 44th St, just east of I-405


Lake Washington Blvd., Park Ave. N, NE 30th St, and NE 27th St are major travel routes.

Transit Routes

Interstate 405 is a major transit route that serves King County Metro bus routes 111, 167, 342, 952, 567, and Sound Transit routes 560 and 566.

A Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) station is planned for the NE 44th St exit and there is an existing Park & Ride at Kennydale United Methodist Church.

Community Input

Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: along N 30th St, N 33rd St, along Aberdeen Ave NE, and along Jones Ave NE. Locations along Lake Washington Blvd, along Lincoln Ave NE and along NE 27th St were identified as bicycling problem spots. See Exhibit 2-23. The Eastside Rail Corridor will be the location of a new regional trail, and preferred alignments were discussed at public open houses and with King County.



34

Exhibit 2-23. Kennydale Community Planning Area Community Input



35

Talbot Community Planning Area

The Talbot Community Planning Area includes a population of

10,060 people as of 2015. This is roughly 10% of Renton’s

population, and 10% of its households. Exhibit 2-24




community input around destinations, travel patterns and

overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-24. Talbot Demographic Characteristics

Source: American Community Survey, 2015.

Compared to the City as a whole the Talbot Community Planning Area is more affluent and racially diverse. It has a larger proportion of older residents than the city overall. A larger proportion of residents here have access to a car.



36

Exhibit 2-25. Talbot Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations


The Talbot Hill Elementary School. Developed park assets include the 10-acre Thomas Teasdale Park and the public tennis and pickleball courts located at Talbot Hill Reservoir Park.

Panther Creek Wetlands Valley Medical Center and surrounding area is major medical hub.


Benson Drive South (SR 515) and SE Carr Road are major travel routes for this area.

Transit Routes

King County Metro bus route 169 runs along Talbot Road S. and 108th Ave SE. Metro Dart route 906 serves east-west to the Valley.

Community Input

Community input identified the following locations as problem spots for walking: the hill between SE Carr Rd and SE 200th St. SE 200th was also identified as a bicycling problem spot. Connecting City-owned park property to Panther Creek Wetlands, connecting Panther Creek Wetlands to the Springbrook Trail, and connecting to Strander Blvd in Tukwila on SW 27th St were identified as ideas for the future. See Exhibit 2-26.



37

Exhibit 2-26. Talbot Planning Area Community Input



38

Valley Community Planning Area

The Valley Community Planning Area is a major employment

center with 20,350 or roughly 33% of the city’s jobs. The

Valley Medical Center is located in this Planning Area. This is

the least populated planning area with only a population of

180 people as of 2018. Exhibit 2-27 summarizes selected

demographic characteristics and places the area in the context

of the city as whole. Exhibit 2-28 summarizes key Community

Plan Area Characteristics and community input around

destinations, travel patterns and overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-27. Valley Demographic Characteristics


Compared to the City as a whole the Valley Community Planning Area is less affluent and more racially diverse. It is similar to the city overall in the proportion of families with children and older residents. A smaller proportion of residents here have access to a car.



39

Exhibit 2-28. Valley Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations

There are no schools in this Community Planning Area. Open space assets include the Black River Riparian Forest and the Springbrook Valley Wetlands.

Lake to Sound Trail There are multiple commercial/employment providers in this area, including IKEA, Providence Health & Services, Boeing, and Kaiser Permanente.


Black River Trail and the Springbrook Trail. Lake to Sound Trail will connect to the Interurban and Green River Trails in 2020.

Transit Routes

SW Grady Way and SR 167 are main transit routes.

King County Metro route 153 and Rapid Ride F route serves the area. Metro routes 952, and Sound Transit routes 566 and 567 run along I-167.

The Tukwila Sounder Station is a key origin/destination for transit users in this area.

Community Input

Community input identified locations along SW 43rd St as problem spots for walking and biking. Specific locations identified along the street as problem spots for bicycling include: S 180th St, SW Grady Way, Oakesdale Ave SW and SW 7th St. A better connection between the Lake to Sound Trail and Interurban Trail and addressing gaps in trails due to private property (Springbrook Trail) were also identified as ideas for the future. See Exhibit 2-29. s



40

Exhibit 2-29. Valley Planning Area Community Input



41

West Hill Community Planning Area

The West Hill Community Planning Area is a predominantly

residential area with a population of 4,340 people as of

2018. This is roughly 4% of Renton’s population, and 4% of its

households. Exhibit 2-30 summarize selected demographic




patterns and overall mobility.

Exhibit 2-30. West Hill Demographic Characteristics (within Renton City Limits)


Compared to the City as a whole the West Hill Community Planning Area is the least affluent and most racially diverse. It has a slightly higher proportion of families with children and a smaller proportion of residents with access to a car.



42

Exhibit 2-31. West Hill Community Plan Area Characteristics

FEATURE SUMMARY


Destinations

Schools in the Planning Area include Campbell Hill Elementary, Dimmitt Middle School, Bryn Mawr Elementary, Albert Talley High School and Lakeridge Elementary School

Park assets and destinations include Earlington Park, Skyway Park (King County park), Lakeridge Park (King County park).

Skyway Library is a key destination and asset.


Rainier Avenue South along Lake Washington is a main travel corridor for the area. Renton Ave South runs through the heart of West Hill. SR 900, west of Rainier Ave S. is major city gateway from I-5.

Transit Routes

Renton Avenue South and SR 900 are bus routes.

King County Metro bus routes 106, 107, 101, 102, and 143X serve the area. There is an existing Park & Ride at City View Church.

Community Input

Community input identified bicycling problem spots at the following locations: along S Sunnycrest Rd, and south of Sunset Blvd. A safe bicycling route connecting to Skyway and West Hill, along SW Langston Rd, was identified as an idea for the future. See Exhibit 2-32.



43

Exhibit 2-32. West Hill Community Planning Area Community Input


JANUARY 2019

CHAPTER 3

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT




JANUARY 2019 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

47

3 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

The City conducted an extensive public outreach process, with an online

questionnaire, an interactive mapping activity, and three in-person

community open houses. Three meetings were organized with a Technical

Advisory Committee. The City also met with regional stakeholders. Project

briefings were presented to the Parks Commission, Planning Commission,

and the Renton City Council. Results are summarized in this Chapter with

more detailed information in Appendix A.

Top Takeaways

Based on the outreach the key takeaways include:

Recreation-based walking and biking is still a primary purpose.

Commuting by bike and on foot is also occurring and could be

encouraged more.

Respondents preferred to walk shorter distances, around their

neighborhoods, mainly for recreation. Walking was not seen as a

primary mode of transportation.

Respondents reported longer and more frequent bicycle trips.

Bicyclists bike within and beyond their neighborhood to trails, work

places or school, or civic or recreation facilities.

Respondents preferred to walk and bike on formal facilities such as

sidewalks, streets, or paved trails.

The Cedar River Trail is the most heavily used trail. Not surprisingly,

given its central location within the city and its length, respondents

cited the Cedar River Trail as the most used non-motorized trail. Trails

along other riparian corridors, such as the Springbrook Creek, Honey

Creek, and May Creek were less frequently used.

Addressing pedestrian and bicyclist comfort is necessary to

encourage more travel and recreation by foot or bike. Discontinuous

or missing sidewalks, walking on roads with fast moving traffic, and

difficulty crossing came up as top barriers to walking. Barriers to

biking focused on the absence of biking facilities (e.g. paved

WALKING AND BIKING IN RENTON

88.5% of the Renton survey respondents walk around the neighborhood. This is consistent with findings in the 2017 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP), which showed 89% participation in the Seattle-King region, and 94% across the state.

Renton's survey respondents have a higher rate of biking with up to 81.1% biking on a trail and 80.2% biking around the neighborhood. In the SCORP, rates were 28% for biking mostly on streets and roads.



48

shoulders, bike lanes, shared use paths), dangerous crossings and

streets with fast moving cars. The lack of wayfinding was also cited as

a potential barrier.

Connection to transit is an important need. Transit is often accessed

by walking and biking and connections to current and future transit is a

key link.

Mountain biking and other more unique forms of bicycling are

pursued by about a quarter of questionnaire respondents, who enjoy

riding along lakes, streams, and rivers.

Equestrian use was not an identified need. The questionnaire

included questions on horseback riding, but no respondents offered

input.

Questionnaire

The City issued a questionnaire in summer 2017 for nearly three months

and received 340 responses (131 full and 209 partial). Respondents are

more able-bodied than Census reports for the city. The share of

questionnaire respondents with children is similar to Census reports for

Renton. Questionnaire respondents are more likely to commute by walking

or bicycling than the city as a whole. Results showed:

Purpose of Walking/Biking: Walking, running, and biking activities

tend to be more for recreation purposes rather than for transportation.

Frequency: Most respondents walk at least 2 times per week or more,

and bike 1 day per week or less.

Destinations: Most respondents walk or bike around their

neighborhood or to a public facility. In the case of bicyclists, they also

frequently use trails. While respondents visited a wide number of

Renton park, recreation, and civic facilities, the most well visited ones

were along Lake Washington and the Cedar River.

Traffic Stress: Renton questionnaire respondents indicated that 25%

were confident on any road, about 50% were comfortable with roads

having some traffic but prefer those with wide shoulders or lanes or

trails, and over 20% were concerned about traffic and other factors.

Barriers & Incentives – Walking or Running: Top barriers to running

or walking included street crossings, traffic, discontinuous sidewalks, or

locations along roads. Top improvements to encouraging walking or



49

running, include more curb ramps, sidewalks, more shared-use trails,

maintenance, and enforcement of traffic laws and biking.

Barriers & Incentives – Biking: Top barriers to biking include motor

vehicle speed, lack of bicycle facilities, too many cars, and routes that

are stressful or dangerous. Top improvements include safer

intersections, wider shoulders on roads, more shared use trails, and

street calming measures in residential areas.

Interactive Maps

An interactive online map was open to public input from June 10, 2017 to

August 31, 2017. The interactive map site had 1,380-page views and 342

data points. Participants could identify areas where they walked or biked,

and problem areas. Maps and summaries of comments follow.

Walking

Based on input received, walk problems included lack of

sidewalks and connections as well as traffic, speeding, and

other dangerous conditions. Most pedestrian problem spots

were identified in the East Plateau, North Highlands, and

mid-Kennydale Planning Areas. See Exhibit 3-1 and

Exhibit 3-2.

Exhibit 3-1. Walking Problems

Source: Tag Word Cloud.



50

The range of comments included:

Nice walk, but would feel much safer with sidewalk (Kennydale area).

No sidewalk for most of this very busy road (Sunset area).

Need signage and wayfinding to connect to Cedar River trail.

Missing ADA ramp.

There is no way to get up and down the hill safely between Carr Rd.

and SE 200th St.... That’s a 1.25-mile sidewalk desert.

Destinations included the Cedar River Trail and May Creek Trail. Many

respondents reported walking in neighborhoods on the Renton plateau

(East Plateau Community Planning Area), as well as in the valley near

Springbrook Trail and Black River Trail (Valley Community Planning Area).



51

Exhibit 3-2. Community Input Walking



52

Biking

Community comments on biking problem spots were similar to comments

about walking. Biking problems related to concerns about travel lanes and

trails, and traffic and safety conditions. Based on comments, most bike

problem spots follow future alignments of the regional trail system. See

Exhibit 3-3 and Exhibit 3-4.

Exhibit 3-3. Biking Problem Spots

Source: Tag Word Cloud.

