TroubleWithSidepaths GA06X

50 %
50 %
Information about TroubleWithSidepaths GA06X
Education

Published on February 6, 2008

Author: Quintino

Source: authorstream.com

The Trouble with Sidepaths…:  The Trouble with Sidepaths… Slide2:  Photos by Dan Burden What the Experienced Say…:  What the Experienced Say… “…why would you want to build them (sidepaths)? We stopped building them years ago because of all the safety problems…” - Arthur Ross Bike / Ped Coordinator City of Madison WS What the Experienced Say…:  What the Experienced Say… “…we (Oregon DOT) build them sparingly because of their operational problems…” - Michael Ronkin State Bike / Ped Coordinator Oregon Department of Transportation What the AASHTO Guide says…:  What the AASHTO Guide says… “…some operational problems are likely to occur…” - AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities pp 33-35 AASHTO Guidance on “Sidepaths” Pages 33-35:  AASHTO Guidance on “Sidepaths” Pages 33-35 Some problems with paths located immediately adjacent to roadways are: 1. Unless separated, they require one direction of bicycle traffic to ride against motor vehicle traffic, contrary to normal rules of the road. AASHTO Guidance on “Sidepaths”:  AASHTO Guidance on “Sidepaths” Some problems with paths located immediately adjacent to roadways are: 2. When the path ends, bicyclists going against traffic will continue traveling on the wrong side of the street. Likewise, bicyclists approaching a shared use path often travel on the wrong side of the street in getting to the path. Wachtel Study Conclusions Palo Alto, California:  Wachtel Study Conclusions Palo Alto, California Bicycling direction / location Comparative Crash Risk Bicyclists traveling on sidewalk/pathway (even with traffic flow) 1.8 times greater risk Bicyclists traveling against traffic flow (regardless of on-street or on sidewalk) 3.6 times greater risk Click on Screen to Continue - ITE Journal February 1996 AASHTO Guidance on “Sidepaths”:  AASHTO Guidance on “Sidepaths” Some problems with paths located immediately adjacent to roadways are: 3. At intersections, motorists entering or crossing the roadway often will not notice bicyclists approaching from their right; they are not expecting contra-flow vehicles. Motorists turning to exit the roadway may likewise fail to notice the bicyclist. Even bicyclists coming from the left often go unnoticed, especially when sight distances are limited. Slide10:  Photo by FDOT Photo by FDOT AASHTO Guidance on Sidepaths:  AASHTO Guidance on Sidepaths Some problems with paths located immediately adjacent to roadways are: 6. Many bicyclists will use the roadway instead of the shared use path because they have found the roadway to be more convenient, better maintained, or safer. Bicyclists using the roadway may be harassed by some motorists who feel that in all cases bicyclists should be on the adjacent path. Slide14:  Photo by FDOT AASHTO Guidance on Sidepaths:  AASHTO Guidance on Sidepaths Some problems with paths located immediately adjacent to roadways are: 7. Although the shared use path should be given the same priority through intersections as the parallel highway, motorists falsely expect bicyclists to stop or yield at all cross-streets and driveways. Efforts to require or encourage bicyclists to yield or stop at each cross-street and driveway are inappropriate and frequently ignored by bicyclists. AASHTO Guidance on Sidepaths:  AASHTO Guidance on Sidepaths Some problems with paths located immediately adjacent to roadways are as follows: 8. Stopped cross-street motor vehicle traffic or vehicles exiting side streets or driveways may block the path crossing. Sidepath Setbacks:  Sidepath Setbacks The risks of cycling, Dr. Eero Pasanen Helsinki City Planning Department, Planning Division :  The risks of cycling, Dr. Eero Pasanen Helsinki City Planning Department, Planning Division “In the City of Helsinki (500 000 inhabitants), we have built 800 kilometres of two-way cycle paths (Figure 5). More than half of these are the dangerous ones, located along the streets. It is hard to imagine that this system could be rebuilt. But in those countries and cities which are just beginning to build their cycling network, two-way cycle paths should be avoided in the urban street network.” The Good News….:  The Good News…. FDOT’s Sidepath Facility Selection & Design Study 2005:  FDOT’s Sidepath Facility Selection & Design Study 2005 Fifty sidepath / sidewalk facilities In-depth crash analysis of sampling Creates crash rate prediction model (safety of Sidepath vs. On-street operation) Model results show design alternatives Sidepath Safety Model:  Sidepath Safety Model where: ∆ = bicycle crash rate for a roadway minus crash rate for sidepath Wsp = width of the sidepath D = effective distance between the sidepath and the roadway (buffer width + ½ sidepath width) S = speed limit of adjacent roadway L = number of through lanes on adjacent roadway ∆ = Wsp(6.311-0.465Wsp)+D(0.015S-0.685- 1.528ln(L)-17.555 Slide29:  The example roadway used for this analysis is a four-lane, 45 mph (72 km/h) roadway, with a separation to the sidepath of 10 feet (3.1 m). Difference in Crash Rates as a Function of Path Width Sidepath more hazardous… Slide30:  Difference in Crash Rates as a Function of Separation from the Roadway example roadway of four lanes, 35 mph (56 km/h) posted speed, with a sidepath width of 8 feet (2.4 m) Sidepath more hazardous… Slide31:  Difference in Crash Rates as a Function of Separation from the Roadway example roadway with four lanes, 55 mph (89 km/h) posted speed, with a sidepath width of 10 feet (3.1 m). Sidepath more hazardous… Slide32:  example roadway of 35 mph (56 km/h) roadway, with a separation to an eight-foot sidepath of eight feet (2.4 m) Sidepath more hazardous…

Add a comment

Related presentations