Selecting Bicycle Facility Types and Evaluating Roadways

1
Selecting Bicycle Facility Types and Evaluating
Roadways
Publication No. FHWA-HRT-05-110
Lesson 13
(Some of these pictures show bicyclists not
wearing helmets. FHWA strongly recommends that
all bicyclists wear helmets.)
2
Lesson Outline

• Bicycle facility type selection.
• Comparison of approaches.
• AASHTO guidance.
• Roadway evaluation.
• Bicycle compatibility index.
• Bicycle level of service.

3
Bicycle Facility Types

• Shared road with regular lane width.
• Most existing roads.
• Wide curb lane.
• Shared outside lane.

(This picture shows bicyclists not wearing
helmets. FHWA strongly recommends that all
bicyclists wear helmets.)
4
Bicycle Facility Types

• Bike lane.
• Dedicated road space with dividing paint stripe.
• Separate path.
• Dedicated path or trail.
• Significant separation.
• Mostly shared-use.

(This picture shows bicyclists not wearing
helmets. FHWA strongly recommends that all
bicyclists wear helmets.)
5
How to Select Facility Type

• No national standards.
• Different State and local guidelines.
• Common factors
• Vehicle traffic volumes.
• Vehicle traffic speeds.
• Other road cross section or traffic variables.

6
Comparison of Approaches

• 2002 Review of North American and European
  guidelines.
• Shared roads low volumes/speeds.
• Wide curb lanes moderate volumes/speeds.
• Bike lanes higher volumes/speeds.
• Separate path special case.

7
AASHTO Guidance on Facilities

• Facility selection is essentially a State/local
  policy decision.
• It may be based on several factors
• Specific corridor conditions.
• Facility costs.
• Bicyclist skilllevel.

Advanced
Basic
Children
Source PBIC (Dan Burden), www.pedbikeimages.org
8
Roadway Evaluation

• Integral to planning an inventory of existing
  conditions.
• How suitable are certain roads for bicycling?
• Bicycle compatibility.
• Bicycle level of service.
• Bicycle suitability.
• Bicycle stress level.
• Other names.

9
Bicycle Compatibility Index

• Product of 1998 FHWA study.
• Empirical model that uses
• Presence and width of shoulder or bike lane.
• Vehicle traffic volume and speed.
• Presence of vehicle parking.
• Type of roadside development.

10
Bicycle Level of Service

• Product of 1997 study in Florida, with subsequent
  testing and validation.
• Empirical model that uses
• Road width.
• Presence and width of shoulder or bike lane.
• Vehicle traffic volume, speed, and type.
• Pavement surface condition.
• Presence of vehicle parking.

11
Applications for Evaluation Tools

• Documenting existing conditions.
• Comparing alternatives.
• Identifying design configurations for
  improvements to existing roads.
• Prioritizing/programming improvements.
• Creating bicycle maps.

12
Lesson Summary

• No national standards for facility selection
• Use State/local guidelines.
• General principles.
• Roadway evaluation tools
• Two commonly used models.
• Numerous applications.