23AUG12 Literature Review – Cornell Cycles

CORNELL CYCLES – A New Call for Transportation Alternatives

The Report of the Cornell Bikeway Project

Project Team:

Brad Lane – Office of Transportation Services

Scott Whitham – Department of Facilities Engineering

Chris Ellis – Office of Transportation Services

Tom Campanella  – Office of Transportation Services

Under the direction of:

William Wendt – Office of Transportation Services

Office of Transportation Services                                                                                                                                                                                                  March 1992

INTRODUCTION

Issues need attention:

l  Safety – Bicycles and motor vehicles safely share roads

l  Should there be bicycle routes on campus? If so, where?

l  Parking for bicycles?

l  Other aspect – cost, practicality, existing laws and regulations, and time lines.

THE CURRENT SITUATION

Existing problems:

l  Careless riders on pedestrian paths

l  Obstruction of traffic flow along campus avenues

l  Locking bicycles to inappropriate facilities

l  High risk locations

l  Lack of enforcement

l  No place to ride

OPTIONS

Solutions to cope with the current bicycling problem:

l  Banning bicycles from campus

l  Maintain current situation

l  Establish a bikeway system

3 components:

  1. Physical infrastructure, i.e., routes, signage, and parking facilities
  2. Regulations and enforcements
  3. Safety education and promotion

TOWARD A MASTER PLAN

Process

l  A review on written material pertinent to the definition and construction of bikeway system

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Office’s (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of New Bicycle Facilities

l  Probe the community for information on preferred routes, origins and destinations, and perceived difficulties to campus biking

l  Inventory the physical conditions of the transportation infrastructure to expose the physical constrains and opportunities inherent within the system

e.g., road and corridors width, surface condition, traffic volume, road side parking, lighting, slope, and scenic value for all of the major corridors on site

Defining the Physical Structure of A Bikeway

l  DIRECTNESS

“For utilitarian bicycle trips, facility should connect traffic generators and should be located along a direct line convenient for users.”                                                                                                                                         ~AASHTO Guideline

l  TRAFFIC GENERATORS

According to AASHTO recommendations, direct routes should be chosen between the peripheral regions and the hub of the site (center area, divided on generating traffics)

l  FREQUENCY OF ROAD USE

Bikeway network should cover >= 50% of reported bike related accident locations

Selecting Appropriate Locations

Criteria used to determine the appropriate class for installation includes traffic volumes and speeds, safety, rider experience, physical constrains and secondary routes.

3 defined bikeway classes (See Fig. 7 – 9)

l  TRAFFIC VOLUMES & SPEEDS

The AASHTO Guide specifies:

“For facilities on roadways, traffic volumes and speeds must be considered along with the roadway width. Commuting bicyclists frequently use arterial streets because they minimize delay and offer continuity for trips of several miles. It can be more desirable to improve heavily-traveled high-speed streets than adjacent streets, if adequate width for all vehicles is available in the more heavily-traveled streets.”

l  SAFETY

A report from Clark County, Washington indicates:

“Accident statistics reported by the National Transportation Safety Board, show that automobile traffic, particularly in urban areas, poses the most hazard to the bicyclist.”

Some of the benefits of bike lanes described by AASHTO:

Bicycle lanes, together with signs and pavement markings, can improve conditions in corridors where there is significant or potential bicycle demand, by delineating the intend or preferred path of travel and by encouraging the separation of bicycles and motor vehicles. Bicycle lanes also help to increase the total capacities of highways carrying mixed bicycle and motor vehicles traffic.”

“Discussion with officials in other municipalities revealed that bike lanes work best if sufficient bicycles and motor vehicle traffic is present to claim the space delineated for each. – in this way, they will be less likely to wander into the other’s lane of travel.

l  RIDER EXPERIENCE

“Bicycle lanes can be considered when it is desirable to delineate available road space for preferential use by bicyclists and motorists, and to provide for more predictable movements for each. Bicycle lane markings can increase a bicyclist’s confidence in motorists not straying into his or her path of travel. Likewise, passing motorists are less likely to swerve to the left, out of their lane, to avoid  bicyclists on their right.”                                                                                            ~ AASHTO Guideline

l  PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS

Roads of which width cannot be expanded

l  SECONDARY ROUTES

AASHTO states the following about wide curb lanes:

“In many areas where there is a wide curb lane, motorists will not need to change lanes to pass a bicyclist. …In general, a lane width of 14 feet (4.3m) of usable pavement width is desired. Usable pavement width would normally be from curb face to lane stripe, or from edge lane to lane stripe, but adjustments need to be made for drainage grates, parking…”

Interior Campus Locations

l  CLASS ONE BIKE PATH

AASHTO describe the dimensional requirements of bike paths where pedestrians also expects to travel.

“Under certain conditions it may be necessary or desirable to increase the width of a bicycle path to 12 feet (3.7m); for example, because of substantial bicycle volumes, probable shared use with joggers and other pedestrians, use by large maintenance vehicles, steep grades…”

l  DISMOUNT AND CAUTION ZONES

Dismount zones step down to caution zones at certain time period

  1. Dismount zones
  2. Regulations

Written policies describing the bicycle regulations, violations and penalties to govern the use of these areas mentioned above should be adopted and enforced.

  1. Suggested areas

Conclusions

…it is recommended that the university consider adopting a standard minimum road width of wide-curb –lanes dimensions for use on all newly constructed campus roads that do not require bike lanes.

IMPROVEMENTS TO RECOMMENDED BIKE ROUTES

Overview

P. 24, Fig. 13

Future Actions

l  Rules and Regulations

Subdivide into 3 categories:

  1. Those that governing the parking of bicycles
  2. Those that address the operation of bicycles
  3. Those that pertain to the registration of bicycles

l  Promotion and Safety Education

* The immediate goal involves the collection and communication of information

Conclusion

(Perhaps) the most important phase in the planning of the physical network is the initial one: Data collection.

APPENDIX

P. 52~53, P. 56~57, P. 58~75