DOCSLIB.ORG

Bicycle Master Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bicycle Master Plan CityCity of Greeley Greeley FINAL BICYCLE May 5, 2015 MASTER PLAN Prepared by: “ROAD TO GOLD” Alta Planning + Design 1836 Blake Street Suite 200 Grant Funding Provided by:by: Denver, CO 80202 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Greeley Public Works Department Joel Hemesath, Director Eric Bracke, PE, PTOE, Traffi c Engineer, Project Manger Project Internal Review Team Eric Bracke, PE, PTOE, Project Manager, City of Greeley Public Works Eric Aakko, Weld County Department of Public Health John Barnett, City of Greeley Planning Sarah Boyd, City of Greeley Parks and Recreation Deborah DeBoutez, City of Greeley City Manager’s Offi ce Wesley Hood, City of Greeley Public Works John Kinne, City of Greeley Police Department Wendy Polulech, North Colorado Medical Center Joshua Romero-Perry, City of Greeley Intern Consultants: Alta Planning + Design Joe Gilpin, Principal in Charge Alicia Zimmerman, PE, PTOE, Project Manager Kim Voros Jessie Stonberg Atkins Jamie Archambeau, PE, PTOE Andrew Iltis Victoria McKennan Funding Provided By Kaiser Permanente Walk and Wheel Grant Special thanks to the more than 500 Greeley community members for their help in imagining and assisting in the creation of this plan by submitting surveys, attending public workshops, visiting the project website, providing feedback on recommended projects, and participating in many other ways. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION. 1-1 CHAPTER 4: RECOMMENDATIONS. 4-1 Overview. .1-1 Overview and Methodology . .4-1 Vision, Goals, and Objectives. .1-2 Engineering . .4-2 The Planning Process . .1-5 Encouragement, Education, Enforcement, and Evaluation. .4-19 The Value of a Bicycle Master Plan. .1-7 CHAPTER 5: IMPLEMENTATION. 5-1 CHAPTER 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS . 2-1 Strategy. .5-1 Overview. .2-1 Project Prioritization. .5-2 Existing Bicycle Facilities . .2-5 Priority Projects and Costs . .5-9 Overall Network Description . .2-12 Funding Opportunities . .5-14 Existing Support Facilities . .2-12 Maintenance . .2-15 APPENDIX Existing Programs Summary . .2-16 Appendix A - Public Involvement Summary Existing Plans and Documents Summary . .2-18 Appendix B - Existing Programs and Documents Summary CHAPTER 3: NEEDS ASSESSMENT . 3-1 Appendix C - Analysis Needs Assessment. .3-1 Appendix D - Implementation Needs and Types of Bicyclists . .3-2 Supplement A - Design Guidelines Public Input - Survey and Mapping Results . .3-3 Supplement B - Complete Streets Bicycle Suitability Index . .3-7 Crash Analysis . .3-13 Economic and Health Benefi ts Analysis . .3-16 Needs, Gaps, and Barriers . .3-21 Opportunities . .3-23 This page intentionally blank CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW for a more diverse set of transportation The Greeley Bicycle Master Plan project team In the spring of 2013, the City of Greeley options and a reevaluation of common went through a process of defi ning plan was designated as a Bronze-level “Bicycle current patterns of development. At the vision and goals, studying and analyzing Friendly Community” by the League of same time, towns and cities around the existing conditions, and developing American Bicyclists. The city has done much country are recognizing that bicycle-friendly recommendations for the proposed bicycle in recent years to increase the number of communities attract new businesses, facility network, support facilities, programs, bicyclists in the community - from facility residents, and visitors alike and help to and policy and facility design guidelines. improvements such as shared use paths combat many of these trends. On a local level, The recommended facilities were then and roadway “right-sizing” to programs this plan represents a strong commitment prioritized, costs studied for priority projects, and policies such as the Zombie Zoom to take on such issues, translating them and an implementation strategy identifi ed. community rides, bicycle facilities as part of into aff ordable personal mobility, vibrant The development of this plan also included the street standards and the establishment communities, appealing recreational an open, participatory process, with the of the Bike Advocacy Group. While these opportunities, and healthy, active