buenas_practicas_diseño_vias_ciclistas

8/9/2019 buenas_practicas_diseo_vias_ciclistas

1/48


2/48

BIKEWAY DESIGN best practices

ThisreportwasdevelopedasanelementofthePortlandBicyclePlanfor2030.

DESIGNWORKINGGROUPforthe

PortlandBicyclePlanfor2030DavidAmitonScottBatson

RobBurchfieldAnthonyButzekWendyCawley

IvyDunlapRogerGeller

DenverIgartaPeterKoonce

GrantMoreheadGregRaisman

ChrisSmithEllenVanderslice

EricWiley

ThankstoDenverIgartaforproducingthisreport.

January5,2010


3/48


INTRODUCTION SURVEYOFBESTPRACTICESTheunprecedentednumbersofpeoplebicyclinginPortlandhasnecessitatedexpansionofthebikeway

design tools available to the citys traffic engineers. Portland is looking to world leaders in bicycle

transportation tomeetthisgrowingdemand.Manycities fromacross theglobehave longrecognized

themerits

of

bicycling

as

an

important

means

of

transportation

and

have

led

the

way

in

facilitating

bicycletrafficthroughinnovationandadaptationofbicyclefriendlyinfrastructure.

Thisreportdocumentsanextensivereviewofbestpracticesfromworldclassbicyclingcitieswherethe

most innovative technologyadvances indesigning forbicycle traffichavebeenproveneffective.The

purposeof thereport istocreateaguide for trafficengineers,designersandplannersdetailingtried

andtestedbicyclefacilitydesignsalongwithessentialconsiderationsfortheirimplementation.

Portlandaimstohelpleadanationalefforttodevelopstandardsandguidelinesfordesigningbikeways

thatmeetthewiderangingneedsofthecyclingpublicforsafe,comfortableandattractiveconditions.

Currently,theCitysBikewayDesignandEngineeringGuidelinesestablishedasAppendixAofthe1996

Bicycle

Master

Plan

serve

as

the

local

manual

for

the

design,

construction

and

maintenance

of

the

citys

bikewaynetwork.FormationofthePortlandBicyclePlanfor2030presentedtheopportunitytorevisitthese guidelines,makeenhancements toapproveddesignsand integratenewdesigns intoa revised

manualthatwillmeetthebicyclingdemandsprojectedincomingdecades.

CurrentStateofthePracticeIn 1996when the citys original bikeway design guidelineswere adopted the bicyclemode share in

Portlandwas roughly two percent for commute trips. Today, eight percent of Portlanders reported

bicycling as theirprimary commutemode and 10percentof thosewho sometimesused adifferent

modereportedbicyclingastheirsecondarycommutemode.Nationally,only0.5percentoftripstowork

aremadebybicycleaccordingtothe2007AmericanCommunitySurvey.

Standardguidanceonbikewaydesignoutlinedinnationalmanuals,namelytheAmericanAssociationof

StateandHighwayTransportationOfficials(AASHTO)GuidefortheDevelopmentofBicycleFacilities

and theManualonUniformTrafficControlDevices (MUTCD),hasproven insufficient to address the

levelsofbicyclingexperiencedinPortland.Theintenseinfluxofbicyclistsusingthecitystransportation

systemhasbegun to exceed the capacityofdeveloped facilities. If Portland is successful in realizing

morethanonequarterofalltripsmadebybicycleasenvisionedinthis2030plan,currentpracticeswill

not suffice. Thus, new design guidelines and standards need to be adopted to ensure safe traffic

conditionsinthefutureforalltravelmodes.

BikewaysforPortlandsFuturePortland

has

areputation

for

implementing

innovative

designs

that

are

not

found

in

any

domestic

traffic

designmanual.DemonstrationprojectsimplementedbythePortlandBureauofTransportation,suchas

bicycleboxesatseveralhighrisk intersections,havebeen laudedby thecyclingpublic.Still,thecitys

existingbikewaynetworkhasprimarilyappealedtothoseresidentswhoarealreadyconfident intheir

cyclingabilitiesandenthusiasticridingonmajorstreetsalongsidemotorvehicles.


4/48


Movingforward,Portlandiscommittedtodevelopingbetterdesignsforbikewaysthatwillhavegreater

appeal to the average citizenwho is interested in bicyclingbut concerned about their safety.A key

recommendationof thePortlandBicyclePlanfor2030 is toexpand thepaletteofbikewaydesigns tofacilitatecreatingconditionsthatmakebicyclingmoreattractivethandrivingforshorttrips.Separation

fromhighvolumesofhighspeed traffic isanessentialelementof thePlansapproach,as it is in the

worldsmost

bicycle

friendly

cities.

NextStepsMostof the facilitiescontainedwithin this reportareconsiderednonstandardorexperimental in the

United States. Some treatments will require enabling legislation to permit their usage. In addition,

transferofanyappropriateengineeringtechnologiesfromothercountrieswillrequirecontextsensitive

translationtofitlocalconditions.

The bikeway designs collected and published as part of this report will be further evaluated and

consideredforpotential inclusion inrevisionstotheCitysBikewayDesignandEngineeringGuidelines

thatwilldirectfuturebikewayimprovementswithintheCityofPortland.


5/48


PORTLANDBICYCLEPLANFOR2030BIKEWAYFACILITYDESIGN:SURVEYOFBESTPRACTICES

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T SRoadSections

1. BikeLanes2. BikePassingLane3. BufferedBikeLane4. ContraflowBikeLane5. FloatingBikeLane6. ColoredBikeLane7. AdvisoryBikeLane8. CycleTrack

TrafficSpeedandVolumeReduction

9. BicycleStreet10.PinchPoint(QueuingStreets/

Neckdown/Choker)

11.Chicanes12.NarrowWidthSharedRoadway13.ResidentialSpeedLimits14.SpeedBumps15.HomeZone/Woonerf16.TrafficVolumeControlMeasures

NonMotorized/OffStreetPathwaySections

17.CopenhagenGreenCycleRoutes18.OffStreetPathSection19.CarFreeStreet/Zone20.Trails/OffStreetPathTransition21.BicycleUnderpass(Tunnel)

Signalization

22.GreenWave23.TrafficSignalOperationsforBicycles24.TrafficSignalCrossingsforBicycles

IntersectionTreatments

25.TruncatedCycleTrack RampDowntoBikeLane

26.CycleTrackTwoStageSignalizedLeftTurnwithQueuingSpace

27.ForwardStopBar28.BicycleBox29.CombinedRightturnBicycleLane30.TrafficCircle31.BikeBoulevardOffSetIntersections32.MedianRefuge33.CrossbikeMarking34.PassthroughCurbExtensions35.BicycleRoundabout

SignageandMarkings

36.BikeBoulevardPavementMarkings37.SharedRoadwayMarkings38.BicycleDestinationSignage

TransitandBicycleStreets

39.StreetcaronBikeways40.BicycleFriendlyTransitStopDesign

MiscellaneousTreatments

41.BicycleLift(Trampe)


6/48

(BLANK PAGE)


7/48


BikeLanesDescription/Purpose

Markedspacealonglengthofroadwayfor

exclusiveuseofcyclists.Bikelanescreate

separation

between

cyclists

and

automobiles.

Advantages Providesbicycleaccessonmajor

throughstreet

Clarifieslaneuseformotoristsandcyclists Increasescyclistscomfortthrough

visualseparation.

Disadvantages Spacerequirementscan

precludeotherpossibleuseslike

parkingorexcesstravellane

Application

Onroadwayswith 3,000motorvehicletripssperday

Anystreetwithexcessivecurbtocurbspacewherebikelanescouldhelp

reducevehiclelanewidths

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Bikelanewidth Frequencyofbikesymbol Keepbikesymbolsoutofthepath

ofturningvehicles

Typicallyplacedonrightsideofroadway

Vehicledoorzoneclearancewhenbikelanesareadjacenttoparked

vehicles

MaintenanceLevelMedium

DesignGuidance Recommendedwidth

6.58.2ft(CROW) Shouldcomfortably

accommodatetwocyclistsriding

sidebysidewithsufficientshy

distancefrombothtravellane

andonstreetparking.

Source:CityofPortland(PBOT)

Implementation Obstaclesn/a

ExampleCities/Countries CROWDesignManualfor

BicycleTraffic Netherlands

Chicago,IL Portland,OR Seattle,WA

1 of 41


8/48


BikePassingLaneDescription/Purpose

Addingasecondbikelaneadjacenttoa

firsttoprovidespaceforpassing

Advantages Reducesthelengthofbicycle

platoons

Reducenumberoffasterbicycliststhatmergewithautotraffictopassslowercyclists.