Destinations included the Cedar River Trail, Green River Trail, Lake

Washington Loop Trail, and other neighborhood locations. Comments

addressed different connections or safety concerns such as:

Add bike trail between Cedar & Green river trails.

Need a safe bike route connecting to Skyway and West Hill.

Sunset Blvd provides the best grade for connectivity with Highlands,

needs bike lanes.

Best bike route up Benson Hill is not clear. Probably old Benson Rd, but

need bike lanes to continue. Consider road diet south of Puget.

Very narrow shoulder, difficult connection to Jones Road from Cedar

River Trail.

Cars using wrong lane, conflicting with NB left turning bikes and cars.

(Renton/Kent border)

I ride around this area as the bridge is too narrow and unsafe, I have

nearly crashed many times on this bridge. (Renton/Tukwila Border)



53

Exhibit 3-4. Community Input Biking



54

OPEN HOUSES

Three open houses were held in 2017. Input at the community open houses

included neighborhood specific feedback on needed improvements, as well

as preferred connections and routes. No input on equestrian facilities was

received.

Needed improvements included:

Intersection improvements along the Cedar River Trail downtown,

Houser Way and Lake Washington Boulevard, and the NE 6th and NE

8th at Logan Avenue N.

Improvements for SW 7th to make it more bike-friendly

Sidewalk improvements across neighborhoods

Preferred Connections and Routes included:

Completion of the proposed Sam Chastain trail segment and the Soos

Creek Trail north of 192nd St. (King County responsibility)

Completion of Burnett Linear Park, South and North in Civic Core

Houser Way was cited by many as the preferred alignment of the

Eastside Rail Corridor

•35 persons•Preferred routes and facility types

•Thoughts on potential routes•Problem spots•Wish list projects•Projects to complete•General concerns and ideas

Open House 1

•26 persons•Regional Trail options•Preferences on network•Questions about facility designation

•Plan Priorities

Open House 2

•30 persons•Regional Trail preferences•Final Network options•Facility type discussion•Prioritization and project preferences

Open House 3



55

King County Meetings

Coordination with King County Parks and Recreation Division, Capital

Projects Program, and Governmental Relations was essential to plan

development with the convergence of four regional trails within Renton’s

Urban Growth Area: The Cedar River Trail (CR), Eastside Rail Corridor

(ERC), Lake to Sound Trail (L2S), and the Lake Washington Loop Trail.

The purpose of the meetings was to collaborate with King County

representatives on possible and preferred routing for the regional trails

through the City of Renton, discuss alternative facility types for these

corridors, update on the status of the Civic Core planning effort and review

proposed cross sections for the corridors in that plan, and review the status

of other regional trails/routes. Two meetings were held to identify and

agree upon the alignment and facility designation(s) for the regional trails.

Detailed meeting summaries, route concepts, and cross-sections are

included in Appendix B of this plan.

Technical Advisory Committee

Community members volunteered to participate in the Technical Advisory

Committee for this plan which included additional background and

educational discussions to provide feedback for plan development.

Important considerations included:

The importance of connecting regional trails

The importance of the transit center as a destination

Recognition that trail users are not as aware of traffic control devices

like Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFB) or C-curbs; this lack of

awareness should be addressed in design options

Cost considerations, and related “low hanging fruit” or easy wins are

important to elevate as criteria

The following trouble spots were identified primarily about bicycling

except where noted:

Near Dimmitt Middle School the location of a pedestrian-vehicle crash

Crossing Sunset Blvd. near Harrington

NE Park Drive Freeway ramps

Gate on Houser Way at Kenworth



56

NE 3rd street for bikes

Connection on Factory Ave.

Rainier Ave. and Hardy Ave.

The following barriers were identified:

Lack of comfort in high

speed/volume conditions

Lack of wayfinding

TAC members were in agreement with the projects identified in the

preliminary list and the conceptual plans for intersections. (See Appendix B

of this plan.)

THEMES

Key themes emerged from the broad input received through outreach

activities. The key themes and representative quotes are shown in the

Exhibit 3-5.

Exhibit 3-5. Outreach Themes Table

THEME REPRESENTATIVE QUOTE

Safety

Safety is a high priority theme that benefits users across the board and encourages less experienced riders to use the trail network. The network should be designed to minimize intermodal conflicts, street crossings, and travel along high speed, high traffic streets. In addition to design features, education and enforcement can improve safety.

“I am not willing to walk or ride a bike on the shoulder of a busy or slightly busy road, regardless of whether or not the shoulder is paved, because it is extremely dangerous due to vehicle driver distractions (talking and texting on phone).”

“Major intersections can be nerve-racking for bicyclists.”



57


Connectivity

Connectivity to regional and local destinations such as job centers, entertainment centers and transit, as well within neighborhoods, is an important feature of the network.

“There is a lack of bike paths on the major roads that lead to the most popular destinations. I prefer to bike, but it takes longer than necessary because I find myself having to take roundabout ways in order to stay safe.”

“I would love to see our bike trails connect all around Seattle like the Sammamish Trail which connects to the Burke -Gilman, then down and around to the waterfront, to Alki, then back to Renton.”

“It is too difficult, and dangerous, to bicycle through Renton to connect to major trails leading north, south, and east (Lake Washington Trail, Rainer Ave, Green River Trail, Cedar River Trail.”

“The bike trail connection isn't the greatest when riding around Lake Washington and along 405. With the amount of hotels /shopping /parks in the area in North Renton it would be great to improve those connections to existing trails to the north for daily and recreational use.”

Continuity

Continuity in the network enables longer trips that are useful for commuting or active recreation and a fluid experience.

“I love the Cedar River Trail and ride it often from downtown Renton to Maple Valley. However wish it were paved beyond Maple Valley - a road bike doesn't navigate well on gravel.”

“I commute from the Highlands to Kirkland. I'm an advanced and confident road rider. Some wonderful improvements have been made to signage and other aspects of driving, but there is no safe way to go up to the Highlands from down in the valley by bike. I tend to go all the way around to Kennydale and climb that big hill to come back to the Highlands rather than risk Sunset.”

Comfort and Inclusivity

This refers to the diversity of experiences the network will enable, reaching across a broad range of activities, ages, and abilities.

“I think that all trails, walkways, paths, etc. should be accessible to ALL.”

“I walk for health. I sold my bicycle a few years ago, and have never felt a need to get another one. I am retired, so do not need daily transportation.”

“I want to bike and walk...my car trips kill me literally and keep me isolated. I want an outdoor vibrant community.”



58


Well-Maintained

Trails wear out with time and need sufficient resources to conduct regular maintenance to offer a predictable, consistent experience for all users.

“Surface maintenance is a MUST! Most importantly, keeping the shoulders /trails clear of debris.”

Wayfinding and Awareness

A comprehensive network of wayfinding signage elements tailored for walking and bicycling allows residents to easily navigate the network and make non-motorized and multi-modal trips.

“Safe, shared use is possible if ALL users are aware of and follow trail rules.”

“There needs to be better signage at all entrance points to the park and along walkways.”

Innovative and Flexible

Trail design optimizes for successful sharing of the network. Soft surface trails are a desired alternative to paved trails.

“Make 2-person soft surface on both sides of national standard width trails so folks can run together.”


JANUARY 2019

CHAPTER 4

DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS




JANUARY 2019 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS

61

4 DEMAND & NEEDS ANALYSIS

This Chapter reviews needs and trends including:

Walking and biking activities participation

Future growth and change

Level of traffic stress

Destinations such as transit, schools, and parks

Connection to the community’s center and region

Based on the needs and trends, gaps and opportunities are identified. The

current and proposed system that closes gaps and addresses needs is

benchmarked to peer communities. Level of service concepts are explored.

Participation

Walking and biking are important to Renton residents and visitors, and

Renton’s local activities match the similarly high participation in the region

and state.

Renton Mobility & Recreation Use & Performance Indicators

Renton’s parks and trail system attracts up to 2.5 million visitors each year.

In the questionnaire for this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, most

respondents walk at least 2 times per week or more, and bike 1 day per

week or less. At least 80% of the respondents walked or biked around the

neighborhood, over two thirds walked on a trail and over three quarters

biked on a trail. See Exhibit 4-1 and Appendix A.

Exhibit 4-1. Questionnaire 2017 Walking and Biking Frequency

MODE 2-7 DAYS PER WEEK

Walking 65.6%

Biking 38.7%

Running 44%

Source: City of Renton, 2017, BERK, 2018



62

Renton monitors mobility and recreation performance indicators in its

budget, and the 2017-2018 budget reported:

Increasing satisfaction with connectivity to local and regional centers via transit, sidewalks and trails from 52% in 2011 to 56% in 2015.

Relatively high but variable satisfaction with the level of trail connectivity and access at 74% to 83% during the 2012-2014 period.

Overall customer satisfaction ratings of good to excellent in cleanliness and appearance of Trail System, with 84%-93% satisfaction variably over the 2012-2015 period.

State Trails Plan

In 2017 a statistically valid participation rate survey across Washington

found the top activity of all respondents consisted of walking in a park or

trail setting at 84%. Participation equaled 89% considering the Seattle-

King region alone. Walking was also the top activity at over 90% for

families with or without children.

State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning

The 2017 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning (SCORP)

document considers participation in recreation activities across the state

and in different regions. The report found the participation rates for

walking was 94% statewide. Rates were 28% for biking mostly on streets

and roads, and 23% for running (many locations). Across different ages,

races, or incomes, the top recreation activity was consistently walking in a

park or trail setting. About 89% of participants in the Seattle-King region

participated in walking in a park or trail setting. Most participation

locations occurred in a person’s yard or neighborhood.

Future Growth & Change

Renton’s current trail and bike routes serve several of the highest

population and job density areas though there are gaps particularly in the

northeast and southeast geographies. See Exhibit 4-2 and Exhibit 4-3

Dense population and job centers are associated with high-density

residential and commercial/industrial zones. Over a 20-year planning

period concluding in 2035, over 16,700 housing units and 31,000 jobs

would be added per the Renton Comprehensive Plan. New residents and

employees would increase demand for walking and biking. Much of the

growth would occur in the high-density residential and commercial zones

identified in Exhibit 4-4, particularly in the City Center.



63

Exhibit 4-2. Population Density and Existing Network



64

Exhibit 4-3. Job Density and Existing Network



65

Exhibit 4-4. Existing Trail Access to High-Density Residential and Job Nodes



66

Level of Traffic Stress

Bicycle systems that provide low traffic stress and high connectivity

attract wider usage:

…a bicycling network to attract the widest possible

segment of the population, its most fundamental attribute

should be low-stress connectivity, that is, providing routes

between people’s origins and destinations that do not

require cyclists to use links that exceed their tolerance for

traffic stress, and that do not involve an undue level of

detour. (Mineta Transportation Institute, 2012)

Renton has some low stress routes usable by most adults and

children. These are in Kennydale, Cedar River, and the Valley.

Most of the community does not have low stress facilities within ¼

mile. See Exhibit 4-5 and Exhibit 4-6.

Exhibit 4-5. Level of Traffic Stress Continuum

Source: City of Renton, 2018: BERK, 2018.

FOUR LEVELS OF TRAFFIC STRESS

LTS 1: the level that most children can tolerate.

LTS 2: the level that will be tolerated by the mainstream adult population.

LTS 3: the level tolerated by cyclists who are “enthused and confident” but still prefer having their own dedicated space for riding.

LTS 4: a level tolerated only by those characterized as “strong and fearless.”



67

Exhibit 4-6. Level of Traffic Stress and Existing Network



68

Schools

Renton is served by the Renton School District, Issaquah School District, and

Kent School District. There are numerous private school throughout the City.