lifestyles community providing input through public changes and improvements have been for the Greeley community. workshops, stakeholder meetings, website welcomed and have resulted in an increase input, and online survey and mapping In the fall of 2013, the Greeley Public platforms. in bicycling, the city is still early in its journey Works Department was successful in to becoming a safe and accessible bicycle obtaining a “Walk and Wheel” grant city. from Kaiser Permanente. The grant was Nationally, recent years have seen signifi cant awarded to complete a bike plan aimed at SAFETY changes to the transportation framework. increasing bicycling as an active mode of transportation through new infrastructure, WALKING & Bicycle use has increased over 60% from BIKING ACTIVITY 2000 to 2012 according to US Census programs, events, culture, and education. Bureau making it the fastest changing Thus, this plan is being developed to address SAFETY IN NUMBERS form of transportation. Other trends such the “Five E’s” of bicycling (Engineering, The likelihood that a given person Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, walking or bicycling will be struck by as increasing gas prices, environmental a motorist decreases as the number damage, changing demographics, and the and Evaluation), while providing an action- of people bicycling and walking prevalence of health issues like obesity and oriented plan that can quickly be moved increases. Jacobsen, P L, “Safety in numbers: more walkers and heart disease are demonstrating the need forward into implementation. bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling,” Journal of Injury Prevention 2003; 9: 205-209. Figure 1-1: Safety in numbers City of Greeley 1-1 Greeley Bicycle Master Plan VISION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Vision Statement The people of Greeley come together around bikes. Whether it’s gathering for a quick fi tness ride after work, a morning commute down the Poudre Trail, the fi rst turn of the cranks at a Bike Rodeo, or to meet downtown for a coff ee, bicycling is important for the recreation, transportation, health, and economy of the community. A vision statement outlines what the city wants to be. It concentrates on the future and is a source of inspiration. The following vision statement, developed in coordination with the Internal Review Team and the public, guides the Greeley Bicycle Plan: Greeley will be a Gold Level Bike Friendly Community where bicycling is a safe, accessible, and normal form of transportation and recreation. Goals help guide the city towards fulfi lling the project vision, and relate to existing and newly-launched eff orts. Objectives are more specifi c statements that defi ne how Figure 1-2: A protected bike lane demonstration project was installed on 65th Avenue for Public Meeting #2 each goal will be achieved. Objectives are measurable and allow tracking and benchmarking to demonstrate the city’s progress toward the goals and vision 1-2 City of Greeley Greeley Bicycle Master Plan Goals & Objectives » Increase bicycle ridership in Greeley. » Incorporate considerations for bicyclists » Develop design, construction, and (facilities, route designation, wayfi nding, maintenance standards for bike facilities. » Increase percent of commuting by signage, access, parking, and storage) bicycle to 5% (up from 1.8 %, as listed in in all future improvements to the » Update Greeley’s design standards, the 2012 American Community Survey transportation system and to public enhancing bicycle facility guidelines to study 5-year1 data) by 2025 2 include best3 practices and innovative space. solutions tailored to fi t Greeley’s » Increase percent of trips to school » Incorporate bicycling as a prominent network needs made by walking and bicycling to 20% component of a city-wide Complete for school age children by 2025 Streets Policy » Include natural systems considerations (potential to increase tree canopy, » Increase the proportion of residents » Continue to “right size” roadways in integrate water quality improvements, who have ridden their bicycle in the Greeley to balance excess vehicle and integrate with sustainability goals) past six months to 60% (up from 42% in capacity, where present, with the in bicycle facility and road guidelines 2012, as listed in the North Front Range potential to