Laserfiche WebLink
Prioritization and Implementation of Proposed Recommendations <br />for the Pleasanton Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update August 18, 2026 <br /> <br />P a g e | 7 <br /> <br />As shown in Table 3, the top-ranked pedestrian projects generally meet most or all of the technical <br />scoring criteria and/or receive medium to high levels of community support. The estimated cost to <br />implement these improvements is also generally low to medium. Bernal Avenue at Pleasanton <br />Avenue and Main Street at Division Street could be prioritized for near-term implementation due to <br />their lower costs. <br />Planning Level Cost for Proposed Projects <br />Overall, the recommended bicycle and pedestrian improvement program represents approximately <br />$76 million in planning-level capital improvements, consisting of $61 million in bicycle improvements <br />and $15 million in pedestrian improvements (see Table 4). <br />Table 4: Planning Level Cost of Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements <br /> <br />Corridor Ranking <br />Individual bicycle and pedestrian projects were grouped into focus network corridors to identify <br />corridor-level investment priorities. Corridor scores were calculated by combining length -weighted <br />bicycle segment scores and average pedestrian intersection scores, with each mode receiving <br />equal weight (50%). Consistent with the project prioritization methodology, corridor rankings were <br />developed by combining normalized technical scores (80%) and normalized community voting <br />results for the entire corridor (20%). The resulting corridor rankings and associated bicycle and <br />pedestrian projects are provided in Appendix E. <br /> <br />Table 5 summarizes the corridor evaluation results, including each corridor's ranking, roadway <br />classification, regional connectivity, performance across the safety, SRTS, access, comfort, and <br />equity criteria, level of community support, and estimated implementation cost range. Community <br />priorities were generally aligned with the technical evaluation. Corridors receiving the highest <br />technical scores also tended to receive the strongest public support. <br /> <br />While the corridor ranking provides a data-driven framework for comparing potential investments, <br />rankings should be considered within the context of each corridor’s unique characteristics. Some <br />corridors ranked highly due to factors such as proximity to schools, access to major destinations, <br />existing network gaps, or lower implementation costs. Conversely, some corridors with important <br />citywide or regional connections ranked lower due to recently implemented improvements, higher <br />implementation costs, or other factors in the evaluation criteria. Furthermore, for lengthy corridors, if <br />some study segments or intersections received lower scores, the overall corridor score was <br />reduced. The discussion below provides additional context on the factors influencing each corridor’s <br />ranking and highlights considerations not fully captured by the scoring methodology. <br />Project Type Number of <br />Projects Estimated Cost1 <br />Bicycle Projects 25 $61,446,700 <br />Pedestrian Projects 58 $14,800,000 <br />Total 83 $76,246,700 <br />1. The costs presented are planning-level estimates <br />intended for project prioritization and comparison. <br />Actual project costs will vary based on the final <br />scope, design, site conditions, utility requirements, <br />right-of-way needs, environmental review, and <br />construction market conditions.