A Comprehensive Evaluation of Protected Cycling Facilities: Lessons from Five Cities

Early Adopters of

the Protected

Bicycle Lane in

United States: What

Have We Learned?

NITC Webinar

March 19, 20151

Photo credit: Nathan McNeil, PSU

Christopher M. Monsere @CMonserePortland State University

Project co-PIsJennifer Dill, Kelly Clifton, Nathan McNeilLead GRAs: Tara Goddard and Nick Foster

http://bit.ly/nitc_583

Webinar Overview

1. Introduction and Background

2. Methodology

3. Change in Ridership

4. Design

5. Community Support

6. Conclusions

2

Credit:People for BikesGreen Lane Project

Research Objectives

• A field-based evaluation of protected

bikeways in five U.S. cities to study:

– Safety of users (both perceived and actual)

– Effectiveness of the design

– Perceptions of residents and other road users

– Attractiveness to more casual cyclists

– Change in economic activity

4

Overview of Sites

5

Green Lane Cities Studied

6

7

Austin: Rio Grande StreetTwo-way protected bike lane on one-way street

Two-way bikeway

One-way vehicle lane

8

Austin: Bluebonnet Lane

Two-way bikeway

Two-way vehicles

Two-way protected bike lane on a two-way street

9

Austin: Barton Springs RoadOne-way protected bike lane on the south side of the road

One-way bikeway

Two-way vehicles4 lanes

Shared-Use Path

10

Chicago: N/S Dearborn StreetTwo-way protected bike lane on one-way street

Two-way bikeway

One-way vehicle lanes

11

Chicago: N Milwaukee AvenuePair of one-way protected bike lanes on a two-way street

One-way bikeway

Two-way vehicle lanes

12

Portland: NE Multnomah StreetPair of one-way protected bike lanes on a two-way street

One-way bikewayTwo-way vehicle lanes with center turn lane

13

San Francisco: Fell StreetOne-way left-side protected lane on a one-way street

One-way bikeway

One-way vehicle lanes

14

San Francisco: Oak StreetOne-way right-side lane on a one-way street

One-way bikewayOne-way vehicle lanes

15

Washington DC: L StreetOne-way protected bike lane on a one-way street

One-way bikeway

One-way vehicle lanes

Methodology

16

Video Data• Primarily intersections• 3 locations per facility (not Austin) 2 cameras per location • 2 days of video (7am to 7pm) per location• 168 hours analyzed • 16,393 bicyclists and 19,724 turning vehicles observed

Example Video Screenshots (2 views) from San Francisco at Oak and Broderick

Surveys

• Resident

• Mailed to residents living near new protected

bike lane(s)

• 8 - 12 pages (~40 questions)

• 23% response rate overall

• Bicyclist

• Bicyclists intercepted on facility and directed

to online survey

– 33% response rate overall

18

Data Used in Analysis

Research Element Video DataBicyclist

Survey

Resident

SurveyCount Data

Change in Ridership

Design/Safety

Evaluation

Barrier Types &

Comfort

Community Support

19

Change in Ridership:Safety perceptions and potential riders

20

Change in Observed Bicycle Volumes

Source: City-provided before and after counts, PSU video counts, ACS Survey

21

126%

68%

46% 46%

21%

171%

65%58%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%

Rio Grande Multnomah Bluebonnet Fell Milwaukee Dearborn L Street BartonSprings

Pe

rce

nt

Incr

ea

se

Before: One-way travelAfter: Two-way travel

Bike lanes prior No bike lanes prior

Before the new facility was built, how

would you have made this trip?

22Source: Cyclist intercept surveys, Green Lane evaluation

60%

38%34% 32% 29%

18%11%

6%

21%

7%10% 10%

6%

6%

7%10%

17%

55% 56% 56%65%

75%80% 83%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Dearborn Rio Grande Multnomah L Street BartonSprings

Oak Street Fell Street Milwaukee

By bicycle,using thissame route

Would nothave takentrip

By othermode

By bicycle,using anotherroute

One likely reason: Improved perception of safety

33%

18%

29%

31%

33%

18%

27%

56%

82%

66%

65%

59%

81%

66%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Austin Barton Springs

Chicago Dearborn

DC L Street

Chicago Milwuakie

Portland Multnomah

SF Oak / Fell

Austin Rio Grande

Increased Somewhat Increased a Lot

23Source: Cyclist intercept surveys, Green Lane evaluation

I feel the safety of bicycling on ______ has . .

