AGENDA #9
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Comparison of Bicycle Lanes and Wide-Outside Lanes
DATE: June 11, 2001
This memorandum reviews the issues of providing bicycle lanes and wide outside lanes for bicyclists. We recommend Council adopt Resolution A proposing an implementation policy for constructing bicycle lanes. Resolution A incorporates the recommendations of the Transportation Board. Resolution B proposes an alternative implementation policy incorporating the recommendation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.
The Council requested staff prepare a policy to guide the construction of bicycle lanes and wide outside lanes along Town arterial and collector streets. Council also requested that the staff recommendation be presented to the Transportation Board and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board for comment prior to presentation to the Council.
We reviewed a wide variety of federal, state and local documents dealing with bicycle facility design and concluded that provision of bicycle lanes where appropriate would support the goals of the Town’s 2000 Comprehensive Plan to promote greater use of bicycles. While both wide outside lanes and bicycle lanes have operational problems, national studies have found that inexperienced and new bicyclists prefer bicycle lanes to wide outside lanes.
The Transportation Board supported the staff’s recommendation that bicycle lanes be constructed where appropriate. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee raised questions about the information used to develop the staff report, suggested additional sources of information and recommended a set of criteria for consideration of bicycle lane construction. In this report we review the recommendations of both advisory boards and offer our conclusions for the Council’s consideration.
We believe the policy recommended for adoption by the Council would allow the Town the flexibility to assess the appropriateness of constructing bicycle lanes along Town streets, balancing safety and budgetary considerations with the desire of inexperienced and new bicyclists for separate bicycle facilities.
At the December 11, 2000 Council discussion of the draft 2002-2008 Draft Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program the issue of the appropriateness of bicycle lanes or wide outside lanes for inclusion as part of several roadway improvement projects was raised. For the past several months there has been discussion among Town Advisory Boards, particularly the Transportation Board and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, concerning the appropriateness of constructing bicycle lanes rather than wide outside lanes to accommodate bicyclists in Chapel Hill.
The Council requested staff develop a preliminary recommendation for consideration by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board and Transportation Board before developing a recommendation to the Council. Staff prepared a report for consideration by the Advisory Boards. (Attachment 1) The recommendations of the Transportation Board and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board are attached. (Attachments 2 and 3)
For purposes of this discussion bicycle lanes are defined as lanes at least 4 feet wide located on the outside of general automobile travel lanes. These bicycle lanes are usually provided on roadways with curb and gutter and are delineated by a solid strip and signed appropriately. Bike lanes can also take the form of 4 foot shoulder sections on roadways without curb and gutter. These bicycle facilities are usually not signed as bicycle lanes.
Wide outside lanes include the provision of 2 feet of extra pavement in each lane on a two lane facility or the outside lanes on multilane facilities, creating a 14 foot lane which is shared by bicycles and automobiles. Wide outside lanes can be provided on roadways with or without curb and gutter.
In considering the issue of bicycle facility design we have reviewed several local, state and federal documents. We have listed below the documents reviewed in preparation of the April 24, 2001 Planning Staff Report:
· Planning For Chapel Hill’s Future: The Comprehensive Plan, May 8, 2000
· Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Urban Area Bicycle Plan, 1992
· City of Davis, Public Works Department, Bicycle Plan, May, 1993
· A Report on the NCDOT Pedestrian and Bicycling Safety Summit 2000, North Carolina Department of Transportation, 2000
· National Bicycling and Walking Study, Case Study Number One, Reasons Why Bicycling and Walking Are Not Being Used More Extensively as Travel Modes, US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1992.
· Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles, US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, January, 1994
· Bicycle Lanes Versus Wide Curb Lanes: Operational and Safety Findings and Countermeasure Recommendations, US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, October, 1999
Attachment 1 includes a more detailed summary of the findings and conclusions of these documents.
From our review of the various studies cited we have developed the following conclusions:
We also note that the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Urban Area 2025 Transportation Plan will include analysis of the potential increase in bicycle use with the construction of new bicycle facilities. Based on national studies that found increased bicycle use with the provision of bicycle paths and bicycle lanes these facilities will be incorporated into the model. Wide outside lanes will not be included in the model analysis. The impact of new bicycle facilities will be tested using the Regional Transportation Model.
During the course of their review of the staff analysis the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board and the Transportation Board identified several additional issues.
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board raised several issues concerning wide outside lanes and bicycle lanes.