Disadvantages Spacerequirementscan

precludeotherpossibleuseslike

parkingor

excess

travel

lane

Application

Largenumberofcyclists Widerangeoftravelspeeds Typicallyonanuphillroadway

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Adequatespacefortwobicyclists

topasswithoutencroachinginto

travellane.


DesignGuidance Commuteroutes

UphillsectionsAfterforcedstops(signals)where platoonsform

RecreationalpathsUphillsections

PBOTguidance Minimumpassinglanewidthof

5ftadjacenttoa5ftbikelane

Skipstripingbetweenthetwobikelanesanddoublebike

symbolsmitigatesconcernsof

motoristsmistakingthearea

foratravellane.

Bikelanesinsamedirectionseparatedby4inwide(100

mm)skipstripe,1ftlong(300

mm)skip

stripe

with

3ft

(1

m)

skip.

Source:BikePortland.orgPortland,OR

ImplementationObstacles Spacerequirementsmayreallocate

usesfromparkingordrivinglane

ExampleCities/Countries Portland,Oregon

2 of 41


9/48


BufferedBikeLaneDescription/Purpose

Bicyclelanewithabuffertoincreasethe

spacebetweenbicyclelaneandtravel

lane

or

parked

cars.

Advantages Providescushionofspaceto

mitigatesfrictionwithmotor

vehicleson

streets

with

narrow

bike

lanes.

Providesspaceforcycliststopasswithoutencroachingintothetravel

lane.

Mitigateforobstaclesinthebikelane,e.g. drainageinlets,manholes.

Parkingsidebuffer:providescyclistswithspacetoavoidthedooring

zoneofparkedcars.

Providesmotorists(particularlydriversoflargevehicles)greatershy

distancefrom

cyclists

in

the

bike

lane.

Disadvantages Additionalspacerequirements Addedmaintenancerequiredfor

thebuffer

striping

Application

Bikelaneswithhighautomobiletrafficspeedsandvolumes

Bikewayswithbikelanesadjacenttoonstreetparking

Bikelaneswithhighvolumeoftruck/oversizedvehicletraffic

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Determinewhichsideofthebike

lanethebufferisneeded,adjacent

toparkingorthetravellane.

Frequencyofparkingturnover Determinebufferwidthneededto

avoiddoorzoneofparkedcars

MajorintersectionapproachesFrequencyofmotorvehicle

rightturns

Designofconflictareaswherecarsandbikeweave

Continuousortruncatedbufferstripingapproaching

intersection


DesignGuidance BufferWidth

Minimum32in(London)32in(Brussels)2030in(CROW)

DiagonalBuffer StripeDetails6ft spacing(Portland

Holgate)

Source:GregRaismanBruges,Belgium

ImplementationObstacles Spacerequirementsmayreallocate

usesfromparkingordrivinglane

ExampleCities/Countries Brussels&Bruges,Belgium London,UK SanFrancisco,CA NewYork,NY Portland,OR(NW10th)

3 of 41


10/48


ContraflowBikeLaneDescription/Purpose

Aonewaystreet formotorvehicles

thatincludesanoppositedirection

bicycle

only

lane.

Advantages Providesdirectaccessand

connectivityforbicyclestravelingin

bothdirections.

Influencesmotoristchoiceofrouteswithoutlimitingbicycletraffic.

Cyclistsdonothavetomakedetoursasaresultofoneway

traffic.

Disadvantages Limitsonparkingmightbe

neededonsidewithcontraflow

lane.

Possibilityofillegalloadingorparkingincontraflowlane.

Application

Onewayautotrafficstreets Narrowstreetswhereonstreet

parkingandbicycleaccessibilityare

givepriorityovertrafficaccessibility

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Accompanyingsignageneeded. Contraflowlaneseparatedfrom

motorvehiclelanebyasoliddouble

yellowline.

Ensurecontraflowlaneisexclusivelyfor

bicycles

by

using

bike

lane

stripingwithlegalstatus.

Clearlydistinguishcontraflowlanewithmarkings.

Consideruseofcoloronbikelane. Considerphysicalseparation

betweenbikelaneandtravellane.

Determinemodificationsneededtoexistingtrafficsignals.


DesignGuidance Contraflowlanewidth

5.0to6.5ft(CROW)Minimum5.0ft(London)

Source:DenverIgartaAmsterdam,Netherlands

ImplementationObstacles Outreachtostakeholders,adjacent

businessesandneighbors

Conversionfrom2wayrequireseliminationofonedirectionofauto

travel.

ExampleCities/Countries Madison,WI Cambridge,MA SanFrancisco,CA Netherlands Germany Portland(23rdPl,WeidlerCt)

4 of 41


11/48


FloatingBikeLaneDescription/Purpose

Asinglelanefunctionsasaparkinglane

oranexclusivebikelane:

Duringpeakhours,parkingisnotallowedandcyclistsuseacurbsidebikelane.

Duringoffpeakhours,cycliststravelinthespacebetweenthe

motorizedtrafficlaneandparked

cars.

Thistreatmentretainsthebicyclefacility

whenanextratravellane(for

automobiles)isaddedduringpeak

hours.

Advantages Accommodatesbicyclesatalltimes,

evenwhenparkingispermitted.

Providesbicyclefacilitiesonstreetswithconstrainedrightsofway.

Disadvantages Unorthodoxdesigncanbe

confusing.

Enforcementrequired

Application

Primarybicycleroutesduringpeakhours Streetswarrantingbikelaneswith

highparkingdemandwherethereis

notenoughspacetoprovideboth

standardbikelaneandparking.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Provideadequatespacetominimizetheriskofdooringswhenparking

ispermitted

Considerusingbicyclesymbolcurbside

Minimaluseofsignagerequired. Considerusingsharrowmarkingsin

lieuofbikelanestriping. (San

Francisco)

Timeofdayvehicleusecommunication


DesignGuidance Peakhour (SF)

7am 9am/3pm 7pm Parkingpermittedduringoff

peak(SF)

9am 3pm/7pm 7am

Source:sfmta.orgSanFrancisco,CA

ImplementationObstacles Typicallyrequiresremovaloftravel

lanetoaddparking

ExampleCities/Countries SanFrancisco(SF),CA

5 of 41


12/48


ColoredBikeLanesDescription/Purpose

Colorisappliedtothebikelanesto

distinguishthebikelane,alertroadway

users

at

high

conflict

areas

and

to

clearly

assignrightofwaytocyclists.Motorists

areexpectedtoyieldtocyclistsinthese

areas.

Advantages Providesacontinuousfacilityfor

cyclists.

Mitigateshighconflictareas. Providesforsafermergingof

bicycleswithmotorvehicletraffic.

Increasesawarenessandsafebehaviorsbybothcyclistsand

motorists

Disadvantages Maintenancerequirements.

Application

Heavyautotrafficstreetswithbikelanes

Atdangerousintersectionorwherecyclistsandmotoristsmustweave

withone

another.

Conflictareawitharecordofcrashes

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Provideappropriatesigns. Usemarkingandsignconfigurations

thatencouragetheweavingof

bicyclesandmotorvehiclesin

advanceof

the

intersection

proper.

UsethermoplasticratherthanpaintMaintenanceLevelHigh

DesignGuidance Provideamplebikelanewidth Providecolorthroughthe

conflictarea

PBOTguidanceGreenColor: Brightgreen

colorwasadoptedin2008

replacingthebluecolor

usedprior.Typicallyblue

colorisusedtoindicate

disabledparking.

Limitusetoconflictareas

Source:BikePortland.orgPortland,OR

ImplementationObstacles NotpartoftheManualonUniform

Traffic

Control

Devices

(MUTCD)

ExampleCities/Countries NewYorkCity,NY Cambridge,MA Portland,OR Cologne,Germany

6 of 41


13/48


AdvisoryBikeLanesDescription/Purpose

Dottedwhitelinesonbothsidesofa

narrowroadwaydelineatebicycleareas.

The

automobile

zone

is

not

wide

enough

fortwocarstopassinbothdirections

creatingaqueuingsituation.Motorists

mayenterthebicyclezonewhenno

bicyclesarepresent.Motoristsmust

overtakewithcautionduetotraffic

travelingintheoppositedirection.

Advantages Aviableoptionwhencrosssectionistoonarrowformandatorybike

lanes

Stripingoffersvisualseparationonalowtrafficroadway

Motoristtendtotravelslowerduetofrictioncreatedwithoncoming

vehicles.