increase the capacity for Metropolitan Planning Organization’s dedicated on-street bicycling facilities. » Develop and apply maintenance Household Bicycle Use Survey) In the next ten years, analyze all arterial standards and frequency requirements for bicycle facilities » Develop and implement an annual on- and collector roadways to determine and off -street bicycle count plan potential for “right sizing” » Incorporate the recommendations in the Bicycle Master Plan into other parks, recreation, and trail planning documents and policies » Create plan and permit review requirements that bicycle facilities (bicycle parking, shared use paths, and network facilities if applicable) be a consideration in all private development projects as part of on-site improvements and off -site mitigation measures as appropriate City of Greeley 1-3 Greeley Bicycle Master Plan » Build a safe and effi cient bicycling » Promote bicycling as a healthy and » Establish a city division under public network and support facilities that inexpensive transportation alternative, works to maintain and expand the city serves the needs
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4 DRAFT Bicycle Master Plan
    Chapter 4: Design and Maintenance Guidance Chapter 4 provides recommended guidance on bicycle facility design and maintenance practices. It includes a discussion of the existing standards that guide street design in Bellingham followed by descriptions of bicycle facility types and intersection treatments that are new or uncommon in the City. Detailed design considerations including design guidance for travel lane widths, corner curb radii and wayfinding are presented in Appendix D. Public Works Development Guidelines and Improvement Standards Currently, street design in Bellingham is guided by the Public Works Development Guidelines and Improvements Standards, which were adopted in 2001. The guidelines contain provisions for development and improvement of bicycle facilities, including: standards signs, signals, and markings, roadway facilities, bicycle lanes, and bicycle parking.1 These design guidelines were developed based on the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and the Washington State Department of Transportation Design Manual. For local roadways, WSDOT instructs local jurisdictions to use the latest addition of the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. It is recommended that the existing guidelines and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities should continue to be used in the development of bicycle facilities. Those documents are not intended to be replaced by the guidance presented here; however, there are instances where additional guidance will be useful in implementing this Plan. This guidance is presented for consideration and possible integration into the Bellingham Public Works Development Guidelines and Improvements Standards. In all cases, the recommendations in this chapter are consistent with current Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidance and recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances
    Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances November 2011 i iv . Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances November 2011 i The Delaware Valley Regional Planning The symbol in our logo is Commission is dedicated to uniting the adapted from region’s elected officials, planning the official professionals, and the public with a DVRPC seal and is designed as a common vision of making a great region stylized image of the Delaware Valley. even greater. Shaping the way we live, The outer ring symbolizes the region as a whole while the diagonal bar signifies the work, and play, DVRPC builds Delaware River. The two adjoining consensus on improving transportation, crescents represent the Commonwealth promoting smart growth, protecting the of Pennsylvania and the State of environment, and enhancing the New Jersey. economy. We serve a diverse region of DVRPC is funded by a variety of funding nine counties: Bucks, Chester, Delaware, sources including federal grants from the Montgomery, and Philadelphia in U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pennsylvania; and Burlington, Camden, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Gloucester, and Mercer in New Jersey. and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Pennsylvania and New Jersey DVRPC is the federally designated departments of transportation, as well Metropolitan Planning Organization for as by DVRPC’s state and local member the Greater Philadelphia Region — governments. The authors, however, are leading the way to a better future. solely responsible for the findings and conclusions herein, which may not represent the official views or policies of the funding agencies. DVRPC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Bicycle Master Plan: 2012