The Renton School District serves most of the Renton city limits. The district

has 15 elementary schools, 4 middle schools, and 4 high schools.

Renton’s 2017 Trails and Bicycle Questionnaire found that children walk to

a large list of local schools (12 schools), and to a lesser extent bike to them

(6 schools). See Appendix A.

Renton has a sidewalk rehabilitation and replacement program targeting

places where curb, gutter, sidewalks, and curb ramps are needed. Many of

the schools in the district identify “walk to school” route options, and

improvements within those areas would benefit children and families.

Parks & Recreation Facilities

Renton’s parks and recreation facilities include 32 developed public parks,

965 acres of public open space, an 18-hole public golf course, two lake-

front beaches and a public boat launch. Many parks and recreation

facilities are accessed along the Cedar River Trail and Springbrook Trail,

as well as bike lanes and shared roadways. Pedestrian trails also connect

to and through parks and recreation facilities. However, parks and

recreation facilities are not fully connected by the trails and bicycle system.

See Exhibit 4-7.



69

Exhibit 4-7. Parks and Recreation and Existing Network



70

Transit Dependent Populations

Renton’s City Center and Valley planning areas have the most frequent bus

service. The Highlands and Benson neighborhoods have a few all-day

routes. Other areas have less frequent service and sparser coverage of

transit. The trail and bicycle network to transit facilities is discontinuous in

areas outside the City Center.

Areas with larger proportions of the elderly, the young, low-income

individuals, and households without access to a car are often considered

transit dependent. The first and last mile problem, one of the most complex

challenges for public transit, refers to the beginning and end of a trip

primarily made by public transit. Renton’s Trails and Bicycle Questionnaire

responses indicate that Renton residents use bicycles or walk to make short,

local trips typically associated with the first and last mile problem. See

Appendix A.

Improving walking and biking infrastructure to appeal to a broad and

diverse range of people – elderly, young, low income – can potentially

help solve the first and last mile problem and thereby make it easier for

more people to access transit. This would benefit one-third of the

community that are younger than 18 and older than 65 years. See Exhibit

2-3 in Chapter 2.

Those earning less than or equal to 80% of the area median income are

concentrated in the City Center, Valley, Benson, and Highlands areas. See

Exhibit 4-8.



71

Exhibit 4-8. Low Income Census Tracts and Existing Network



72

Equity – Puget Sound Regional Council Opportunity Index

The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) has evaluated areas that provide

access to opportunities – education, economic, housing, transportation, and

health/environment. The current trail and bicycle network contribute to

opportunities and access for persons of color, and diverse age groups in

the City Center, Valley, and a few other Community Planning Areas. The

existing network is sparser in areas of lesser opportunity in Benson,

Highlands, and West Hill.

Opportunity maps illustrate where opportunity-rich communities exist, assess who has access to those neighborhoods, and help to understand what needs to be remedied in opportunity-poor neighborhoods. Exhibit 4-9 displays the current trail and bicycle network against the latest PSRC Opportunity Index map. This map is a graphical representation of how this plan analyzed demand and need with an equity lens.



73

Exhibit 4-9. PSRC Opportunity Index and Existing Network



74

City Center

Renton’s City Center Planning Area contains the historic core of the

community. It is a regional center for manufacturing and service jobs, and

increasingly a mixed-use residential neighborhood offering cultural and

commercial amenities. Many roads and regional trails converge in this hub.

The Renton Library, City Hall, and other government facilities serve the

community. Regional parks and trails provide gathering places and access

to the Cedar River and other open spaces. Renton adopted a City Center

Community Plan to guide the future growth and direction of the center.

City Center Community Plan goals include increasing transportation

connections for multiple modes, improving trail connections and reaching

more destinations, and making civic amenities more accessible. Since the

City Center is a multimodal crossroads to other neighborhoods, meeting

City Center goals will also advance this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan.

Goal 5: Provide better regional transportation connections for a

range of transportation modes to improve access to and from

the City Center.

Goal 6: Provide better internal connections between areas within

the City Center, especially Coulon Park/Lake Washington, The

Landing, North Renton neighborhood, Downtown, and the South

Renton neighborhood.

Goal 7: Connect regional trails in the City Center and build on

these key connections as an economic development strategy.

Goal 8: Protect and enhance the natural features and open

space in the City Center and improve public access to and

connections between the Lake Washington shoreline, the Cedar

River, and the variety of parks and open spaces throughout the

City Center.

The City Center is designated in part a Regional Growth Center and is also

slated to take most of Renton’s residential and commercial growth in the

next 20 years. Today, single-occupancy vehicles comprise 82% of trips in

the City Center. The City’s goal is to decrease drive alone work trips to

below 75%. Improving opportunities to bike and walk to and through the

City Center will help meet the needs of residents and employees across the

Renton planning area.

City Center and Regional Trails

City Center Plan, Makers 2011



75

Regional Trails

Regional trails in Renton include the Cedar River Trail, Soos Creek Trail,

Lake to Sound Trail, and soon the Eastside Rail Corridor and the Lake to

Sound Trail.

When complete the Eastside Rail Corridor will provide 16.7 miles of new

trail that will connect the cities of Renton, Bellevue, Kirkland, Redmond, and

Woodinville.

The Lake to Sound Trail, when completed by King County, will be a

continuous 16-mile non-motorized, multi-use recreational trail from the south

end of Lake Washington in Renton to the Puget Sound in Des Moines,

connecting the cities of Renton, Tukwila, Sea-Tac, Burien, and Des Moines.

King County has also planned other regional trail extensions with the Soos

Creek Trail with the future goal of connection to the Cedar River Trail.

See Chapter 5 for additional information on increases in Regional Trail miles.

GAPS & OPPORTUNITIES

Renton considered the gap analysis and community comments to identify

opportunities to create a more connected system with capacity for current

and future use.

This plan encourages higher participation rates in walking and biking by

better connecting users to destinations, reducing traffic stress, and

anticipating greater demand from new housing and job growth:

The network increases the extent of facilities in both high population

and high job density. See Exhibit 4-10 and Exhibit 4-11.

Nearly every gap is filled with a connecting route meeting LTS 1 or 2

criteria. See Exhibit 4-12.

The future network knits together all Community Planning Areas

including those of low opportunity. See Exhibit 4-13.



76

Exhibit 4-10. Population Density and Proposed Network



77

Exhibit 4-11. Job Density and Proposed Network



78

Exhibit 4-12. Level of Traffic Stress with ¼ Mile Service Area and Proposed Network ¼ Mile Service Area LTS 1 & 2



79

Exhibit 4-13. PSRC Opportunity Index and Proposed Network



80

BENCHMARKS

Benchmarking compares Renton’s trail miles to other agencies to assess

Renton’s performance relative to peer communities.

Renton has the lowest miles per 1,000 population compared to surrounding

communities and other major cities in south and east King County. See

Exhibit 4-14. If only implementing the Highest Priority projects (Tier 1) in

Chapter 5, the City’s network will be in the middle of benchmark

communities and increase its system length by over 65%.

Exhibit 4-14. Miles of Trails per 1,000 Population – Renton and Peers




81

LEVEL OF SERVICE

A “level of service” (LOS) refers to the amount and quality of trails and

bicycle facilities that are necessary to meet current and future needs. A

LOS helps establish a capital facility program. Costs and revenue can

then be matched, and projects phased to help achieve the planned LOS.

LOS policies or standards are locally established and up to each

community to set. Levels of service are often related to a unit of

population, e.g. miles of trail per 1,000 population. In addition to

quantity-based LOS measures, communities often consider quality and

extent (distribution).

This Plan is designed to meet the following three LOS criteria:

Level of Service – Quantity: Increase the miles of trails per 1,000

persons. See Exhibit 4-15.

Exhibit 4-15. Miles of Trails per 1,000 (2018 – 2035)

The Plan will increase miles of trails per 1,000 residents in Renton from its current level of 0.29 miles/l,000 residents in 2018 to 0.44 miles/1,000 residents with the implementation of all highest priority projects and to 0.95 miles/1,000 residents with the implementation of all proposed projects by 2035.


Given limited resources, Renton will phase the system over time based on priorities including community input and need.



82

Level of Service – Quality: Increase the extent of LTS 1 and LTS 2

facilities to increase user comfort and participation. See Exhibit 4-16.

Exhibit 4-16. Change LTS 1&2 Trail Miles

The Plan will increase the total LTS 1 & 2 trail miles in Renton from 23.3 in 2018 to 113 in 2035 by adding 92.8 miles of new LTS 1 & 2 trails.

Source: City of Renton, BERK, 2018.

Level of Service – Connectivity and Extent (Distribution):

a. Reduce gaps and increase the coverage of facilities across all

Renton community planning areas. See Exhibit 4-17.

b. Increase the share of residents and employees within a quarter

mile service area of LTS 1 & 2 facilities. See Exhibit 4-18.

Exhibit 4-17. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles by Community Planning Area




83

Exhibit 4-18. Percentage of Renton Residents within a Quarter Mile Service Area of LTS 1 & 2 Facilities




84


JANUARY 2019

CHAPTER 5

TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN




JANUARY 2019 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN

87

5 TRAIL & BICYCLE SYSTEM PLAN

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Based on Chapter 1 Goals and Objectives, Chapter 3 Community

Involvement results, and Chapter 4 Demand and Needs Analysis,

following are guiding principles of the Trail and Bicycle System. The

Guiding Principles are ideas that influenced the proposed network

recommendations, design guidelines, and projects and priorities.

Characteristics

Renton’s Trail and Bicycle System will be:

Accessible, Connected to Destinations, and Continuous

Safe, Comfortable, and Inclusive

Easy to Navigate

Innovative and Flexible

Benefits

An improved Trail and Bicycle System will have positive effects for Renton’s

community by:

Achieving Equity

Increasing Awareness

Promoting Physical and Environmental Health

Enhancing the Economy and Community



88

NETWORK RECOMMENDATIONS

Renton’s Trail and Bicycle System is one integrated system that will be

expanded from about 30 miles to 127 miles within the city limits. This

includes approximately 4 miles of existing trail facilities being upgraded

or converted to different facility types. See Exhibit 5-1. Another 8 miles of

new, proposed trails are planned in areas immediately outside of Renton’s

city limits for an overall plan total of 135 miles.

Exhibit 5-1. Existing and Proposed Trail Miles


The Trail and Bicycle System features a regional hub connecting in the

Downtown Urban Center, and an expanded local network. Regional trails

connect Renton to other cities and regional destinations that lie to the north,

east, south, and west. Local Connector routes tie together multiple Renton

neighborhoods to one another and carry more non-motorized trips. Local

Neighborhood routes connect destinations within the same neighborhood.



89

Exhibit 5-2. Regional and Local System Map



90

Regional

With the proposed network, regional trail miles will double in Renton under

the Plan from approximately 9.2 miles today to 19.1 by 2035.

Exhibit 5-3. Existing and Proposed Regional Trail Miles


Renton’s Downtown Urban Center will become a hub where several

regional trail connections that come together all linked to the Cedar River

Trail.

The Eastside Rail Corridor will connect from the Cedar River Trail via

the Renton Connector or Houser Way Bypass north towards Bellevue.

The Lake to Sound Trail will connect to the Cedar River Trail to the

east and to the Green River Trail to the west.

The Lake Washington Loop Trail would connect from the Cedar River

northwest along Lake Washington Blvd to Seattle.

A series of trail alternatives were reviewed with King County and the City

of Renton staff. See Exhibit 5-4. Based on the meetings with King County,

concepts were developed for Preferred Lake to Sound and Eastside Rail

Corridor routes. See Appendix B for preferred concepts and intersection

improvements.