Disadvantages Motorvehicleencroachmentintothebikelanepermitted

Ifvehiclesareparkedinthebikelanecyclistsmustpositionthemselvesfurtherintothe

roadwaytopasssafely

Lessprotectionforcycliststhanaconventionalbikelane

Application

Lowmotorvehicletrafficvolumesandspeeds

Straightsegmentswithfewbends,inclines

or

sightline

obstructions

Twowaystreets Nocenterlineonroadway

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Nocontinuouscenterlineshouldseparateopposingdirectionsof

autotravel

Colored

pavement

on

the

edges

to

discourageencroachmentby

motoristsorparkedvehicles.

Assesspotentialhazardsandconflictpoints

Minimumbikelanewidth5ft(London)

Twodirectiontravellanenotwideenoughfortwocarstopassin

oppositedirections

Considermaximumvolumeandspeed(London:3000adt/30

mph

1

/

37

mph

2

)

Continueacrossminorstreetintersection


DesignGuidance Advisorybikelanewidth:

5ft 6.5ft(CROW)Min.5ft(London)4.1ft 5.25ft(FGSV)

2waymotorvehiclelane:15ft 18ft(FGSV)Min.13ft(London)

CurbtoCurb:23ft 28ft(London)

Parking dimensions:7.5ft 8.2ft(FGSV)

Linedimensions(CROW):Width:4in 6inSpacing:3.28ft

Source:RogerGellerIJsselstein,Netherlands

ImplementationObstacles NotinMUTCD Mayrequireenablinglegislation Standardneedforstriping

ExampleCities/Countries(1)DutchCROWManual

(2)GermanFGSV

(3)London,England

1TransportLondon LondonCyclingDesignStandards2Zeeland,Netherlands

7 of 41


14/48


CycleTrackDescription/Purpose

Exclusivebicyclefacilityadjacentto but

separatedfrom theroadwaybya

physicalbarrier.Combinestheuser

experienceof

aseparated

path

with

the

onstreetinfrastructureofabikelane.

Advantages Directaccesstomainstreetcommercialareas

Significantseparationfromautomobile

traffic

in

busiest

parts

of

town

Disadvantages Amountofrightofwayrequired Mayrequireremovaloftravellaneoronstreetparking

Leftturnsmustbemadeinnonstandardmanner,potentially

resultingindelay

ExpensiveApplication

Arterialroadwayswithhighermotorvehiclespeedsandvolumes.

Roadswithfewercrossstreetsandlongerblocks.

Source:DenverIgartaAmsterdam,NL

DesignGuidance Cycletrackwidth

6.5ftminmum,7fttypical,8ftdesirablefornew

construction,Upto10ftfor

additionalcapacity(CPH)

6.5ftto13.1ftdependingonrush

hour

bicycle

intensity

(CROW)

2ftbufferonvehiclesideisdesirable,requiredifcycle

trackwidthislessthan7ft

(CPH)

5.5ftabsoluteminimumforcycletracks(CPH)

Curbseparatingthebikeandpedestrianfacilities(CPH)

Maketheintersectionlookmoredangerousthanitactuallyis

(CPH)

Onstreetparking:placecycletrackadjacenttothesidewalk

with2ftclearspacetoprevent

doorings(ALTA)

Removeparkingdirectlyinadvanceof theintersection

ImplementationObstaclesSeparationfrompedestrianrealmADAaccesstosidewalksfromonstreetparking

Designstandardsrequired

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Separationchannelized(elevatedoratgrade),mountablecurb,or

bollards/markings

CycletrackwidthBasedonbicyclevolumes,designspeed,andpassingopportunities.

Crossingdriveways&lowvolumestreets

Continuethecycletrackthroughthedrivewaycrossing

Usepavementmarkingsandgradeseparationtoindicatecycle

trackhastherightofway

SignalizedintersectionsDropdowntobikelaneForwardstopbarCrossbikemarkingthroughtheintersection

Exclusivebikesignalphase Otherconsiderations:maintenance, bikesymbol,interactionswith

transit,ADArequirements,andtwo

waycycletracks.

Adequatesidewalkstoreducelikelihoodofcycletrackuseby

pedestrians.

Difficulttoimplementwhereintersectionsarecloselyspaced.


ExampleCities/Countries CopenhagenTraffic

Department(CPH)

Netherlands(CROWManual) Cambridge,MA St.Petersburg,FL NewYork,NY

8 of 41


15/48


BicycleStreet Fahrradstrassen/Fietsstraten

Description/Purpose

Astreetwithinaresidentialareathatacts

asamajorbicyclerouteandwherethe

position

of

the

car

is

subordinate

to

that

of

thebicycle.Bicyclestreetsoffersafe

passageforlargenumbersofcyclists,

mainlybetweenandthroughdistricts.The

intentofthistreatmentistoprovidedirect,

safe,comfortableandattractiveroutesto

promotebicycleuse.

ProvisionsforFahrradstrassenareoutlinedinGermantrafficlaw(StraenVerkehrs

OrdnungStVO)requiring:

Allvehiclesarerequiredtotravelatmoderatespeeds

Allowingcycliststoridesidebyside

Advantages

Achieveobjectivesofsafety,comfortandattractivenesson

lowtraffic

direct

through

streets.

Providecyclistsanalternativetobicyclingonanarterial

street.

Localstreetstypicallyhavefewermodalconflicts.

Disadvantages

Residentialstreetsdonottypicallyprovide

directaccess

to

commercialdestinations.

Localresidentsmayobjecttoimprovements

oralterationsontheir

street.

Application

Lowtrafficresidentialstreetwithasharedspaceforbicycleandmotor

vehicletraffic.

Streetsparalleltoanearbyarterial. Directroutesacrossdistricts.

DesignMaintenance

Considerations

Bicyclesarepermittedtousetheentirewidthofthe

roadway.

BicycleboulevardtoolboxSignageandpavementmarkings

TrafficcalmingDiversiontechniques

Speedlimits30km/hor18.6mph(Germany)

Preserveemergencyaccessandoccasionaccessforlarge

vehicles.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance

Designshouldconsiderneighborhood

aesthetics.

Source:Fietsberaad

Oss,Netherlands

ImplementationObstacles

Enablinglegislationmayberequiredtoreducespeed

limits

ExampleCities/Countries

Muenster,Germany Essen,Germany Oss,Netherlands

9 of 41


16/48


PinchPoint(orQueuingStreet/Neckdown/Choker)Description/Purpose

Thisisaresidentialtrafficcalming

treatmentthatnarrowsthetravellanefor

motorists

by

installing

curb

extensions

or

islandstocreateanarrowchannel.A

separatedbicycletravelwaysegregates

bicyclesandmotorvehiclesastheytravel

throughthedevice.Thisdesignslows

automotivetrafficwhileretainingpriority

movementforbicycles.Theintentisto

calmanddiscouragenonlocaltrafficon

bicycleboulevards.

Advantages Slowsspeedofmotorvehicles Providesmodeseparationbetween

bicyclesand

motor

vehicles

passing

throughconcurrently

Discouragescutthroughtraffic Actsashorizontaldeflectiontoreduce

speed,andismorecomfortablethana

speedbump

Somedesignsmayallowforgreentreatmentsandthatimprove

attractiveness.

Disadvantages Reducesonstreetparking

capacity

Cost

Application

Softdiversionuseinlocationwherereduced

volume

is

desired,

but

hard

diversionisnotpossible

Useasgatewaytreatment Speedreduction HarddiversionatTintersection

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Ensureadequatepassthrough Providegoodvisibilitybetween

modes.

Providegoodvisibilityandadequatewarningoffloatingislands.

Potentialtoaddspeedcushionincenterofdeviceforadditionalspeed

reduction

Oppositionalflowoftrafficimprovesspeedreductionbenefit

Autospeedthroughpinchpointandcyclistmergepoint.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Mustaccommodateturn

movementsat

intersections

Widthofextension/islandscanbeincreasedforwider

streets

Source:GregRaismanUtrecht,TheNetherlands


TrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)

ExampleCities/Countries Utrecht,TheNetherlands

10 of 41


17/48


ChicanesDescription/Purpose

Alternatingcurbextensionsorislands

installedtocreatehorizontal(serpentine)

shifts

of

the

travel

lane

thus

reducing

trafficspeeds.

Advantages Narrowcircuitouslanesthatlimitthe

clearpathofvisionandencourage

slowauto

speeds.

Narrowtravellanesprovideopportunitiesforonstreetparking

Disadvantages Placementofcurb

extensions/islandsmay

eliminateon

street

parking

Application

Bicycleboulevards Lowtrafficresidentialstreetwith

sharedspaceforbicycleandmotor

vehicletraffic.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Allowpedestrianandbicyclepass

through

Avoiddisruptingdrainage Medianislandsmaybeinstalledto

eliminatetheopportunityfordrivers

toavoid

travel

lanes

shifts

by

driving

downthecenterline.