    BICYCLE MASTER PLAN: 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREPARED FOR V VISION STATEMENT VII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IX CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1 BICYCLING IN MESA 1 THE BENEFITS OF BICYCLING 3 BICYCLE TRIP AND RIDER CHARACTERISTICS 6 BICYCLE USE IN MESA 8 PAST BICYCLE PLANNING EFFORTS 12 REGIONAL PLANNING & COORDINATION EFFORTS 15 WHY MESA NEEDS AN UPDATED BICYCLE PLAN 20 PLAN UPDATE PROCESS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM 23 CHAPTER 2 - GOALS & OBJECTIVES 25 PURPOSE OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 25 GOAL ONE 27 GOAL TWO 28 GOAL THREE 29 GOAL FOUR 30 GOAL FIVE 31 i CHAPTER 3 - EDUCATION, ENCOURAGEMENT, AND ENFORCEMENT 33 INTRODUCTION 33 MESARIDES! 34 EDUCATION 35 ENCOURAGEMENT 38 ENFORCEMENT 42 CHAPTER 4 - BICYCLE FACILITIES AND DESIGN OPTIONS 47 INTRODUCTION 47 BASIC ELEMENTS 48 WAYFINDING 52 BICYCLE PARKING DESIGN STANDARDS 53 BICYCLE ACCESSIBILITY 58 CHAPTER 5 - MESA’S BICYCLE NETWORK 61 INTRODUCTION 61 MESA’S NETWORK OF THE FUTURE 65 DEVELOPING A RECOMMENDED FUTURE NETWORK 68 METHODOLOGY TO IDENTIFY NEEDS 72 ii CHAPTER 6 - IMPLEMENTATION, EVALUATION, AND FUNDING 101 INTRODUCTION 101 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 103 IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA 104 PROJECT PRIORITY RANKING 105 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROGRAM EXPANSION 122 ADDITIONAL STAFF REQUIREMENTS 124 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT 125 SUMMARY 130 APPENDIX A - THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN PROCESS 131 PURPOSE OF THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN 131 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND COMMUNITY INPUT PROCESS 132 BENEFITS OF THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM (PIP) 132 DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM (PIP) PLAN 133 MESA BICYCLE
    [Show full text]
  • Approved-Bicycle-Master-Plan-Framework-Report.Pdf
    MONTGOMERY COUNTY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN FRAMEWORK abstract This report outlines the proposed framework for the Montgomery County Bicycle Master Plan. It defines a vision by establishing goals and objectives, and recommends realizing that vision by creating a bicycle infrastructure network supported by policies and programs that encourage bicycling. This report proposes a monitoring program designed to make the plan implementation process both clear and responsive. 2 MONTGOMERY COUNTY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN FRAMEWORK contents 4 Introduction 6 Master Plan Purpose 8 Defining the Vision 10 Review of Other Bicycle Plans 13 Vision Statement, Goals, Objectives, Metrics and Data Requirements 14 Goal 1 18 Goal 2 24 Goal 3 26 Goal 4 28 Goals and Objectives Considered but Not Recommended 30 Realizing the Vision 32 Low-Stress Bicycling 36 Infrastructure 36 Bikeways 55 Bicycle Parking 58 Programs 58 Policies 59 Prioritization 59 Bikeway Prioritization 59 Programs and Policies 60 Monitoring the Vision 62 Implementation 63 Accommodating Efficient Bicycling 63 Approach to Phasing Separated Bike Lane Implementation 63 Approach to Implementing On-Road Bicycle Facilities Incrementally 64 Selecting A Bikeway Recommendation 66 Higher Quality Sidepaths 66 Typical Sections for New Bikeway Facility Types 66 Intersection Templates A-1 Appendix A: Detailed Monitoring Report 3 MONTGOMERY COUNTY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN FRAMEWORK On September 10, 2015, the Planning Board approved a Scope of Work for the Bicycle Master Plan. Task 4 of the Scope of Work is the development of a methodology report that outlines the approach to the Bicycle Master Plan and includes a discussion of the issues identified in the Scope of Work.
