PLANNING BICYCLERO‘UTES WITH-IN , - THE. DEVELOPED GOMM’UNITY _, _;:2:2;g.vg;=gf:r:}g_; ‘ ' In..- , - \ . . ‘ .. V fi_Q‘m-mu7flnr;up:q:l ".:"""‘-v '9 *M'P. ‘ I'm. .4.“ N. ' » . . ’ ' -- V . ‘ . H’ ‘ h' ' "r ‘ .1' " ' ": - ~V n'ul' ' '.'..'. <\‘ ' I. 'H’u-vfiu'.‘ amt-“9...... 1,.“- N‘ _ u.,’:(£n':fin’:iai—-;r,. . I-‘--:~.. . ": ~ Thesis for the. Degree ‘of M.- U.;;P,, , i r - MICHIGAN STATE UNNERSIW “ f MICHAEL J. 03-:ch 1972 N Tnéaw LIBRARY MiChigan State University ."\\ —W7 2 ’1 luNgim fl ””t‘ 1mm“ & GSUNS 2 W222: 222222.222 ‘ Newllih I. I. -___.‘_,4__f N 2 2 |\\ 22222222222222 2 2 312931 PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout {tom your record. INES man on Of before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 3,-w ABSTRACT PLANNING BICYCLE ROUTES WITHIN THE DEVELOPED COMMUNITY BY Michael J. Cecka ,{lnterest in bicycling for recreation, health, and transportation purposes has increased tremendously within the last five years, and communities across the country are beginning to face the problem of how to safely accom- modate the bicycle in their automobile-oriented circula- tion systems?/ This study attempts to provide a framework and methodology for planning and implementing bicycle routes within the develOped community. Most of the reference material pertaining to bi- cycle routes exists as individual plans and reports, and inadequate efforts have been made to relate these studies and designs in a form which is useful to those interested in bicycle facilities. Therefore, this study draws from a composite of background material in presenting a planning perspective for bicycle routes: The research effort in- cluded analysis of planning and development reports, Michael J. Cecka examination of the limited published material on the sub- ject, personal correspondence and interviews, and personal experience as planning consultant for the East Lansing bike route study. A discussion of the historical development of bicycles and their facilities brings the current pOpularity of cycling into perspective, and indicates that this popu- larity is not simply a fad. The study analyzes the various approaches to bicycle route planning, and con- cludes that the general land use planning model, rather than the transportation planning model, is best suited to bicycle.facilities. The importance of considering all types of bicycle trips, rather than just recreational trips, is emphasized. The elements required in a background investiga- tion of existing bicycling characteristics are discussed, and methods for conducting additional research are pre- sented. Steps involved in the design process are developed, and the synthesis of background data and in- formation within the design is emphasized. A classifica- tion system for the various types of bicycle routes is given, and each class of route is considered in terms of description and extent of use, standards of application, safety and effectiveness, and cost of development. The background data and design steps, when applied to route classes, result in a bicycle route plan based on the Michael J. Cecka needs of the cyclists and the realities of the existing community. Methods of financing the plan are presented, and the existing and possible future State and Federal sources of assistance are.listed. The relationships of public input and program coordination with implementation are discussed. .Emphasis is given to the staging of plans, and examples.of implementation policies are presented. The study concludes with a discussion of additional re- search needed in the area of bicycle route planning. PLANNING BICYCLE ROUTES WITHIN THE DEVELOPED COMMUNITY BY Michael J. Cecka A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER IN URBAN PLANNING School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture 1972 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people deserve an expression of appreciation for their assistance in the preparation of this thesis. However, I would particularly like to recognize Mr. Robert Cleckner, National Field Director of the Bicycle Institute of America for the excellent work he is doing in promoting bicycle routes throughout the country, and for his contri- bution in supplying material for the thesis. Roger Bardsley also deserves a word of thanks for his assistance and support throughout my development of interest in bicycles. As co-author of the East Lansing bike study, Roger deserves credit for much of the back- ground work and many of the concepts which have been described in this thesis. I would like to express my appreciation to the East Lansing Planning Department for their direct support in the development of the East Lansing study. This study added immeasurably to the content of this thesis. Finally, my wife Sandra deserves a special measure of appreciation for her constant help and understanding, which made this entire effort possible. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O v LIST OF FIGURES O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O 0 Vi Chapter I O IIJTRODUCTIOIJ O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O I 1 Limits of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Definitions 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O 3 Research Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Description of Content . . . . . . . . . 5 II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Brief History of Bicycles . . . . . . . . 8 Popularity Trends and Public Acceptance . 12 Growth of the Bikeway Movement . . . . . 16 III. PLANNING APPROACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Bicycle Routes as an Element of the Urban Transportation System . . . . . 21 The Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . 25 IV. EXAMINATION OF EXISTING BICYCLE USE CHARACTERISTICS IN THE COMMUNITY . . . . 29 Citizen Interest Groups . . . . . . . . . 29 Experience of Other Areas . . . . . . . . 31 Bicycle Registration Data . . . . . . . . 32 Traffic Counts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Accident Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Ordinance Review . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 V. QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY O O O O I O O O O O O O 4 4 Bicycle Rider Interviews . . . . . . . . 44 General Questionnaire Survey . . . . . . 45 Stratified Questionnaire Survey . . . . . 47 iii Chapter Page VI. ROUTE DESIGN AND TREATMENT . . . . . . . . . 57 Route Location Criteria . . . . . . . . . 58 Classification of Route Types . . . . . . 63 Class I Bike Route--Signs Only . . . . . 64 Class II Bike Route--Signs and Lane Stripes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Class III Bike Route--Physicall ' Separated Bike Lanes . . . . . . . . . 78 Class IV Bike Route--Altered Street Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Class V Bike Route--Sidewalks and Curb Cuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Class VI Bike Route--New Route Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Cost Estimates Applie to Classifica- tion Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 VII. FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . 95 Federal Funding Programs . . . . . . . . 95 Current and Pending State Funding Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Staging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Program Coordination . . . . . . . . . . 103 Public Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 Implementation Policies . . . . . . . . . 105 VIII O CONCLUSIONS 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 109 BIBLIOGMPHY O C O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O O 115 APPENDICES A. Copy of Letter to Planning Agencies Requesting Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 B. Copy of Questionnaire Used in California Study 0 O O O O O I O O I O O O O O O O O 121 C. Matrix of Data from East Lansing Questionnaire Survey . . . . . . . . . . 123 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Sampling procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 2. Weighting factor for questionnaire responses 50 3. Costs for bike route signing . . . . . . . . 71 4. Bicycle lane widths . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 5. Costs for striping a bicycle lane . . . . . . 77 6. Costs for bike lane with concrete bumpers . . 80 7. Costs for curb cuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 8. Costs for new bicycle path construction . . . 93 9. Summary of route classification costs . . . . 94 10. Current and pending state bicycle legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 LIST OF FIGURES Figure .1. Automobile transportation planning process 2. Bicycle route planning process . . . . . . 3. Bicycle accident locations . . . . . . . . 4. East Lansing adult cyclists preferred routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Bike Route sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. Bike Xing sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Page 25 27 39 55 65 66 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The people of the United States are almost com- pletely dependent upon the auto-highway system for their transportation needs within the metropolitan center, and between the urban and rural parts of their region. Roads and streets in the United States, under the jurisdiction of all levels of government, totaled nearly 3.73 million miles in 1970, and of this total, 79% have paved surfaces.1 The immense commitment of developing this single means of transportation has not only resulted in the emerging crises of traffic, pollution, accidents, and the erosion of urban space, but has penalized those who, for reasons of age, income, or personal choice would prefer to use non-automotive means of transportation./ An approach is available which would serve to diversify urban trans- portation by providing an alternative mode of travel, a comprehensive system of urban bicycle routes.7 1Friends for Bikecology, "Eco Stats," Serendipity 3, January, 1972. At present, there are only about 15,000 miles of designated bicycle routes nationwide,2 serving a bicycling population which has recently grown to over 80 million, and a good percentage of these are located on the urban fringes where space is most easily availablev/ In the developed urban areas, where the demand for space is high, transportation facilities have been designed for essential- ly two modes, walking and driving, and the bicycle has been ignored. [Incorporating the bicycle as a third mode has been successfully accomplished in recent "New Town" designs;3 however, the challenge remains to do something about the current situation in existing communities. Thus, recognizing the need for diversifying urban trans- portation systems, the recent nationwide renewal of interest in bicycling for fun, exercise, and utility, and the need for safe places to ride within the community, this thesis approaches the problem of planning and pro- viding facilities for a supplementary means of transpor- tation, the bicycle, within the established urban design. Limits of the Study By concentrating on the provision of bike routes within the already developed urban area, the thesis 2Ibid. 3See Chapter III, page 24. attempts to interpret and provide for an established need, rather than attempting to convince non-riders of the bene- fits of cycling. Limits on the study have been set in terms of scope, as well as in the areas of problem state- ment and approach. This thesis will cover planning steps through the financing and implementation stage. Questions such as the actual effectiveness of the system, impact on the traffic, reaction by pedestrians, cyclists, and auto drivers, and provision of facilities in new developments will be left for future studies. Further, matters such as the provision of bicycle parking facilities and the development of anti-theft measures have been judged as beyond the scope of this thesis. Definitions By way of clarification, a limited set of terms has emerged to describe the various types of bicycle facilities being developed. Although no clear concensus yet exists on their proper use and meaning, the following descriptions or definitions appear to be valid: Bikeway: a street designated as suitable for bi- cycle traffic by means of posted "Bikeway" signs. Bicycle Safety Route: the same as a Bikeway. Bicycle Path: usually refers to a specially con- structed pathway, designed for the exclusive use of bicycles. Bicycle.Route: a general term encompassing any facility designed or designated for the use of bicycles. Throughout this thesis, the term "bicycle route" will be used, unless a more specific meaning is intended. Research Steps Research steps involved in the preparation of this thesis included a search of published literature. The author soon discovered that beyond the areas of historical background and.current interest, there is a distinct lack of published material on bicycle routes. To compensate for this lack of data, a letter requesting specific experi- ence and information on bicycle route planning was mailed out to planning and parks departments throughout the country (see Appendix A for example of this letter). More than one hundred (100) copies were sent to areas reputed to be involved with bicycles, and approximately half of the departments and agencies responded. The material re- ceived included letters, plans for systems, and brochures describing existing routes, and thus formed a substantial base of information for this thesis. Personal contact and consultation was established with individuals and departments in the greater Lansing area having an interest or relationship to the thesis. Telephone interviews were conducted with individuals in Ann Arbor, Michigan and New York City4 to answer specific questions. In addition, personal interviews were conducted with Mary Ann Zimmerman, one of the planners of the Chicago bikepath system, and with Robert Cleckner, National Field Director for the Bicycle Institute of America, in Arling- ton Heights, Illinois. These personal interactions pro- vided immediate feedback on detailed matters, and greatly added to the substance of the thesis. Finally, as a result of the efforts of several individuals and the climate of local public interest, the author was enabled to participate as a consultant to the East Lansing Planning Commission in the development of a background information study and development plan for bicycle routes in East Lansing. The experience gained in conducting this study and preparing the report5 served as an essential catalyst for the previous data collected. Consequently, the East Lansing bike route study has served as a major source of data for this thesis. Description of Content The thesis begins by reviewing the bicycle's his- torical background with an emphasis on its fluctuating 4Howard F. Russell, Chief Civil Engineer for Ann Arbor, Michigan and Barbara Hickock of the New York Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs Administration. 