Other regional trail improvements include the 1.2-mile Soos Creek Trail

extension from SE 192nd St to Petrovitsky Road, considered a high priority

programmed project in the King County Regional Trails Need Report and

the 2014 - 2019 Capital Improvement Program. Other segments including

the Petrovitsky Crossing, Renton Park Segment, and the Lindberg to Cedar

River Trail, are considered programmed and identified as a Tier 3 priority.

(King County, 2016)



91

Exhibit 5-4. Regional Trail Alternatives

Source: MacLeod Reckord, 2017; City of Renton, 2017.



92

Local Connector & Local Neighborhood

Community outreach results showed high participation in walking and

biking in and around neighborhoods, and a desire to connect to the

broader trail and bicycle network. The proposed network focuses on

increasing and expanding the local network. Completing all proposed

projects in the plan will increase Local Neighborhood miles by 475% and

Local Connector miles by 412% and better connect local neighborhoods to

the Regional trail network. See Exhibit 5-5 and Exhibit 5-6.

Exhibit 5-5. Regional and Local Trail Miles – Existing and Proposed


Exhibit 5-6. Regional and Local Trail Miles – Total Proposed Network




93

TRAIL & BICYCLE FACILITY CHARACTERISTICS

Roadway Characterisitcs & Trail & Bicycle Options

Renton’s unified trail system is made up of different facilities meant to

reduce level of stress given traffic volumes, speed, and number of lanes in

each direction. Shared Use Paths are separated from roadways and have

the most flexible use and are often implemented with Regional or Local-

Connector facilities. Bicycle lanes may be protected, buffered, or striped

on Local-Connector facilities. Local Neighborhood routes feature lower

volume traffic and a range of Shared Roadways, Buffered Lanes,

Neighborhood Greenways, or Soft Surface Trails. See Exhibit 5-7.

Exhibit 5-7. Facility Options by Roadway Characteristics

* LTS 2 may be achieved with protected bike lanes if traffic volumes are less than 10,000-15,000. Source: City of Renton, 2018.

ROADWAY DESCRIPTION SPEED LIMIT (MPH)

LANES PER DIRECTION FACILITY OPTIONS

No vehicle traffic - - Soft Surface Trail Shared Use Path

Low-volume, residential, local street

≤ 25

1 Neighborhood Greenway Shared Roadway

2-3 Shared Roadway Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane

Mixed use, medium volume collector arterial

30

1 Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane

2-3

Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane

Protected Bike Lane*

35 2

Bike Lane Shared Use Path

High volume, high intensity, major arterial

3+ Bike Lane Buffered Bike Lane

40 2+ Protected Bike Lane Shared Use Path

LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4



94

This Trails and Bicycle Plan will increase the miles of each trail type with an

emphasis on Shared Use Paths that offer the most comfort and safety for

all non-motorized modes. All other trail types will increase from present

numbers. See Exhibit 5-8. Each trail and bicycle facility type is described in

the following section with typical features and design considerations.

Exhibit 5-8. Existing and Proposed Network by Facility Type (Miles and Percent)

FACILITY EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED

Shared Use Path 7.67 40.03 25% 31%

Protected Bike Lane - 3.05 - 2%

Protected Bike Lane - 0.39 - < 1%

Two-Way Protected Bike Lane - 2.66 - 2%

Striped Bike Lane 9.70 32.03 32% 25%

Striped Bike Lane 9.70 31.24 32% 24%

Buffered Bike Lane - 0.79 - 1%

Neighborhood Greenway - 22.82 - 18%

Signed Shared Roadway 2.47 10.31 8% 8%

Pedestrian Trail 10.36 19.58 34% 15%

Boardwalk 0.26 3.96 1% 3%

Hard Surface Trail 6.32 5.62 21% 4%

Soft Surface Trail 3.79 9.99 13% 8%

TOTAL 30.20 127.81 100% 100%

Notes: Proposed trails include conversion of 4.34 miles of existing facilities to new facility types. Source: City of Renton, 2018.



95

Low-Stress Network

The City of Renton can select the facility type that most increases user

comfort where feasible with local conditions. By increasing comfort and

offering more buffered or protected facilities, there could be increased

non-motorized facility usage.

The Trails and Bicycle Plan increases the miles of trail and bicycle facilities

that are suited for all or most users – LTS 1 and LTS 2. See Exhibit 5-9.

These include facilities such as separated Shared Use Paths, Protected and

Buffered Bike Lanes, and others.

For a variety of reasons –physical conditions, design considerations,

partner requirements, funding, and others – LTS 1 and 2 facilities are not

feasible everywhere.

When fully implemented, the plan increases LTS 1& 2 facility miles from

23.34 to 112.97 miles, an increase of 398%. Additionally, the plan

increases LTS 3 & 4 facility miles from 6.86 to 14.84 miles, an increase of

133%. Overall, the plan increases the ratio of LTS 1 & 2 miles to LTS 3 &

4. See Exhibit 5-9.

Exhibit 5-9. Existing and Proposed Trails by LTS Rating (Miles and Percent)


CITY LIMITS TOTAL LTS 1&2 LTS 3&4 LTS 1&2 LTS 3&4

Existing 30.20 23.34 6.86 77% 23%

Proposed 127.81 112.97 14.84 88% 12%



96

SHARED USE PATH

A shared-use path is physically separated from traffic by open space or a

barrier and allows for two-way travel. A shared-use path can be used by

bicyclists, pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers, and other non-

motorized users. Some common locations for shared-use paths are along

rivers, streams, utility rights of way, and abandoned railroad rights of way

and between parks as well as within existing roadway corridors.

Example: Cedar River Trail.

For the purposes of this plan, the Shared-Use Path standard measurements

were used. Physical and financial cost constraints may lead to considering

Side Paths, which separation and width would not be ideal.

Regional Shared Use Paths, like the Cedar River Trail, were the most used

by bicyclists and second-most used locations by walkers per questionnaire

results. Route locations along natural areas and separated routes were

particularly used and desired by off-road bicycle users such as mountain

bikers, BMX users, and Cyclocross users as preferred locations in the

questionnaire. See Chapter 3.

The Washington State Department of Transportation’s Design Manual

suggests: When designing shared-use paths, the bicyclist may not be the

critical design user for every element of design. For example, the crossing

speeds of most intersections between roads and pathways should be

designed for pedestrians, as they are the slowest users. Accommodate all

intended users and minimize conflicts.

Exhibit 5-10. Shared-Use Path

Shared Use Path

Facility physically separated from traffic by open space or a barrier.

May be in the right-of-way or independent right-of-way.

2-way travel. May be used by bicyclists, pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers, and other non-motorized users.

Width: o 10’ minimum o 12’ preferred + 2’ shoulder on each side = 14’

or 16’ total 5’ minimum separated from roadway. Surfacing varies.

Renton, 2009; WSDOT Manual Chapter 1515



97

PROTECTED BIKE LANE

A protected bike lane combines the user experience of a multi-use trail

with a conventional bike lane. They provide space that is used for bicycles

and are separated from motor vehicle travel lanes, parking lanes and

sidewalks. Two-way protected bike lanes are physically separated cycle

tracks that allow bicycle movement in both directions on one side of the

road. This facility type will be newly implemented in the city and planning

area.

Exhibit 5-11. Protected Bike Lane

Configured as a protected cycle track—at street level with a parking lane or other barrier between the cycle track and the motor vehicle travel lane—and/or as a raised cycle track to provide vertical separation from the adjacent motor vehicle lane.

Require additional considerations at driveway and side-street crossings.

One-way lane width varies from 5-8 feet exclusive of the barrier.

WSDOT Design Manual Exhibit 1520-1 | AASHTO Bike Guide

Two-Way Protected Bike Lane



98

BUFFERED BIKE LANE

Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a

designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent

motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. The City does not yet have

an example of a buffered bike lane.

Exhibit 5-12. Buffered Bike Lane

Separated buffered bike lanes are at grade with the roadway, and they include a bike lane and a buffer area.

Buffer: Consider a 3-foot buffer strip whenever possible. Minimum width is 2 feet.

Bike Lane Width: 3 feet to 7 feet. o Minimum: 3 feet. o Recommended: 5 feet to enable passing maneuvers

between cyclists o Increased: High cyclist volume locations should consider

more width to facilitate mobility performance for this mode.

WSDOT Design Manual: 1520.02(3)

Buffered Bike Lane



99

STRIPED BIKE LANE

The striped bicycle lane accommodates cyclists in a

designated striped lane that is typically 5-feet wide.

Example: Duvall Avenue NE, north of NE 4th Street

Exhibit 5-13. Striped Bike Lane

Bike Lane

Shared Lane Down/Bike Lane Up

1-way facilities traveling in the direction of traffic, usually on both sides of roadway.

Exclusive use by bicyclists. Width: 5’ minimum to curb face or guardrail, 4’ minimum without curb and gutter.

Lane and Parking Area Combined Width: 13 feet without curb face. 14 feet with a curb face.

Paved surface denoted with pavement markings: o 4” or 6” solid white line demarcating bike lane,

bicycle lane symbol. o 4” solid white line demarcating parking area

Bike lane symbol (6’ high) and directional arrows should be painted on the far side of each intersection.

Renton, 2009



100

NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAY

Neighborhood greenways are safer, calm residential streets.

Neighborhood greenways are a large component of added trail and

bicycle miles in the City Planning Areas, though no examples exist

presently.

Exhibit 5-14. Neighborhood Greenway


Typically, residential streets that parallel an arterial route providing a "lower stress" option.Low vehicle volumes and speeds through traffic calming treatments.

Safe and convenient crossings of arterial streets. Signs and pavement markings. Could include storm water facilities (low-impact development facilities).



101

SIGNED SHARED ROADWAY

When right-of-way widths and existing roadway conditions

prohibit the addition of dedicated bicycle facilities, a roadway

can be designated for shared use by motorists and bicyclists.

Typically, this design solution is used on roadways with low

traffic speeds and low levels of traffic or with wide curb lanes (i.e. 14 feet

minimum). Signed shared roadways may provide a safer alternative to

travel on busier parallel routes; direct cyclists toward particular

destinations, such as parks, schools, shopping areas; or may serve as a link

between discontinuous segments of dedicated bicycle facilities. Because

signed shared roadways are often local streets, they may not necessarily

be the most direct route. Ideally, signed shared roadways give bicyclists

more priority in traffic maneuvers.

Example: 116th Ave SE

Exhibit 5-15. Signed Shared Roadway


Bicyclists share roadway with motorists for safety, wayfinding, or other purposes

No change to roadway configuration required, though routes are often designated with signage and other measures to give bicyclists priority or enhance their safety and comfort

Usually on lower volume, speed roadways/local streets. Signage: every ¼ mile, or at every turn

Renton, 2009



102

PEDESTRIAN TRAILS

Pedestrian trails are dedicated facilities made of a variety of surfaces

depending on environmental sensitivity and usage levels. Hard-surface

trails can require less maintenance and accommodate more frequent use

but are more expensive to construct and may not be sited where there are

critical areas. Soft-surface trails can cost less when constructed but are

typically not suited for heavy use and may require more maintenance.

Boardwalks may be appropriate in wetlands or over water bodies.

Exhibit 5-16. Pedestrian Trails

Boardwalk

Boardwalks

Boardwalks are used to span unavoidable wet areas or depressions. It allows adequate drainage and impacts the fragile ecosystem less than other surface types.

