DOCSLIB.ORG

Costs for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure Improvements

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Costs for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure Improvements Costs for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure Improvements A Resource for Researchers, Engineers, Planners, and the General Public Authors: Max A. Bushell, Bryan W. Poole, Charles V. Zegeer, Daniel A. Rodriguez UNC Highway Safety Research Center Prepared for the Federal Highway Administration and supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation through its Active Living Research program October, 2013 Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Authors .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 The Highway Safety Research Center ........................................................................................................... 4 Cover Page Photo Credits ..................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Making the Case for Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure ......................................................................... 6 Walking/Bicycling and Public Health ............................................................................................................ 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Key Assumptions ........................................................................................................................................... 9 Sources ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 Infrastructure Cost Tables ........................................................................................................................... 10 Bicycle Facilities ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Bicycle Parking .................................................................................................................................... 12 Bikeway ............................................................................................................................................... 12 Bikeway Preparation ........................................................................................................................... 13 Traffic Calming Measures ....................................................................................................................... 13 Chicanes .............................................................................................................................................. 13 Curb Extensions ................................................................................................................................... 14 Diverters .............................................................................................................................................. 14 Island ................................................................................................................................................... 15 Median ................................................................................................................................................ 15 Raised Crossing ................................................................................................................................... 16 Roundabout/Traffic Circle ................................................................................................................... 16 Speed Treatments ............................................................................................................................... 17 Pedestrian Accommodations .................................................................................................................. 18 Bollard ................................................................................................................................................. 18 Curb Ramp........................................................................................................................................... 18 Fence/Gate .......................................................................................................................................... 19 Gateway .............................................................................................................................................. 19 Lighting ................................................................................................................................................ 20 Overpass/Underpass ........................................................................................................................... 20 Railing .................................................................................................................................................. 21 Street Furniture ................................................................................................................................... 21 Page 1 of 45 Street Closures .................................................................................................................................... 22 Pedestrian Crossings and Paths .......................................................................................................... 23 Crosswalks ........................................................................................................................................... 23 Sidewalks ............................................................................................................................................. 24 Paths.................................................................................................................................................... 25 Mid-Block Crossings ............................................................................................................................ 25 Signals ..................................................................................................................................................... 26 Flashing Beacon .................................................................................................................................. 26 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon ................................................................................................................... 26 Pedestrian and Bicycle Detection ....................................................................................................... 27 Signals for Drivers and Pedestrians ..................................................................................................... 27 Speed Trailer ....................................................................................................................................... 28 Signs ........................................................................................................................................................ 28 Striping .................................................................................................................................................... 29 Pavement Marking .............................................................................................................................. 29 Pavement Marking Symbols ............................................................................................................... 30 Curb and Gutter .................................................................................................................................. 30 Summary of Results .................................................................................................................................... 31 Figure References ....................................................................................................................................... 32 Appendix A – Links to Database and More Information ............................................................................. 34 Appendix B – Glossary of Terms ................................................................................................................. 35 Appendix C – Cost Information by State ..................................................................................................... 40 Appendix D - Complete Table of Infrastructure Costs ................................................................................ 42 Other Resources .......................................................................................................................................... 45 Page 2 of 45 Acknowledgements This project was made possible through funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, through its Active Living Research program and the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center (UNC HSRC). The authors would like to particularly acknowledge the support of Gabe Rousseau and Tamara Redmon of FHWA and James Sallis, the Program Director of Active Living Research at UCSD, as well as David Harkey of UNC HSRC. Ann McGrane, a graduate student in the Department