Opportunitiestoenhanceaestheticswithlandscapingandstreetscape

design.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Refertootherdesignsheets

Narrowwidthroadway Passthroughcurb

extensions

Source:DenverIgartaVictoria,BC,Canada

ImplementationObstaclesn/a

ExampleCities/Countries Seattle,Washington Tallahassee,FL Victoria,BC,Canada

11 of 41


18/48


NarrowWidthSharedRoadwayDescription/Purpose

Abikewayonalocalstreetwitha

narrowwidthtoreducemotor

vehicle

speeds

and

enhance

safety

forcyclistsandpedestrians.

Advantages Achieveobjectivesofsafety,

comfortandattractivenesson

sharedlocal

streets.

Localstreetstypicallyhavefewermodalconflicts.

Providemorespaceforpedestrianrealm(sidewalks,landscaping,

etc.).

Potentialforlessimpervioussurface.

Disadvantages Localresidentsmayobject

toimprovementsor

alterationson

their

street.

Cost

Application

Lowtrafficresidentialstreetwithamixedprofileforbicycleand

motorvehicle

traffic.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Complementaryspeedlimits Considerwaystopreserveaccess

foremergency

vehicles,

buses

and/ordeliverytrucks.

Bicyclesarepermittedtousetheentirewidthoftheroadway.

Considerpossiblediversionimpactsonadjacentstreets.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Roadwaywidth(curbto

curb)

12.5ft:extremelylowvolumes(CROW)

16ft:basedonbicycle/car/bicycle

combination(CROW)

Designshouldconsiderneighborhoodaesthetics.

Source:DenverIgartaVancouver,BC,Canada

ImplementationObstacles Requiresenablinglegislationto

sufficientlyreducespeedlimits

ExampleCities/Countries Muenster,Germany Berlin,Germany Netherlands(CROW)

12 of 41


19/48


ResidentialSpeedLimit(Zone30/Tempo30/20mphZone)Description/Purpose

Discouragemotoristsfromcutting

throughresidentialareasbysettinga

speed

limit

of

20

mph

and

implementing

necessarytrafficcalmingmeasures.

Advantages Improvesroadsafetybyreducingthenumberofcrashrelatedinjuries

Relativelyinexpensivetoimplement Concentratesthroughtrafficonstreetsdesignatedasarterials

Enhancesneighborhoodlivability(noiseIevels,airquality,other

trafficnuisances)

Enablescycliststomorecomfortablysharetheroadwith

motorists

Disadvantages Enforcementrequirements

Application

Localservicetrafficstreetsinresidentialareas.

Applytoanareaconsistingofseveralstreetsratherthananindividual

streets(UK)

Bicycleroutesoffthemainarterialstreets.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Ifzoneistoolarge(>250acresorasquarekm),itmaydiverttoomuch

trafficonto

arterials.

(SWOV)

Determineneedfortrafficcalmingmeasurestoaccompanyspeedlimit

signs.

Trafficcalmingdevicesmustbebicyclefriendly.

Gatewaytreatments(signs,pinchpointsandothercalmingmeasures)

atneighborhoodentrypointshave

beenshowntobeveryeffectivein

reducingspeeds.(UK)

Considerspeedlimitpavementmarkings

(aka

roundel

marking)

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Refertoothertrafficcalming

relateddesignsheets


ImplementationObstacles Requiresenablinglegislationtosufficientlyreducespeedlimits

ExampleCities/Countries NewYorkCity,NY1 Graz,Austria Netherlands(SWOV) UKDeptofTransport

1NewYorkSTATEVehicle&TrafficLaw1643

II.Incitieswithapopulation>1million,speedlimits


20/48


SpeedBumpsDescriptionSpeedbumpsareshortsectionsofroadway

thathavebeenverticallyraisedtocausea

reduction

in

automobile

speed.

(Also

known

asSpeedHumps(14)orSpeedTables(22))

Advantages Fulltimespeedreduction Lowcostrelativetoenforcement Quicktoinstall

Disadvantages Firevehicleresponsedelay Potentialtogeneratenoise

Application

LocalServiceorNeighborhoodCollectorstreetsthatarenotMajorEmergency

ResponseRoutes

DesignConsiderations Adequatemarkings Adequatewarningsigns Distancefromutilityaccess

pointsandintersectingstreets

Distancefromdriveways

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance BumpSpacing

Rangesfrom300500ftbutistypicallynear400ft.

BumpSize SpeedBump(14ft)on

LocalService

streets

SpeedTables(22ft)onbusroutesandNeighborhood

Collectorstreets

OffsetSpeedTablesonMajorEmergency

ResponseRoutes

Source:GregRaismanPortland,OR


ExampleCities/Countries Portland,OR

14 of 41


21/48


HomeZone/WoonerfDescription/Purpose

HomeZonesareresidentialstreetsin

whichtheroadspaceissharedbetween

drivers

of

motor

vehicles

and

other

road

users,withthewiderneedsofresidents

(includingpedestrians,bicyclists,and

children)inmind. (UKDfT)

Advantages Improvesneighborhoodlivability

andtrafficsafetybymakingstreets

placesfor

people,

not

only

traffic.

Changesthelayoutofthestreetsothatmotoristsperceivethatthey

shouldgiveinformalpriorityto

otherroadusers.

Reducescutthroughtrafficandspeedingbymotorists

Prioritizespedestrianandbicycletravelonresidentialstreets

Disadvantages Canreduceconnectivityfor

motorvehiclecongestionrelief

Impactsconvenienceofresidentsandvisitorswhodrivetotheneighborhood

Application

HomeZonescanbeestablishedinareas

thatareprimarilyresidential.Thistraffic

managementsystem

is

particularly

beneficialinareaswithschools,parks,

andotherpublicspaces.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Motoristsshouldfeellikeguests

onthestreet.(UK)

Streetdesignmustbelegibletovisuallyimpaired.

Preservetwowayconnectivityonallstreetsforbicyclesand

pedestrians

Ensureacceptablelevelsofdiversiononadjacentstreets

Retainemergencyresponseaccess Focusonoperationalandareawide

strategies

Utilizecapitalprojectsstrategically Retainaccessforstreetsweeping Retainaccessfordeliveriesand

basicmunicipalservicessuchas

garbageremoval.

Accommodateoccasionalusebylargevehicles(UK)

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Travellaneshouldbeasnarrow

aspracticableminimum10ft

(UK)

Designfor20mphtravelspeed Trafficflowsof


22/48


TrafficVolumeControlMeasuresDescription/Purpose

Volumecontrolmeasurescoverall

techniqueswhichutilizeaphysicalbarrierto

restrictthe

flow

of

motor

vehicles.

Treatmentstocontrolautovolumesinclude:

Semi (Partial)diverter Medianbarrier Diagonaldiverter Culdesac/Fullstreetclosure Forcedturnisland

Advantages Reducepotentialconflictsbetween

motorvehiclesand

bicyclists/pedestrians

Increasecomfortandattractivenessofroutefor

bicyclists

Enhanceneighborhoodlivability

Disadvantages Createssomeaccess

restrictionsforlocalresidents

Trafficmaybedivertedtoanadjacentlocalstreet

Enforcementmayberequiredforpartialdiverters

Application

Bicycle

boulevards

Localservicestreetsinresidentialareas Streetswithadocumentedcutthrough

trafficproblem

Nottransitormajoremergencyresponseroute

DesignGuidanceDesign/MaintenanceConsiderations

Consider

designs

that

preserve

necessaryaccessforemergency

vehiclesoroccasionaltruck

deliveries

Makepassableforpedestriansandbicyclists

Provideadequatealternativeexit/entryroutesforautomobiles

Considertrialtreatmentperiod Enhancevisibilitywithsigns,

delineations,paintedcurbs,etc.

Consideruseinsetstomakethrough

traffic

possible

but

less

attractive

Considerintegratingstormwater,utilitiesandotherfunctions

MaintenanceLevelLow

Source:DenverIgartaPortland,OR

ImplementationObstacles Defininganeighborhoodoutreach

process


Berkeley,

CA

Boulder,CO Eugene,OR Portland,OR Seattle,WA

16 of 41


23/48


CopenhagenGreenCycleRoutesDescription/Purpose

Greencycleroutesserveabicycle

mobilityfunctiononquietroutes

separated

from

heavy

traffic.

These

routesservebothatransportationand

recreationfunctionpassingthrough

neighborhoods,parks,greenwaysand

naturalspaces.Greencycleroutesare

long(15mi)continuousroutesthat

formacitywidenetworkcomplementing

thecitybikewaynetwork.

