Advocacy FAQs...
|
The plan for this page is to post information on questions and answers typically asked by people wanting to start a local group and work with their local gonvernment and public works to plan and improve cycling in their area. There are lots of progressive cities out there which have done a lot of research and testing of what works, and what doesnt when planning paths, traffic control trail planning and other issues. Our goal is to collect the best ideas and create a resource for local advocacy groups. If you have Question (or an Answer) , let us know!
Questions What can be done to make narrow streets more bike-friendly ? Where can business/cities buy Bike Racks ? Are there scientific ways to evaluate and improve "bike-friendlyness" ? What information is available for the design of "good" RoundAbouts? What information is available to restrict/refine the use of rumble strips? What can I present to my local city/county to encourage better shoulders? How do I find out who my Senate and House representatives are? Answers Q: What can be done to make narrow streets more bike-friendly ?
Sharrows have now been evaluated and used in a number of US cities like San Francisco, Chicago, Seattle, Portland and others with various configurations, and recently (Jan 2007) been approved by the National Committee for Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The design guildelines will be introduced in the next revision of the MUTCD manuals, and begin filtering their way to common use by State and City Public Works departments. Sharrows are intended to be placed in Traffic Lanes to educate both motorists and cyclists as to correct and safe positioning when there is not room for a motorist to pass safely. It is typically considered in situations where the speed limit is 35mph or less, and total lane width is 13' or less, or heavy streetside parking is present, and there is significant use by cyclists. The positioning of the Sharrow symbol is intended to indicate that cyclists can and should be mid-lane and act as vehicles for maximum safety, visibility, and avoiding car doors. You can read more about these Sharrows and the endorsement by the National Comm for Uniform Traffic Control Devices online, or by doing a quick Google search on 'City Sharrow safety' to read about how other Cities are installing the symbols.
Q: Where can business/cities buy Bike Racks ?
Q: Are there scientific ways to evaluate and improve "bike-friendlyness" ?
Thanks to federal studies, there are resources for planners to evaluate "friendlyness" with some scientific metrics, and assistance in developing and prioritizing improvements. The results of this research effort are documented in two FHWA documents. The Bicycle Compatibility Index: A Level of Service Concept, Implementation Manual (FHWA-RD-98-095) provides practitioners with a guide to using the BCI methodology along with several real-world examples. Development of the Bicycle Compatibility Index: A Level of Service Concept, Final Report (FHWA-RD-98-72) documents the research project including validation of the video data collection technique, field data collection procedures, and results of the data analysis. For more information about this research effort and the subsequent reports, please contact:
Carol Tan Esse, Federal Highway Administration
Q: What information is available for the design of "good" RoundAbouts?
I did find some material on design guidelines for BIG roundabouts at http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/00068.htm but so far have not turned up much on the "mini" roundabouts that are popular with some local traffic calming planners.
There is one other reference I have found, but not reviewed:
If you know of any other good studies and evaluations with respect to effectiveness and bike safety, let us know! Over the last several years in working with various groups and designs, we have come up with a short list of elements that should be considered in what WE would call good design for motorists and cyclists:
Q: What information is available to restrict/refine the use of rumble strips?
Q: What can I present to my local city/county to encourage better shoulders?
Critical dimensions
Less than 4 feet (1.2m): any additional width of paved shoulder is better than none at all, but below 4 feet a shoulder should not be designated or marked as a bicycle facility.
Widths should be increased with higher bicycle usage, motor vehicle speeds above 50mi/hr, higher percentage of truck and bus traffic. Further guidance on the appropriate width of shoulders to accommodate bicyclists on roadways in these situations can be found in FHWA's Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicyclists. Wisconsin DOT has a policy of providing a three foot paved shoulder on all highways with an average daily traffic in excess of 1,000 vehicles, and this is widened to five feet if a moderate number of bicyclists regularly use the road. See page 38 of the WisDOT State Bicycle Plan. http://www.dot.state.wi.us/dtim/pdf/bikeplan.pdf
Q: How do I find out who my Senate and House representatives are?
|