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Manual on Uniform Traffic
    MManualanual onon UUniformniform TTrafficraffic CControlontrol DDevicesevices forfor StreetsStreets andand HighwaysHighways U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration for Streets and Highways Control Devices Manual on Uniform Traffic Dotted line indicates edge of binder spine. MM UU TT CC DD U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration MManualanual onon UUniformniform TTrafficraffic CControlontrol DDevicesevices forfor StreetsStreets andand HighwaysHighways U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration 2003 Edition Page i The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is approved by the Federal Highway Administrator as the National Standard in accordance with Title 23 U.S. Code, Sections 109(d), 114(a), 217, 315, and 402(a), 23 CFR 655, and 49 CFR 1.48(b)(8), 1.48(b)(33), and 1.48(c)(2). Addresses for Publications Referenced in the MUTCD American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 249 Washington, DC 20001 www.transportation.org American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) 8201 Corporate Drive, Suite 1125 Landover, MD 20785-2230 www.arema.org Federal Highway Administration Report Center Facsimile number: 301.577.1421 [email protected] Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) 120 Wall Street, Floor 17 New York, NY 10005 www.iesna.org Institute of Makers of Explosives 1120 19th Street, NW, Suite 310 Washington, DC 20036-3605 www.ime.org Institute of Transportation Engineers
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Calming Fact Sheets May 2018 Update Speed Table/Raised Crosswalks
    Traffic Calming Fact Sheets May 2018 Update Speed Table/Raised Crosswalks Description: • Long, raised speed humps with a flat section in the middle and ramps on the ends; sometimes constructed with brick or other textured materials on the flat section • If placed at a pedestrian crossing, it is referred to as a raised crosswalk • If placed only in one direction on a road, it is called an offset speed table Applications: • Appropriate for local and collector streets; mid-block or at intersections, with/without crosswalks • Can be used on a one-lane one-way or two-lane two-way street • Not appropriate for roads with 85th percentile speeds of 45 mph or more • Typically long enough for the entire wheelbase of a passenger car to rest on top or within limits of ramps • Work well in combination with textured crosswalks, curb extensions, and curb radius reductions • Can be applied both with and without sidewalks or dedicated bicycle facilities • Typically installed along closed-section roads (i.e. curb and gutter) but feasible on open section (Source: Google Maps, Boulder, Colorado) (Source: Delaware Department of Transportation) ITE/FHWA Traffic Calming EPrimer: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/traffic_calm.cfm Design/Installation Issues: • ITE recommended practice – “Guidelines for the Design and Application of Speed Humps” • Most common height is between 3 and 4 inches (reported as high as 6 inches) • Ramps are typically 6 feet long (reported up to 10 feet long) and are either parabolic or linear • Careful design is needed for drainage
    [Show full text]
  • Application for Speed Bump Installation
    Oakland Department of Transportation APPLICATION FOR SPEED BUMP INSTALLATION ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SPEED BUMPS Advantages: • The overall speed of traffic is reduced near speed bumps. • Speed bumps create an impression that discourages speeding and “cut through” trafficking. • Speed bumps are self-enforcing. Disadvantages: • The response time for emergency vehicles may be increased by speed bumps. • Some residents may object to the visual impact of speed bumps—the signs and the markings that accompany them. • There will be an increase in vehicle emissions and noise near speed bumps. • Inconvenient access as a result of speed bumps may be imposed on some parts of the neighborhood. • Speed bumps may displace traffic to neighboring streets. • Although speeds will be reduced immediately next to them, drivers tend to speed up after passing or traveling between speed bumps. REQUESTER INFORMATION A. Location Please provide the name of the street block to be considered. Indicate the boundaries of the block by identifying the intersecting street on each end. A separate application is required for another block. Street Name: _____________________________________________ From: _____________________________________ To: _________________________________ B. Contact Information Each application must contain a contact person who will receive all correspondence from the City and be responsible for gathering evidence of support when requested. Name: ________________________________ Email Address: ____________________________ Address: _________________________________________________ Zip Code: ______________ Daytime Phone #: _______________________ Additional Phone #: _________________________ C. Concerns Please tell us about the specific concerns you have for this segment of the street. _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ NOTE THAT AFTER RECEIVING A QUALIFYING PETITION THE CITY WILL CONDUCT AN INSPECTION TO DETERMINE IF SPEED BUMPS ARE FEASIBLE.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Reference Document
    2012 REFERENCE DOCUMENT Incorporation by reference In accordance with Article 28 of EU Regulation n°809/2004 dated 29 April 2004, the reader is referred to previous “Documents de référence” containing certain information: 1. Relating to fiscal year 2011: - The Management Discussion and Analysis and consolidated financial statements, including the statutory auditors’ report, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 23 April 2012 under number D.12-0387 (pages 59 to 124 and 216, respectively). - The corporate financial statements of JCDecaux SA, their analysis, including the statutory auditors’ report, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 23 April 2012 under number D.12-0387 (pages 125 to 148 and 218, respectively). - The statutory auditors’ special report on regulated agreements with certain related parties, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 23 April 2012 under number D.12-0387 (page 220). 2. Relating to fiscal year 2010: - The Management Discussion and Analysis and consolidated financial statements, including the statutory auditors’ report, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 14 April 2011 under number D.11-0300 (pages 55 to 122 and 222 to 223, respectively). - The corporate financial statements of JCDecaux SA, their analysis, including the statutory auditors’ report, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 16 April 2010 under number D.11-0300 (pages 123 to 145 and 224 to 225, respectively). - The statutory auditors’ special report on regulated agreements with certain related parties, set forth in the “Document de référence” filed on 16 April 2010 under number D.11-0300 (pages 226 to 228).