Example: Springbrook Trail south of SW 27th Street

Hard Surface Trail

Hard Surface Trails

Trails surfaced with asphalt, concrete, crushed stone, soil cement, or other pervious materials.

Example: Thomas Teasdale to Cascade Park Trail

Soft Surface Trail

Soft Surface Trail

Trails surfaced with earth, woodchips, or other similar natural and pervious materials.

Example: May Creek Trail



103

FACILITY DESIGN GUIDELINES

Intersection & Trail Crossing Guidelines

Well-designed intersections and trail crossings are essential in creating a

continuous trail and bicycle system that encourages walking and biking.

There are limited pedestrian bridges and pedestrians must cross lanes of

travel at intersections; bicyclists are often in the flow of vehicular travel

between and at intersections. Separated trails like shared use paths may

cross streets. See guidelines for different types of crossings below.

Pedestrians at Intersections

These intersections, where the paths of people and vehicles come

together, can be the most challenging part of negotiating a

pedestrian network. If pedestrians cannot cross the street safely,

then mobility is severely limited, access is denied, and walking as

a mode of travel is discouraged. (FHWA, Undated)

Ensuring pedestrian safety and comfort follows these design principles:

Make pedestrians as visible as possible.

Make pedestrian actions as predictable as possible.

Slow vehicular traffic, particularly in central business districts or

similar areas. (FHWA, Undated)

Treatments at intersections include curb bulbs, curb ramps, signalization,

crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands.

Bicyclists

The principle objective when designing intersections for bicycle

mobility and safety performance is to provide a visible, distinct,

predictable, and clearly designated path leading to and through

the intersection while managing potential conflicts between all

other users and cyclists. (WSDOT Design Manual 2015)

The National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO)

suggests several methods for increasing bicyclists’ comfort and reducing

the risk of crashes:

Bike Box A bike box is a designated area at the head of a traffic lane at a signalized intersection that provides bicyclists with a safe and visible way to get ahead of queuing traffic during the red signal phase.

Crossing Markings Intersection crossing markings guide bicyclists on a safe and direct path through intersections, including driveways and ramps.

Through Bicycle Lane Allows bicyclists an opportunity to position themselves to avoid conflicts with turning vehicles at an intersection.

Source: NACTO



104

Designs should heighten the level of visibility, denoting a clear right-

of-way, and facilitating eye contact and awareness with competing

modes.

Intersection treatments can resolve both queuing and merging

maneuvers for bicyclists and are often coordinated with timed or

specialized signals.

The configuration of a safe intersection for bicyclists may include

elements such as color, signage, medians, signal detection, and

pavement markings.

See the sidebar for several design options. More options and details

can be found in the WSDOT Design Manual 2015 and the NACTO

Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Second Edition, 2014, and others.

Trail Crossings

Clearly define who has the right of way and provide sight

distance for all users at shared use path and roadway

intersections. (WSDOT Design Manual 2015)

Two types of trail crossings are common:

Mid-block – preferably placed perpendicular to a road and with

traffic right of way assignments; traffic control devices; sight distances

for both bicyclists and motor vehicle operators; refuge island use;

access control; and pavement markings

Adjacent Path Crossing – at an intersection where the trail crossing is

placed within public intersection crosswalks

In addition to standards in the WSDOT Design Manual for trail

crossings, the City can consult standards and specifications developed

by the National Park Service Handbook for Trail Design and Construction

and Maintenance, and US Forest Service Standard Trail Plans and

Specifications.

Transit Stop Integration

The first and last mile problem, one of the most complex challenges for

public transit, refers to the beginning and end of a trip primarily made

by public transit. Renton’s questionnaire responses summarized in

Chapter 3 and Appendix A indicate that residents use bicycles or walk

Transit as part of a Mobility Ecosystem King County Metro customers will soon be able to use new mobile apps to hail an on-demand shuttle to and from transit hubs throughout the region, starting at the county’s largest park-and-ride…. Metro is creating a mobility ecosystem with transit at the center, moving large numbers of people over longer distances and along the busiest corridors in King County. (King County Metro, October 2018)

Transit Integration Prioritizing bicycle routes to transit stops and stations, reducing traffic, and improving bicycle and transit integration (bike parking, bikes on-board capacity) is essential to getting transit customers out of their cars and on a bicycle for the first or last mile of travel. (American Public Transportation Association, September 2018)

Bike Sharing Bike share stations can be co-located with transit stops to form mobility hubs.

Wayfinding Bicycle wayfinding signage should be used to guide bicyclists to transit stops, especially for rapid services and other transit lines with significance for long trips. NACTO



105

to make short, local trips typically associated with the first and last mile to

or from the destination.

Improving walking and biking infrastructure to appeal to a broad and

diverse range of people can help address the first and last mile problem

and thereby make it easier for more people to access transit. This plan

includes proposed projects that will improve access to high density

residential or commercial zones, transit, or services.

Likewise, there are many things that transit agencies can do to make transit

use more convenient, including:

Allowing bikes on board Providing bicycle parking at transit centers or stops Providing for bike sharing Wayfinding along bike routes Ride sharing to transit hubs in low transit service areas Avoid requiring assigned bike spaces

Signage

This plan promotes a connected system to take trail and bicycle facility

users to everyday destinations. A wayfinding plan for signage can help

them find their destination or discover a new one.

The Renton Downtown Civic Core Vision and Action Plan provides a

wayfinding system to link pedestrians and cyclists to parks, trails, and

places in the Downtown. The wayfinding system advances the design and

character of Downtown. The City anticipates a similar wayfinding

approach citywide with variations unique to each neighborhood.

Exhibit 5-17. Renton Downtown Civic Core Wayfinding System




106

The City may develop route-specific signage and/or pavement markings to

guide pedestrians and bicyclists to their destinations along preferred

routes. Route designation and guide signs would be installed based on

regional standards. Sign spacings may depend on the regional,

neighborhood, and local destinations on the route. Bike route signs may be

mounted to freestanding posts or to existing utility poles or light standards.

In addition to wayfinding guidelines, this plan addresses roadway caution

signage and pavement markings. Roadside caution signs and pavement

markings follow the standards and guidelines of the Manual of Uniform

Traffic Control Devices and the AASHTO Guidelines for the Development

of Bicycle Facilities.

King County promotes regional trail wayfinding elements through a

general policy in its King County Open Space Plan: Parks, Trails, and

Natural Areas:

CIP-151 King County should/shall provide up-to-date mapping

and consistent wayfinding throughout the regional trails network

to enhance user navigation and travel. Trail wayfinding

programs should be consistent with the USDOT MUTCD and

regionally-accepted wayfinding programs.

King County has also created a King County Regional Trails System (RTS)

Arts Master Plan calling for improved signage standards consistent

between the County and cities:

The RTS needs an appropriate wayfinding approach to signage;

this standard should be included in the RTS Design Guidelines.

Consider improved signage standards consistent among King

County and other jurisdictions, with an eye toward unifying

alignments.

For the Cedar River Tail in King County, the Art Master Plan calls for

Gateway/Trailhead Wayfinding Projects, Elements, and Signage.

Site Amenities

Bike Parking Guidelines

Bicyclists will seek to park as close as possible to their final destination. Per

ASHTO guidance, bicycle racks should be located so that they:

Are easily accessed from the street and protected from motor vehicles.



107

Are visible to passers‐by to promote usage and enhance security.

Do not impede or interfere with pedestrian traffic or routine

maintenance activities.

Allow reasonable clearance for opening of passenger‐side doors of

parked cars.

Are covered, if possible, where users will leave their bikes for a longer

amount of time.

Performance criteria for bike parking racks have been developed by the

Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals, September 2015, in

the Essentials of Bike Parking. Bike racks should be designed to:

Support bikes upright without putting stress on wheels

Accommodate a variety of bicycles and attachments

Allow locking of frame and at least one wheel with a U-lock

Be intuitive to use

Bicycle Lean Rails

The City of Renton may install bicycle lean rails at intersections allowing

bicyclists to rest their arms and feet when waiting at intersections. They

have been installed in Seattle along the Burke-Gilman Trail, together with

a push button at the intersection to initiate a crossing phase.

Exhibit 5-18. Bicycle Leaning Rail

Source: City of Seattle.

Trailheads and Amenities

Trailheads serve as the designated entryways into trails and have clear

signage. Features also include vehicle or bicycle parking, information



108

stations, informal recreation areas, seating and picnic areas, plazas or

gathering spaces, and restrooms. For maintenance and emergency vehicle

access, trailheads would be allowed occasional vehicle access. Trailheads

may offer various levels of amenities depending on location, need, and

expected user groups.

Access should be provided and controlled so that ad hoc trails do not occur

on private land or on public lands where access is not desired, e.g.

environmentally sensitive areas.

The following guidelines relate to the development and placement of

trailheads and access points.

Trailhead Location: Trailheads should be placed at each terminus of a

trail corridor, and any place where a large concentration of trail users

is expected, such as at major parks along the trail.

Trailhead Features: Trailheads should at least include parking and a

trail map. Trailheads may also include restrooms, drinking water, picnic

facilities, benches, optional lighting, bike racks, and other recreational

amenities. Site specific designs can also create or enhance

neighborhood identity, incorporate public art, and/or provide cultural

or environmental interpretation opportunities.

Trailhead Special Parking Designs: Trailheads associated with off-

road biking trails or equestrians should provide parking and turn-

around space for trailers.

Trailhead Accessibility: An accessible pathway should be developed

that connects parking and other accessible elements to the trailhead.

ADA access should be provided to as many site features as possible

based on site conditions

Trail Access Points: Trail access points should be placed wherever

trail access is expected, such as at schools, commercial areas, and

parks. Trail access points should include signage identifying the trail

and may include a map and drinking water. These access points serve

to encourage neighborhood and local pedestrian and bicycle access to

the trail system. They provide minimal amenities, most importantly trail

system signs. They should be located at approximately one quarter-

mile intervals along corridors, particularly along regional trail routes

or other routes with large concentrations of uses. Entry nodes typically

do not include parking facilities but could have a few standard size

spaces depending on needs and circumstances.



109

Landscaping: Typical landscape elements will include grass and trees

or shrubs to buffer parking areas from the street. Trees may provide

shade relief and accentuate amenities within the trailhead location,

and alert trail users to the presence of a trailhead. Informal

landscaped areas may offer recreation potential.

Signs: Signs should include general and interpretive signs, location

map, and rules/notices.

Additional Design Guidance Resources

AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities

This manual of design standards is recognized nationally as the “industry

standard for development of bicycle facilities.” All of the design guidelines

included in the recommendations section of this plan will meet the minimum

standards articulated in the AASHTO document.

WSDOT Local Agency Guidelines

This manual identifies specific design standards related to bicycle and

pedestrian facility installations. These standards are referenced in the

design guidelines.

King County Regional Trails Guidelines

King County Regional trail guidelines are closely aligned with the AASHTO

guidelines but are intended to create and unify the regional network by

standardizing regional trail design elements, based on the concerns of

safety, convenience, aesthetic experience, and economical maintenance.

Some King County regional trails see as many as 2,000 users a day. As

such, the regional trail standards are designed to accommodating a large

number and variety of users in a safe, efficient, and enjoyable manner.

Other

The City may also consult standards and specifications developed by the

National Park Service Handbook for Trail Design and Construction and

Maintenance, US Forest Service Standard Trail Plans and Specifications, or

the United States Access Board, A Summary of Accessibility Standards for

Federal Outdoor Developed Areas.