Advantages Offersrouteswithminimalmotor

vehicleconflicts

Providesthehigheststandardofbikewaydesign

Disadvantages Challengeofconnectinggreen

spacestoformanetwork

Application

Greenareasandlowtrafficroadways Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Widebicyclepathwayandseparatedwalkwaythepreferred

treatment

Minimizeoutofdirectiontravel Minimizestops(delays)forcyclists

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Refertootherdesignsheets:

OffStreetandSharedUsePath

Sections

Bicyclestreets

Source:CityofCopenhagen


ExampleCities/Countries Copenhagen,Denmark

17 of 41


24/48


Trails/OffStreetorSharedUsePathSections

Description/Purpose

Minimumandstandarddimensionsfor

offstreetexclusivebikepathsand

shared

use

pathways.

Advantages

Uniformityofexpectationsforusersanddevelopers

Disadvantages

Application

Offstreetbikepathsorsharedusebikeandpedestrianpathways.

Design/Maintenance

Considerations

Travelspeedofbicyclists Grade Pedestrianvolumes Securityissuesnighttime

illumination

Nocurbing Signing,includingroutesigning MarkingsMaintenanceLevelLow

ImplemenationObstacles

Rightofwayacquisition

Source:DenverIgarta

Munich,Germany


BurkeGilmanTrail,Seattle,WA SpringwaterCorridor,Portland SouthWaterfrontTrail,Portland Netherlands(CROWmanual)

DesignGuidance

Horizontalseparationofmodes,particularlyoncommuteroutes

Vegetationadjacenttocatchrunoff Ideally,pedestriansandbicyclists

shouldbeseparated,especiallyin

areaswithhighexpecteduse.

Bike&pedtrafficcanbecombinedif


25/48


CarFreeStreet/Zone

Advantages

Achievessafety,comfortandattractivenessoncarfreestreets. Providesbicyclistsanalternativetobusyarterialstreets. Bicyclistscanremainclosetotheirbicycletoreducetheftandfacilitate

transportofpurchasedgoods.

Allowingbicycling(asopposedtoprohibitingit)inpedestriandistricts: Offersaccesstothedestinationsclusteredinthearea Eliminateswhatmayformasabarrierinthebicyclenetwork Enablesbicycliststoavoidbusystreetsthatoftenencirclepedestrian

districts

Description/Purpose

Streetsorareaswithaconcentrationof

destinations where motor vehicles

have

been

excluded

from

the

public

rightofway. Combine pedestrian and

bicycle traffic (modes with minimal

nuisance) to provide for an attractive

carfreeexperience.

Disadvantages

PossibleconflictswithpedestriansApplication

Streetsinthecentralbusinessdistrictor

regional/town

center

with

high

numbersofpedestriansand

bicyclists.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations

Volumeofpedestrians/bicyclists Speedofbicyclists Pedestriandistrictstreetslimitedto

bus,taxiandservicevehicleaccess

shouldalsobeavailabletobicyclists

Signing,includingroutesignage PavementmarkingsMaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance

Horizontalseparationofmodes Wherevolumesofpedestrians

andbicyclistsarehigh,designing

forseparationmaybedesirable.

Bike&pedtrafficcanbecombinedif


26/48


Trail/OffStreetPathTransitionDescription/Purpose

Theconcretedrivewayrampwithbollard,

signingandmarkingsthatdelineatethe

beginning

or

end

of

a

bicycle

only

or

sharedusepathwaywhereitmeetsa

standardpublicrightofway.

Advantages Currentdrivewaydesignisfamiliar

toconstructandnotconfusedwith

pedestrianramp

Candoubleasaccesspointformaintenancevehicles.

Separatesbicyclistsfrompedestriancrossingpaths

Disadvantages Widerthanstandardramp,so

usesmorespace

Addedcostofconstruction

Application

Anystreetwhereanoffstreetpathorsharedpathentersorcrossesatypical

rightofway.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Sharedusepathsmayneedadded

signingtocommunicatedesired

separationofmodes.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Standard12ftdrivewaywith

single,removablebollard

centeredinramp.

Pedestrianrampsadjacenttobicycledrivewayonbothsides

withdrop

ramps

at

sidewalk.

Useoddnumberofbollardsonly



ExampleCities/Countries Portland,OR Copenhagen,DK Houton,NL

20 of 41


27/48


BicycleUndercrossing(Tunnel)Description/Purpose

Bicycleundercrossings,ortunnels,provide

bicyclistsgradeseparatedpassagebeneath

major

arterial

streets.

Tunnels

eliminate

theconflictscyclistswouldencounterwith

motorizedtrafficifthecrossingwasat

grade.

Advantages Conflictfreecrossingofbicycleandmotorizedtraffic

Mayoffershorterinclinesthananovercrossing.

Disadvantages Susceptibletovandalism Securityconcerns Cost

Application

Intersectionbetweenamainbikewayandamajorarterialstreet.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Unobstructedviewsthroughtunnels(CROW)

Goodlightingsituationforsecurity.Maximizedaylight.

(CROW)

Considergroundwater/drainageissues.

Bicyclistpreferablyatgroundlevel(CROW)

Clearofvegetation.Nocornersorrecesses.(CROW)

Wallsrecedetowardstop(CROW)MaintenanceLevelMedium

DesignGuidance Bicyclesection

Separatefootpath:10ftminimum(CROW).

Shareduse:11.5ftminimum(CROW).

Height:>8.2feet Incline


28/48


GreenWaveDescription/Purpose

Greenwavesarecoordinatedtraffic

signalsthatallowbicycliststotravelfrom

intersection

to

intersection

without

stoppinginonedirection.Signs

communicatetobicycliststheintended

speedforthefacilityandhowfastthey

needtoridetostaywithintheband.

Greenwavesincreasetheefficiencyofthe

bicycleandareadevelopingtoolto

addresshighdemandbicyclecorridors.

Advantages Reducesthenumberofstopsfor

bicyclistsalonganarterialstreet.

Makescyclingmorecompetitiveascomparedtoautomobiletravel. Reducespersondelay,where

bicycleandtransitvolumesexceed

autocarryingcapacity(orwhere

policydictates).

Reducednoiseduetolowerspeeds Increasessafetyforallroadway

users(includingpedestrians)

Disadvantages Potentialtoincreasecomplaints

fromdriversabouttrafficsignal

timingand

maintenance.

Potentialairqualityimpactsduetoincreasedidlingattraffic

signals(notinallcases).

Moredifficulttoimplementontwowayroadways.

Application

Arterialandcollectorstreetswithgroupsofsignalizedintersections

Highbicyclevolumes Ahighpercentageofthrough

movementsforbicyclists

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Identifyeffectstotraffic(bicycle

andautomobile)inbothdirections

Undercongestedconditions(automobilecongestion),impacts

tovehiclesmaybelesssignificant

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Greenwavespeedsmaybe

influencedbygrade

Operationmaybelimitedtoperiodsofpeakbicyclistuse

Operationmaybelimitedtoperiodswhensignaltimingis

operatingatagivencyclelength

Signalcyclelengthsmayneedtoberevised,requiring

comprehensivecorridor

evaluation.

Source:CityofCopenhagen

ImplementationObstacles Autotrafficcongestionresultingin

complaints

Increasedroadmaintenancecostsduetobrakingcausedbyheavy

vehicles

ExampleCities/Countries Copenhagen,DK Amsterdam,NL

22 of 41


29/48


TrafficSignalOperationsforBicyclesDescription/PurposeItiscommonplacetohavetrafficsignalsdesignedprimarilyforautomobiles.However,there

are

several

techniques

that

can

balance

theusefulnessofthetrafficsignalforbicyclists,including:

Advancedsignaldetectioninthebikelane

Shortendelayforbikeboulevardcrossings

Leadingbicycleinterval

Advantages Reducesbicycledelay(associated

withadvancebicycledetectionanduncoordinatedsignals)Providesbicy

clistpriorityover

bicyclistsafetybythe

otherusers(leadingbicycleinterval)Increasesallowingaheadstartthroughintersection(leadingbicycleinterval)

Disadvantages Additionalmaintenance

associatedwithadvancebicycledetection

Increasedtrafficcongestionassociatedwithadditionalgreentimeusedbybicyclists(advancedetection,signalphasing,leadingbicycleinterval)

Application Signalizedintersectionswherebicyclists

travelatahighspeeds Locationswhereintersectionoperationis

notintuitiveforcrossingthroughthesignal Highvolumeofbicycletrips

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Identifyeffectstotraffic(cyclists

andauto)inbothdirections Identifymodeofoperationof

signal(timeofdayforcoordination)anddeterminewhetheritisnecessary.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Advancedetectionmust

accountforsignaltimingparameters(gaptiming),speedofbicyclists,andpotentialforautomobilestoactuatethedetector.