Resident Survey: Potential New Cyclists

24

Strong and Fearless,

5%

Enthused and Confident, 27%

Interested but Concerned, 43%

No Way No How, 25%

Share of Residents

43%

62%

85%

37%

Strong and Fearless Enthused and Confident Interested but Concerned No Way No How

I would be more likely to ride a bicycle if motor vehicles and bicycles were physically separated by a barrier.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women

San Francisco Washington DC Chicago Austin Portland Overall

Increased Somewhat

Increased a lot

Because of the ____ Street separated bikeway,

how often I ride a bicycle overall has . . .

Source: Cyclist intercept surveys, Green Lane evaluation

25

Design:Intersections, Signals, Buffers

26

Design Elements

• Intersections

– Turning and mixing zones

– Fully signalized

• Buffers

– Type and widths

27

Turning Zone with Post Restricted Entry and

Through Bike Lane (TBL)

28Motor vehicleBicycle

Merging Area

Turning Zone with Unrestricted

Entry and TBL

29

Mixing Zone with Yield Entry

Markings

30

Mixing Zone with Sharrow Marking

31

Mixing Zone with Green Skip

Coloring

32

Intersection and Type of DesignDirection of Turning

Traffic

Through Bikes Per

Hour

Turning Vehicles Per Hour

Observed Correct Turning

Motorist

Observed Correct Through Bicycle

% of Bicyclists Agreeing

They Feel Safe

Turning Zone with Post Restricted Entry and

Through Bike Lane (TBL)

L Street / 15th

Left 110 173 86% 93% 64%

Turning Zone with Post Restricted Entry and TBL

L Street / ConnecticutLeft 116 125 88% 89% 64%

Turning Zone with Unrestricted Entry and

TBL

Oak / Divisadero

Right 201 126 66% 81% 74%

Mixing Zone with Yield Entry Markings

NE Multnomah / 9thRight 31 94 93% 63% 73%

Mixing Zone with Sharrow Marking

Oak / BroderickRight 188 24 48% 30% 79%

Mixing Zone with Green Skip Coloring

Fell / BakerLeft 226 48 49% - 84%

DC Design

on M

Street

(new)

34Photo from @JenniferDillPSU

Observed Precautionary and Minor Conflicts

35

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 200 400 600 800 1,000

Tota

l Co

nfl

icts

Turning Vehicles When Bike Is Present * Bicycles Thousands

Multnomah and 9th

Oak Divisadero

Oak and Broderick

Fell and Baker

L and 15th St

L and Connecticut

36

Dearborn and Madison, Chicago, IL

Photo: C. Monsere

Left-turn signal for cars

Bicycle signals

37

93%

77%

92%

7%

23%

8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Dearborn/ Congress

Dearborn/ Madison

Dearborn/ Randolph

Waited for green/legal right-turn on red Proceeded illegally on red

84%

90%

92%

10%

5%

6%

6%

6%

2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Dearborn/ Congress

Dearborn/ Madison

Dearborn/ Randolph

Legal Turn on Green Illegal Turn on Red Arrow Jumped into crosswalk

People on Bicycles

People in Motor Vehicles

Perceived Safety at Intersections

38

0 20 40 60 80 100

L Street/ 15th Street

L Street/ Connecticut

Oak/ Divisadero

NE Multnomah/9th

Oak/Broderick

Fell/Baker

Chicago - Signalized

Percent Feeling Safe

Percent Respondents Somewhat or Strongly Agreeing "Feel Safe"

Change in Stated Comfort (from a bike lane), by bicyclist type

1%

-1%-5%

-2%

7% 6%

-1% -1%-4%

1%

10% 9%

24% 24%

31%

50% 48%

60%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

A painted 2-3foot buffer

A solid paintedbuffer

A paintedbuffer andparked cars

A raisedconcrete curb

A 2-3 footbuffer and

plasticflexposts

Plantersseparating the

bikeway

Perc

ent

Incre

ase

of

Norm

alized S

core

(wit

h a

sta

ndard

bic

cyle

lane a

s base

)

Strong and Fearless Enthused and Confident Interested But Concerned

39

Community Support:Motorists, Pedestrians, General

40

Support for

Protected

Lanes

41Source: Resident surveys, Green Lane evaluation

95%

79%

78%

76%

75%

69%

75%

97%

88%

82%

84%

80%

79%

83%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Bicycle

Foot

Transit

Mix

Non-commuters

Car/Truck

All Residents

Facilities that encouragebicycling for transportationare a good way to improvepublic health.