5East Lansing Planning Commission, "East Lansing Bike Routes: Background Study and Development Plan," East Lansing, Michigan, 1972 (an unpublished planning report). periods of popularity, and the early attempts at providing facilities.2 The question as to whether the current popu- larity of bicycling is simply a fad is discussed. Chapter III examines the planning approaches taken regarding bicycles thus far, and discusses some of the pitfalls and.problems associated with inadequate planning. An evaluation is made between the transportation planning model and the.needs of bicycle route planning. A planning concept is suggested for bicycle facilities, and followed throughout the thesis. Chapter IV analyzes the various elements of a com- plete background study of existing bicycle characteristics. Included in this analysis are discussions about citizen interest groups, the experience of similar areas, regis- tration data, automobile and bicycle traffic counts, bicycle accident data, and local bicycle ordinance review. This data then forms the basis for further study. Various survey methods for expanding this background information base, including personal interviews, the general survey, and the stratified questionnaire survey, are discussed in Chapter V. Advantages and disadvantages associated with each technique are presented, and recommendations regard- ing analysis of data are given. synthesis of data through the design process is discussed in Chapter VI. A system of classification for the various route types is suggested. Each class of route is analyzed in terms of description and extent of use, standards of-application, safety and effectiveness, and cost of development. Based on the analysis of existing conditions and the potential application of route class types, design of a comprehensive, transportational system of bicycle routes becomes possible. Financing and implementation are the subject of Chapter VII, with a detailed examination into the various sources of available funding. The importance of staging the develOpment of routes, while at the same time main- taining the basic structure of a system, is emphasized. Implementation policies are discussed, and examples given. The final Chapter (VIII) is devoted to summary and conclusions. The role of bicycle route planning in the overall community planning framework is emphasized, and new areas of research are suggested as a means of evaluat- ing the bicycle's potential role as an integrated component} of the urban transportation system. II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The bicycle as we know it today has had a long and colorful history of development. Examination of this back- ground places the current status of the bicycle in proper perspective, and gives insight regarding the bicycle's future. Brief History of Bicycles Credit generally goes to a Frenchman, Chevalier de Sivrac, for creating the first two-wheeled, man-powered machine, in 1790.6 This vehicle, called the Celifere, consisted of a wooden bar, often ornately fashioned in the form of an animal, supported by two wheels and carrying a padded saddle. It was propelled by the rider's feet pushing against the ground. It did not steer, and therefore never developed into anything more than a historical curiosity. In 1816 the Baron von Drais of Karlsruhe, Germany, introduced a similar machine, which incorporated a major improvement. Its front wheel was mounted on a fork that swiveled, enabling it to be steered. In order to demon- strate the practicality of his Draisine, as it became 6Arthur Judson Palmer, Riding High (New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1956), p. 16. known, the Baron rode from Karlsruhe to Schwetzingen in sixty minutes, a distance normally covered in four hours on foot.7 An improved version of the Draisine, sporting an adjustable saddle, cushioned rest for the forearms and different handlebars, was introduced into England in 1818 by Denis Johnson. The Hobby Horse, as it was called there, was popular for several years among the young aristocrats, or "dandies," who wheeled at riding academies and on the road. The Hobby Horse was brought to America in 1819. There was a brief flutter of excitement over this vehicle, centering in Boston and Philadelphia where riding schools opened; but the novelty wore off and the Hobby Horse dis- appeared from sight. The fifty year period following the invention of the Hobby Horse witnessed a surprising variety of attempts to allow rider propulsion by mechanical means. The first man to build and operate a machine that could be driven with both feet entirely free of the ground was Kirkpatrick Macmillan of Scotland in 1838. His vehicle was remarkable, both in its similarity to the modern bicycle and in its practicality. It had upturned handle bars, fenders, and rear wheel drive (levers were used instead of a chain) like today's bicycle. Macmillan could ride ten miles an 71bid., pp. 13-14. 10 hour, and for short distances as high as fourteen. He was arrested several times for endangering pedestrians, and angered the local stagecoach driver by outrunning the coach. Despite its excellent design, the Macmillan machine was apparently never offered for sale, and possibly owing to a prejudice against Hobby Horses at the time, faded from the picture.8 Development of the bicycle then reverted to the fitting of cranks to the front wheel of the Hobby Horse, creating a vehicle known as the velocipede. In 1860 either a Paris manufacturer named Pierre Michaux or his employee Pierre Lallement (a dispute immediately developed between the two) fitted pedals to a Michaux vehicle.9 The resulting Michaux velocipede sold by the hundreds in Europe, and in 1869 created a brief stir in America. This machine had wooden wheels with iron tires, making it heavy and uncomfortable to ride, and it was nicknamed the "bone shaker." In an attempt to gear the machines up and obtain greater speed, the tendency was to use a larger wheel. In 1871 James Starley of Coventry, England, introduced his famous Ariel bicycle, the first "high-wheeler" or "penny- farthing" (for the big wheel as the penny and the small as 81bid., pp. 33-35. 91bidcl pp. 38-39. 11 the farthing). The high-wheeled bicycle was the first really practical bicycle. The rider, being almost directly over the large wheel, could use his weight to pedal and, compared with the boneshaker, the "pennyfarthing" or "ordi- nary" as it was also called, was a lightweight, comfortable machine. It was an instant success and interest in bicycl- ing soared with its introduction. Copies of the design quickly appeared, and ordinaries produced in several countries dominated the market for nearly two decades. A serious shortcoming of the ordinary, the tendency for the rider to "take a header" and fall headlong onto the roadway whenever the front wheel hit a bump, led to the final major improvement of the bicycle into the form we see today. Known as the safety, this bicycle was suc- cessfully introduced in 1885 by Starley & Sutton of England. The safety featured equal-sized wheels, the diamond frame in use today, and a chain driven rear wheel. The pneumatic tire, invented by John Dunlop in 1888, insured the safety's success by greatly increasing its speed, comfort, and ease of propulsion. Detailed refinements, such as the geared hub, derailleur gears, drop-style handle bars, coaster brakes, and lightweight frames all made their first appear- ance in the period between 1885 and 1910. 12 Popularity Trends and Public Acceptance As indicated by this history of development, the loicycle has always been affected by fluctuating trends of loopularity. The Hobby Horse and the boneshaker were play- things of the rich. Novelty created their brief popularity, lout their lack of comfort and efficiency prevented lasting (or widespread use. These limitations were overcome with 1the ordinary, and with the further improvement of the :safety, bicycling became an extremely popular form of 1transportaion for urban dwellers in America between 1880 sand the 19203. The bicycle had come within reach of the <:ommon man, and it is estimated that in the 18905 there Vwere 10 million bicycles in the United States, while the population was just approaching 76 million.]'0 This is not to say that the adoption of the bicycle «came spontaneously and without the opposition that so often (accompanies social innovation. Early cyclists were pri- Inarily athletic types, often guilty of "scorching" over 1:he highways in record-breaking attempts. Later cyclists, ailthough tamer, inherited the antagonism of pedestrians, 1”horsemen, and teamsters. Fist fights often broke out, and Slxoups of non-cyclists banded together to pass laws . 10Sidney H. Aronson, "The Sociology of the Bicycle," Jan Sociology and Everyday Life, ed. by Marcello Truzzi (New CTersey: Prentice Hall, 1968). P. 299. 13 prohibiting the riding of bicycles in public parks and drives. In 1879 wheelmen won an important victory when a Massachusetts court ruled that "bicycles cannot be deemed as nuisances but are entitled to the reasonable use of the highways."11 And a few years later the Treasury Department classified bicycles as carriages rather than as steel pro- ducts. To further this legal struggle as well as for social reasons, the League of American Wheelmen was formed on May 31, 1880. Throughout its history, the L.A.W. kept its pledge to "promote the general interest of bicycling; to ascertain, defend, and protect the rights of wheelmen."12 Through its efforts in several test cases the laws which were applied to carriages came to be generally applied to bicycles as well. Thus, in the days before the automobile, the bicycle achieved its legal status as a vehicle. Follow- ing the introduction of the automobile, this proved to be a liability, for most states prohibited sidewalk riding, and the bicycle was ill-equipped to compete with auto traffic. The bicycle was even less prepared to cope with the popularity and availability of the automobile as a Personal means of transportation. While the popularity \ llIbid., p. 295. lzIbid. 14 of the Hobby Horse and boneshaker had been restricted by jpracticle shortcomings of the vehicles, the bicycle of 1910 had proven itself to be a reliable, comfortable, and eefficient means of transportation. In Europe, where the aautomobile until recently has been generally unavailable :for the average man, the bicycle has continued to serve aas an important form of transportation. However, in Ameri— <:a it simply couldn't compete with the inexpensive family <:ar for popularity. Sales dropped steadily through the 219208 and reached an all-time low of 180,000 in 1932.13 Inost of these were bulky childrens' bikes, for by this 1time the bicycle in this country had received the status (of a toy. Although the bicycle retained its legal heri- ‘tage as a vehicle, autos had claimed the roads, and trans- ];ortational use of the bicycle remained inconspicuous. Interest in bicycles increased briefly toward the (and of the Depression and during World War II, with the Shortage of automobiles and gasoline. Following the war, 1:he light-weight "English Racer" was reintroduced to the United States, but with record-breaking auto sales in the Pubst4War boom period, bicycles remained a children's play- ‘tJning. Reflecting the population boom, bicycle sales grew 12:3 3 million in 1950. Between 1950 and 1960, sales rose ‘ 13New York City Department of Parks ["Program of 'Ffiroposed Facilities for Bicycling"], New York, 1958, p. ii ( Mimeographed . ) 15 gradually to 3.7 million, and then the Boom occurred.? In “the following decade the number of people using bicycles rnore than doubled--from 35.2 million in 1960 to more than £30 million in 1970. The greatest portion of this increase 11as occurred in the past year, with sales, which declined ssince 1968 to 6.7 million in 1970, jumping to an all-time Iligh of 8.5 million in 1971.14 It is apparent that bicycle ssales in 1972 will exceed the number of automobiles sold jLn the United States for the first time in over 50 years. aThere is no one single reason for this resurgence cnf interest in bicycles. Certainly the rediscovery of the ZLightweight bicycle, coupled with the refinement of the 1:en-speed derailleur gearing system has played its part, ssince most of the increased sales have been of the adult 1:en-speed models. Disenchantment with the automobile for 1:he first time in its history is a factor, and the recent (Economic slump has added to the bicycle's appeal. An in- <:reasingly health conscious American public, spurred on by 1:he efforts of such cycling enthusiasts as Dr. Paul Dudley “White, well known heart specialist, is turning to the klicycle for exercise. This interest in health has con— tzributed to the current popularity of outdoor recreation, and Americans are discovering that bicycling can be fun V 14Bicycle Institute of America, "Some Facts About tihe Current Bike Explosion," New York, 1971, p. 1 (Xeroxed). 