Visibilityofdisplayforleadingbicycleintervalneedscarefulconsideration.

Source:DenverIgartaAmsterdam, NL


Exclusivesignaldisplaysfor

bicycleshavenotbeenreviewedbytheFederalHighwayAdministration.


Albany,OR(advance

detection) Boulder,CO(scramble

phase) Portland,OR(scramble)

23 of 41


30/48


TrafficSignalCrossingsforBicyclesDescription/Purpose

Varioustypesoftrafficsignalcontrolprovide

opportunitiesforbicycliststocrossmajor

streets

in

a

safe

and

comfortable

manner,

include:

Fulltrafficsignalswithdetection/actuationforbikes

PedestrianHybridSignals(a.k.a.Hawk)

Midblocksignalsfortrailsandpedestriancrossings

Advantages Reducesbicycledelayduring

periodsofhighvehicletraffic

Providesasaferprotectedcrossing Helpscreateanattractiveand

lowstressrouteforbicyclists

Disadvantages Powerandmaintenancecosts

forsignal

Increasedstopsanddelayforautomobiletraffic Increaseddelayforbicyclists

duringperiodswhenthemajor

streettrafficislow

Application

Bicycleboulevardcrossingsofhighervolumecollectorandarterialstreets.

TrailcrossingsofhighervolumeCollectorandArterialStreets

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Evaluatewarrantstoidentifythe

needforatrafficsignalandthe

type

of

signal.

Placementofanewsignalalongamajorstreetshouldconsider

signalspacingandprogression.

Identifymodeofoperationofsignal(timeofdayfor

coordination).

Designdetectorssothattheyareeasyforbicycliststouse.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance

Source: CityofPortland(PBOT)

ImplementationObstacles PedestrianHybridSignalsarenot

yetapprovedforgeneraluse.

Exclusivesignaldisplaysforbicyclesarenotincludedin

proposeddesignstandardsfor

HybridSignals.

ExampleCities/Countries Portland,OR Phoenix,AZ Boulder,CO

24 of 41


31/48


TruncatedCycleTrack RampDowntoBikeLane

Description/Purpose

Acycletrackthatrampsdowntothe

roadwayinadvanceoftheintersectionto

reduce

conflicts

with

right

turning

motorists.

Advantages

Bicyclistsaremorevisibletomotoristsatintersections.

Mitigatesriskofrighthookcrashwithrightturningmotorists. Increasesvisibilityofbicyclistsinadvanceoftheintersection.

Disadvantages

Bicyclistsmayhaveasenseofperceivedriskenteringatravel

lanewith

motor

vehicles.

Application

Cycletrackssituatedbehindonstreetparkingorotherwiseremovedfrom

travellane.

Intersectionswithfrequentrightturningmotorvehicles.


Bicyclistsrampdowntoadedicatedbikelaneormixed

rightturnlane.

Providebikelaneuptotheintersection. Markbicyclecrossingthroughtheintersection.

Maybecombinedwithbicycleboxtreatment.

Removeparkinginadvanceoftheintersectiontoincreasevisibility.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance

Rampdownatleast70100ftbeforetheintersection

dependingonthenumberof

right

turning

motorists.

(Denmark)

Ifcombinedwithrightturnlanemustbeabout13ftwideto

facilitatesafemerging

manoeuvres.(Denmark)

Source:CityofVancouver,BC


n/a


DenmarkCollectionofConcepts

Muenster,GermanyAmsterdam,Netherlands

25 of 41


32/48


CycleTrackTwoStageSignalizedLeftTurnwithQueuingSpace

Description/Purpose

Twostageleft(akaCopenhagenLeft,

MelbourneLeft,jughandleturn)offers

bicyclists

a

safe

left

turn

movement

where

therearephysical/safetybarriersto

enteringtheroadwayinadvanceofthe

intersection.Bicyclistsproceedstraight

acrosstheintersectiontothefarsideand

thenqueueinfrontofthecrossstreet

traffic.

Advantages

Reducesconflictsbetweenmotoristsandbicyclists.

Bicyclistscanpositionthemselvesinfrontoftrafficoncrossstreet. Reducescomplexityofleftturnfor

bicyclists.

Disadvantages

Bicyclistsmustwaitfortwosignalsratherthanone.

Bicyclistsmayfeeluncomfortableinthequeuingarea.

Application

Cycletracksorbikelaneswithmultiplemotorvehicletravellanes.

Signalizedintersections.


Usepavementmarkingstochannelizebicyclemovementsand

definequeuingspace.

Consideraphysicalrefuge(e.g.curb

extension

or

jug

handle)

for

queuingbicyclists.

Considerbicycleadvancedsignal.MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance

Markingsseparateleftturnandthroughmovementsofbicyclists.

Adequate/markedqueuingarea.Queuingareawidth>4.0ft

(CROW).

Motoristsoncrossstreetarenotallowedtoturnrightonred.

Source:CityofMuenster,Germany


n/a


Netherlands,CROWManualCopenhagen,DenmarkMuenster,Germany

26 of 41


33/48


ForwardStopBarDescription/Purpose

Asecondstopbarforbicyclistsplaced

closertothecenterlineofthecrossstreet

than

the

first

stop

bar.

Typically

used

with

crossingtreatment(i.e.curbextension)to

encouragebicycliststotakefulladvantage

ofcrossingdesign.

Advantages Bicyclistshavebettervisibilityof

crossstreettraffic.

Bicyclistsaremorevisibletoadjacentmotorists. Bicyclistsarepermittedtobypass

queuingmotorists.

Shortenscrossingdistanceforbicyclists.

Disadvantages Rightturnvehicleconflictif

bicyclistarrivesaftermotorist

goingin

the

same

direction.

Potentialconflictswithpedestrianscrossingthelegof

theintersectionwiththeforward

stopbar.

Application

Lowvolume,stopcontrolledintersections,preferablywithcurb

extension

Unsignalizedbicycleboulevardcrossing

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Low%rightturningmotorists Moderatemotorvehiclevolumes Highvolumesofbicycletraffic Placementoftheforwardstopbar

inrelationtothecrosswalk

Adequatespaceforpedestrians Shouldbethermoplasticdueto

increasedwear

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Considerothertreatmentsif

>25%motorvehiclesturnright

or>15%bikes(Portland)

Combinedbike/rightturnlane

Bikeboxinthroughlane Stopbarshouldbe

thermoplastic

Stopsignpermitsbicycliststomovepastthemotoriststop

barwithoutstopping.



ExampleCities/Countries Portland,OR

27 of 41


34/48


BicycleBoxDescription/Purpose

Bicycleboxesareatrafficcontroldeviceat

signalizedintersectionsthatrequire

motorists

to

stop

a

short

distance

before

thecrosswalkandallowbicycliststostopin

theareabetweenthecarsandthe

crosswalk.Bicycleboxesgivebicyclists

prioritybyallowingthemtogotothehead

oftheline.

Disadvantages Eliminatesmotoristrightonred.

Potentialforunfamiliardriverstobeconfusedortoencroachintothebicyclebox.

Maintenancecostsofcoloredsurface.

Application

Signalizedintersections:

Ahighnumberofqueuingbicyclists

Highautomobile&bicyclevolumes Frequentturningconflicts Ahighpercentageofturningmovementsbybothbicyclistsand

motorists.

Advantages Givesbicyclistspriorityandmakesthemmorevisibletomitigate

righthook

threat.

Givesbicyclistsonbikeboulevardsprioritywhensignalhasashort

greenphase.

Enablesleftturningbicycliststopositionthemselvestotheleft

priortogettingagreensignal

(worksviseversaifbicyclists

turningrightfromleftsidebike

lane).

Lessensnuisancefromexhaust.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Identifydimensionsthatworkbestforbicyclists(comfort/safety)

Boxmaybedisregardedbymotoristsifnotcommonlyfilled

bybicyclistsandproperlysigned.

Considersurfacecolorandmarkingstoreducevehicle

encroachment

MaintenanceLevelHigh

DesignGuidance Reservoir(box)depth

13ft 16.4ft(CROW/London)

Leadinapproachbikelanetoallow

bicycles

to

bypass

queuing

motorvehicles.

Minimumwidth:5ft(London)

Aslongasqueuelength Prominentbicyclesymbolandbrightcolorsurfacing.

Rightturnonredprohibited. Considerheadstartadvancedsignal.


ImplementationObstacles NotpartoftheManualonUniformTrafficControlDevices

(MUTCD)

ExampleCities/Countries Cambridge,MA Portland,OR Vancouver,BC,CA Victoria,BC,CA Amsterdam,Netherlands Muenster,Germany

28 of 41


35/48


36/48


TrafficCircles

Description

Trafficcirclesareraisedcircularislandsat

thecenteroftheintersectionoftwoormore

streets.