110

PROJECTS & PRIORITIES

Projects

Responding to gaps and needs and community input, and Guiding

Principles, this plan promotes trail and bicycle facilities of all types across

all Community Planning Areas. Eighty projects have been identified.

Shared Use Path

Striped Bike Lane

Pedestrian Trail

Protected Bike Lane

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

n

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

^

^

^

^

^

^

^

Hoquiam Ave NE

Talbot Rd

S

SEJonesRd

SPug

etDr

Lind Ave SW

Monroe Ave NE

Edmonds Ave NE

S 7th St

Newcastle Way

116th Ave SE

87th Ave S

WellsAve

S

148th Ave SE

128th Ave SE

SE 216th St

Benson Rd S

SE183rdSt

SW 41st St

SE 168th St

Union Ave NE

SW 7th St

Lake

WashingtonBlvd

SE

Puget Dr SE

SEMayValleyRd

SW 34th St East Valley Rd

SW 27th St

E Valley Hwy

84th Ave S

S 216th St

SouthcenterBlvd

SE 192nd St

S 228th St

154thPlSE

S 132nd St

N3rdSt

64th Ave S

Island Crest W

ay

TukwilaPkwy

SE 208th St

68th Ave S

Duvall Ave NE

S129thSt N 4th St SE 128th St

Interurban Ave S

Rainier Ave S

124th Ave SE

NE 4th St

Rainier

Ave

N

4thAve

N

CoalC

reekPkw

ySE

S212thW

ay

NE3rd

St

EMercerW

ay

140th Ave SE

OakesdaleAve

SW

RentonAve

S N

ParkDr

SW 43rd St SE

CarrRd

BeaconAve

S

LoganAve

N

Forest Dr SE

S212thSt

SGradyW

ay

Park Ave N

132nd Ave SE

156th Ave SE

S124thSt

148th Ave SE

Lakem

ont Blvd SE

116th Ave SE

S 180th St

66th Ave S

164th Ave SE

AirportWay

SWGrady

Way

SE 204t

h Way

WMerce

rWay

Monster

Rd

SW

SEMayValleyRd

140thWaySE

SE Petrovitsky Rd

NewcastleGolfClubRd

68thAveS

S 133rd St

UV169

UV900

UV515

UV900

UV181

UV167

¥405

¥405

¥405

27

38

45

S 7th St

SunsetBlvd

N

NE 23rd Pl

NESun

setBlvd

SE 160th St

NE 6th St

NE 19th St

N 30th St

NE 10th St

NE27thSt

SE 164th St

Park Ave N

Main Ave S

NE 24th St

Jericho Ave NE

NE 10th St

TalbotRd

S

NE6thSt

NE 7th St

MontereyAve

NE

125th Ave SE

N 8th St

NE 10th St

NE 4th St

SE 184th St

NE9thStBeacon

W

ayS

NE 2nd St

RentonAveS

Garden Ave N

Nile Ave NE

GrantAveS

SE 164th St

108th Ave SE

HarringtonAve

NE

NE12thSt

Kirkland Ave NE

BensonDrS

SE Petrovitsky Rd

Lake

WashingtonBlvd

N

Talbot Rd S

Black RiverRiparianForest

Cascade Park

Cavanaugh PondNatural Area

Cedar River Natural Area

CedarRiverPark

Cedar River toLake Sammamish

Trail Site

Cedar RiverTrail

Cedar RiverTrail Park

Cleveland /RichardsonProperty

CoalfieldPark

Cougar MountainRegional

Wildland Park

EdlundProperty

Fort Dent

FosterGolf Course

FutureSW AthleticComplex

Gene CoulonMemorial Beach

Park

GreenRiverTrail

Honey CreekGreenway

LakeridgePark

MaplewoodCommunity Park

MaplewoodGolf Course

MaplewoodHeights Park

MayCreek

/ McAskill

May CreekGreenway

MayValley County

Park

McGarveyPark OpenSpace

MetroWaterworkPark

NARCOProperty

Panther CreekWetlands

PetrovitskyPark

Renton Park

RentonWetlands

Riverview Park

Ron RegisPark

SkywayPark

SoosCreek Park andTrail

SpringbrookTrail

SpringbrookWatershed

1

1

2

3

4

4

5

5

6

6

7

8

8

9

9

10

10

11

11

12

12

13

14

14

15

15

16

17

18

19

19

20

20

21

22

23

24

24

24

2526

28

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

39

40

41

42

43

44

46

47

47

4848

49

50

51

52

52

54

55

56

56

5758

59

60

61

62

62

63

63

64

65

65

66

66

67

67

67

68

68

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

74

75

76

77

77

78

79

79

80

63

3

53

53

Existing & Proposed Trails and Bicycle Network

Lake Washington

Existing TrailsShared Use Path

Striped Bike Lane


Pedestrian Trail

Proposed TrailsShared Use Path

Protected Bike Lane

Striped Bike Lane



Pedestrian Trail

Parks & Open Space

^ Community Center

Library

Potential Transit Hub

n School°0 0.5 1Miles

Proposed Project Number, Name




4, Benson Drive S/108th Avenue SE Shared Use Path

5, Benson Neighborhood Greenway

6, Benson Road/Main Avenue S Bike Lanes

7, Cascade Waterline Spur Trail

8, Cedar to Sammamish Trail

9, Duvall Avenue NE Bike Lanes

10, East Valley Road Shared Use Path

11, Eastside Rail Corridor

12, Edmonds Avenue Connector

13, Garden Avenue N Shared Use Path

14, Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway

15, Grant Avenue Neighborhood Greenway

16, Hardie Avenue Bike Lane & Shared Use Path

17, Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway

18, Highlands Hillclimb

19, Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway

20, Honey Creek Trail Extensions

21, Houser Way and Factory Avenue

22, Houser Way N Shared Use Path

23, Jericho Avenue NE Bike Lanes

24, Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway

25, Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway

26, Kenyon-Dobson Trail and Trailhead

27, Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment

28, Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment

29, Lake Washington Loop Trail

30, Langston Road/SW 134th Street Hillclimb

31, Logan Avenue N Shared Use Path

32, Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway

33, May Creek Hillclimb

34, May Creek Trail

35, May Valley Trail

36, Mill Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway

37, Monroe Avenue NE Bike Lanes

38, N 4th Street Connector

39, N 6th Street Bike Lanes

40, N 8th Street Shared Use Path

41, Naches Avenue Shared Use Path

42, NE 3rd Street



45, NE 16th Street Signed Shared Roadway

46, NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path

47, Nile Avenue NE Bike Lanes

48, North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway

49, North Southport Drive Shared Use Path

50, Oakesdale Avenue Bike Lanes

51, Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail

52, Panther Creek Trail

53, Powerline Trail

54, Puget Drive Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway

55, Renton Connector

56, Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway

57, S 2nd Street Protected Bike Lanes

58, S 3rd Street Signed Shared Roadway

59, S/SW 7th Street Transit Connector

60, Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail

61, SE 168th Street Protected Bike Lanes

62, SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway

63, SE Petrovitsky Road Shared Use Path

64, Seattle Waterline Spur Trail

65, Seattle Waterline Trail

66, Shattuck to Airport Connector

67, Soos Creek Trail

68, South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway

69, Springbrook Trail

70, Springbrook Trail Extension

71, Sunset Boulevard Hillclimb

72, SW 16th Street Shared Use Path

73, SW 27th Street Connector

74, Talbot Road S Bike Lanes

75, Thunder Creek Trail

76, Tiffany-Cascade Connector Trail

77, Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway

78, Tukwila Station Trail

79, Union Avenue NE Bike Lanes

80, Wells Avenue S Signed Shared Roadway

Highest Priorty Project



113

Project Prioritization

Methodology

Eighty projects were scored with prioritization criteria addressing five

categories: Connectivity and Accessibility, Safety and Trail Experience,

Equity, Economy and Community, and Construction and Implementation.

Each category was weighted with Connectivity and Accessibility and Safety

and Trail Experience weighted more highly, Equity weighted moderately,

and Economy and Community and Construction and Implementation

weighted lower.

For each category, indicators or variables were developed. For each

indicator, project evaluation criteria were developed, and each rated on

either a 3-part high, medium, or low range or a 5-part high, medium-high,

medium, medium-low, and low range. See Exhibit 5-20 and Appendix D

for detailed information.

Exhibit 5-20. Prioritization Criteria and Indicators

CATEGORY INDICATORS/VARIABLES

Connectivity and Accessibility

Weight: 30%

Does the project:

Fill a gap between existing facilities, or Fill gap in area with no/few facilities, or Remove pedestrian and/or bicycle barriers?

To what extent does this project improve pedestrian/bike access to schools?

Does this project offer connections to parks, recreation, or natural areas?

Safety and Trail Experience

Weight: 30%

Does the project increase the extent of the low stress (LTS 1 or 2) network?

Does the project enhance the natural environment experience?

Does the project address a known issue regarding user experience (intersections, slope/terrain, lighting, wayfinding, formalize informal trail, etc.)?

Equity

Weight: 20%

Does the project reach a large number of people and jobs?

Does the project improve bicycle or pedestrian access for users older than Age 64 and/or users younger than Age 18?

Does the project improve bicycle or pedestrian access for the city's Households in Poverty?



114

CATEGORY INDICATORS/VARIABLES

Economy and Community

Weight: 10%

Does the project leverage plans or priorities?

Does the project improve access to high density residential or commercial zones, transit, or services?

Does the project reflect public feedback?

Construction and Implementation

Weight: 10%

Is the project a strong candidate for possible grants?

To what extent can the project be implemented with future construction?

Is the project reasonably attainable? Is the cost reasonably balanced with potential benefits?


Tiers & Results

Once scored, three tiers of projects were developed: Highest Priority, High

Priority, and Medium Priority. The City used two qualitative criteria in

addition to prioritization scores to develop the Highest Priority projects list

(Tier 1): partnership commitments and geographic equity. Thus, the top

scoring projects include the highest scoring projects, plus projects with

known commitments, and projects that are opportunistic, feasible in the

near term, enhance connectivity across planning areas, or assist with

geographic equity.

Since some projects had identical scores, there were 27 projects in Tier 1,

26 projects in Tier 2, and 27 projects in Tier 3.

The process is illustrated in Exhibit 5-21.

Exhibit 5-21. Prioritization Process

Source: BERK, 2018.

Define & Weight Priorities

Define & Score

Indicators

Rank Projects

Consider Partnerships

& Geographic

Equity

Develop Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3

List



115

Project tiers are nearly equal in length, but Tier 1 projects emphasize

Shared Use Paths, and complete all Protected Bike Lanes. Striped Bike

Lanes are also increased. Implementation of Neighborhood Greenways is

initiated but is a smaller share than in later phases. Tier 2 continues to

advance Shared Use Paths, adds Striped Bike Lanes, and adds

Neighborhood Greenways, plus implements most Pedestrian Trails. Tier 3

completes the network with the emphasis on Neighborhood Greenways, as

well as Striped Bike Lanes, and Shared Use Paths. See Exhibit 5-22.

Exhibit 5-22. Facility Types by Project Tiers (Miles)

Note: Numbers are in miles and are rounded. Source: City of Renton, 2018; BERK, 2018.

The project list is provided in Exhibit 5-23. Project cut sheets are included in

Appendix C. Details of the ranking process are provided in Appendix D.