16 as well as invigorating. Also, the arrival of the ecology lmovement in the last two years is at least partly responsi- Ible for the attention bicycles have most recently received. Whatever the reasons, the bicycle is riding the crest of 'unparalleled popularity, creating serious problems of ‘Mhere the cyclist can safely ride:7 Growth of the Bikeway Movement The problem of adequate facilities first arose as :soon as the bicycle became a popular form of transporta- ‘tion, in the 18808. At that time the roads in this country ‘were in a sad state of disrepair, and surfaced roadways suitable for bicycles were almost non-existent. The League (of American Wheelmen took the lead in campaigning for better roads. Sidney H. Aronson in his study, The Sociology of _3he Bicycle reports: To the League of American Wheelmen goes most of the credit for road reform in the eighties and nine- ties. Under its direction, pamphlets and books-- including the Good Roads magazine-~urging reform were written and distributed. In Washington the League lobbied unsuccessfully for a federal highway, but did succeed in 1893 in getting the national government to create the Office of Public Roads Inquiries. Other returns for this effort began to roll in. By 1896, 16 states appropriated money to improve their roads. Several states-~Massachusetts and New Jersey were the first--also established state control of roads through a central highway commission. In Massachusetts, all the members of the State Highway Commission belonged to the L.A.w.15 15Sidney H. Aronson, op. cit., p. 301. 17 (One example of results from the League's efforts was an 1899 Wisconsin law providing for the construction of kaicycle sidepaths in each county. The law stated that upon 1:he request of fifty county residents the county judge vvould appoint a board of sidepath commissioners for the <:ounty to: construct and maintain sidepaths along public sstreets, license each bicycle, plant shade trees along Ipaths, and limit the passing speed of a bicycle to not Inore than ten miles an hour. This law was repealed in 11923. Wisconsin published a 1900 road map which was actu- éally a bicycle map, showing a network of bicycle touring aroutes and railroads tying the state together.16 Metropolitan centers offered better facilities in ‘the form of smoother streets and park roads, and much <3ycling activity was concentrated around the larger cities such as Boston, New York, and Chicago. In addition to the .auto-free roads, some areas developed special paths exclu- aSively for bicycles.' One of the earliest examples was the twin cycle path system running from Prospect Park to Coney Itsland in Brooklyn, a distance of 5 1/2 miles. These paths, nnade of finely crushed bluestone, ran between rows of trees ” ailong either side of Coney Island Boulevard, and were first Cxpened in June, 1895.’ ‘ 16Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, "Fact ESheet: Bicycling in Wisconsin," Madison, Wisconsin, n.d. (Mimeographed) . 18 Other areas of the country besides Brooklyn had their cycleways for local cyclists. Notable among these *was the Pasadena Cycleway for bicycles and motorcycles, Ibuilt in 1900. This unique facility consisted of an ele- 'vated wooden roadway, which linked Pasadena with downtown ILos Angeles, a distance of nine miles. The grade was mini- Inum and curves were gradual. This cycleway deserves credit .as being the first super highway in America. Revived interest in bicycles in the late thirties Lled to the preparation by Robert Moses of a plan for con- :struction of 59 miles of bicycle paths in parks throughout. lNew York City.18 This proposal employed the concepts of separate, paved pathways alongside pedestrian walks, as ‘well as specially marked and designated lanes on low- -traveled streets and parkways. Apparently most of these Igaths were constructed, for many of them appear as existing Ipaths in a 1972-73 budget report on bike paths. Some along the parkways were lost when roadways were widened, at a tLime when bicycles were less popular. {Similar path systems were provided through park areas in cities such as Chicago and Boston, and on some \Jruiversity campuses. However, bikeways as a movement got 1Zl'leir impetus from cyclists in Homestead, Florida, with 17Arthur Judson Palmer, op. cit., pp. 120, 125-126. 18New York City Department of Parks, op. cit. 19 the concept of "bicycle safety routes." Discouraged by mounting traffic problems, the Homestead bike club pro- jposed designating lightly traveled secondary streets con- .necting residential areas with schools, playgrounds, shopping centers, ball parks and other centers of activity as bicycle safety routes, marked with easy-to-read signs. ‘The system opened in February, 1962 and received national attention, largely through the efforts of the Bicycle In- stitute of America. Within a year of the Homestead open- ing, thirty-four Bikeways were completed or under construction in thirteen states, with mileage approaching 19/‘Bikeway designation and construction of both 1,000. recreation and commuter routes has proceeded steadily since theg;}’ {The question as to whether this current popularity trend in bicycles is just a fad concerns many people. It is true that bicycles and bike facilities have fluctuated in popularity in the past. However, as already indicated, 'the first two surges of interest were limited by technology, \vhile the boom at the turn of the century lasted over ‘thirty years, only to be supplanted by the introduction (of the automobile. Bicycles are now making their comeback féespite+_and_perhaps,bquuse of, the overwhelming presence .- ..—.... q—W ,,,........————4 ¥ 19Bicycle Institute of America, "Success Story-- TIhe Growth of 'Bikeways'," New York, n.d., p. 3 (Mimeo- graphed) . 20 ._Qf_:h§,automobilel. It seems unlikely that an innovation in transportation as significant as the automobile will appear and blunt this interest in bicycles. The increas- ing emphasis on mass transit could, with proper planning, actually stimulate use of the bicycle as a means of getting -to the stations and stops. Further, it is estimated that ‘there are still 150 million Americans between the ages of 16 and 65 who have not yet bought bicycles.20 Legisla- ‘tures throughout the country are passing bills supporting 'the construction of bicycle facilities, thus reflecting a uoaum> m Eoum poawmaoo “monsom u- sum .. u- om.mm mm.auom.flm .w.z .omsomusm ailoomm ow om.o m I: II In .Ho .Ucmauuom ovw In II II In :1 .Hz .ooxsmzaflz .. u- n- .. oe.mm oe.mm .so .mennmuuos cam I: an In nu I: .OH .muflo «Sea ommuoomm u- u- I- u- I- .mo ..aom .ucsm gx. ooam Axn\Hvoa oo.oaw oo.mw oo.mm oo.vw .fiz .mswmcmq .m oocnobmw II II In In In .mo .mfi>mn II in II oo.mw In oo.~m .mam ..OU moon I: II oo.HHw oo.¢m oo.vw om.mnom.~m .mu .ucOEoumHU comm Axnxecum oo.-m .. n- .. .HH .ommoneo II II oo.m m II II In .00 .Howasom owafimwwm owwwflmom cmflmmmwm cwwmommm umom\w cmflm\m muwu .mswcmfim ousom exam How mumoo .m mange 72 Class II Bike Route--Signs and Lane Striping This route technique involves the striping of an actual lane within the paved portion of the street right- of-way, intended for the exclusive use of the bicyclist. Striped bicycle lanes can be accommodated in streets which were over-designed in terms of width, in streets of mini- mum width construction through the redesignation of driving or parking space as bicycle lanes, and in streets designed in width to accommodate bike lanes. Davis, California has had the most detailed experience with this form of bicycle route. Standards of application for this type of bike route center around the type of striping used, the width of lane designated, the location of the bike lanes within the street, and the type of street used in accommodating bike lanes. Some variety of opinion exists regarding the type of striping involved in proper marking of bike lanes. A painted line from four to eight inches in width has been used, in both solid and dashed patterns. Davis uses a solid, white, eight inch line. A report from Chula Vista, California notes that San Diego, California uses green lane markings, that nearby Coronado uses blue stripes, and that the colored stripes seem to be more effective than 73 the white.39 The need for uniformity is apparent, and has received the attention of Edward F. Kearney, Executive Director of the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Law 40 who favors the solid white and Ordinances in Washington, stripe. Width of lanes is subject to an equal variety of treatments. Table 4 indicates the range of widths in use. Table 4. Bicycle lane widths. Place Lane width, Lane width, no parking outs1de parking Davis, Ca. 6 feet 6 feet Chula Vista, Ca. 6 feet 6 feet Mich. St. Univ. 3 feet¢/// -- E. Lansing, Mi. 4 feet 5 feet Sacramento, Ca. 7 feet 6 feet Santa Barbara, Ca. 3 feet -- Englewood, Co. 6 feet -- Berkeley, Ca. 3 1/2 feet 4 1/2 feet Portland, Or. 8 feet -- Oregon State 6 feet 6 feet Source: Compiled from a variety of Planning Reports-- See Bibliography. Apparently, some of the recommended minimum widths are influenced by the availability, or lack of, adequate street space. Many of the California communities listed above are characterized by wide local streets, and the 6 or 7 39W. G. Jasinek, Director of Parks and Recreation, "Bicycle Routes for Chula Vista," Chula Vista, California, 1971, Appendix F. (Mimeographed.) 40Bicycle Institute of America, "Federal Traffic Law Expert Urges Consistent Bike Lane Marking," Boom in Bike- ways, 7:1, February, 1972, p. 5. 74 foot width on either side is easily accommodated. Three feet is the narrowest width recommended, and experience on the Michigan State University campus has proven this to be inadequate for the following reasons: The curbside \‘ bike lane often includes the joint between the concrete gutter and the paving, and the cyclist must ride outside this joint, thus reducing the riding space of the lane. Often, too, the paving contains ruts and chuckholes which cyclists tend to avoid. Thus, the East Lansing figures of four feet width with no parking, and five feet width with parking (to compensate for the opening of car doors), can be considered as minimum acceptable bicycle lane widths. The 6 or 7 foot width is desirable when possible. Bicycle lanes have been arranged in several dif- ferent ways on existing streets. Assuming four feet to be minimum bike lane width with no parking, five feet to be minimum width with parking, eight feet to be minimum parking lane width, and ten feet to be minimum driving lane width, the following combinations are possible: Two driving lanes and Total two bicycle lanes: . 4'--10'--10‘--4' 28' Two driving lanes, 1 parking lane, 2 bike 8'--5'--10'--10'--4' 37' lanes: Two driving lanes, 2 parking lanes, 2 bike 8'--5'--10'--10'--5'--8' 46' lanes: 2 driving lanes, 1 center left turn lane, 2 bike 4'--10'--10'--10'--4' 38' lanes: 75 Similar combinations can be developed for streets with four driving lanes, with or without parking. It should be pointed out that the elimination of one existing driving or parking lane can provide the needed space for two bi- cycle lanes. Wider bike lanes for two-way bicycle traffic should be discouraged as contrary to most existing laws, and confusing to drivers and cyclists alike. Parking should be prohibited within marked bicycle lanes. The selection of streets for bicycle lane treat- ment has received little attention in most reports to date, beyond the considerations of lane widths. The East Lansing report considered this factor in terms of traffic volumes and speed of travel: Separate bike lanes within the street right-of-way . were considered, where room was available, for streets‘ with up to 15,000 cars per day. It was felt that along streets with greater traffic volumes...bicycles could not safely share the same roadway with cars, even with the benefit of a separate lane. Frequent turning movements and higher speeds of travel wiuld minimize the margin of safety a lane provides.4 This is not to say that bicycles could not share the same roadway or right-of-way, provided that a physically separate path or lane were established. The safety and effectiveness of bicycle lanes has been questioned more than studied; however, the following data may be cited on the subject. The majority of bicycle 41East Lansing Planning Commission, op. cit., p. 25. 76 accident victims are youngsters (84% of the bicycle acci- dent victims in a 1957 National Safety Council Study were 42 The study by the Council in under 16 years of age). 1969 of bicycle accidents among school age children re- vealed that the accidents in the study occurred more frequently on a street between interSections (30.97%).43 Bicycle lanes would be in a position to reduce the fre- quency of such accidents. The effectiveness of lane striping in discouraging encroachment by autos on bike lanes is open to debate; however, research on road shoulder striping, similar to bike lane striping, has been shown to be effective in reducing auto accidents,44 and this indicates that striping offers some degree of protection for the cyclist. Finally, based on experience with the Davis bike lanes, Dale Lott and Robert Sommer reported that after one year, no accidents occurred 429i£ppm§tances of Bicycle Accidents (Chicago: National Safety Council, Statistics Department, 1958). 43Vilardo, Nicol, and Heldreth, op. cit., p. 31. 