I would support building moreprotected bike lanes at otherlocations.

Because of the protected bikelanes, the desirability of livingin my neighborhood hasincreased

Support for

Protected

Lanes

42Source: Resident surveys, Green Lane evaluation

66%

45%

43%

47%

36%

39%

43%

95%

79%

78%

76%

75%

69%

75%

97%

88%

82%

84%

80%

79%

83%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Bicycle

Foot

Transit

Mix

Non-commuters

Car/Truck

All Residents

Facilities that encouragebicycling for transportationare a good way to improvepublic health.

I would support building moreprotected bike lanes at otherlocations.

Because of the protected bikelanes, the desirability of livingin my neighborhood hasincreased

Because of the protected bike lanes, the

safety of _____ on the street has . .

30%

23%

28%

43%

38%

38%

45%

27%

15%

19%

44%

52%

21%

37%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Washington DC - L St.

Chicago, Dearborn

Chicago, Milwaukee

Austin, Barton Springs

Austin, Bluebonnet

San Francisco, Oak

Portland, Multnomah

Percent of Residents Stating “Safety Increased"

Walking

Driving

Bicycling

Source: Resident Surveys, Green Lane evaluation

43

Because of the protected bike lanes, the

safety of _____ on the street has . .

80%

76%

74%

82%

85%

80%

74%

30%

23%

28%

43%

38%

38%

45%

27%

15%

19%

44%

52%

21%

37%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Washington DC - L St.

Chicago, Dearborn

Chicago, Milwaukee

Austin, Barton Springs

Austin, Bluebonnet

San Francisco, Oak

Portland, Multnomah

Percent of Residents Stating “Safety Increased"

Walking

Driving

Bicycling

Source: Resident Surveys, Green Lane evaluation

44

Conclusions

• Evidence of increased bicycle volumes

– Within one year, mostly due to shifting routes

• Strong improved perception of safety for

people riding on the facilities

– May be improving experience for women

more than men

– Surveys of residents indicate that separation

may encourage more cycling

45

Conclusions

• Designs choices affect safety and comfort,

some worked better than others

– Clear demarcation of the merge entry point for

vehicles and the use of the “through bicycle

lane” performed best

– Use of signals effective (highest perception of

safety)

– Green markings good for communicating paths

– Designs with buffers with highest physical

separation preferred, though flexpost scored

high too

46

Conclusions

• Generally positive perceptions for other

road users

– More negative perceptions are specific to

certain streets

• Support for the protected lane concept

– Road users appear to recognize larger

benefits

47

Christopher M. MonserePortland State University

[email protected] 48

Questions?http://bit.ly/nitc_583

Thanks to support from:

National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), a U.S.

Department of Transportation university transportation center, People for

Bikes (formerly Bikes Belong) and the Summit Foundation.

Thanks to City partners:

Mike Amsden (CDOT), David Smith (CDOT), Jim Sebastian (DDOT), Mike

Goodno (DDOT), Roger Geller (PBOT), Rob Burchfield (PBOT), Ross Swanson

(PBOT), Wendy Cawley (PBOT), Lindsay Walker (Lloyd District TMA), Seleta

Reynolds (SFMTA), Miriam Sorell (SFMTA), Annick Beaudet (Austin), Nathan

Wilkes (Austin), Aleksiina Chapman (Austin).

Reference List• Monsere, C., J. Dill, N. McNeil, K. Clifton, N. Foster, T. Goddard, M. Berkow, J. Gilpin, K. Voros,

D. van Hengel, J. Parks. Lessons From The Green Lanes: Evaluating Protected Bike Lanes In The

U.S.. Final Report, National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC), NITC-RR-583,

June 2014.

• Foster, N., Monsere, C., Dill, J., Clifton, K. “A Level-of-Service Model for Protected Bike Lanes”

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. X,

Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2015. In Press.

• McNeil, N.M., Monsere, C., Dill, J. “The Influence of Bike Lane Buffer Types on Perceived

Comfort and Safety of Bicyclists and Potential Bicyclists” Transportation Research Record:

Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. X, Transportation Research Board of the

National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2015. In Press.