All Tiers Tier I Tier II Tier III

Shared Use Path 32.4 16.5 9.5 6.4

Protected Bike Lane 3.0 3.0 - -

Protected Bike Lane 0.4 0.4 - -

Two-Way Protected Bike Lane 2.7 2.7 - -

Striped Bike Lane 24.2 7.0 9.0 8.2

Striped Bike Lane 23.4 7.0 9.0 7.5

Buffered Bike Lane 0.8 - - 0.8

Neighborhood Greenway 22.8 1.4 7.0 14.4

Signed Shared Roadway 8.6 1.6 1.8 5.2

Pedestrian Trail 10.9 3.0 7.4 0.5

Boardwalk 3.7 0.2 3.5 -

Hard Surface Trail - - - -

Soft Surface Trail 7.2 2.9 3.8 0.5

Total Miles 101.9 32.5 34.7 34.7

Facil ity



116

Exhibit 5-23. Project Ranking R

AN

KIN

G

PR

OJE

CT N

UM

.

PROJECT NAME CO

NN

EC

TIV

ITY

&

AC

CESSIB

ILIT

Y

SA

FETY

& T

RA

IL

EX

PER

IEN

CE

EQ

UIT

Y

EC

ON

OM

Y &

C

OM

MU

NIT

Y

CO

NSTR

UC

TIO

N &

IM

PLE

MEN

TA

TIO

N

Tier 1 – HIGHEST PRIORITY

1 55 Renton Connector 4 4 4 4 3

1 28 Lake to Sound Trail: West Segment 4 4 4 4 3

3 57 S 2nd St Protected Bike Lanes 4 3 4 4 4

4 69 Springbrook Trail 3 4 4 4 3

5 11 Eastside Rail Corridor 3 4 3 4 4

5 7 Cascade Waterline Spur Trail 4 4 3 3 2

7 29 Lake Washington Loop Trail 3 3 4 4 4

7 73 SW 27th St Connector 3 3 4 4 4

7 27 Lake to Sound Trail: East Segment 4 3 3 4 3

10 60 Sam Chastain Water Trail 3 3 4 4 3

10 46 NE Sunset Blvd Shared Use Path 3 3 4 4 3

10 12 Edmonds Ave Connector 4 3 3 4 2

10 67 Soos Creek Trail 4 4 1 3 4

14 20 Honey Creek Trail Extension 3 4 2 4 2

14 34 May Creek Trail 3 3 2 4 2

14 9 Duvall Ave NE Bike Lanes 4 1 1 4 4

14 80 Wells Ave S Signed Shared Roadway 2 1 2 4 4

14 43 NE 4th St Bike Lanes 2 1 2 4 2

19 21 Houser Way & Factory Avenue 4 3 2 4 3

19 22 Houser Way N Shared Use Path 3 4 2 4 3

19 13 Garden Ave N Shared Use Path 4 3 3 4 2

22 17 Harrington Ave NE Neighborhood Greenway

4 2 3 4 3

22 61 SE 168th St Protected Bike Lanes 3 3 4 2 3

24 1 116th Ave SE Bike Lanes 2 3 4 4 3

24 59 S/SW 7th St Transit Corridor 2 3 4 4 3

24 38 N 4th St Connector 3 3 4 2 2

24 41 Naches Ave Shared Use Path 3 3 3 4 2



117

RA

NK

ING

PR

OJE

CT N

UM

.

PROJECT NAME CO

NN

EC

TIV

ITY

&

AC

CESSIB

ILIT

Y

SA

FETY

& T

RA

IL

EX

PER

IEN

CE

EQ

UIT

Y

EC

ON

OM

Y &

C

OM

MU

NIT

Y

CO

NSTR

UC

TIO

N &

IM

PLE

MEN

TA

TIO

N

Tier 2 – HIGH PRIORITY

28 63 SE Petrovitsky Rd Shared Use Path 2 3 4 4 2

28 64 Seattle Waterline Spur Trail 3 4 2 3 1

28 65 Seattle Waterline Trail 3 4 2 3 1

28 70 Springbrook Trail Extension 3 3 3 2 3

32 49 N Southport Dr Shared Use Path 2 3 3 4 3

32 53 Powerline Trail 3 3 3 2 3

32 76 Tiffany-Cascade Connector Trail 3 4 1 3 2

35 31 Logan Ave N Shared Use Path 2 3 3 4 2

35 6 Benson Rd/Main Ave S Bike Lanes 3 3 2 4 2

37 79 Union Ave NE Bike Lanes 4 2 2 2 2

37 78 Tukwila Station Trail 1 3 4 4 2

37 39 N 6th St Bike Lanes 3 3 2 4 0

37 8 Cedar to Sammamish Trail 3 4 1 3 1

41 26 Kenyon-Dobson Trail & Trailhead 2 4 1 3 2

41 51 Pacific Railroad Trailhead & Trail 2 4 1 3 2

41 74 Talbot Rd S Bike Lanes 4 2 1 3 4

44 50 Oakesdale Ave Bike Lanes 3 1 3 4 2

44 66 Shattuck to Airport Connector 3 2 2 4 2

44 5 Benson Neighborhood Greenway 4 2 2 1 1

47 48 North Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 3 2 2 2 2

47 19 Hillcrest Neighborhood Greenway 3 2 2 3 1

47 36 Mill Ave S Signed Shared Roadway 3 2 2 4 2

50 75 Thunder Creek Trail 2 3 2 2 1

50 37 Monroe Ave NE Bike Lanes 2 2 3 3 2

50 72 SW 16th St Shared Use Path 2 3 4 1 2

50 52 Panther Creek Trail 1 3 2 3 3



118

RA

NK

ING

PR

OJE

CT N

UM

.

PROJECT NAME CO

NN

EC

TIV

ITY

&

AC

CESSIB

ILIT

Y

SA

FETY

& T

RA

IL

EX

PER

IEN

CE

EQ

UIT

Y

EC

ON

OM

Y &

C

OM

MU

NIT

Y

CO

NSTR

UC

TIO

N &

IM

PLE

MEN

TA

TIO

N

Tier 3 – MEDIUM PRIORITY

54 40 N 8th St Shared Use Path 2 2 3 2 3

55 16 Hardie Ave Bike Lane & Shared Use Path 0 3 3 4 1

55 30 Langston Rd/SW 134th St Hillclimb 2 2 1 4 1

57 4 Benson Drive S/108th Ave SE Shared Use Path

0 3 3 2 2

57 42 NE 3rd St 2 2 1 4 2

59 56 Renton Park Neighborhood Greenway 2 1 3 1 1

59 18 Highlands Hillclimb 2 2 2 1 1

59 58 S 3rd St Signed Shared Roadway 2 0 3 4 2

62 10 East Valley Rd Shared Use Path 1 2 4 1 1


62 68 South Highlands Neighborhood Greenway 3 1 2 1 1

62 77 Tiffany Park Neighborhood Greenway 4 1 1 0 2

66 44 NE 12th St Bike Lanes 1 1 2 3 2

66 45 NE 16th St Signed Shared Roadway 2 2 0 2 1

66 35 May Valley Trail 1 3 1 0 2

69 71 Sunset Blvd Hillclimb 1 1 2 3 2

70 33 May Creek Hillclimb 2 0 0 4 2

70 23 Jericho Ave NE Bike Lanes 3 2 0 0 1

72 62 SE 182nd & 184th Streets Neighborhood Greenway

1 2 0 0 2

73 15 Grant Ave Neighborhood Greenway 2 1 1 2 0

74 32 Maplewood Heights Neighborhood Greenway

0 2 0 0 2

75 54 Puget Dr Bike Lanes & Signed Shared Roadway

0 1 2 2 1

75 24 Kennydale Neighborhood Greenway 1 2 0 0 1

77 14 Glencoe Neighborhood Greenway 0 1 0 0 2

77 25 Kennydale Signed Shared Roadway 1 1 0 0 2

79 47 Nile Ave NE Bike Lanes 0 1 0 0 0



JANUARY 2019

CHAPTER 6

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES




JANUARY 2019 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

121

6 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

This chapter identifies actions the City can take to optimally implement the

goals, objectives, and projects of this plan. It also identifies topics meant

for further exploration.

MONITORING

The City intends to track its performance periodically to determine

progress on implementation of this plan. Potential monitoring strategies are

listed in Exhibit 6-1. Monitoring is recommended biennially in association

with updates to the City budget and capital improvement program.

Performance measurement is a useful strategy in requesting additional

funding and resources.

Exhibit 6-1. Potential Monitoring Measures and Targets


PHASING

Given local conditions on each route and available funding, Renton may

phase improvements and consider alternative trail and bicycle facility

types and cross sections. At the project design level, each project will be

reassessed to determine the appropriateness of the suggested

PRIORITY PERFORMANCE MEASURE

Connectivity & Accessibility Percentage of bicycle facility network completed within quarter mile of schools and parks.

Safety & Trail Experience Percentage increase in LTS 1 or 2 network.

Equity Percentage of households within ¼ mile of network

Percentage increase in network serving children, elderly, households in poverty.

Economy & Community Percentage increase in access to high density residential or commercial zones, transit, or services.

Percentage progress on Tier 1 Projects.

Construction & Implementation Projects programed and completed in six-year CIP.



122

improvements, and to determine the available right-of-way, etc. When a

project is in the development phase, a topographic and right-of-way

survey will provide the first clear picture of the actual conditions of the

route, and it may be necessary to implement a different design solution or

combination of design solutions than are shown in this plan. In addition,

there may be development of other capital projects or changes in funding

strategies that dictate a different cross section or facility classification than

the one currently identified.

PARTNERSHIP & FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

Partnerships

The City’s trail and bicycle system is an integral part of the county and

state transportation and park system. Key regional and state partners

include:

Cities of Newcastle, Issaquah, Kent, Tukwila, and others

King County Parks

King County Metro

Renton, Issaquah, and Kent School Districts

Sound Transit

Washington State Department of Transportation

The City has planned in partnership with these agencies to develop this

plan, and these partners can advance implementation of this system

through joint design, funding, and coordination.

The City seeks to work with additional partners, such as Seattle-King

County Public Health which is advancing a healthy communities program,

and the Puget Sound Regional Council with a Regional Open Space

Strategy.

Funding

The City of Renton includes non-motorized capital investments in the annual

Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP is adopted

annually by the City Council. The 2019-2024 TIP has programmed funding



123

to implement some of the projects identified in the Trail and Bicycle Master

Plan:

$1,450,000 Walkway program.

$1,850,000 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program.

Project level implementation of pedestrian and bicycle routes per this

plan (e.g. Lake Washington Loop Trail).

The funding can be used for planning, design, and construction phases of

the projects as well as for local matches for state and federal grants.

Although it may not be the primary purpose of a particular project or

program, many TIP projects have the potential to assist in implementing

projects within the Trails and Bicycle Master Plan.

The Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) provides

matching grants for trail acquisition and development and is open to local

and state agencies. Grant applications are received on even calendar

years. Many funds require a comprehensive plan, such as this master plan.

Funds that are open to local agencies include:

Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account (ALEA) - Provides funding to

buy, protect, and restore aquatic lands habitat and to provide public

access to the waterfront. Projects must be associated with navigable

waters of the state.

Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) - State Program.

Provides funding to buy or develop public outdoor recreation areas

and facilities. Grants support both acquisition and development of

active and passive recreation areas and conservation lands. Public use

is required.

Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) - Outdoor Recreation

Legacy Partnership Program. Provides funding to buy or develop

public outdoor recreation areas and facilities in, or serving, urban

areas with 50,000 or more people. Grants support both acquisition

and development of active and passive recreation areas and

conservation lands. Public use is required.

Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program, Trails Category

(WWRP) - Provides funding to acquire, develop, or renovate

pedestrian, equestrian, bicycle, or cross-country ski trails. Program is

for non-motorized trails that provide connections to neighborhoods,

communities, or regional trails.



