My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
_Agenda_Packet_092826
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN AND TRAILS
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2026
>
092826
>
_Agenda_Packet_092826
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/24/2026 3:28:31 PM
Creation date
9/24/2026 3:25:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/28/2026
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
253
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
8 <br /> <br />• Ideally, provide a relatively level shoulder area of 3 to 5 feet on at least one side of <br />path where feasible. The shoulder area should be maintained and useable as a rest <br />area in all weather conditions. <br />• Provide protective railings/fences at 42 inches high if the trail and graded shoulder <br />are directly adjacent to a steep slope and drop, as defined in Chapter 5 of the <br />AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. <br />• All shared-use paths must conform to the current editions of both the AASHTO and <br />ADA guidelines. <br />• Shared-use paths are pedestrian facilities and are required to be fully accessible. <br />They must conform to Public Rights-of-way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) if in <br />a public right-of-way or Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on <br />Accessibility Guideline for Shared-Use Paths if in a private right-of-way. <br />Considerations <br />• Consider providing lighting at path/roadway intersections at a minimum and at other <br />locations where personal security may be an issue. <br />• Shared-use paths are appropriate when an on-street route may be perceived as <br />unsafe due to the speed of the road or high volume of vehicles, most users are <br />recreational or leisure users, or to provide a direct route between points of interest. <br />• Shared-use paths typically have a lower design speed for bicyclists than on-street <br />facilities and may not provide appropriate accommodation for more confident <br />bicyclists who desire to travel at greater speeds. In some situations, it may be <br />appropriate to provide an on-street bikeway in addition to a shared-use path along <br />the same roadway. <br />• Path width should be informed by the number and type of users, and the differences <br />in their speeds. For example, a path used by higher-speed bicyclists and children <br />walking to school may experience conflicts due to the difference in user speeds. <br />Additional user types like roller bladers, skateboarders, and dog walkers can <br />introduce similar conflicts. By widening the path to provide space to accommodate <br />passing, conflicts can be reduced. <br />• A path may benefit from the separation of users by speed (e.g., e-bikes versus <br />bikes), type (e.g., rolling versus walking), or direction. When separating users, <br />consider the path width and paving material preferred by each user. Typically paths <br />that separate users are 15 feet or wider. <br />• Shared-use paths may present increased conflicts between path users and motor <br />vehicles at intersections and driveway crossings. Conflicts can be reduced by
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.