    [Show full text]
  • Active Transportation
    Tuesday, September 10 & Wednesday, September 11 9:00 am – 12:00 pm WalkShops are fully included with registration, with no additional charges. Due to popular demand, we ask that attendees only sign-up for one cycling tour throughout the duration of the conference. Active Transportation If You Build (Parking) They Will Come: Bicycle Parking in Toronto Providing safe, accessible, and convenient bicycle parking is an essential part of any city's effort to support increased bicycle use. This tour will use Toronto's downtown core as a setting to explore best practices in bicycle parking design and management, while visiting several major destinations and cycling hotspots in the area. Starting at City Hall, we will visit secure indoor bicycle parking, on-street bike corrals, Union Station's off-street bike racks, the Bike Share Toronto system, and also provide a history of Toronto's iconic post and ring bike racks. Lead: Jesse Demb & David Tomlinson, City of Toronto Transportation Services Mode: Cycling Accessibility: Moderate cycling, uneven surfaces Building Out a Downtown Bike Network Gain firsthand knowledge of Toronto's on-street cycling infrastructure while learning directly from people that helped implement it. Ride through downtown's unique neighborhoods with staff from the City's Cycling Infrastructure and Programs Unit as well as advocates from Cycle Toronto as they discuss the challenges and opportunities faced when designing and building new biking infrastructure. The tour will take participants to multiple destinations downtown, including the Richmond and Adelaide Street cycle tracks, which have become the highest volume cycling facilities in Toronto since being originally installed as a pilot project in 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Streets Safe
    About WalkBoston WalkBoston plays an important role ensuring walker- CHICANE TREES BIKE friendly/safe designs and has an impressive record LANES of getting cities, towns, state agencies, developers, RAISED institutions, and elected officials to provide for the CROSSWALK needs of walkers. Every additional member helps our message be heard. Join online at walkboston.org. We work to transform communities into more walkable CURB places and reintroduce people to walking as a con- EXTENSION venient, healthy and low-cost transportation choice. People who depend on walking most: lower income, elders, children, people with disabilities, and transit PARKED users especially benefit from our advocacy. CARS SPEED How we can help you CUSHION • Advise on walking improvements for your community. MIDBLOCK CROSSWALK • Provide guidance, moral support, technical assistance. making • Give a variety of presentations on pedestrian design and advocacy. Speed Kills: Small-scale fixes go a long way to slow traffic • Help set up advocacy groups and strengthen them. • Demonstrate how these techniques are working streets The human costs and economic consequences of The tools can be small in scale, relatively inexpensive, across Massachusetts and elsewhere. speed-related crashes are immense. In 2007, about and are easily tested and evaluated. Streets can be 31 percent of all fatal crashes were speeding-related, made safer by putting them on a “road diet,” reducing safe resulting in 13,420 fatalities. In Massachusetts, 15 to speeds and enhancing pedestrian safety. Techniques Thanks to our supporters 20 percent of all road fatality victims are pedestrians. include signage, pavement devices and paint. Physically Nationwide, the economic cost to society of speed- or visually narrowing a standard width lane by 1 foot Striders ing-related crashes is estimated to be $40.4 billion slows cars by 7 miles per hour.