124

In 2007, King County voters approved Proposition 2, which included

expanding the regional trail system over a six-year period, with the last

distribution to cities ending in 2013. In 2013, King County voters approved

a second, six-year levy (Proposition 1) which provides for trail acquisition

and development; the last distribution will be in 2019. King County is

considering placing a third levy on the ballot for voters to approve in

2019 which could also be used for trail acquisition and development.

REQUIREMENTS & INCENTIVES

Implementing Standards at Time of Development

The City has enacted ordinances that give it authority to require

developers to implement the trail and bicycle cross sections and projects in

this plan.

Street Frontage and Off-site Street Improvements (RMC 4-6-060): To

implement trail and bicycle standards, the City can require that

facilities that are within the right of way are implemented with street

frontage improvements consistent with the standards in this plan and

the City’s development regulations pertaining to streets. When offsite

improvements are required to support new development, the City can

require implementation of pedestrian and bicycle improvements as

part of its street standards.

Shoreline Public Access Requirements (RMC 4-3-090): The Shoreline

Master Program also requires shoreline public access when demand is

created and is another regulatory program that can advance trails in

shoreline jurisdiction.

In the near-term, the City can amend its environmental review procedures

(RMC 4-9-070) to include this plan in its SEPA Substantive Authority, and

development that would impact the trail and bicycle system could be

conditioned to mitigate impacts, such as implementing improvements that

serve as mitigation. The City already adopts its Comprehensive Plan,

Transportation Improvement Program, and Parks, Recreational, Natural

Areas (PRNA) Plan, and this Trails and Bicycle Master Plan can be similarly

included.

The City can also adopt regulations that require trail easements when a

development is located within an area identified for a local or regional

trail system in this plan.



125

Incentives

There are two types of incentives relevant to this plan:

Incentives for Individuals: The City can continue to require commute trip

reduction programs by large employers, who can incentivize their

employees to use non-motorized forms of commuting or transit. The

City can also support and encourage federal and state tax incentives

or subsidies to encourage bike and transit commuting.

The City can provide development incentives when amenities for transit

users, bicyclists, and pedestrians are included and being implemented.

Where improvements are not required for new development, but

extension of trail or bike facilities is planned, the City could incentivize

voluntary trail and bicycle project implementation such as through

density or height bonuses for new development or allowing onsite

density transfer from trail corridors to other developable parts of the

site.

Fee in Lieu

The City could allow or require development to provide trail or bicycle

facility improvements or pay a fee in lieu when it is not in the City’s interest

to have the improvement installed at the time of permit. This may occur

when the expected improvement is a short segment of a longer trail

improvement and the work should be done all at once. The City allows a

fee in lieu of required street improvements in RMC 4-9-060.

E-bike & Motorized Foot Scooters

Electric bikes and motorized foot scooters are finding popularity in major

cities across the country. These types of vehicles increase more use of trails

and bicycle facilities because they assist with speed and sloped terrain.

The State regulates motorized foot scooters and local communities may

pass their own regulations.

A motorized foot scooter is a device with no more than two 10-

inch or smaller diameter wheels that has handlebars, is designed

to be stood or sat upon by the operator, and is powered by an

internal combustion engine or electric motor that is capable of

propelling the device with or without human propulsion.



126

The City restricts motorized foot scooters in any park, trail, or sidewalk, or

on streets with a maximum speed limit of 25 miles per hour, or any corridor

marked “No non-motorized vehicles.”

Recently, the State passed SB 6434 in 2018 regulating different types of

electric bikes and where they may be allowed on bike lanes or trails.

Similar to Motorized Foot Scooters, the City could determine how to

regulate E-Bikes as allowed under State law.

COMMUNITY EDUCATION & PROMOTION

Events & Promotion

Renton can promote awareness of the trail and bicycle system by

advertising its system in its recreation program, city newsletter, online, and

elsewhere. The City can also continue providing online or print maps and

other materials.

The City could increase recreation and community events in association with

trails and bicycle facilities including fun runs, races, and other activities to

promote awareness and use of the system and promote health and fitness.

The City could also support guided walking and biking tours illustrating key

routes and how to access key destinations. Guides could be volunteers.

The City can work in partnership with King County Metro on expanding its

transit to trail program that was launched in the Issaquah Alps area.

Safety & Awareness

Trail and bicycle safety has many facets. Potential actions to increase

safety include:

The City can provide user safety and etiquette tips and rules on how

pedestrians and bicyclists share facilities.

The City can advertise and support other entities who are providing

safety and awareness programs such as the School District.

The City can implement design standards that promote crime

prevention through environmental design that influence landscaping,

lighting, and location of facilities.



127

Code enforcement officers and police officers can enforce City laws

and reduce civil and criminal infractions.

Continue to expand Renton’s Trail Ranger Program.

FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS

Incorporate Trails and Bicycle Master Plan in Citywide Comprehensive Plan

The City references the Trails and Bicycle Master Plan in the Transportation

Element. The Comprehensive Plan could be updated to reflect the 2019

plan vision, goals, and policies.

Explorations in Multimodal Transportation Levels of Service

The City’s Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element identifies a

multimodal level of service addressing person trips by motor vehicles,

transit, and non-motorized (bicycle and pedestrian) modes. Person trips are

the number of persons making the same trip in the same mode of travel.

Using person trips provides a common metric for use in concurrency and

also impact or mitigation fees.

Policy T-48: A. Citywide Person Trips: Based on the City’s land

use and growth strategy, establish a citywide level of person

trips by mode, and support each mode with capital

improvements and programs. The general mode categories

include: motor vehicle trips, transit trips, and non-motorized

trips.

The City has established a person trip bank for motor vehicle trips. The City

could establish a bank of non-motorized person trips and link it to capital

improvements.

Utilize Prioritization Criteria for Sidewalk Plan

The City completed a Comprehensive Walkway Study in 2008 that

prioritized needed sidewalk projects. Feedback through the community

outreach included an emphasis on sidewalks and walkways. The City could

incorporate the prioritization methods used in this plan in updating the

Comprehensive Walkway Study for complete network integration.



128

Vision Zero

Started in Sweden in the 1990s, Vision Zero is an approach to traffic

safety for all users that sets a goal of zero traffic deaths or severe injuries

through holistic, integrated action strategies. As an approach, Vision Zero

includes several fundamental principles that differentiate it from traditional

approaches to road safety.

The City can consider whether and how to implement a Vision Zero

program. Implementing Vision Zero typically involves the following

practices:

Build and sustain leadership, collaboration, and accountability: In

addition to strong and visible commitment from the Mayor and Council,

large-scale, cross-sector collaboration that includes transportation,

public health, law enforcement, policy makers, elected officials, and

community members is key to successful implementation.

Collect, analyze, and use data: Data should drive all stages of Vision

Zero planning, from strategy development, to ongoing management,

evaluation, and predictive planning. Collecting, analyzing, and using

data will need coordination across city departments. Local knowledge

and community input are also important to supplement quantitative

data.

Prioritize equity and engagement. Vision Zero planning should include

effective, meaningful community dialogue to gather input from diverse

voices on the issue of road safety.

Lead with roadway design that prioritizes safety.

Manage speed to safe levels. This is a central tenet of Vision Zero and

includes strategies such as designing roads for lower speeds, setting

and communicating safe speed limits, and enforcing these limits.

Maximize technology advances, but don’t overlook low-tech solutions.

Over the longer term, innovation in automated vehicles and other

technologies offer opportunities for improvements in safety. In the

shorter term, relatively inexpensive, low-tech improvements such as the

addition of side guards, cameras, and mirrors on large vehicles and

trucks (since large vehicles are disproportionately involved in crashes)

can save lives.



129

A foundational element to implement the Vision Zero approach is the

creation of a Vision Zero Action Plan that operationalizes these principles.

The Action Plan includes broad community input and lays out specific

measurable action steps, priorities, with clear timelines for implementation.

Increase Local Funding for Non-Motorized Facilities

The City could pursue other funding sources dedicated to the provision of

trails and bicycle facilities. One such source is to collect mitigation fees

from new development that creates a demand for service, requiring

mitigation to reduce adverse impacts on the built environment. The City

could condition development if it has identified impacts in environmental

documents prepared under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).

Impacts could be determined by measuring the number of person trips that

development generates on bicycle and pedestrian facilities. To implement

the SEPA mitigation fee, the City could develop and publish a study of

expected demand and person trip rates, and then apply it to development

subject to SEPA. Fees that are collected must be expended within 5 years

of receipt.


JANUARY 2019

CHAPTER 7

REFERENCES




JANUARY 2019 REFERENCES

133

7 REFERENCES

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

(AASHTO). (2012) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities.

See: https://www.transportation.org/.

City of Renton. (2015, June 22; amended November 2017).

Comprehensive Plan. Available:

https://rentonwa.gov/city_hall/community_and_economic_develop

ment/long_range_planning.

City of Renton. (2011). Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan.

Available:

https://rentonwa.gov/city_hall/community_services/parks_plannin

g_and_development/parks__recreation__and_natural_areas_plan

King County (2016). King County Open Space Plan: Parks, Trails, and

Natural Areas 2016 Update. Available:

https://www.kingcounty.gov/services/parks-

recreation/parks/about/open-space-plan.aspx.

King County. (2016, November 22). Technical Appendix C2: Regional Trails

Needs Report. Retrieved from kingcounty.gov:

https://ww.kingcounty.gov/~/media/depts/executive/performanc

e-strategy-budget/regional-

planning/2016CompPlanUpdate/2016Adopted-KCCP/Appendix-

C2-RegTrailsNeedsReport-2016KCCP-ADO-112216.ashx?la=en

LaCivita, Leah. (2018, April 16). New Legislation Targets E-Bikes.

Retrieved from Municipal Research and Services Center:

http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/April-

2018/New-Legislation-Targets-E-Bikes.aspx.

Mineta Transportation Institute. (2012, May). Low-Stress Bicycling and

Network Connectivity. Retrieved from transweb.sjsu.edu:

https://transweb.sjsu.edu/research/low-stress-bicycling-and-

network-connectivity.

National Association of City Transportation Officials. (2014, March). Urban

Bikeway Design Guide, Second Edition. See:

https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/.


JANUARY 2019 REFERENCES

134

National Park Service (NPS) Requirements. Civil (Site) & Environmental

Engineering Standards: NPS Management Policies 2006 - The

Guide to Managing the National Park System. Available:

https://www.nps.gov/dscw/ds-civil-environmental.htm.

United States Access Board (2014, May). Outdoor Developed Areas: A

Summary of Accessibility Standards for Federal Outdoor

Developed Areas. Available: https://www.access-

board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/recreation-facilities/outdoor-

developed-areas/a-summary-of-accessibility-standards-for-

federal-outdoor-developed-areas.

US Forest Service. (2014, November). Standard Trail Plans and

Specifications. Retrieved from www.fs.fed.us:

https://www.fs.fed.us/managing-land/trails/trail-management-

tools/trailplans.

Vision Zero Network, February 2017. Moving from Vision to Action.

Available: https://visionzeronetwork.org/wp-

content/uploads/2017/11/VZN-Moving-from-Vision-to-Action.pdf.

Vision Zero Network, December 2017. Vision, Strategies, Action:

Guidelines for an Effective Vision Zero Action Plan. Available:

https://visionzeronetwork.org/wp-

content/uploads/2017/12/VZN_ActionPlan_FINAL.pdf.

Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). (2018, July)

Design Manual. Available:

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Publications/Manuals/M22-

01.htm#Individualchapters.

renton trails and bicycle master plan

Documents