    [Show full text]
  • MINI-ROUNDABOUTS Mini-Roundabouts Or Neighborhood Traffic Circles Are an Ideal Treatment for Minor, Uncontrolled Intersections
    MINI-ROUNDABOUTS Mini-roundabouts or neighborhood traffic circles are an ideal treatment for minor, uncontrolled intersections. The roundabout configuration lowers speeds without fully stopping traffic. Check out NACTO’s Urban Street Design Guide or FHWA’s Roundabout: An Information Guide Design Guide for more details. 4 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS COMMON MATERIALS CATEGORIES 1 2 Mini-roundabouts can be created using raised islands 1 SURFACE TREATMENTS: and simple markings. Landscaping elements are an » Striping: Solid white or yellow lines can be used important component of the roundabout and should in conjunction with barrier element to demarcate be explored even for a short-term demonstration. the roundabout space. Other likely uses include crosswalk markings: solid lines to delineate cross- The roundabout should be designed with careful walk space and / or zebra striping. consideration to lane width and turning radius for vehicles. A mini-roundabout on a residential » Pavement Markings: May include shared lane markings to guide bicyclists through the street should provide approximately 15 ft. of 2 clearance from the corner to the widest point on intersection and reinforce rights of use for people the circle. Crosswalks should be used to indicate biking. (Not shown) where pedestrians should cross in advance of the » Colored treatments: Colored pavement or oth- roundabout. Shared lane markings (sharrows) should er specialized surface treatments can be used to be used to guide people on bikes through the further define the roundabout space (not shown). intersections, in conjunction with bicycle wayfinding 2 BARRIER ELEMENTS: Physical barriers (such as route markings if appropriate. delineators or curbing) should be used to create a strong edge that sets the roundabout apart Note: Becase roundabouts allow the slow, but from the roadway.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Drive, Walk & Bike in a Roundabout
    What do the signs at a REMEMBER roundabout mean? Look and plan ahead. Slow down! Pedestrians go first. When entering or Roundabout ahead. exiting a roundabout, yield to pedestrians at the crosswalk. Look to the left, find a safe gap, then go. Choose your destination. Start planning your route. Don’t pass vehicles in a roundabout. Remember to signal. There are two entry lanes to the roundabout. Choose the correct lane for your destination. Yield to all traffic in the roundabout including TRANSPORTATION AND pedestrians at crosswalks. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Remember you may have 150 Frederick Street, 7th Floor to stop! Kitchener ON N2G 4J3 Canada Phone: 519-575-4558 Flag exit signs identify Email: [email protected] street names for each leg of the roundabout. For more information check our website: www.GoRoundabout.ca Yield here to pedestrians. www.GoRoundabout.ca Updated January 2011 MOWTO HAT IS A ROUNDABOUT? HOW TO DRIVE IN A ROUNDABOUT TIPS FOR CYCLISTS A roundabout is an intersection at which ᮣ Slow down when A cyclist has two choices at a roundabout. Your all traffic circulates counterclockwise approaching a choice will depend on your degree of comfort riding roundabout. in traffic. around a centre island. ᮣ Observe lane signs. For experienced cyclists: Choose the correct ● Ride as if you were driving entry lane. a car. Yield Line ᮣ Expect pedestrians ● Merge into the travel lane Central and yield to them at before the bike lane or shoulder ends. Island all crosswalks. ● Ride in the middle of your lane; don’t hug the curb. Turning right and turning left ᮣ Wait for a gap in ● Use hand signals and signal as if you were a traffic before motorist.