    [Show full text]
  • Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team
    Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team Project Leads: Nancy Smith Lea, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Ray Tomalty, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Researchers: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Marvin Macaraig, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Julia Malmo-Laycock, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Report Design: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Cover Photo: Tour de l’ile, Go Bike Montreal Festival, Montreal by Maxime Juneau/APMJ Project Partner: Please cite as: Benni, J., Macaraig, M., Malmo-Laycock, J., Smith Lea, N. & Tomalty, R. (2019). Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada. Toronto: Clean Air Partnership. CONTENTS List of Figures 4 List of Tables 7 Executive Summary 8 1. Introduction 12 2. Costs of Bicycle Infrastructure Measures 13 Introduction 14 On-street facilities 16 Intersection & crossing treatments 26 Traffic calming treatments 32 Off-street facilities 39 Accessory & support features 43 3. Costs of Cycling Programs 51 Introduction 52 Training programs 54 Repair & maintenance 58 Events 60 Supports & programs 63 Conclusion 71 References 72 Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada 3 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Bollard protected cycle track on Bloor Street, Toronto, ON ..................................................... 16 Figure 2: Adjustable concrete barrier protected cycle track on Sherbrook St, Winnipeg, ON ............ 17 Figure 3: Concrete median protected cycle track on Pandora Ave in Victoria, BC ............................ 18 Figure 4: Pandora Avenue Protected Bicycle Lane Facility Map ............................................................ 19 Figure 5: Floating Bus Stop on Pandora Avenue ........................................................................................ 19 Figure 6: Raised pedestrian crossings on Pandora Avenue .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter Four Pedestrian Facility Recommendations
    CHAPTER FOUR PEDESTRIAN FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter recommends two types of Recommendations included in this chapter are infrastructure improvements: planning-level design concepts. This means that the recommendations are guided by the »» Design concepts for six example plan goals and informed by existing conditions, locations; and prioritized missing best practices, and opportunities identified sidewalk links in the City. The during field work. Additional engineering example location recommendations analysis and field work is needed before show how a mix of treatments can proceeding with project implementation. improve the pedestrian network in a defined area. Recommended Example Locations treatments include sidewalks, pedestrian crossing facilities, and bus Six locations were identified for field work in stop improvements. order to develop conceptual recommendations »» A prioritized list of sidewalk projects. to improve pedestrian safety and comfort. Sidewalk projects are scored and These “example locations” were identified from ranked using the new method several sources, including the demand and recommended in Chapter 3. needs analysis, public input, and input from the City’s technical team. Appendix C provides 76 DECEMBER 2012 sample comments from CommunityWalk of the design concepts are described in around each example location. Chapter 3, Best Practices, Design Standards and Sidewalks. Overall, recommended design The example locations are typical of pedestrian concepts are intended to achieve one or more of conditions in many areas of the City. Thus, the following objectives: these design concepts recommended can be applied elsewhere in the City. The example locations are not in any priority order. Many Ensure ADA compliance. Ensure sufficient crossing time. All sidewalks and intersection features meet Adjust signal timing to ensure pedestrians have at standards set by PROWAAG, NCDOT and the City of least 3.5 feet per second to cross the street.
    [Show full text]
  • Jcdecaux Wins World's Second Largest Automatic Public Toilet
    JCDecaux wins World’s second largest Automatic Public Toilet contract in Berlin Paris, June 28th, 2018 – JCDecaux SA (Euronext Paris: DEC), the number one outdoor advertising company worldwide and the pioneer of self-cleaning public toilets is pleased to announce that its German subsidiary Wall GmH has won the Berlin tender for the supply, installation and operation of public toilets in the German capital. Wall has operated the public toilets financed by OOH advertising revenues in Berlin since 1992. The new 15-year contract (including a 2-year extension option) was signed on Tuesday and will commence on 1/01/2019. Wall will supply, install and operate 193 new fully automatic public toilets and become responsible for the operation of 37 existing toilet facilities. Furthermore, Berlin will have the option to order 109 additional automatic public toilets and include 30 more existing toilet facilities. Wall will receive over 15 years €235,9mio from Berlin if all options are exercised. Jean-François Decaux, Co-CEO of JCDecaux, said: “After renewing earlier this year the main OOH Berlin advertising contract, we are very pleased to continue to operate the World’s second largest automatic public toilet contract which will be financed by a guaranteed fee from the City. JCDecaux also operates the World’s largest automatic public toilet contract in Paris. Our non-advertising revenues in our street furniture division represent 10% of all street furniture revenues and are very stable. This decision confirms JCDecaux’s strong ability to win street