44Parallel studies in Ohio, J. V. Musick, "Effect of Pavement Edge Marking on Two-Lane Rural State Highways in Ohio," HRB Bulletin 266, 1960; and in Kansas, A. J. Basile, "Effect of Pavement Edge Marking on Traffic Acci- dents in Kansas," Topeka, 1961; demonstrated significant gains in auto safety. That is, the cars stayed in their lanes and ran off the road with less frequency on roads which had been marked with shoulder stripes. These stripes would be similar to proposed bike lane markings. 77 within bicycle lanes, compared with 46 reported automo- bile-bicycle collisions in the city as a whole.45 Costs associated with bicycle lane striping are-' minimal, and are often covered in the normal process of street maintenance. The following estimates give an idea of the possible range of costs (Table 5): Table 5. Costs for striping a bicycle lane. Location Cost Chula Vista, California $360 per mile, striping only Davis, California $120 per mile, paint only A East Lansing, Michigan 5 65 per mile, striping V/ only Huntington Beach, California $280 per mile, striping only $580-$630 per mile, signing and striping Source: Compised from a variety of sources--See Biblio- graphy. It should be pointed out that use of lane striping should also include "Bikeway" signing and the stencil marking of pavement with the words "Bikes Only" to assure the exclu- Sive use of lanes by bicycles. 45Lott and Sommer, op. cit., p. 5. 78 Class III Bike Route--Physically Separated Bike Lanes This form of bike lane is similar to the painted lane, except that some form of positive, physical separa- tion of cars from bikes is present. Davis, California _has used this method in many of its bike routes, with concrete bumpers serving as barriers. Littleton, Colorado is using a variation of this technique, with steel buttons at three feet intervals acting as a warning barrier of the bike lane. This type of route treatment is appropriate in two situations: first, where bike lanes and parking are to be combined with driving lanes in which case it becomes pos- sible to have the bike lane between curb and concrete bumpers, with parking outside the bumpers and driving outside the parking; second, along streets with traffic volumes or speeds indicating the necessity of an added safety factor beyond simple lane striping. In the first case, standards of minimum street width for this type of treatment would be similar to those listed for Class II Routes, with some additions. The first parking space along a block with this treatment should be set at least 20 feet back from the intersection to allow adequate visibility of cyclists in the lane. The Oregon State report on standards and guidelines recommends that openings in the barriers be of the 79 following widths: for residential driveways-~8'; for com- 46 The mercial driveways-~12'; for fire hydrants-~40'. Oregon report further recommends that at the beginning and end of each block and at all openings one half of the bumper block be painted yellow and a reflective marker be installed on the end of the bumper block. In addition to the standard "Bike Route" signs along such routes, the words "Bikes Only" should be stenciled on the pavement at -the head of each block. These considerations would also apply to physically separated routes which were estab- lished on streets with dangerous traffic and no parking. The safety and effectiveness of this type of bike route should be obvious, since it results in complete separation of bikes from cars and pedestrians. Where parking is involved, it represents a clear advantage over a striped bike lane outside parked cars, since cars aren't required to cross the bike lane in order to park. Such treatment also reduces the threat of opening car doors on the driver‘s side. Cyclist behavior at inter- sections remains a problem, however. Efforts should be made to locate this type of route along through streets which have a minimum of Stop signs and lights. Left turns by cyclists should be accomplished by riding across the 46Footpaths and Bike Routes: Standards and Guide— lines (Oregon State Highway Division, 1972), p. 15. 80 intersecting street to the far side, and then crossing, rather than moving to the center lane for left turn, as cars do. The primary limitation for this type of bike route in most areas involves a lack of street space for such lanes. Another limitation becomes significant in communi- ties where snow is a problem, since the concrete bumpers would make snow removal difficult within the bike lane. In this situation, it might be possible to use such lanes, provided the bike lane was designed wide enough to permit mechanical plowing. Costs for this type of treatment have been well- documented through experience at Davis, and are broken down as shown in Table 6. Table 6. Costs for bike lane with concrete bumpers. Item .. Cost/mile Labor (including layout) $2280 Materials: curbing o o o o o o o o o 0 $4400 reflector markers . . . . . 50 $4930 signs . . . . . . . . . . . 400 paint 0 O O O O O O O O I O 80 Equipment $90 Total $7300 Source: From a xeroxed sheet prepared by the DaVis, California, Planning Department, n.d. 81 Class IV Bike Route-- Altered Street Pattern This type of bicycle route involves changes in the existing street pattern which discourage automobile traffic while at the same time encouraging bicycle traffic. Such changes could involve placement of permanent or removable posts at alternate intersections, thus eliminating through automobile traffic, while permitting bicycle through traf— fic and automobile access to homes on the block, such as has been done on some neighborhood streets in Davis, California. Another method could involve the construction of a diagonal island across a residential intersection, thus forcing auto traffic to turn. A break in the island would permit bicycle through traffic. A third way to alter streets would involve the actual construction of cul-de-dacs on a grid pattern of streets, with bike paths joining adjacent streets. These last two techniques would be quite expensive to accomplish; however, in a major re- development of a residential area as in the case of a renewal project, such measures might be considered. Standards and costs for this type of treatment are difficult to estimate, since the experience with it has been minimal. The use of barrier posts would involve minimal cost beyond that of signing. The potential bene- fits are significant in view of the fact that the vast 82 majority of bicycle accidents occur in residential areas,47 where this technique is most applicable. It discourages through traffic which does not belong in residential areas to begin with, yet still permits access by car to homes, and permits on-street parking, which would be difficult to remove if bicycle lanes were being considered. glass V Bike Route-- Sidewalks and CurB Cuts This type of bike route has received little atten- tion in California or Florida, where street widths are often quite adequate in accommodating bicycles. However, in areas where streets are narrow, with heavy traffic, and which may yet be desirable as bicycle routes, the possibility of sidewalk bicycle routes with curb cuts must be considered. This type of bike route has been instituted on an experimental basis in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and plans have been developed to extend the system. In addition, wide sidewalks in parks have been striped with bike lanes in Chicago and Santa Barbara, California. The Berkeley plan has considered limited use of sidewalk routes, while the East Lansing plan suggests widespread use of the technique. The combination of bicyclists and 47The University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center study, cited on page 39, found that 87.6% of all bike accidents took place in residential neighbor- hoods. 83 pedestrians on footpaths is widely accepted in Europe,48 and the recently issued pamphlet by the State of Oregon titled Footpaths and Bike Routes--Standards and Guidelines, referred to earlier, describes the use of sidewalks as bike routes. Design of sidewalk routes involves three considera- tions: the construetion_of ramps at intersections, treat- ment of the sidewalk between intersections, and the _1ocation of sidewalks suitable as bicycle routes. Looking first at curb cuts, the only community with actual experi- ence in this area is Ann Arbor. The design there involved construction of a narrow bicycle ramp adjacent to the sidewalk at the intersection. Slope was 10% and width at street level was 1 1/2 feet. Problems with this design arose because the ramp was too narrow, and cyclists scraped their pedals on the sides of the ramp. These ramps have been redesigned to provide adequate clearance of pedals. Another type of ramp design was used in Ann Arbor, where the entire width of the sidewalk at the intersection was ramped down, to accommodate both bicycles and other vehicles, such as wheelchairs. A variation of this method has been suggested in the East Lansing plan, 48Jean K. Perraton, "Planning for the Cyclist in Urban Areas," Town Planning Review, Vol. 39, No.2, July 1968, p. 158. 84 involving the ramping down of the entire sidewalk area at the intersection, so that the curved radius of the curb is at street level. The advantage of this design is that it permits bicycle access from two directions, rather than just one. Also, it allows more room for bicycles to ride up onto the sidewalk, and serves people with strollers, shopping carts, and wheelchairs. This design has been introduced in Minneapolis, Minnesota, primarily for the convenience of pedestrians. Since these ramps usually occur in residential areas where traffic is light, their significance for bicycles is reduced. Between intersections, sidewalk routes should be signed as with other classes of routes. Where sidewalks are narrow (five feet or less), or where pedestrian use is moderate, the sidewalk should be widened. The East Lansing plan suggested increasing five foot walks by two feet, and construction of new sidewalks at least seven feet wide where bicycle use is anticipated. Some cities have attempted to differentiate bike lanes on sidewalks; however, where the pedestrian--bicycle conflict is great enough to warrant this separation, the use of stripes or signs will most likely prove ineffective. Santa Barbara, California reports on this situation: The primary difficulty we are experiencing with our bikeway is a conflict between pedestrians and bicy- clists along that portion of the route where the bikeway occupies a portion of the sidewalk. The 85 problem occurs on weekends and holidays when the beach area is crowded with both pedestrians and bicyclists. Signs have been erected instructing bicyclists to walk their bikes during these periods, but the signs are for the most part ignored. Pedestrians end up walking on the bikeway and bicyclists ride all over the side- walks. Some bicycle riders return to the street where they again cause problems with automobile traffic. In situations where large crowds are expected, we suggest that the bikeway be constructed completely separate from sidewalks and city streets. The Chicago plan recommends a minimum of six feet width for pedestrians and six feet for bicyclists. The report adds: "Through the posting of signs and the paint- ing of a line on the sidewalk, pedestrian and bicycle traffic may be effectively separated."so It is possible that, at this scale, a line might be effective; however, separate facilities would probably do more in separating bicyclists from pedestrians. The proper location of sidewalk routes within the community has received little attention in the reports reviewed for this thesis. The East Lansing report recom- mended using sidewalk routes along collector or arterial streets where there was insufficient space in the street for bike lanes, provided that the sidewalk didn't carry a heavy volume of pedestrians.. Generally, sidewalks in 9Department of Public Works, Traffic Division, "City of Santa Barbara Bikeway Program," Santa Barbara, California, 1971, p. 3. (Mimeographed.) 50Chicago Department of Planning and Development, op. cit., p. 9. 86 business districts or in the vicinity of high density housing or large schools might prove unsuitable as bi- cycle routes. Widening of the sidewalk in some instances might aid the situation, but the experience of Santa Barbara, in the case of large crowds, should be kept in mind. There is no clear agreement on the use of bicycles on sidewalks. Proposed sidewalk routes in East Lansing have been criticized by serious cyclists who find the streets more adaptable to their riding. This situation was also referred to in the Milwaukee, Wisconsin report: "Adult bicycle commuters do not desire to ride on the 51 sidewalks." Jean K. Perraton, in an English study titled Planning for the Cyclist in Urban Areas takes a different view: The cycleway system should be related to the pedes- trian system. . .Experience in several countries in- dicates. . . cycles and pedestrians are certainly compatible, and that in some instances all three (including motor powered bicycles) may share paths in relative safety. After all, the main danger to all three users is the motor car. He concludes his article by writing: Cycling as a means of transport has much in common with walking, and like walking it should be provided for within the environmental areas and not pushed to the edges. On a modern road system the bicycle is an archaic anachronism, delaying and worrying car drivers 51Milwaukee Bureau of Traffic Engineering and Electrical Services, op. cit., p. 4. 87 and endangering its rider. If proper provision is made, cycling may still have a useful part to play in' the pattern of communications at a local scale agd children may once again cycle for fun in safety. 