    [Show full text]
  • Bicycle Master Plan
    Edmond Bicycle Master Plan October 2012 October 2012 Table of Contents Acknowledgements IV Section 5 / Implementation 46 5.1 Action Plan .......................................................46 Executive Summary V 5.2 Implementation of Bicycle Network Improvements ...........................................62 Section 1 / Bicycle Master Plan Overview 2 5.3 Funding Recommended Improvements............................65 1.1 Introduction ......................................................2 1.2 Master Plan Purpose and Framework ..............................3 Appendix A – Public Outreach and Input 66 1.3 The Case for Investing in Bicycling .................................4 1.4 Implementation of the Bicycle Master Plan Will Appendix B – Bicycle Plan Network 79 Support the City’s Established Goals and Objectives................7 1.5 Stakeholder Outreach and Input...................................9 Appendix C – Wayfinding Protocol and Best Practices 80 Section 2 / Existing Conditions Analysis: Introduction ...........................................................80 Constraints and Opportunities 12 Edmond History and Current Practice ...................................80 2.1 Arterial Streets ....................................................12 Policy and Regulatory Framework.......................................80 2.2 Collector Streets . 15 Sign Types .............................................................80 2.3 Local Streets ......................................................16 General Sign Components ..............................................84
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic-Light Intersections
    Give Cycling a Push Infrastructure Implementation Fact Sheet INFRASTRUCTURE/ INTERSECTIONS AND CROSSINGS TRAFFIC-LIGHT INTERSECTIONS Overview Traffic-light intersections are inherently dangerous for cyclists. However, they are indispensable when cyclists cross heavy traffic flows. Cycle-friendly design must make cyclists clearly visible, allow short and easy maneuvers and reduce waiting time, such as a right-turn bypass or an advanced stop-line. On main cycle links, separate cycle traffic light and cycle-friendly light regulation can privilege cycle flows over motorized traffic. Background and Objectives Function Intersections are equipped with a traffic control system when they need to handle large flows of motorized traffic on the busiest urban roads, often with multiple lanes. A cycle-friendly design can greatly improve safety, speed and comfort, by increasing visibility, facilitating maneuvers and reducing waiting time. Scope Traffic-light intersections are always a second-best solution for cyclists, in terms of safety. Actually, traffic light intersections with four branches are very dangerous and should be avoided in general. Dutch guidance states that roundabouts are significantly safer than traffic lights for four- branch intersections of 10,000 to 20,000 pcu/day. In practice, traffic lights are used when an intersection needs to handle large flows of motorized traffic speedily. They can handle up to 30,000 pcu/day, more than is possible with a roundabout. These will typically include at least one very busy distributor road with multiple traffic lanes (50 km/h in the built-up area, higher outside the built-up area). Often, these busy roads are also of great interest as cycle links.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary Bike Master Plan
    Georgetown Bicycle Master Plan 1 City of Georgetown Bicycle Master Plan (Draft as of 7.29.2019) 2 Acknowledgements Georgetown’s residents have offered incredible insight and local knowledge that proved invaluable in this plan’s creation, and the project team would like to extend its gratitude to each individual who participated in helping to produce a bicycle network that will serve the City for years to come. CITY OF GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT STAFF AUSTIN Public Works Project Manager Octavio Garza, former Director Dr. Ming Zhang, AICP Ray Miller, Jr., Transportation Planning Coordinator Project Assistant Ed Polasek, former Transportation Evan Scott Planning Coordinator Mady Akers, Data Analyst Project Team (2018) Chris Bischak Planning Kyle SmitH Sofia Nelson, Director Liang Chen Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Louis Alcorn Madison Graham Communications Nicole McGratH Keith Hutchinson, Manager Paulina Urbanowicz Rachel Thomas Library Robert Davila Eric Lashley, Director Sydni Ligons Ziqi Liu City Manager’s Office Jim Briggs, General Manager of Utilities 3 Acknowledgements ADVISORY SUPPORT City of Georgetown Kimberly Garrett, Director, Parks and Recreation Eric Nuner, Parks and Recreation Cari Miller, Manager, Convention and Visitors Bureau Board Roland Waits, Police Department Clay Shell, Fire Department Georgetown Independent School District Virginia Wade, Route Coordinator David Biesheuvel, Executive Director of Construction and Development Southwestern University Derek Timorian, Associate Dean of Student Life Jim Seals, Police
