Abstract
Bicycling and walking can provide public health and quality of life benefits to a community, but safety concerns and crash rates for those who choose to bicycle or walk remain high. To better understand how agencies decide which bicycle and pedestrian treatments to install in their regions and where to install them, the team surveyed state, regional, and local agencies regarding current practices in bicycle and pedestrian design policy. Results show that agencies believe a data-driven approach is important for improving safety, but very few collect the data necessary to assess safety implications. Safety was reported as the most important variable in all stages of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure implementation, with 78% of respondents listing safety as a variable in site identification and 97% saying safety was very or somewhat important in site prioritization. However, one third of the responding agencies stated that they did not collect any type of permanent or temporary bicycle or pedestrian counts, which means that it is impossible to know the risk exposure rates in their regions and at specific sites.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Eno Center for Transportation for their input and review of this paper prior to publication.
References
AMPO (Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations). 2003. “Bike-Ped survey results, Washington DC.” Accessed July 25, 2016. http://www.ampo.org/assets/50_bikepedsurveyresults.pdf.
Barnes, E., and M. Schlossberg. 2013. “Improving cyclist and pedestrian environment while maintaining vehicle throughput.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2393 (1): 85–94.
Digioia, J., K. Watkins, Y. Xu, M. Rodgers, and R. Guensler. 2017. “Safety impacts of bicycle infrastructure: A critical review.” J. Saf. Res. 61: 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2017.02.015.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2016. Pedestrian and bicycle information center. Washington, DC: FHWA.
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2016. “Guidance on before-after studies of new starts projects: Report to congress.” Federal Transit Administration, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC. Accessed January 28, 2017. http://transit.dot.gov/funding/grant-programs/capital-investments/guidance-and-after-studies-new-starts-projects.
Grossman, A. 2018. “Adoption of performance measures in regional transportation planning: Current practice and lessons for future application.” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology.
MacDonald, B. 2007. Valuing the benefits of cycling: A report to cycling England. London: SQW.
NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). 2014a. Traffic safety facts: Bicyclists and other cyclists. Washington, DC: USDOT.
NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). 2014b. Traffic safety facts: Pedestrians. Washington, DC: USDOT.
Ogden, C., M. Carroll, B. Kit, and K. Flegal. 2012. Prevalence of obesity in the United States, 2009–2010. Hyattsville, MD: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
ORNL (Oak Ridge National Laboratory). 2015. Transportation energy data book, 34th ed. Oak Ridge, TN: ORNL.
PBIC (Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center). 2010. The national bicycling and walking study: 15-year status report. Chapel Hill, NC: PBIC.
Pucher, J., and J. L. Renne. 2003. “Socioeconomics of urban travel: Evidence from the 2001 NHTS.” Transp. Q. 57 (3): 49–77.
Saelensminde, K. 2004. “Cost–benefit analyses of walking and cycling track networks taking into account insecurity, health effects and external costs of motorized traffic.” Transp. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 38 (8): 593–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2004.04.003.
WHO (World Health Organization). 2002. The world health report 2002: Reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva: WHO.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 145 • Issue 1 • January 2019
Copyright
©2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 30, 2017
Accepted: Jul 23, 2018
Published online: Nov 15, 2018
Published in print: Jan 1, 2019
Discussion open until: Apr 15, 2019
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.