2 In reference to Children, Perraton focuses on the primary difference between those who favor sidewalk routes in certain situations, and those who oppose such routes. The experienced cyclist does not want to be bothered by periodic curb cuts or pedestrians, and feels more at home in the street, where his riding speed sometimes approaches that of the cars. On the other hand, the young, inexperi- enced rider may not feel safe on the same street, and without a facility which separates him from cars, he may not ride at all. The high percent of bicycle accidents involving Children points to the need for provision of facilities for this type of bike rider. From a transpor- tational standpoint, a system serving all types of bike riders cannot, in the opinion of the author, ignore the possibilities of sidewalk routes, where suitable. Cost estimates for the curb cuts necessary in this type of bike route construction is seen in Table 7. In addition to the cost of curb cuts, this type of route would involved the usual costs of signing. Widened Side- walks would add approximately $1 per square foot of concrete to the costs. 52Jean K. Perraton, op. cit., pp. 156, 162. 88 Table 7. Costs for curb cuts. Place Type ofcurb cut Cost Ann Arbor, Mich. Bike Ramp, 1 1/2' wide $69 per ramp Ann Arbor, Mich. Wheelchair Ramp, 4-5 $138 per feet wide ramp East Lansing, Mich. Full curve ramp $50 Source: Letter from Howard F. Russell, Chief Civil Engineer, Ann Arbor, Michigan, August 30, 1971. Class VI Bike Route--New Path Construction New bike path construction, involving the separa- tion of bicycles from pedestrians and automobiles, repre- sents the ultimate solution to bicycle transportation needs. However, this is also the most expensive type of bicycle route, and examples of exclusive urban bicycle paths are uncommon. New York City has 65 miles of bicycle paths, primarily located within the parks of its boroughs. These paths go back to the 1895 paths from Brooklyn to Coney Island, and have been added to during periods of bicycle popularity through the years. Local Law No. 55, passed in 1967 expressed the intent of creating a "large cen- tralized riding area in each borough" of the City.53 53 1967, #55. Local Laws of the City of New York for the Year 89 The New York 1972-73 Parks budget requested a total of $575,000 over the next two years for continued development of the park bike paths, hoping to raise the total mileage of paths to 150 miles. Similarly, Chicago is developing a system of bicycle paths along its lakefront, and pre- sently has 18 miles of paths, broken up into several seg- ments. Plans now exist for extending this system and linking up the various parts, to create a continuous lakefront bike path system. Both of these examples involve exclusive recreational routes, on a rather limited scale. Examples of widespread new path construction as part of an urban transportation system exist primarily as plans. Fort Collins, Colorado plans to incorporate paths along the banks of streams and irrigation canals as part of an overall transportation network. Litchfield Park in Ari- zona has begun a network of 12' wide paths with grade separations at auto crossings. When complete, the system will be 35 miles long. Planners for Fremont, California project a system serving a ninety square mile area, with complete separation of auto and bicycle traffic. And a recently completed bikeway plan for Boulder, Colorado, envisions a fifteen year program of bike route develop; ment, much of which involves new path construction. The total cost from all sources would be in excess of $2 million, involving nearly 150 miles of bike routes. 90 Standards for development of new path construction cover a wide range of items, including length, width, slope, clearance, location, bridges, construction material and methods. The following material, taken from the Oregon State Highway Division's 1972 publication on bike route standards and guidelines, represents an excellent summary Of the latest thinking in this area. Len th: Generally speaking, the proposal should be in excess of five miles in length to assure continued interest and utilization by the pedestrian and bicy- clist. If the proposal serves largely commuting traffic, and if large sources or generators of use (e.g., college campus, large factory) are present at the termini, short distance and direct routes may become a primary consideration. Width: The recommended width for bike routes is eight feet but heavily used, urban bike routes can exceed this width. For a two-way bike facility, the minimum width is five feet. Where conditions warrant one-way trials, sections with widths of three to four feet would be considered adequate, but minimal. Bridges: Bridges will need to be wider than the bike routes they connect, particularly if two-way traffic is to be accommodated. A survey shows that an average width of bicycle bridges is 7.5 feet, therefore a basic minimum width of eight feet is desirable. Con- sideration should be given to pull-off areas on or abutting the bridge to take advantage of scenery or other interesting features of the crossing. Horizontal and vertical alignment: Development of the horizontal alignment, in many respects, is similar to that of highway, roads or streets. Where the bike route is contiguous with such existing facilities, it ‘assumes the same alignment with deviations to create interest--the extent of deviation would be dependent upon topography, culture, and available right of way. When the facility is not contiguous to an existing roadway, it is not necessary to employ transition (spiral) curves. It is important to recognize that trails not contiguous to a road or street are not 91 bound by the alignment of the road or street and freedom in alignment is allowed under these condi- tions. The bike route in this instance can follow the topography prevalent in the area keeping cuts and fills to such a minimum to ensure proper drainage of the trail. It may be desirable to split the trail creating a "one-way" condition to avoid trees or other obstacles-~this also adds interest to the trail. Curve radius should be selected to provide a smooth transition in change of direction. In some instances where the angle between adjacent tangents is slight (10° or less), curves are not necessary. Short, sharp curves and sharp angles should be avoided if possible, particularly in areas where high Speeds can be attained, e.g., at the botton of a long de- scending grade. Opportunities Should be given to permit the cyclist to slow down and not brake while in the curve. K..- ,_ A bicycle is a versatile machine and is capable of negotiating a 6 foot radius; the range of minimum turning radii reported in a recent survey varied from 6 to 50 feet with an average minimum radius of 17.4 feet. On this basis, the minimum turning radius should be 20 feet. Grades should vary on a bike route particularly one serving recreation cyclists. The main condition to avoid is long, steep uphill grades. A 15% uphill grade for short distances may be considered a working maximum, while 10% grade is a desirable maximum. The grade and its length must be judged together. The 54 long climb, even though gradual, should be avoided. The effectiveness of a separated bike path is in- itially dependent on its proper location in relation to cyclist needs and on the adequate design and construction, according to standards such as those outlined above. Con- tinued use of the path can only be assured through a regu- lar program of maintenance. 54 18-21. Oregon State Highway Division, op. cit., 92 The safety of an exclusive bike path is obvious. Complete separation of bicycles from autos and pedestrians on a well-designed path assures a minimum of conflict. The National Safety Council report on bicycle accidents to school-aged children documents this fact. Out of a total of 3563 accidents investigated, only 99 occurred on a bicycle path. These 99 accidents involved the fol- lowing situations: Bicycle hit car -- 1 Car hit bike -- 1 Bike hit bike -- 23 Bike hit fixed object -- 34 Fall -- 4055 When the bicycle was riding on the street this study found that one accident in four involved a bicycle-auto colli- sion, thus the change in the nature of accidents occuring on bike paths becomes significant. Relatively minor falls and collisions with other bikes and fixed objects predomi- nate, and with careful attention to design, even these kinds of accidents might be reduced. Costs of developing exclusive bike paths vary widely depending upon the type of construction used, and the part of the country involved. Table 8 presents a wide range of construction methods and materials from widely 55Vilardo, Nicol, and Heldreth, op. cit., p. 31. distributed communities. 93 This information should give some idea of the range of techniques and costs either planned or in use across the country. Table 8. Costs for new bicycle path construction. Construction City $/sq' Width $/linear' $/mile materials and methods Boulder, Co. $ .21 6' $1.25 $7600 graded, gravel,’ seal coat and ' stone chip Chicago, 11. $1.00 6' $6.00 $31680 2" crushed lime- J; stone, 4"asphalt Chicago, 11. $1.80 6' $10.80 $57024 4"crushed lime- stone, 4" poured concrete Chula Vista, $ .52 2 4' $4.16 $22000 2"a.c., both Ca. lanes (total) sides of street, signs f East Lansing $ .50 6' $3.00 $15840 3" base, 1 l/4"ij” (Reith-Riley) asphalt surface LaHabra, Ca. $ .20 8' $1.60 $8448 2"a.c. over (mach.) native earth LaHabra, Ca. $ .40 8' $3.20 $16896 2"a.c. fully (mach.) structured LaHabra, Ca. $ .30- 5' $1.50- $7920- 2"a.c. over .40 (manual) 2.00 10560 native earth M.S.U. $ .67 6' $4.02 $21120 4"deep, concrete M.S.U. $ .80 2 2' $3.20 $16896 4"deep, concreteufl' lanes (total) Syracuse, N.Y. -- -- -- $5000 -- Wichita, Ka. $ .33 12' $4.00 $21120 includes grad- J- ing and land- scaping Source:Compiled from a variety of sources--see Bibliography. 94 gost Estimates Applied to Classification types Based on the preceeding information, costs for the various classes of routes can be summarized as in Table 9. The figures selected represent a reasonable median approxi- mation drawn from the full range of data included under the various class descriptions. Table 9. Summary of route classification costs. Classification Cost Comments Class I (signs only) $360/mile New posts, labor Class II (signs and . . stripes) $710/m11e One s1de of street only Class III (signs and . . bumpers) $7000/m11e Dav1s type *Class IV (street $400/mile Signs and barrier posts interruption) Class V (curb cuts) $100/block Varies greatly per mile Class VI (new path $16000/ . construction) mile 6' w1de asphalt path Application of these route classes, according to the determined desire lines, as modified by existing conditions, represents the final step in designing the bike route system. Costs projected for the planned routes must next be program- med into a framework for financing and implementation. CHAPTER VII FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION Bicycle route plans currently have many elements in their favor. These include: safety, health, traffic reduction, ecology, recreation, wide popular appeal. However, the lack of sufficient funds and financing pro- grams prevents or impedes the implementation of many ex- cellent plans. Despite the claims that bike route systems are exceedinly inexpensive, a properly designed network of transportational routes may easily be judged to be beyond the means of many communities. Federal Funding Programs At present there are several Federal programs which, although not designed for assisting bike route con- struction, may be applied towards implementing bicycle route systems. Amongthese isthe_0pen Space Land Program, passed by Congress in 1961 to enable urban areas to acquire open space areas that were suitable for outdoor recreation, conservation and scenic purposes. Under this program com- munities, regions and states can secure up to 30% of the acquisition costs of undeveloped urban land which has value for park, recreation, scenic or historic purposes. 95 96 The Urban Renewal program, which provides federal assistance to local governments for the prevention and elimination of slums and blighting conditions, is another possible source of aid where renewal programs are planned. Inclusion of bicycle routes in the comprehensive program for community development is regarded as highly desirable by HUD in approving renewal proposals. _The Highway Beautification Act of 1965 specifies that 3% of the Federal funds appropriated to a State for Federal-aid highways shall be earmarked for "landscape and roadside development, including acquisition and development of publicly owned and controlled rest and recreation areas and sanitary and other facilities reasonably necessary to 56 Funds not so used accommodate the traveling public." revert back to the Federal Government. Although this Act does not specify the development of bicycle facilities, the Bicycle Institute of America encourages communities to consider this as a possible source of funding. A recent memorandum sent out to all State highway headquarters, regions, and divisions by F. C. Turner, Federal Highway Administrator reads in part: There are times when in the planning of a highway it is possible to include in the highway right-of-way a walk- ing or bicycle trail that would be of significant 56Public Law 89-285, Oct. 22, 1965, sec. 319(a). 