MEMORANDUM
To: Robert Ovadia, Director of Public Works; Town of Atherton From: Mauricio Hernández, Alta Planning + Design
CC: Asher Kohn, Principal Planner; M Group; Charlie Simpson, Alta Planning + Design Date: January 30, 2026
Re: Town of Atherton Active Transportation Plan – DRAFT Prioritization Methodology Prioritization: Targeting the Greatest Needs
The Town of Atherton’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP) will include a planning-level assessment for the prioritization of recommended infrastructure improvements. In order to develop this prioritization rubric, Alta has developed a methodology used to weigh projects that employs several metrics.
The approach to enhancing Atherton’s active transportation network must consider what is realistic (given historic and anticipated funding) while providing the Town with flexibility to respond to changing conditions and opportunities that may arise in the future. This prioritization must also balance community feedback received on the proposed network with how the network addresses safety and internal connectivity for people walking and biking.
The prioritization of proposed infrastructure improvements will be used to formulate a strategic list of projects that will guide the implementation of the Active Transportation Plan. We recommend that the Town reevaluate the proposed projects and rankings every five years. Over time, as development occurs and changes to the Town’s transportation network are implemented, this framework can be used to re-evaluate remaining projects and continue pursuing implementation of the recommended improvements.
Attachment 4
DRAFT 01-30-26 Atherton Active Transportation Plan
Alta Planning + Design 2 Town of Atherton
Methodology
Alta recommends focusing investments on areas with the greatest needs. This helps to leverage scarce public dollars to achieve the greatest public benefit from the improvement of transportation safety, access, and connectivity.
The proposed methodology considers a separate weighted prioritization process for pedestrian improvements and bicycle improvements separately. Prioritization for the proposed bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements was conducted separately because, while they are not mutually exclusive, they address different travel needs. Each prioritization process includes mode-specific findings from analyses completed during the Existing Conditions phase of the project and considers feedback from community members gathered through the project’s Public Engagement efforts.
In alignment with the Goals and Objectives of the Active Transportation Plan, the prioritization methodology has been organized by Goal. As summarized in Tables 1 (Pedestrian) and 2 (Bicycle), the Roadway Safety Goal received the highest combined weighting, emphasizing improvements at high-collision intersections and roadway segments for both pedestrian and bicycle projects. Network Cohesiveness and Connectivity received the second-highest weighting, focusing on enhancing access throughout the town and improving connections to key local destinations. The third Goal, Funding and Implementation, considers project cost, feasibility of delivery, and input received from community members. The following section describes the prioritization results in detail and explains how these results can inform project selection and implementation.
Interpreting Prioritization Results
Following completion of the scoring and calculations, Alta will use the resulting prioritization rankings to identify the order in which projects may yield the greatest community benefit for Atherton residents. To support ease of implementation, the prioritized list will be grouped into three tiers based on the distribution of scores. Each tier will include recommended timeframes for completion, measured from the date of plan adoption, as follows:
• High Priority – Projects in this category are recommended for implementation within 0–2 years following plan adoption. These projects score highly due to their combined contributions to roadway safety, network cohesiveness, and connectivity, and are generally considered feasible for near‑term delivery.
• Medium Priority – These projects are recommended for implementation within 3–5 years. While they provide meaningful benefits to the active transportation network, they may require additional design, coordination, or resource allocation prior to construction. • Opportunity – These projects are anticipated for implementation beyond 5 years, or when funding and other favorable conditions arise. Examples include alignment with repaving schedules, utility or infrastructure upgrades, or development‑related improvements.
Overall project rankings can help identify projects for Active Transportation Program (ATP) grant applications or for projects to add to the Town’s next Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Breaking down the scores of the different inputs can also provide guidance for more specific needs. For example, Town staff could sort projects Attachment 4
DRAFT 01-30-26 Atherton Active Transportation Plan
Alta Planning + Design 3 Town of Atherton
in a spreadsheet by order of the “Roadway Safety” goal to find the best projects for Local Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) or California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) grants.
Over time as development occurs or changes to existing land uses and the town’s transportation network take place, this framework can be used to re-evaluate remaining projects and continue pursuing implementation of the recommended improvements. For example, an opportunity project may be completed ahead of a highpriority project due to immediate funding opportunities as part of a redevelopment or larger project. Similarly, a high-priority project may require additional study and funding, making it take longer to implement.