Staff Comment: In the course of preparing this report we have reviewed information from federal, state and local websites and bicycle advocacy groups. We have also reviewed reports from the Federal Department of Transportation. We have noted those reports that included any information on either bicycle lanes or wide outside lanes. We have not found any source of information that dealt exclusively with the benefits of wide outside lanes.
We have reviewed Effective Cycling, 1984 and Bicycle Transportation, 1994, by John Forester. Attachment 4 is Chapter 9, “The Effect of Bikeways on Traffic” from Bicycle Transportation. Mr. Forester makes several points when considering bicycle lanes, including:
· “…there is the possibility that bikeways increase accidents, either by increasing the number of some types that have been occurring or by creating entirely new types.”
· “Crossing and turning relationships during traffic maneuvers are involved in 95% of car-bike collisions, while failure of such separation as can be achieved is the cause of less than 5% of car-bike collisions. Bikeways, in other words, are aimed at a problem that is insignificantly small while they fail to address the great majority of car-bike collisions.”
· “The phrase ‘perceived safety’ is used in the strictly propaganda sense of claiming that greater safety exists in a form that appears obvious to new cyclists, without bothering to test whether the opinions accurately reflect the true safety situation. In actual fact, of course, the so called perception of safety is, for nearly all persons concerned, merely the natural outward show of the cyclists inferiority superstition.”
· Bicycle lanes pose problems for cyclists and motorists at intersections, particularly in situations where bicyclists must move into the left lane to turn.
Staff Comment: Mr. Forester does raise important design and operational issues, particularly regarding the problems of interaction between motor vehicles and bicyclists at intersections and during turning movements. We note that many of these problems are inherent to bicycles operating on roadways rather than a unique element of bicycle lanes and should be addressed through driver and cyclists education programs.
We also note that both books were written before much of the recent federal and State research had been completed. Although Bicycling Transportation was updated in 1994, it was originally published in 1976 and most references in the book were published in the 1970’s and 1980’s. We believe that many of the concerns raised by Mr. Forester have been addressed by recent federal evaluations of bicycle lanes and wide outside lanes and through the evolution and refinement of bicycle lane design practices.
Staff Comment: The general policy of the North Carolina Department of Transportation is to request local funding of bicycle lanes while providing funds for wide outside lanes as “incidental” features of roadway widening.
The Town has been successful in utilizing Surface Transportation Program Direct Allocation funds, provided by the Metropolitan Planning Organization, for partial funding of bicycle lanes as part of roadway widening projects. The Town has had to provide a 20% local match.
The Metropolitan Planning Organization has requested the North Carolina Department of Transportation provide full funding for bicycle projects. They have also requested that the State provide the local match for those bicycle projects that utilize Direct Allocation funds.
While the State will consider providing additional pavement width for wide outside lanes, it is usually in conjunction with roadway widening projects. It is unclear whether the Town will pursue any additional roadway widenings beyond those now included in the 2002-2008 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program.
· Roads with 35 mph and 45 mph speed limits
· Intersections are minimal, with limited cross traffic
· Few driveway cuts
· Limited turning movements
· Descents with high speeds (>25 mph) are not an issue
· Commitment to keep bicycle lanes free of debris
Staff Comment: We agree that roadways with speeds 35 mph or higher should be candidates for bicycle lanes and the Town should attempt to keep bicycle facilities clear of all types of debris. We believe that the feasibility of implementing bicycle lanes should be evaluated for each corridor, reflecting the unique characteristics of the roadway. We agree that the number of intersections, driveway cuts, turning movements and grade should all be included in the evaluation, along with an assessment of current bicycle use in the corridor and potential for encouraging increased bicycle use. We do not believe that all the criteria set forth by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board must be met before a roadway could be considered for bicycle lanes.
Transportation Board
1. Collector Streets: The Transportation Board recommended that bicycle lanes
be implemented only on those collector streets with higher speeds or traffic volumes.
Staff Comment: We agree that both arterial and collector roadways be evaluated prior to implementation of bicycle facilities. Factors such as traffic speed and volume, current bicycle use, roadway grade and other safety issues should assessed.
We believe the Town should reaffirm the policy included in the 2000 Comprehensive Plan to pursue the construction of bicycle lanes on arterial and collector streets within the community. This policy is intended to accommodate existing bicyclists and to encourage more individuals to use bicycles on a regular basis, particularly for commuting to work or school.
Wide outside lanes would be provided on local and those collector streets that have low speed limits and traffic volumes. Bicycle lanes would be appropriate for collector streets with higher speeds or traffic volumes. In cases where the Council wished to minimize the impact of arterial roadway widenings on adjacent properties wide outside lanes could be included in these projects.