97 benefit to the community. This would be especially true when the trail along the highway serves as a connecting link between a larger system of trails running through the community. In view of the above, trails proposed within highway rights-of-way should be given favorable consideration where an important public need will be served and where conditions are appropriate. This policy is in accord with recent statements by Secretary Volpe and myself urging the development of trails for hiking, bicycling, and equestrian use...Land acquired under the scenic enhancement provisions of Section 319(b) [Highway Beautification Act] can provide additional opportunities. Unfortunately, the Opportunity to use this source of fund- ing is limited, if not non-existent, in most communities. The Land and Water Conservation Fund, which pro- vides 50-50 matching grants to States for the acquisition and development of land and water recreational areas and facilities, currently seems to offer the best opportunities for Federal assistance. Bicycle facilities are a priority item for approval because of the recent interest in cycling. Sacramento, California is currently developing bicycle paths with the aid of $65,000 in Federal matching funds through this Act. Detroit has developed a bicycle path on Belle Isle with the aid of Land and Water Conservation Funds. The East Lansing bike route plan recommendes appli- cation to this Fund for moneys. Reaction to the East Lansing application, if it is made, will be significant, 57F. C. Turner, "Trails in Highway Rights-of-Way," U.S. Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Adminis- tration Notice), Aug. 12, 1971. 98 since the East Lansing system is based on a transportation, rather than recreation, concept. The above-mentioned programs offer the possibility of financial assistance for bike routes only as a sideline item. The Bicycle Transportation Act, introduced in Con- gress in 1971 as H.R. 9369 by Rep. Edward Koch of New York, and still pending at this time, would consider the matter of funding bicycle facilities directly. The Act would provide Federal assistance from Highway Trust Fund Money for the development of bike paths, bike traffic control devices, and bicycle security research. Passage of this Act would undoubtedly give strong impetus to the develop— ment of bicycle facilities throughout the country. Current end Pending State Funding Sources The Federal Government is not the only source of assistance for constructing bicycle routes. Several states have passed, or are considering, bicycle hills which would aid the development of facilities. Leading in this area is Oregon, which passed H.B. 1700 in 1971. This Act requires that cities and counties spend not less than one percent of their share of State Highway funds for the establishment of footpaths and bicycle trails. Communities are permitted to accumulate this money for a period of ten years to develop a substantial amount for 99 development of facilities. This Act has resulted in the earmarking of approximately $1.3 million for Oregon bicy- cle route construction in 1972. Table 10 contains a partial listing of legislation either pending or passed in States throughout the country. Table 10. Current and pending state bicycle legislation. Bill No. Author Subject Status ARIZONA S.B.1156 Conlan Identical to Oregon's #1700 Pending CALIFORNIA S.B.90 Mills Include bike-pedest. facili- Pending ties on new Toll Bridge. S.C.A. Mills Up to 5% ngy. Revenue for Pending . Trans. Systems. S.C.R.1l Gregorie Adequate bike parking at Pending State Bldgs. S.B.34 Nejedly 8' bike lanes on Antioch Pending Eridge. SB325 -- Transportation Planning and Pending Research. SB 265 Behr Bicycle Paths and Routes Law, 11-71 SB 858 -- Bicycle Facilities along Pending Corridors SB 1083 Marks Bicycle Facilities on new Law, 11-71 ngys and Freeways AB 1377 Arnett Requires D.P.W. to include Passed the bicycle lanes in plans House SB 36 Mills State and Federal Funds for Pending Bicycle Lanes SB 147 Mills Bicycle Registration Pending SB 997 -- Bicycle Routes along Freeways Law, 11-70 and Highways 100 Table 10. Continued. Bill No. Author Subject Status COLORADO HB 1066 Arnold Bicycle Safety lanes on Pending Highways CONNECTICUT HB 5936 Ciampi Bridge Paths, Pedest. Walks, Passed Bicycle Paths, and House Linear Parks FLORIDA HB 944 Gustafson Florida Recreation Trail Pending System SB 393 -- Committee Study for Bicycle Pending Trails in School Areas ILLINOIS HB 1514 Katz Motor Fuel Tax Funds for Law, 9-71 Bike Route Signs IOWA HB 139 -- Authority of Con. Comm. to Law, 1971 Establish Bike Routes on Highways MARYLAND HB 282 Schweinhaut 1% Highway Funds for Bike Pending Trails MASSACHUSETTS HB 1450 Ames Include Bikes in "Highway" Pending Definition to Allow Funds for Routes MICHIGAN HB 5707 Allen Amendment to Transportation Passed Package Allowing Gas Tax House for Bike Trails 5901 Forbes State Gas Tax Revenues for Pending HB Local Bike Trail Construc- tion Table 10. Continued. 101 Bill No. Author Subject Status Mill. Stat. LB 1217 DeCamp SB 3962 Smith AB 8163 Hardt SB 247 Regula HB 1700 Stathos HB 44 G.A. SB 33 Francis AB 1316 Rogers MINNESOTA Public Recreation Use of Privately Owned Lands-- Rec. Use Including Bikes NEBRASKA 1% Highway Funds for Bike Path Const. NEW YORK Establishment of State Council on Trails and Bikeways Construction of Footpaths and Bicycle Trails in Certain Instances. OHIO State Bicycle Trail System OREGON State Gas Tax Funds for Bike Paths (see discus- sion, page 98). TENNESSEE Tennessee Trail System, Hike and Bike Trails WASHINGTON 1% Motor Vehicle Fund for Bike Trails WISCONSIN Authority to Establish Bicycle Ways after 1-13-72. Law,197l Pending Pending Pending Pending Law, 9-71 Law, 4-71 Pending Pending Source: From "Bicycle Trail Legislation, Proposed and En- acted Bills," prepared by the Bicycle Institue of America, Feb. 1, 1972 (mimeographed), in part. Other sources include the Bicycle Institute's Feb. and June 1972 newsletter issues of Boom in Bikeways. 102 In addition to Federal and State financial assis- tance, the local unit has available several potential methods for funding bicycle route construction. The Capi- tal Improvements Budget is one such source, and the East Lansing plan recommends developing the bike path system as part of the Capital Improvements Program. The communi- ty could vote on a public bond issue, as is being tried to partially fund development of the Boulder, Colorado system. In instances where sidewalk or alley routes are proposed which involve improvement or construction of new surfaces, a part of the cost might be paid by the adjacent land- owner under a special assessment, if the alley or sidewalk improvement would have been accomplished anyway.‘ Increased ’H—Hl‘ bicycle registration fees might be established for the con— struction of facilities. Finally, private citizen fund raising activities, community service club projects, and donations can aid in the financing of bicycle routes. Staging It is unrealistic to expect that a bicycle route proposal will be immediately implemented in its entirety. For a plan to make a successful transition between drawing board and construction, a staging format must be developed. This staging program must take into consideration the loca- tion of routes most urgently needed, the availability of 103 local funds, the requirements for obtaining matching Federal 58 coordination with ongoing projects which affect Funds, the proposed bike routes, and the need for developing a first stage set of routes which act at least as a skeleton network. The temptation often occurs to provide the easiest routes first, or to construct the least expensive routes first. This must be balanced against the pressing needs of the cyclists, since the success of construction to fol- low may depend to some extent, on the acceptance and level of use of the routes first established. Program Coordination The range of individuals and departments involved in bicycle route planning includes urban planners, trans- portation planners, the police, city managers, mayors, councilman, engineers, parks and recreation departments, public works departments, and in the case of Chicago, the Department of Streets and Sanitation. This gives some in- dication of the variety of people involved in planning and developing bicycle facilities at the local level. Regard- less of which city or county department is responsible, communication and coordination must be maintained with the others if the plan is to succeed. In the case of the urban planner, close coordination must be maintained with the 58L & WCF grant requires 25% of the estimated total project cost to be spent before reimbursement of 50% of the costs to the local planning agency is begun. 104 traffic engineer especially, since he is specifically charged with keeping the area's circulation system func- tioning, and any bicycle route proposals will definitely affect that system. This kind of coordination and involve- ment must be established in the earliest planning stages, and continued through implementation. Similar efforts should be made with the local political decision makers, and with the officials of adjacent political jurisdictions if regional routes are contemplated. Public Interest Bicycle route planning is strongly dependent upon public interest for successful development. The original [concept generally has as its source some interested citi- zen's group, and without continued public support, bike route plans have little chance for success. Public enthu- siasm for a program seems to come in spurts or cycles, and is extremely difficult to sustain throughout the long period required for the full development of plans and im- plementation. A bicycle group may lobby strongly to get the concept of bicycle routes across to a community. Once accepted, the planning department may take over the study. Hopefully, citizen groups will be consulted during the study, but interest may fall off once the study is complete. The intervals between completion of plans, the official adoption of the plan, the allocation of funds, and the 105 beginning of construction are crucial, and efforts should be made to sustain public interest in the plans by con- tinued publicity and contact with bicycle interest groups. Efforts should also be made to give the plans wide exposure to the general public, to insure that all interested per- sons may respond to the plans. Implementation Policies The final element of the bike route plan is the specification of implementation policies. These policies should draw together all elements of the plan into a con- cise statement of community positions and actions, which can then be presented to the local legislators for approval or modification. Once adopted, these policies should form the basis of development in terms of bicycle routes. Policies suggested in the East Lansing plan include the following: 1. Direct that construction of the Highest Priority Routes begin immediately. 2. Direct that all new road construction, and rebuilding and realigning of existing roads should take bicycles into consideration, and where appropriate, bike routes should be in- corporated into the design. 3. Direct that Section 5.363(5) of the Subdivi- sion Regulations dealing with sidewalk design and standards be amended to read "Each subdi- vision shall provide concrete sidewalks five feet in width on both sides of the street and where pedestrian walkways are required by the Planning Commission along major and secondary arterials, sidewalks shall be seven feet in 106 width. Where new sidewalks intersect streets they shall be ramped down to street grade level." 4. Direct that whenever curbs are repaired or re- placed at intersections that they be designed as curb ramps to permit bicycle access. 5. Check to insure that bicycle and pedestrian access and breakthrough connections are pro- vided in all new subdivisions and residential developments. 6. Direct that the City's parks be evaluated in terms of suitability for recreational bicycle routes. 7. Encourage the provision of bicycle parking racks for stores and multi-family residential projects, and require bike racks for all public buildings. 8. Maintain coordination with adjacent governmental units to explore the possibilities for coopera- tive bike routes. 9. Develop an experimental route network or micro- system surrounding one of the City's elementary schools, to demonstrate the safety and feas- ibility of elementary school children riding their bikes to school. 10. Conduct research into the impact of this sys- tem on the overall transportation picture in East Lansing, with feedback from both cyclists, pedestrians, and automobile drivers. 