Advantages

Requiresmotoriststoslowdowntodrivearoundthem

Reducesthelikelihoodofrightanglecollisions

Disadvantages

Highcost Delaytofiretrucks Longvehiclescannotgoaround

circletomakealeftturn

Wherebikelanesdonotexist,bicyclistsandmotoristsare

forcedtogether

Application

LocalServicestreetsonly DesignConsiderations Proximityofcircularroadwaytopedestriancrossingpath

Emergencyvehicleaccess Onhighvolumeroadways

impactrepairsmaybemore

frequent,but

are

typically

infrequent. Maintenanceof

vegetationforvisibilityissues

mayberequiredeveryfive

years.

MaintenanceLevel Medium

DesignGuidance

Source:DenverIgarta

Vancouver,BC

DesignObstacles/Challenges

n/a


Seattle,Washington Portland,Oregon Vancouver,BC,Canada

30 of 41


37/48


BicycleBoulevardOffSetIntersectionwithArterialStreet

Description/Purpose

Avarietyoftreatmentstofacilitateanoffset

bicycleboulevardcrossingofamajortraffic

street

where

the

bicycle

boulevard

forms

two

closelyspacedTintersections.

Advantages

Providesfacilitiesforbicycliststoenablingthemtocrossone

directionof

traffic

at

once

or

using

adedicatedsignal.

Facilitatesbicyclemobilityonbicycleboulevards.

Providessafecrossingsofhighvolumeroads.

Disadvantages

Somedesignsmaylimitturningmovementsfor

motorists.

Parkingremovalmayberequiredforsome

designs.

Application

Bicycleboulevardsintersectingarterialstreetsatoffsetlocations.


DesignsforRIGHToffsetintersectionsinclude:

Bicycleonlycenterturnlane(s)Medianrefugeislandwith

integratedbikepath

Rightrunningbikelane/cycletrackwithleftturnpockets

Twowaybicyclesidepath DesignsforLEFToffset

intersectionsinclude:

Rightrunningbikelane/cycletrack

Twowaybicyclesidepath Provideadequatebicycleturnlane

width

Considermedianrefugesorsignalsatintersectionsforrightrunning

bikefacilities

Considercrossbike tomarkroadwaycrossingsforbicyclists

Alldesignsmayincludeasignal.MaintenanceLevelMedium

DesignGuidance

Bikelanewidth6to8ft

Useretroreflectivematerials

on

raised

or

paintedcenterturn

lanes.

Source:RogerGeller

Portland,ORImplementationObstacles

n/a


Portland,OR Seattle,WA Tucson,AZ DeBilt,Netherlands

31 of 41


38/48


MedianRefugeDescription/Purpose

Ashortmedianoffullheightcurb

constructedbetweenautomobiletravel

lanes

where

bicyclists

(and

pedestrians)

cantakerefugewhilecrossingamulti

laneorhighvolumearterial.

Advantages Calmstrafficandprovidesspacefor

safebicycleandpedestriancrossing

Allowsbicyclistsandpedestriantocrosswhilefocusingononedirectionoftrafficatatime.

Disadvantages Mayrestrictleftturn

movementsofautomobiles

Requiresrightofwaythatmayresultinlossofparkingspacesoratravellane

Cost

Application

Relativelywideroadwayswithmultiplelanesandfewgapsintraffic.

Maybeusedatsignalizedorunsignalizedcrossings.

Canbeeffectivewhenlocatedatintersections

between

signalized

intersectionsthatcreategaps

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Adequatewidthtoallowabicyclist

withatrailertobeprotectedfrom

thetravellanes

Angledrefuge(45degree)canbeusedtoprovidespaceandface

bicyclisttowards

oncoming

traffic

Ifacrossingislandislandscaped,itshouldnotcompromisevisibility.

Considerreflectorsorlightingtoenhancevisibilityatnight

Preferableatgradepassagethroughtheislandratherthanrampsand

landings.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Medianwidth:minimumwidth8

ft,10ftpreferred(BMP)

Shouldbeatleast6.6ftwidetoprovidesufficientwaiting

space.(MTC)

If2misnotavailable,thebicyclestorageareamaybe

angledacrossthemedian

(MTC)



ExampleCities/Countries Portland,OR(BMP) SanFrancisco,CA(MTC)

32 of 41


39/48


CrossbikeMarkings

Description/Purpose

Pavementmarkingsadjacenttothecrosswalk

indicatingspaceforbicyclestocrossmajor

intersections.

Increases

visibility

of

bicycles

at

intersectionsandencouragesmotoriststo

yieldrightofwaytobicyclistswaitingtocross.

Advantages

Providesgreatervisibilityforbicyclistsatintersections.

Informsallroadwayusersofwherebicyclistsshouldcross. Separatesmodestoreduceconflicts.

Disadvantages

Crossbikewillhavehigherthannormalwearbasedon

thelevel

of

crossing

auto

traffic.

Application

Wheremainbicycleroutescrossrelativelyminorcollectors.

Wherecrosstraffichastoyieldrightofwaytocrossingbicyclists.

Notappropriatewherespeedsexceed30mph

unless

signalized.

(Sustrans)

DesignGuidance

Minimumwidthofsinglelanecrossingis5ft

(London/CROW)

Minimumwidthoftwowaycrossingis10ft(CROW)

Elephantfootprints.Blockmarking(CROW)

20inby20inmetersSpacing:20in


NotinManualonUniformTrafficControlDevices

(MUTCD)

Mayrequireenablinglegislation

Standards

for

application

needed

Source:DenverIgarta

Groningen,NL

Design/Maintenance

Considerations

Considercombiningwithyield(sharksteeth)marking.

Useofcolor Improvesvisibility Increasesmaintenancecost

Markingsshouldnotbeconfusedwithcrosswalks

Skidresistantmarkingsforbicycles

Physicalmeasurestoslowtraffic. Civilcrossingimprovementsshouldbeintroducedin

conjunction.

Ifsignalized,prohibitrightturnsonred.

Consider

ladder

bar

shape

(aka

Zebra)toreduceautotirewear

Considermarkingadjacentcrosswalktodistinguishtwo

pathways

MaintenanceLevelHigh


London,England(Sustrans) Vancouver,BC(Keefer/Carrall)

Vienna,Austria Netherlands(CROW) Paris,France Groningen,Netherlands

33 of 41


40/48


PassthroughCurbExtension

Description

Acurbextensionwithapathforbicyclists

thatpermitsthemtodriveoverthecurb

extension.

Advantages

Eliminatesconflictpointwherebicyclesandautomobilesshare

thesame

space

Disadvantages

Potentialforpedestriancyclistconflict

Automobilesovertakingbicyclesandconflictsafterbothpasscurbextension

Application

Highconflictpointwherefrequentlystoppedtransitvehiclemayblockbike

lane

Softdiversionlocationwhereroadisnarrowedtoinducequeuingfor

automobiletraffic

DesignConsiderations

Conspicuityofinroadfeaturesforroadwayusers

Clearlycommunicatetocyclistandmotoriststheproperpathto

take

Clearlydesignaterightofwaybetweenopposingmotorists

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance

Roadnarrowingto16ftdoesnotrequireadvancewarning,below

16ftprovideadvancewarningof

narrowroad

Markbikepaththroughcurbextension

to

reduce

conflict

with

pedestrians

Providetruncateddomesforpedestriansforcrossingboth

bikepathandenteringroadway

Bikelanewidthovercurbextensiontomatchbikelane

standards

Source:DenverIgarta

Vancouver,BC

DesignObstacles/Challenges

n/a


Vancouver,BC Portland,OR

34 of 41


41/48


42/48


BicycleBoulevardPavementMarking

Description/Purpose

Largepavementmarkingsthatidentify

bikeboulevards.Intentofmarkingsisto

make

these

streets

recognizable

to

all

usersasbicycleprioritystreets.

Advantages

Guidebicyclistsalongtheoccasionaljogsonboulevardroutes.

Reinforcesproperbicyclepositiononasharedroadway. Makesbicycleboulevardsas

recognizable toroadwayusersas

streetswithbicyclelanes.

Disadvantages

Maintenancecosts.

Application

Lowtrafficsharedroadways. Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Supplementalarrowshelpdirectbicyclistswhenboulevardroute

jogs.

Fittheneighborhoodaesthetic. Placenearhighconflictareas

(driveways).

Applymarkingswithretroreflectivepaintorthermoplastic(Alta)

Shouldbeskidresistant. Considertheapplicationofcolor

andmarkingsatmajorcrossings.