    [Show full text]
  • Complete Streets FACT SHEET 2.0
    Complete Streets FACT SHEET 2.0 Since the NYSAMPO Complete Streets Fact Sheet was published in 2012, additional needs have been identified. They are addressed in this addendum. The original Complete Streets Fact Sheet can be found at www.nysmpos.org MORE MUNICIPALITIES HAVE HOW CAN COMPLETE STREETS BE IMPLEMENTED ADOPTED COMPLETE STREETS IN SIMPLIFIED PAVING PROJECTS? ORDINANCES AND POLICIES A focus on managing infrastructure assets at a time of A number of additional New limited capital funding has resulted in many jurisdictions, York municipalities have officially from local to State, doing simplified or maintenance paving recognized the importance of work. Such projects may entail a simple overlay, or mill and considering Complete Streets resurfacing, and is generally limited to “working between elements in street design and the curbs or shoulders”. road improvement projects Complete Streets necessarily reflect their location. through the adoption of local ordinances or policies. Most use An urban street that is curbed will require different language that is similar in content treatments than a suburban or rural roadway that has paved to the New York State law. shoulders but no sidewalks. There is no single approach to designing Complete Streets. Since any list is quickly outdated, readers are referred to the New While this places limits on the range of Complete Streets elements that can be employed, there is still a great deal York State Department of that can be done. Often changing pavement markings Transportation’s Complete alone can improve the experience of all roadway users. Streets web page: There are other low cost improvements that may be outside the scope of simplified paving, but worthy of consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • Policy on Children at Play Signs
    MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE Traffic Department SPEED HUMP FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS HUMPS VERSUS BUMPS? A speed hump is a (typically) rounded traffic calming device designed to reduce vehicles speeds on residential streets. They are constructed across the road, and, often installed in a series of several humps to reduce the potential for drivers to gain any significant benefit from speeding once the vehicle has crossed the hump. The height of the device ranges from 3 to 4 inches, and, is typically 13 feet long (as measured along the center of the road) for the humps used here in Anchorage, and is constructed to a very specific curvature over which the vehicles travel. In addition, warning signs are placed at the location of the device to provide information that the hump is located on the road (important to motorists, emergency responders, and street maintenance personnel) and pavement markings on the hump to provide an added visual warning of the device. Humps are used in locations on residential streets with low to moderate volumes (typically no less than 500 vehicles per day – about 50 homes and no greater than 1000 to 1500 vehicles per day), and not major roadways serving as connections between neighborhoods, and are rarely used on bus routes or primary emergency response routes. 1. What is a speed hump, and what is its purpose? A speed hump is a traffic control/calming device constructed with asphalt concrete. It is constructed to a very specific design that uses one of several potential vertical layouts, and used to control speeds – typically effective only when several humps are used on a section of roadway, about 400 to 500 feet apart.
    [Show full text]
  • Easy Rider® Rubber Speed Bump Product Information Brochure Pictured: Speed Bump
    EASY RIDER® RUBBER SPEED BUMP PRODUCT INFORMATION BROCHURE PICTURED: SPEED BUMP Checkers™ is a full-service manufacturer of parking lot safety solutions. We design and manufacture traffic control products that help cars navigate and park safely. Our main goal has been to create solutions that protect motorists and pedestrians from the perils of today’s parking lots. As such, Checkers™ products have been designed and developed with speed reduction, driver and pedestrian safety in mind. All our solutions are manufactured from 100% recycled rubber and plastic. Our speed bumps or parking blocks, for example, are longer lasting, highly visible, and more car-friendly than asphalt or concrete alternatives. Not only are Checkers™ traffic safety solutions environmentally friendly, they can also be installed for either temporary or permanent use. • Rubber speed bumps greatly outlast concrete or • Pliable rubber protects vehicles as well as curbs asphalt competitors • Highly-reflective colored tape ensures the speed • Rubber speed bumps don’t degrade like concrete bump will be visible speed bumps, keeping parking lots • Easy-to-install, either on asphalt or concrete surfaces aesthetically pleasing • Can be used for temporary or • Channeled bottom for cabling and piping permanent applications • High-quality rubber is resistant to weather, salts, • Great for commercial and residential applications and chemicals • End caps available and sold separately • Recycled rubber construction is environmentally friendly 800-438-9336 • CHECKERS-SAFETY.COM PRODUCT INFORMATION Easy Rider® Speed Bump reduces vehicle speeds to 2-5 mph (approximate), making parking lots or light traffic streets safer for pedestrians and motorists. Constructed from 100% recycled tires, Easy Rider® speed bumps are preformed to ensure a smooth, safe ride.
    [Show full text]