11. The City should institute a bicycle safety education program. This program should begin immediately to instruct bike riders, auto drivers and pedestrians about the use of bi- cycles and the bike path system.59 59 pp. 79, 80. East Lansing Planning Commission, op. cit., ./_ 107 The fifth policy included on the preceding list deserves elaboration, for the new subdivisions and residen- tial developments which are occurring on the fringe of the developed community offer the opportunity of providing bicycle facilities along the lines of those suggested for "New Towns." Indeed, these expanding areas of the existing community may be thought of as the transition toward new community development. The opportunities for developing bicycle facilities in these new developments cover the full range of treatments. Streets could be laid out with sufficient width to accom- modate Class III routes (lanes with bumpers). Cluster or planned unit developments could incorporate bicycle routes through the open Spaces. Pedestrian-bicycle breakthroughs could be provided at mid-block locations, and between cul- de-sacs. Potential bicycle traffic generators such as new schools, parks, residential shopping centers, and employ— ment facilities could be treated as nuclei for microsystem path networks within the development. Connection with routes within the established community must be provided for, to insure the functioning of the routes as an overall system. Provision of routes in the expanding fringe of the community, in conjunction with a system of routes for the developed portion of that community, can help deemphasize 108 the importance of the automobile in suburbia, and intro- duce an element of human scale to the transporation net- works of our emerging communities. CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSIONS Since the invention of the bicycle at the turn of the eighteenth century, cyclists have been looking for safe places to ride in the community. The bicycle has been alternately regarded as a toy, a fad, a curiosity, and a nuisance. It has upset pedestrians and angered people in four-wheeled vehicles, both horse and motor powered. Throughout its history it has demonstrated its qualities of speed, economy, efficiency, and health. The bicycle was directly responsible for the renewed activity in road building in the United States and in England dur- ing the two decades before the automobile. It appears more than coincidental that at this time, during a period when the implications of the automobile and its ecological and social costs are being seriously questioned, the bi- cycle is enjoying a great surge of popularity. Coupled with this renewed interest in bicycling as an activity, cyclists have been pressing for safer places to ride. What began as a modest idea of marking lightly traveled streets as bicycle safety routes with inexpensive signs has developed into a nationwide effort 109 110 in providing for the bicycle as an alternative mode of urban transportation. Federal policy, with the support of the President and the Secretary of Transportation, en- courages the development of bicycle facilities. The pro- posed Bicycle Transportation Act of 1971 would give financial impetus to this policy. Some States have al- ready moved into this area, and funds are now becoming available to meet a demand which has been growing for the past ten years. It is important that planning keep pace with this growing legislative commitment by developing the concepts, and implementing the facilities, which will sustain the use and enjoyment of the bicycle within the developed community. This thesis has taken as its speci- fic problem the ways in which the bicycle may be assimi- lated into the existing urban transportation system. A planning approach, taking into consideration the unique qualities of the bicycle as a vehicle, has been suggested and followed throughout the study. The first element of this planning approach, the survey of existing bicycle characteristics, has been dis- cussed in Chapter IV. The importance of citizen interest groups was emphasized as a stimulus for activity and as a source of data. Methods for obtaining and analyzing data regarding the experience of other areas, the use of registration information, traffic counts, and accident 111 data were presented, and the importance of ordinance review was emphasized. Based on the analysis of this collected data, a research methodology was introduced to obtain further in- formation regarding the bicycle facility needs of a community. Advantages and disadvantages of the personal interview, the general survey, and the stratified survey methods were discussed and examples presented. Prefer- ence was expressed for the stratified survey method, due to the added controls this method affords to the re- searcher. The combination of information gained through the examination of existing characteristics and the sur- vey data can assist the planner in the formulation of goals, and should enable him to proceed with the design process. Careful attention has been given to the rela- tionships between the base data, the stated goals, and route location. Alternative methods of route treatment were presented through a classification of route types, which included signs only (Class I), signs and striping (Class II), physically separated lanes (Class III), bi— cycle safety zones (Class IV), sidewalk routes (Class V), and new path construction (Class VI). Throughout this entire process, the importance of treating the bicycle as a means of transportation rather than as a toy or a recreational vehicle has been stressed. It is essential 112 that people incorporate the bicycle into their daily living pattern if it is to have significant impact on the overall transportation system. The need to view bicycle routes as a system was emphasized in both the design and the implementation of these routes. Financial staging of route development should be based on the provision of at least a skeleton system rather than on a piecemeal approach of developing the most inexpensive routes first. In this manner, the routes can begin to function as a transportation system from the outset, and continued development of the plans will be assured. A safe, convenient, and attractive network of bicycle routes within the developed community will serve to institutionalize the current popularity of the bicycle. Once this occurs, the trend toward increased bicycle use will hopefully become self-sustaining. It is essential for bicycle route plans to be incorporated into the overall planning framework of the community. The planning process developed in this thesis merely describes a methodology for preparing a bicycle route study. This study must find expression in the goals, objectives, and policies of the community's comprehensive plan, to assure that the potential of bicycle transporta- tion is not limited by competing or conflicting public plans and actions. The Transportation Plans, Recreation Plan, Central Business District Plan, and proposed land 113 use components of the Comprehensive Plan all have rela- tionships with bicycle transportation, and should reflect that relationship. As with many research efforts, this study tended to uncover more questions than it could answer. The basic difficulty in obtaining published background material, mentioned in the Introduction to this thesis, is a func- tion of the newness of bicycle routes as a planning con- cern, and reflects the need for further study into this area. Research is needed into the overall effectiveness and safety of the system, and the various classes of routes which make up that system. More rigorous study is needed in developing standards for application of treat- ments which involve more than simply intuitive evaluations. The impact of the bicycle on overall traffic con- ditions is a major area of needed research. The successful approach to this condition might be a detailed before-after study which would have to be made of a community that was going to implement a comprehensive transportational bicy- cle route system. With the data from this kind of study, the significance of the bicycle as a component of the urban transportation system could be evaluated. Implica- tions of this data, in terms of benefit-cost analysis, are interesting to contemplate. If the bicycle could be demonstrated to reduce the level of automobile traffic in 114 a community, the savings in terms of reduced need for new automobile facilities might be translated into fund- ing additional bicycle facilities. Reactions to the system by bicyclists, pedes- trians, and automobile drivers should be investigated to determine whether attitudes have changed regarding the bicycle, and to determine the actual effectiveness of the routes. Study should also attempt to evaluate the. extent to which bicycle routes have altered travel pat- terns, and the ability of bicycle routes to generate demand. Information such as this will enable the planner to place the bicycle in its proper perspective within the urban transportation context. At distances of perhaps four miles the bicycle can serve a variety of community transportation needs, while at the same time providing the rider with a unique, refreshing experience.\ The cyclist is not sealed within a capsule of protective metalwork; but rather is free to experience his immediate surroundings by seeing, smelling, hearing, and feeling. His speeds are at human scale, and he brings an element of vitality to the urban scene. Only careful planning sensitive to the needs of the bicyclist will insure his presence in the communities of the present and the future. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Aronson, Sidney H. "The Sociology of the Bicycle." Sociology and_Everyday Life. Edited by Marcello Truzzi. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1968, pp. 293-303. Cook, Walter L. Bike Trails and Facilities: A Guide to their Design Construction, and Operation. Wheeling, West Virginia: American Institute of Park Executives, 1965. Creighton, Roger L. Urban Transpogtation Planning. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1970. Footpaths and BikeRoutes: Stendards and Guidelines. (3 Oregon State Highway Division, 1972. "‘ Mason, Phillip P. "The League of American Wheelmen and the Good-Roads Movement." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1958. McGonagle, Seamus. The Bicycle in Life; Love, War and Literature. New York: A. S. Barnes & Co., 1968. Palmer, Arthur Judson. Ridin Hi h. New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 1956. Sloane, Eugene A. The Com lete Book of Bic clin . New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1&70. Tanner, Hans, Ed. Complete Bic cle Book. Los Angeles: Peterson Publishing Co., 1972. Woodforde, John. The Stor of the Bicycle. New York: Universe BoOks, 1970. Periodicals Bicycle Institute of America. Boom in Bikeways: The News- letter of the Bikeways Ex losion. 6:2, June, 1971; 7:1, February, 1972; 7:2, June, 1972. 115 116 Brooks, Mary E. "Planning for Urban Trails." ASPO Plan- nin Advisory Service, Report No. 252, DeceEEer, 196g Cartsonis, E. M. "'Ten Minute Town' Designed Around Path- way System." Landscape Architecture. 57:1, October, 1966, 40-42. Friends for Bikecology. Serendipity 2, Fall, 1971. Friends for Bikecology. Serendipity 3, Winter, 1972. Jackson, J. B. "90-Year Wonder: 'It Rarely Broke the Human Barrier." Landscape Architecture. 57:1, October, 1966, 38-39. Perraton, Jean K. "Planning for the Cyclist in Urban Areas." Town Planning Review. 39:2, July, 1968, 149-162. Planning Documents Berkeley Planning Department. "Bicycles in Berkeley: A Background Report." Berkeley, California, 1971. (Mimeographed.) Bikeways Subcommittee of Project Green. "Hawkeye Area Bikeway System." Iowa City, February, 1969. (Mimeographed.) Boulder Transportation Division. "Proposed Boulder Valley Bikeway Plan." Boulden,Colorado, 1972. Cecka, Michael J. "The Use of Sidewalks as Bicycle Routes in East Lansing." East Lansing, Michigan, May, 1972. (Unpublished position paper prepared for the East Lansing City Planning Commission, Type- written.) East L nsing Planning Commission. "East Lansing Bike {ff ‘v/fi Routes: Background Study and Development Plan."'“ East Lansing, April, 1972. Englewood Department of Community Development. "Proposed 5; Bicycle Trails." Englewood, Colorado, January ’ 1972. (Xeroxed.) Hagan, Ron. "Bicycle Trails for Claremont." Claremont, California, April, 1971. (Mimeographed.) 117 Hansen, Robert J. "Preliminary Study of Bicycle Facili- ties for the City of Portland." Portland, Oregon: Department of Public Works. October, 1971. (Mimeographed.) Hogle, R. D. and Lefler, C. L. "City of Santa Barbara Bikeway Program 1971." Santa Barbara, California: Department of Public Works, Traffic Division. September, 1971. (Mimeographed.) Huntington Beach Department of Public Works and Huntington Beach Police Department. "Preliminary Report on the Possible Establishment of Bikeways Within Huntington Beach." Huntington Beach, California, March, 1971. (Mimeographed.) La Habra Planning Department. "Bicycle Routes in La Habra." La Habra, California, April, 1971. (Interoffice Memorandum, mimeographed.) Local Transit Committee. "Berkeley Bikeways Plan." Berkeley, California, February, 1971. (Mimeo- graphed.) New York Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Affairs Adminis- tration. "Bike Paths: Analysis Prepared as Part of 1972-73 PRCA Budget Submission." New York, 1972. (Mimeographed.) Rasmussen, Paul. "Guidelines for a Comprehensive Bicycle Route System." Chicago: Department of Develop- ment and Planning, March, 1971. (Xeroxed.) Syracuse Department of Parks and Recreation. "City of Syracuse, New York, Bike Route." Syracuse, May, 1970. (Xeroxed.) Technical Reports P. I ._..- \/ Basile, A. J. "Effect of Pavement Edge Markings on Traffic Accidents in Kansas." Topeka, Kansas Highway Commission, 1961. Bureau of Traffic Engineering and Electrical Services. "A Proposed System of Bicycle Commuting Routes and v/ Comments on the Use of Bicycles on Sidewalks." Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Department of Public Works, March, 1971. (Mimeographed.) 118 Campbell, B. J., Foley, J. P., and Pascarella, E. A. "Bicycle Riding and Accidents Among Youths: A Summary Report." Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Highway Safety Re- search Center, July, 1971. Jasinek, W. G. "Bicycle Routes for Chula Vista, Cali- fornia." Chula Vista: Parks and Recreation (/’ Department, July, 1971. (Mimeographed.) Lott, Dale F. and Sommer, Robert. "Bicycle Lanes in Davis, California: First Year Report." Univer- sity of California at Davis, Department of Psychology, July, 1969. (Mimeographed.) Musick, J. V. "Effect of Pavement Edge Marking on Two- Lane Rural State Highways in Ohio." HRB Bulle- 4 tin, 266, 1-8, 1960. Vilardo, Frank, Nicol, Marvin J., and Heldreth, Harold E. "An Investigation Into Bicycle Usage." Chicago: National Safety Council, September, 1968. . "Bicycle Accidents to School Aged Children." Chicago: National Safety Council, September, 1969. Other Material Bicycle Institute of America. "Bicycle Trail Legislation: Proposed and Enacted Bills." New York, February, 1972. (Mimeographed.) . "Pedal Power: Courses of Action for Commuter »/’ Bike Routes." New York, n.d. (Mimeographed.) . "Success Story: The Growth of 'Bikeways.'" ~,/ New York, n.d. (Mimeographed.) Cecka, Michael J. "Bikepaths in East Lansing: Economic \//~ Analysis and Route Location." East Lansing, November, 1971. (Typewritten.) Cecka, Michael J. and Bardsley, Roger. "Non-Automotive Transportation: The Bicycle in Tri-County." East Lansing, May, 1971. (Mimeographed.) 