    [Show full text]
  • Building a Bicycle Friendly Neighborhood a Guide for Community Leaders
    Building A Bicycle Friendly Neighborhood A Guide for Community Leaders Washington Area Bicyclist Association Building a Bicycle Friendly Neighborhood • Page 1 Washington Area Bicyclist Association © 2013 Suggested Citation: Building a Bicycle Friendly Neighborhood: A Guide for Community Leaders. (2013). Washington Area Bicyclist Association. Washington, D.C. The Washington Area Bicyclist Association is a nonprofit advocacy and education organization representing the metropolitan Washington area bicycling community. Reproduction of information in this guide for non-profit use is encouraged. Please use with attribution. Table of Contents Introduction and How to Use This Guide .....................................................Page 3 How Biking Projects Happen .......................................................................Page 4 Benefits of Biking .........................................................................................Page 7 The Importance of Bike Infrastructure to Get People Biking .................. Page 12 Building Community Support .................................................................... Page 20 Conclusion ...................................................................................................Page 27 Endnotes ..................................................................................................... Page 28 Appendix A: Sources Cited ......................................................................... Page 29 Appendix B: Survey Results .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Designing for On-Road Bikeways
    Designing for Bicyclist Safety Module B DESIGNING ON-ROAD BIKEWAYS LEARNING OUTCOMES Describe features of on-road bikeways Select design criteria for on-road bikeways in various contexts BICYCLE CHARACTERISTICS BICYCLE CHARACTERISTICS Height Handlebar - 36-44 in Eye - 60 in Operating - 100 in Width Physical – 30 in Minimum operating – 48 in Preferred operating – 60 in OLDER BIKEWAY TYPES “Bike Route” “Bike Path” Neither term is clear They are all bikeways BIKEWAY NETWORK Just like roads and sidewalks, bikeways need to be part of an connected network Combine various types, including on and off-street facilities HIERARCHY OF BIKEWAYS Shared-Use Paths Separated Bike Lanes Bike Lanes Shoulders Shared Roadway Photo by Harvey Muller Photo by SCI Photo by Harvey Muller Photo by SCI Designing On-Road Bikeways SHARED ROADWAY Photo by Harvey Muller SHARED ROADWAY Most common— roads as they are Appropriate on low-volume or low-speed 85% or more of a well-connected grid SHARED LANES Unless prohibited, all roads have shared lanes No special features for: Minor roads Low volumes (< 1000 vpd) Speeds vary (urban v. rural) SHARED LANES Supplemental features Pavement markings or “sharrows” Detectors & signal timing SHARED LANE MARKING Lateral position Connect gaps in bike lanes Roadway too narrow for passing Position in intersections & transitions SHARED ROAD SIGNS Ride side-by-side? Chase bicyclist? Warning or regulation? Opposite forces? Philadelphia, PA ...and who “shares”? New Orleans, LA California SHARED ROAD SIGNS
    [Show full text]
  • Bicycle Plan
    6: BICYCLE PLAN This chapter summarizes existing and future facility needs for bicycles in the City of Richland. The following sections outline the criteria to be used to evaluate needs, provide a number of strategies for implementing a bikeway plan and recommend a bikeway plan for the City of Richland. The needs, criteria and strategies were identified in working with the City's Technical Advisory Committee and Steering Committee for the Transportation Plan. Needs There are few designated on-street bike facilities within the City. One is on Swift Boulevard between Wright Avenue and Stevens Drive and the other is on Columbia Point between George Washington Way and its eastern terminus. There are also several multi-use paths – these can be used by both pedestrian and bicycle travelers. They are primarily located along the Columbia River, along I-182, and along SR 240. The existing bike lane system on arterial and collector streets does not provide adequate connections from neighborhoods to schools, parks, retail centers, or transit stops. Continuity and connectivity are key issues for bicyclists and the lack of facilities (or gaps) cause significant problems for bicyclists in Richland. Without connectivity of the bicycle system, this mode of travel is severely limited (similar to a road system full of cul-de-sacs). Local streets do not require dedicated bike facilities since the low motor vehicle volumes and speeds allow for both autos and bikes to share the roadway. Cyclists desiring to travel through the City generally either share the roadway with motor vehicles on major streets or find alternate routes on lower volume local streets.
    [Show full text]