Bicycle Level of Service for Arterials

Petritsch, Theodore Anton; Landis, Bruce W; Huang, Herman F.; McLeod, Peyton; Lamb, Daniel R.; Farah, Waddah; Guttenplan, Martin

doi:10.3141/2031-05

Cited by 50 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Researchers and practitioners have developed a number of quality-of-service (QOS) models for bicyclists (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28). The six most relevant methods are summarized in Table 1.…”

Section: Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Level-of-Service Model for Protected Bike Lanes

Foster¹,

Monsere

Dill

et al. 2015

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several methods exist for quantifying the quality of service provided by a roadway from a bicyclist's perspective; however, many of these models do not consider physically protected bike lanes and, of those that do, none is based on empirical data from the US. This is problematic as engineers, planners, and elected officials are increasingly looking to objective performance measures to help guide transportation project design and funding prioritization decisions. This paper addresses this gap by presenting a cumulative logistic model to predict user comfort on protected bike lanes developed from data collected during in-person video surveys. The surveys were conducted in Portland, OR with video footage gathered in Chicago, IL, Portland, OR and San Francisco, CA. The model is for road segments only and not signalized intersections. It complements the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 level-ofservice methods by providing an analysis procedure for a facility type that is not currently included in the manual. The model indicates that the type of buffer, direction of travel (one-way vs. two-way), adjacent motor vehicle speed limit, and average daily motor vehicle volumes are all significant predictors of bicyclist comfort in protected bike lanes. The model predicts a mean value of 'A' or 'B' on an A (most comfortable)-F (least comfortable) scale for all protected bike lane clips used in the survey. Consistent with previous research findings, survey respondents report that protected bike lanes are generally more comfortable than other types of on-street infrastructure.

show abstract

Section: Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Level-of-Service Model for Protected Bike Lanes

Foster¹,

Monsere

Dill

et al. 2015

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their random-sample survey of Portland, Oregon, residents, Dill and Voros found that nearly 40% of people who wanted to bicycle more cited a lack of bike lanes or trails as a barrier to doing so (11). Research by Petritsch and Landis on bicycle LOS in Florida found that the presence or absence of a bicycle lane was the most commonly cited reason for giving a roadway a high or low score, respectively (12). In their analysis of perceived cycling risk and route acceptability, Parkin et al found that bicycle lanes could mitigate the perceived risk of bicycling near high amounts of auto traffic (13).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do All Roadway Users Want the Same Things?

Sanders

Cooper

2013

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents findings from a recent study on roadway design preferences among pedestrians, drivers, bicyclists, and public transit users along a major urban corridor in the East San Francisco Bay Area. Sponsored by the California DOT, the research focused on exploring design preferences that could increase perceived traffic safety, walkability, bikability, and economic vitality along urban arterials.Results from an intercept survey showed that all user groups desire similar roadway design features along the test corridor, which carries 25,000-30,000 motorists bi-directionally and has comprehensive sidewalk coverage, but no bicycle facilities. In an open-ended question about street improvements to enhance perceived traffic safety, all respondent groups requested the same top five improvements. Bicycle lanes were ranked first by pedestrians, drivers, and bicyclists (fifth by public transit respondents), and improved pedestrian crossings were ranked second by pedestrians, drivers, and public transit users (third by bicyclists). The other top five suggestions were the same for all groups, though ordered slightly differently: slowing traffic/improving driver behavior, increasing street lighting, and increasing traffic signals/stop signs. Similar preference alignment was found regarding street improvements to encourage more visits to the corridor.These findings suggest that design features generally thought to benefit one road user group, such as bicycle lanes for bicyclists, may also benefit other users. Moreover, these results provide evidence that roadway planning can take advantage of synergistic opportunities to benefit multiple user groups by implementing a few key design interventions. Overall, the findings support the continued implementation of complete streets principles and policies.

show abstract

“…Supplementary methods to the initial list were found through snowballing of references and searches in the Scopus database. The criterion results in the exclusion of such methods as those that are focused solely on intersections [18], separated bicycle or shared paths [19][20][21], rural areas [22,23], urban arterials [24], or bicycle lanes [25,26]. Audit-based metrics are also excluded from Table 1, including those in Australia and the UK that use the term "Cycling Level of Service" [9,27,28] and select others that use the term bicycle level of service but are either 'scorecard' based or lack an empirical foundation for the combination of variables [29,30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bicycle Level of Service for Route Choice—A GIS Evaluation of Four Existing Indicators with Empirical Data

Pritchard

Frøyen

Snizek³

2019

IJGI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS) indicators are used to provide objective ratings of the bicycle suitability (or quality) of links or intersections in transport networks. This article uses empirical bicycle route choice data from 467 university students in Trondheim, Norway to test the applicability of BLOS rating schemes for the estimation of whole-journey route choice. The methods evaluated share a common trait of being applicable for mixed traffic urban environments: Bicycle Compatibility Index (BCI), Bicycle Stress Level (BSL), Sixth Edition Highway Capacity Manual (HCM6), and Level of Traffic Stress (LTS). Routes are generated based on BLOS-weighted networks and the suitability of these routes is determined by finding the percentage overlap with empirical route choices. The results show that BCI provides the best match with empirical route data in all five origin–destination pairs, followed by HCM6. BSL and LTS which are not empirically founded have a lower match rate, although the differences between the four methods are relatively small. By iterating the detour rate that cyclists are assumed to be willing to make, it is found that the best match with modelled BLOS routes is achieved between 15 and 21% additional length. This falls within the range suggested by existing empirical research on willingness to deviate from the shortest path, however, it is uncertain whether the method will deliver the comparable findings in other cycling environments.

show abstract

Bicycle Level of Service for Arterials

Cited by 50 publications

References 4 publications

Level-of-Service Model for Protected Bike Lanes

Level-of-Service Model for Protected Bike Lanes

Do All Roadway Users Want the Same Things?

Bicycle Level of Service for Route Choice—A GIS Evaluation of Four Existing Indicators with Empirical Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About