The final rankings are not intended to be a final list but rather a guide for Town staff and decision makers to select projects based on a variety of factors that present opportunities to move projects forward. For this project, all scores have been aggregated with a total possible sum of 100 points.
Attachment 4
DRAFT 01-30-26 Atherton Active Transportation Plan
Alta Planning + Design 4 Town of Atherton
Table 1. Pedestrian Project Prioritization Matrix (linear and spot improvements) Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring
Max
Score
Criteria Max
Score
Roadway Safety Collision History
Pedestrian Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) along segment (refer to Figure 28 on Existing Conditions Memo)
20 pts: 1 or more KSI;
0 pts: none
20 40
Segment or intersection is considered a higher-collision location (refer to Table 4, Table 5 and Figure 32 on Existing Conditions Memo) 20 pts: Yes
0 pts: No
20 Network
Cohesiveness and
Connectivity
Transit Street segment served by transit – segment includes bus stops (refer to Figure 19 on Existing Conditions Memo)
10 pts: segment served by transit (i.e., bus)
0 pts: if not
10 30 Pedestrian Level of Traffic Stress Relative stress experienced by people walking along segment (refer to Figure 34 on Existing Conditions Memo)
10 pts: segment received PLTS score of 3 or 4
0 pts: segment received PLTS score of 1 or 2
10 Demand Proposed improvement provides direct connection to local destinations (i.e., schools, parks, Town center)
10 pts: project connects to local destination (i.e., schools, parks, Town Center)
0 pts: if not
10 Funding and
Implementation
Cost and Implementation Planning level cost estimates (refer to the generalized Cost Estimates sheet) 5 pts: $-$$
2 pts: $$$
0 pt: $$$$-$$$$$
5 30
Public Support Recommended improvement receives public support through Phase 2 of engagement
15 pts: 75% or more positive votes/comments
10 pts: 60-74% are positive votes/comments
5 pts: 50-59% are positive votes/comments
0 pt: no clear positive votes/comments received
15 2014 Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan
Prioritization
Identified as a top 15 ranked recommendation from the 2014 Atherton Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan prioritization.
10 pts: Top 15 priority project
0 pt: Not identified as a Top 15 priority project
10 Attachment 4
DRAFT 01-30-26 Atherton Active Transportation Plan
Alta Planning + Design 5 Town of Atherton
Table 2. Bicycle Recommendation Prioritization Matrix
Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring
Max
Score
Criteria Max
Score
Safety and Comfort Collision History
Bicyclist Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) along segment (refer to Figure 31 on Existing Conditions Memo)
20 pts: 1 or more KSI;
0 pts: none
20 40
Segment or intersection is considered a higher-collision location (refer to Table 4, Table 5 and Figure 32 on Existing Conditions Memo) 20 pts: Yes
0 pts: No
20 Access, Connectivity, and
Multimodal Consistency
Transit Street segment served by transit – segment includes bus stops (refer to Figure 19 on Existing Conditions Memo)
10 pts: segment served by transit (i.e., bus)
0 pts: if not
10 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress 30 Relative stress experienced by people walking along segment (refer to Figure 36 on Existing Conditions Memo)
10 pts: segment received BLTS score of 3 or 4
0 pts: segment received BLTS score of 1 or 2
10 Demand Proposed improvement provides direct connection to local destinations (i.e., schools, parks, Town center)
10 pts: project connects to local destination (i.e., schools, parks, Town center) 0 pts: if not
10 Funding and Implementation
Cost and Implementation Planning level cost estimates (refer to the generalized Cost Estimates sheet) 5 pts: $-$$
2 pts: $$$
0 pt: $$$$-$$$$$
5 30
Public Support Recommended improvement receives public support through Phase 2 of engagement
15 pts: 75% or more positive votes/comments
10 pts: 60-74% are positive votes/comments
5 pts: 50-59% are positive votes/comments
0 pt: no clear positive votes/comments received
15 2014 Bicycle & Pedestrian
Master Plan Prioritization
Identified as a top 15 ranked recommendation from the 2014 Atherton Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan prioritization.
10 pts: Top 15 priority project
0 pt: Not identified as a Top 15 priority project
10 Attachment 4