The Town Council has adopted a policy in the Comprehensive Plan to pursue the construction of bicycle lanes on arterial and collector streets within the community. This policy is intended to accommodate existing bicyclists and to encourage more individuals to use bicycles on a regular basis, particularly for commuting to work or school. The Comprehensive Plan includes an Action Plan that identifies the goal to “adopt roadway standards for on-street bike lanes and begin applying to resurfacing/reconstruction projects” with 0-2 years of the adoption of the Plan. The Plan suggests a deadline of December 31, 2001 for development and adoption of these guidelines.
We suggest the following specific standards to implement the Comprehensive Plan’s goal.
The Comprehensive Plan also recognizes the need to develop a detailed Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. This Plan could provide the means for implementing the Town’s Bicycle policies by identifying a bicycle network that would include arterial, collector and local streets. Appropriate facility designs could then be implemented along specific corridors identified in the Plan.
Transportation Board Recommendation: The Board met on May 1, 2001 and voted 7-0 to recommend that the Council approve the preliminary policy proposed by staff and that (Attachment 3):
· The specific standards identified on page 6 of the April 24, 2001 Planning Staff Report be incorporated into the recommendation; and
· That bikelanes be considered for collector streets where appropriate rather than implemented on all collector facilities.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board: The Board met on May 22, 2001 and voted 5-1 to recommend that the Council consider the comments and recommendations contained in the May 22, 2001 Board memorandum. (Attachment 4)
This memorandum proposed the following criteria for implementation of bicycle lanes:
· Roads with 35 mph and 45 mph speed limits
· Intersections are minimal, with limited cross traffic
· Few driveway cuts
· Limited turning movements
· Descents with high speeds (>25 mph) are not an issue
· Commitment to keep bicycle lanes free of debris
Manager’s Recommendation: That the Council adopt Resolution A, setting a policy to pursue the construction of bicycle lanes on arterial and collector roads in Chapel Hill. Resolution A incorporates the recommendations of the Transportation Board.
Resolution B would approve a policy for bicycle lane construction that incorporates the criteria defined by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.
RESOLUTION A
(Transportation Board and Manager’s Recommendation)
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BICYCLE FACILITIES WITHIN THE TOWN (2001-06-11/R-16a)
WHEREAS, it is the goal of the Town of Chapel Hill to accommodate the needs of existing bicyclists; and
WHEREAS, is the goal of the Town of Chapel Hill to encourage greater use of bicycles as an alternative mode of transportation; and
WHEREAS, research indicates that the provision of bicycle lanes and paths would encourage greater use of bicycles by casual and new bicyclists; and
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill 2000 Comprehensive Plan includes the objective “develop and maintain a system of safe and efficient bikeways (on-street bike lanes and off-street paths within greenways) designed to contribute to Town-wide mobility, connecting neighborhoods with activity centers, schools, parks, and other neighborhoods”; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan recommends the Town “adopt revised roadway standards incorporating on-street bikelanes, including a commitment to install bike lanes in roadway resurfacing projects where feasible”;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council adopts the following policy:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to incorporate this policy in all design guidelines used by the Town to construct or improve roadways.
This the 11th day of June, 2001.
RESOLUTION B
(Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Recommendation)
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BICYCLE FACILITIES WITHIN THE TOWN (2001-06-11/R-16b)
WHEREAS, it is the goal of the Town of Chapel Hill to accommodate the needs of existing bicyclists; and
WHEREAS, is the goal of the Town of Chapel Hill to encourage greater use of bicycles as an alternative mode of transportation; and
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill 2000 Comprehensive Plan includes the objective “develop and maintain a system of safe and efficient bikeways (on-street bike lanes and off-street paths within greenways) designed to contribute to Town-wide mobility, connecting neighborhoods with activity centers, schools, parks, and other neighborhoods”; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan recommends the Town “adopt revised roadway standards incorporating on-street bikelanes, including a commitment to install bike lanes in roadway resurfacing projects where feasible”;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council adopts the following policy:
- Roads with 35 mph and 45 mph speed limits
- Intersections are minimal, with limited cross traffic
- Few driveway cuts
- Limited turning movements
- Descents with high speeds (>25 mph) are not an issue
- Commitment to keep bicycle lanes free of debris
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council directs the Manager to incorporate this policy in all design guidelines used by the Town to construct or improve roadways.
This the 11th day of June, 2001.