• Monsere, C., Foster, N., Dill, J., McNeil, N.M. “User Behaviors and Perceptions at Intersections

with Mixing and Turning Zones on Protected Bike Lanes” Transportation Research Record:

Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. X, Transportation Research Board of the

National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2015. In Press.

• Dill, J., Goddard, T., Monsere, C., McNeil, N.M. “Can Protected Bike Lanes Help Close the

Gender Gap in Cycling? Lessons from Five Cities” Paper 15-3481. Proceedings of the 94th

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2015.

• Dill, J. Clifton, K., Monsere, C., McNeil, N. Measuring and Predicting Behavior Change In

Response To New Cycle Tracks. Prepared for the 10th International Conference on Transport

Survey Methods Leura, Australia, November 16-21, 2014

49

BONUS SLIDES

50

78%

25%

97%

72%

28%

73%

32%

56%

37%

6%

89%

1%

5%

7%

93%

7%

48%

89%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Home Owners

2+ Adults in HH

Children in HH

Driver's License

Transit Pass

Car Share Membership

Own/Lease a car

Own working bicycle

Female

<35 years of age

35 to 54 years

55 + years

White

Black

Hispanic or Latino/a

Asian

Work Outside Home

Work From Home

Income >$100k

Four year degree +

Resident Bicyclist

55%

64%

15%

96%

50%

18%

81%

67%

53%

26%

40%

34%

81%

5%

5%

6%

66%

15%

41%

83%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Home Owners

2+ Adults in HH

Children in HH

Driver's License

Transit Pass

Car Share Membership

Own/Lease a car

Own working bicycle

Female

<35 years of age

35 to 54 years

55 + years

White

Black

Hispanic or Latino/a

Asian

Work Outside Home

Work From Home

Income >$100k

Four year degree +

51Source: Resident and Bicyclist surveys, Green Lane evaluation

Types of buffers used include:

Buffer type affects safety and comfort

Semi-permanent planter with colored pavement(Multnomah St., Portland)

Parked vehicles and flexposts(Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago)

Flexposts and painted buffer(Fell Street, San Francisco)

52

53

Bicyclists: Mean Stated Comfort with Hypothetical Buffers

1

2

3

4

5

6

Solid painted buffer (5) Painted 2-3 foot buffer(3)

Painted buffer andparked cars (1)

Raised concrete curb(6)

2-3 foot buffer andplastic flexposts (2)

Planters separating thebikeway (4)

Austin Barton Springs Austin Rio Grande Chicago Dear. Chicago Milw.

Portland Mult. SF Oak / Fell Streets D.C. L Street

The buffer effectively separates bikes

from cars

54

Disagree, 14%

Somewhat Agree, 38%

Strongly Agree, 49%

Disagree, 5%

Somewhat Agree, 32%

Strongly Agree,

63%

Disagree, 12%

Somewhat Agree, 41%

Strongly Agree, 47%

Disagree, 29%

Somewhat Agree, 41%

Strongly Agree, 30%

"Strong and Fearless""Enthused and

Confident""Interested But

Concerned""No Way No How"

% Disagree

Perceptions of residents driving on street

Percent responding increased

55

18%

15%

54%

63%

32%

22%

20%

27%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Barton Springs

Bluebonnet

Dearborn

Milwaukee

Multnomah

Oak

Fell

L Street

Since the protectedbike lanes were built,the amount of time ittakes me to drive onthis street has . . .

Since the protectedbike lanes were built,how safe andpredictable bicyclistsare acting has . . .

Perceptions of residents driving on street

Percent responding increased

56

58%

59%

53%

44%

48%

54%

52%

18%

15%

54%

63%

32%

22%

20%

27%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Barton Springs

Bluebonnet

Dearborn

Milwaukee

Multnomah

Oak

Fell

L Street

Since the protectedbike lanes were built,the amount of time ittakes me to drive onthis street has . . .

Since the protectedbike lanes were built,how safe andpredictable bicyclistsare acting has . . .

Perceptions about Parking

57

30%

41%

44%

46%

49%

55%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Multnomah (+20 spots)

Dearborn (-minimal)

Bluebonnet (-some)

L Street (-150 spots)

Milwaukee (-some)

Oak/Fell (-50 spots)

% indicating negative impact on...

ability to find a parking spot on the street