Considerwear/maintenanceonroadwayswheremotorvehicles

travel.

Potentialneighborconcernsaboutaesthetic.

MaintenanceLevel

Low

DesignGuidance

Installmarkingsatallintersectionsandatregular

intervals:

200ftintervals(Alta) Symboldimensions

Largebicyclesymbol5by9(CROW)

5.5by9(LondonCyclesymbol1057)

Source:vuzessen.de

Essen,Germany


NotinManualonUniformTrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)


SanLuisObispo,CA Berkeley,CA Portland,OR Eugene,OR Essen,Germany Kiel,Germany

36 of 41


43/48


SharedRoadwayMarkingsDescription/Purpose

Sharedroadwaypavementmarkings,or

sharrows,aremarkingsusedtoindicatea

shared

lane

environment

for

bicycles

and

automobiles.Sharrowsincreasethe

visibilityoftheroadwayasavalidplacefor

bicycletrafficandguideproperroadway

positioningofbicyclistsonstreetswherea

separatedfacilityisdesiredbutnotfeasible.

Advantages Helpsbicyclistsposition

themselvesinlanestoonarrowfor

amotor

vehicle

and

abicycle

to

travelsidebysidewithinthesame

trafficlane.

Mimicstheeffectofbicyclelanesonstreetswithconstrainedrights

ofwayandalertsroadusersofthe

laterallocationbicyclistsmay

occupy.

Movesbicyclistsoutofthedoorzoneofparkedcars.

Encouragessafepassingbymotorists.

Disadvantages Maintenancerequirements Lessdesirablethanaseparated

bicyclefacility.

Application

Streetswithmoderatemotorvehicletrafficvolumes,butwherebikelanesare

precludedbyconstrainedrightofway.

Shortgapsbetweenbikelanes. Streetswithoutspaceforbikelanesin

bothdirections.

Lowtrafficsharedroadwaystoindicatepresenceofbikeway.

Todesignatethroughmovementofbicyclesthroughsharedturnlane

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Visibleplacementofmarkings.MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Designguidanceforsharrows

areprovidedintheManualon

UniformTrafficControlDevices

(MUTCD)

Bikeandchevronsymboldimensions9ft3inby3ft3in.

Markingplacedminimum11fromcurbface.

Symbolspacingshouldcorrespondtodifficultyof

bicycliststrying

to

take

proper

travelpath.

Source:Denver

IgartaPortland,OR


ExampleCities/Countries SanFrancisco,CA Portland,OR Montreal,Quebec,Canada Usedby76jurisdictionsin26

statesasof2009

37 of 41


44/48


BikewayDestinationSignageDescription/Purpose

Guidesigningforbicyclistsalong

designatedbikeroutes.Reinforcebikeway

network

by

providing

visual

cues.

Direct

bicycliststodestinationsviapreferred

routes.

Advantages Guidesbicycliststosignificant

destinations

Encouragespotentialriders

Disadvantages Sizelimitsinformation Signclutter

Application

Bikerouteintersections Atkeydecisionpointsalongbikeways

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Currentsignsincludedirection,

destination&distance(3D)

consideraddingdifficulty.

Conspicuity Legendsize ColorcodeorroutenumberingMaintenanceLevel Low

DesignGuidance ManualonUniformTraffic

ControlDevices(MUTCD)

OregonDepartmentofTransportation(ODOT)standard

CityofPortlandstandardsign


ImplementationObstacles FederalHighwayAdministration

andODOTcurrentlyhave

standards

that

differ

from

the

City

ofPortland.

Maintainingandupdatingsystemwithadditionofnewroutes

becomesincreasinglycomplex.

ExampleCities/Countries Portland,OR Berkeley,California Vancouver,BC,Canada Netherlands Denmark

38 of 41


45/48


StreetcaronBikeways(Centerorleftrunningstreetcartrackswithbicyclelaneorcycletrack)

Description/Purpose

Thestreetisdesignedtoaccommodatea

centeror

left

running

streetcar

track

and

platform. Bicyclistswilleithertraveltothe

rightofthestreetcarineitherabikelane,

cycletrackorvehiclelanefreeofthe

streetcartracks.

Advantages Bicyclistsandstreetcarare

completelyseparated.

Increasessafety. Thecenterplatformeliminates

thepinchpointatcurbextension

platforms,andthelackofparked

carseliminatesconflictwith

parkingcarsanddoors.

Centerplatformseliminatecurbextensionplatformsthatforce

bicycliststocrosstracksat

shallowangles.

Disadvantages Potentialconflictswith

pedestrianscrossing

the

streettothecenterplatform.

Application

Wherestreetcarisplannedonaonewayortwowaystreetwithabicycle

facility.

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Separatebicycletravelfrom

streetcartrackstotheextent

possible.

Clearlymarkwherecrosswalksmeetwiththebicyclefacility

(bikelaneorcycletrack)

Wayfindingsignsandmarkingsshouldbecreatedforbicyclists

toindicateturningopportunities

Designshoulddirectbicycliststocrosstracksatarightangle.

Crossing

angles

should

be

near

perpendicular.

Midblockorfarsidestreetcarstopsmayresultinfewer

conflictsthannearsidecorner

stops.

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance Trackcrossingangleforcyclists

Minimum45degreeangle Offer90degreewhenever

possible

Source:DenverIgartaAmsterdam,NL


ExampleCities/Countries Melbourne,Australia

(SwanstonSt.)

Portland,OR(SWBond/SWHarrison)

Amsterdam,Netherlands

39 of 41


46/48


BicycleFriendlyTransitStopDesign

Description/PurposeAboardingplatformisplacedatatransitstopbetweenthebicyclefacilityandtheroadway

to

eliminate

the

need

for

transit

vehiclesandbikestomerge.

Advantages

Busesarenotforcedtomergeinto/acrossthebikelane.

Bicyclistsdonothavetomergeintoautomobiletrafficoracrossrailtrackstoovertakeastoppedtransitvehicle.

Disadvantages

Pedestrianshavetocrossthebicyclefacility.

Ifinadvanceofanintersection,visibilityofbicyclistsmaybeobscuredbyplatform/shelter.

PotentialADAissues.

Application Bikelanesorcycletracksontransit

routeswherebusesmergewithbicycliststoreachapassengerboardingarea.


Atintersections,visibilityformotoristsandbicyclistsshouldnotbeblockedbytheshelter.

Communicateproperpositioningforbicyclists,pedestriansandmotorists.

Considermarkingsorcoloredpavementinbicyclefacilityatconflictareaswithpedestrians,includingwherepedestrianscrossthebicyclefacility.

Considermaintenancestreetsweeping

MaintenanceLevelLow

DesignGuidance

Platformshouldbeatleast6.56ftwide.(CROW)

Platformwithsheltershouldbewider(8.2ft)withthedistancebetweenthebicyclefacilityandtheshelterbeingatleast2.1ftapart.(CROW)

Providetruncateddomesandcrosswalkmarkings forpedestrianscrossingboththebicyclefacilityandtheroadway

Widthofbicyclefacilitythroughtheboardingareamustmatchdesignstandards

Source:DenverIgarta

Portland,OR


TrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)ExampleCities/Countries

Netherlands(CROW) Copenhagen,Denmark Portland,OR

40 of 41


47/48


BicycleLift(Trampe)Description/Purpose

TheBicycleLiftisacontinuouscollective

transportationconceptforassisting

bicyclists

up

steep

hills

in

urban

areas.

Advantages Eliminatesaseveretopographical

barrier

Providesaccessforallbikewayusers,notjustthemostfit. Providesasweatfreeoption

Disadvantages Installationcostsand

maintenance

Maycreateabarrierforlocalautoaccess Rightofwayrequirements

Application

Relativelyshortbikewaysegmentswithsteepgrades

Importantlinksinthenetwork

Design/MaintenanceConsiderations Semiundergroundcableway Electrickeycardunitatbaseofhill

(operationisunmanned)

Trondheimprototype: Operationalsince1993 Served145,000tripsinfirst6yrs 4,500keycardholders(approx.

150,000residents)

Operatesform7amto10pm Safety:noinjuriesin5years.User

safetyratingof4.7outof6points

70%ofusersweremaleMaintenanceLevel High

DesignGuidance Maximumdistance656ft Trondheimprototype:

Distance:430ft Grade:upto20%

Source:CityofTrondheim,Norway


TrafficControl

Devices

(MUTCD)

ExampleCities/Countries Trondheim,Norway

41 of 41


48/48

buenas_practicas_diseño_vias_ciclistas

Documents

Transcript of buenas_practicas_diseño_vias_ciclistas