119 Davis, California. Unpublished information sheets, standards, diagrams, and guidelines for bike routes. " (Unbound, Xeroxed.) "Fact Sheet: Bicycling in Wisconsin." Madison: Department of Natural Resources, September, 1971. (Mimeo- graphed.) Hanneman, Ralph. "Bicycle Commuting: The Push is on by Urban Environmental Activists." New York: Bicycle Institute of America, December, 1970. (Mimeographed.) Hayes, J. "Some Facts About the Current Bike Explosion." New York: Bicycle Institute of America, 1971. (Mimeographed.) Turner, F. C. "Memorandum: Trails in Highway Rights-of- Way." Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highways Administration, August 12, 1971. APPENDIX A Michael J. Cecka 2780 E. Grand River #310 E. Lansing, Mich. 48823 August 1, 1971 Dear Sir: As a graduate student in Urban Planning at Mich- igan State University I have become increasingly aware of the problems involving the automobile and transpor— tation in urban areas. At the same time I have been impressed with the potential of the bicycle as a means of getting around in the city. As a result, this past Spring another student and I made a feasibility study on a bikeway system for East Lansing. I now intend to expand that interest into a the- sis on bicycle transportation in urban areas, using East Lansing as a case study. As a part of my background re— search I am writing to all communities and organizations I am aware of, that have had experience with bike paths (the present list includes over a hundred addresses). I am eager to learn from your knowledge and exper- ience concerning bicycle transportation. I am particularly interested in the extent of facilities (if any), type of facilities, cost and methods of financing facilities, ex- tent of usage of facilities, numbers, nature, and behavior of cyclists, as well as descriptions of any failures or problems to avoid, and discussion of future trends and plans. Your help regarding these and any other planning considerations you may be aware of will be of great help in the preparation of this thesis. Respectfully yours, Michael J. Cecka 120 APPENDIX B 121 General Survey Questionnaire PART I: QUESTIONS TO BE AHMERED BY THE HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD 1. How many bicycles are owned by your household?____ Your Age 2. Are you a home owner? D Yes D No 3. If yes, for what might your house rent, if it were for rent? $____ Mo. 4. If not a homeowner, what is your monthly rent? $___Mo. 5. How many years have you lived at your present address? 6. What is your zip code number? 7. In which city within the Los Angeles area do you live? 8. How many people live in your house or apartment? 9. How many years of school have you completed? 10. What is your present employment status? D Armed forces [3 Employed U Unemployed [:1 Not looking for permanent employment 11. What kind of work do you do? 12. When you made the decision to move to your present address, did you consider whether the area was favorable for bicycle use? [I Yes D No 13. Please indicate your FAMILY level of income from all sources for last year. [:1 Less than $2,000 [:1 $6,000 to $7,999 [I] $12,000 to 314,999 El $2,000 to 33,999 D $8,000 to 39,999 D $15,000 to $24,999 Cl $4,000 to $5,999 [1510.000 to 311,999 El $25,000 or more PART II: QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED BY THE BICYCLE USER 14. How many speeds does your bicycle have? __ Your Age __ Sex 15. What is your relation to the head of the household? El Head Cl Spouse of head [3 Child of head Cl Unrelated 16. Please indicate which of the following types of transportation YOU normally use during a typical week by placing a 1 next to the type YOU use most frequently, a 2 next to the second most frequent, and so on until you have ranked all types of transportation you normally use: Auto Motorcycle _Public Transportation Bicycle Walking Other NOTE: For questions 17 ~23, circle the appropriate number to the right of the question. If the question is not applicable, circle NA. Not At All Ixtrcmety 17. How favorable is your immediate neighborhood for bicycle use? ...... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 18. How important to YOU is each reason for riding your bicycle? A. For touring ............................ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA B. For recreation .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA C. To exercise ............................ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA D. For transportation ........................ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA E. To save time ........................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA F. To save money .......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA G. For environmental reasons .................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA H. To ride with my friends ..................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 1. To ride with my family ...................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA J. Other (specify) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 19. To what extent do each of the following factors inhibit YOU from using your bicycle for NON-recreational trips (i.e., trips to work, for shopping, etc.)? A. Too much physical effort and sweating ............. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA B. Personal safety .......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA C. Lack of bicycle racks at destination ............... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA D. Danger of theft .......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA E. Bad weather ........................... l 2 3 4 S 6 7 NA F. Takes too long .......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA G. Social pressure (dress, ridicule, etc.) ............... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA H. Too much starting and stopping ................. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 N A I. Cannot carry packages ...................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA J. Other (specify) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 20. To what extent do each Of the following weather conditions inhibit YOU from riding your bicycle for NON-recreational trips? A. Raining .............................. l 2 3 4 S 6 7 NA B Smoggy .............................. 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 NA C Hot ................................ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA D Cold ............................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA E Windy ............................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA F Snowy .............................. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA G. Foggy ............................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 122 21. From YOUR experience when riding a bicycle, how dangerous Not do YOU find the following conditions? A, A" Extremely A. Bicyclist making left hand turn. . . . .............. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA B. Car door opening ......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA C. Cross traffic ........................... 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 NA D. Being hit from rear ........................ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 ' NA E. Car turning abruptly ....................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA F. Car stopping abruptly ....................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA G. Riding bicycle against traffic ................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA I-I. Riding bicycle at night ...................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 1. Drainage ditches ......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA J. Bad weather ........................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA X. Other (specify) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 22. To what extent is each of the following a reason for YOU to ride your bicycle along streets with high automobile traffic? A. Fewer stop signs ......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA B. Less cross traffic ......................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA C. Shorter distance ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA D. Fewer hills ............................ l 2 3 4 S 6 7 NA E. Better road surface ........................ l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA F. More attractive scenery ...................... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA C. Other (specify) ~ 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 NA 23. To what extent would bicycle pathways (i.e., some designated pathway which is generally restricted to bicyclists) increase the number of times YOU use your bicycle if placed in the following places? A. Pathways in downtown metropolitan areas ............ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA B. Pathways along major arterial streets ............... l 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA C. Pathways along residential or secondary streets ......... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA D. Pathways through recreation areas or parks. ........... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NA 24. Please fill in the appropriate response under headings l and II for each of the types of bicycle trips YOU take. Under heading [11, check whether MOST of these trips are made on weekdays 0R weekends. Under IV, indicate the appropriate hour(s) you would be most likely to make this trip (e.g., a trip to and from work might have under "To" 8:30-9:00 AM and under “From" 5:00-5:30 PM) I II III IV No. 0! Approx. Oneway Cheek One Indicate Round Trips Dist. In Miles Week- Week- mm of Day Type of Trip '0' W.“ 0" ”We" Day‘", End To From A. Travel to and from work B. Travel to and from school C. Shopping trip D. Recreational trip B. Other (specify) 25. Please check each of the following ways YOU use your bicycle. D A. To get to other means of transportation (e.g., bicycle to bus) C] B. Transport bicycle close enough to ride bicycle to work (e.g., auto with bicycle rack) C. Transport bicycle close enough to ride bicycle to school. D. Transport bicycle close enough to ride bicycle to shopping area. B. Transport bicycle close enough to ride bicycle to or in recreational area. C] F. Other (specify) 26. lfa bicycle pathway were built parallel to the route that you now take for NON-recreational purposes, how many blocks would YOU be Willing to go out of YOUR way to ride on the pathway?:(Assume 10 blocks = 1 mile) E] None at all __Number of blocks 27. How many continuous years have YOU used a bicycle regularly for NON-recreational purposes? 28. Do you belong to a bicycle club or organization? D Yes D No DUE! 29. Do you own a car? D Yes D No A motorcycle? D Yes D No 30. If you have any ideas or comments on how to encourage wider use of bicycles and on how to create bicycle pathways in your area, please indicate below. Source: University of California Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering, "California Bicycle Feasibility Study," 1971. (Use an additional page If necessary) Happy bicycling and thank you! APPENDIX C 123 Matrix of Questionnaire Data QUESTIONS ELEMENTARY MlODLE H1611 INVERSITY ADULT SWARY OF SCHOOL SCHOOL RESPONSE (199 reap.) (84 resp.) (47 reap.) (226 resp.) (175 resp.) (735 resp.) 1, 313.. p“ p.11, 34 3—4 3-4 1-2 3-4 2-3 2. Registration 1 reg. 35$ 39S 491 783 _ 601 651 ‘ “”"9' 55s 61s 51s 22s 40s as: 3. Trip Frequency every day 53! 70! 651 631 48% 571 Here lbnths sev. Mai: 42% 282 33S 34$ 41! J7! once/wk 51 21 2! 31 6: 41 less than 0! O! 01 0% 51 21 4. Trip Frequency every day 51 81 21 11 2% 21 Hinter sev. dial: 8! 161 17! 61 131 101 once/wk 1 3S 6! l 1! 4S 6% 6% less than 19S 23! 17! 20$ 24% 208 not at all 55: 47! 53: 69! 55$ 62! 5. 1 Willing to ride if Yes 731 81! 64$ 62$ 67S 66! Routes Cleared of Snow No 27S 19$ 361 38$ 33$ 34% 6. Bike Riding Problems snow (123). snow (125) snow (167) snow (1-72) snou (169) snow (164) theft (107) theft (105) cold (126) cold (123) no paths (136) cold (117) rain ( 91) no paths ( 94) theft (124) no paths (115) traffic (126) no paths (117) no paths ( 90) cold ( 92) rain (113) rein (112) cold (125) rain (108) traffic ( 86) traffic ( 91) no paths(101) traffic (111) rein (113) traffic (104) cold ( 79) no racks ( 781 traffic ( 96) theft ( 79) theft ( 81) theft ( 88) parents ( 74) rain ( 73) no racks( 90) no racks ( 74) no racks ( 51) no racks ( 70) ' no racks ( 72) effort ( 56) tine ( 36) tine ( 28) tine ( 48) effort ( 49) effort ( 57) parents ( 551 effort ~( 14) effort ( 21) effort ( 21) time ( 29) 7. Trip Types ergggralflock “' visit (1751 visit (153) "$0 (257) artamdflock 1150 (120) 66 around block school (145) shop (100) around block visit (165) (112) shop ( 83) (110) shop ( 80) visit ( 86) part ( 94) school ( 381 HSU ( 77) visit 1 93) around block around block shop ( 46) shop ( 83} (74) (66) work ( 76) shop ( 88) HSU ( 45) Mg) i 43 co ntr 27 work ( 30) visit £5) school 5 56) ‘ 8. Rarity Used Host Sidewalk 35% 131 81 291 121 2 tan Street 65$ 87S 92$ 71$ 88$ 77! 9. line Hilllng to 0-10 min. 131 81 16: 11! Comte 10-20 471 501 39$ 47! NO DATA NO DATA 20-30 18$ 24x 26x 24% I05; the 22$ 18! 191 18! 'The nubers following the bike riding problems indicate how strongly the preelu was felt by the respondents. elementary school students were not as bothered by snow as were miversity students. “The mater: following the trip types indicate the strength of the frequency of response to a particular trip type. Thus university students listed 1450 as a trip ouch lore often than shopping. thus Source: pa 86. East Lansing Planning Commission, Bike Routes: Plan,"l972, "East Lansing Background Study and Development “iiiiiii'iiiiiiii