Who is Toole Design Group?

Similar documents
2018 AASHTO BIKE GUIDE

2018 AASHTO BIKE GUIDE

Guidance. ATTACHMENT F: Draft Additional Pages for Bicycle Facility Design Toolkit Separated Bike Lanes: Two-Way to One-Way Transitions

Small Town & Rural Multimodal Networks

FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide

Off-road Trails. Guidance

The 2012 AASHTO Bike Guide: An Overview

Bicycle Facilities Planning

APPENDIX A: Complete Streets Checklist DRAFT NOVEMBER 2016

On Road Bikeways Part 1: Bicycle Lane Design

PBIC Webinar. How to Create a Bicycle Safety Action Plan: Planning for Safety [IMAGE] Oct. 2, 2014, 2 pm

REGIONAL BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN DESIGN GUIDELINES

Planning Suburban Bike Networks

Bicycle Boulevards and Neighborhood Greenways

National Guidance on Street Standards: From AASHTO to NACTO and Beyond. APA National Planning Conference Los Angeles April 15, 2012

Guidance for Installation of Pedestrian Crosswalks on Michigan State Trunkline Highways

DRAFT Montgomery County Bicycle Master Plan Design Toolkit

Bike Planning: A New Day

Appendix 3 Roadway and Bike/Ped Design Standards

Appendix C. City of Fort Collins Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines. Appendix C: Recommended Bicycle Design Guidelines 1

MUTCD Part 6: Temporary Traffic Control

South Carolina Department of Transportation. Engineering Directive

INDEX. Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads INDEX

Off-Road Facilities Part 1: Shared Use Path Design

Active Transportation Facility Glossary

CURBSIDE ACTIVITY DESIGN

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Study. Old Colony Planning Council

Traffic Engineering Update on Bike/Ped Topics. Marc Lipschultz, P.E. PTOE Central Office Traffic Engineering Division

and Rural Multimodal Networks 2017 ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN

Planning Guidance in the 2012 AASHTO Bike Guide

General Design Factors

PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TREATMENTS

Roundabouts and Bikes: Like Oil and Water or Peanut Butter and Bananas?

Zlatko Krstulich, P.Eng. City of O9awa

City of Albert Lea Policy and Procedure Manual 4.10 ALBERT LEA CROSSWALK POLICY

APPENDIX D LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS METHODOLOGY

INTERSECTION DESIGN TREATMENTS

What Is a Complete Street?

WYDOT DESIGN GUIDES. Guide for. Non-NHS State Highways

Overview. Illinois Bike Summit IDOT Complete Streets Policy Presentation. What is a Complete Street? And why build them? And why build them?

NJDOT Complete Streets Checklist

Pedestrian Safety at Interchanges

DEFINITIONS Activity Area - Advance Warning Area Advance Warning Sign Spacing Advisory Speed Approach Sight Distance Attended Work Space

Multimodal Through Corridors and Placemaking Corridors

Cycle Track Design Best Practices Cycle Track Sections

TOWN OF PORTLAND, CONNECTICUT COMPLETE STREETS POLICY

What's in the 2012 California MUTCD for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and School Areas?

Multimodal Design Guidance. October 23, 2018 ITE Fall Meeting

WYDOT DESIGN GUIDES. Guide for. NHS Arterial (Non-Interstate)

Appendix C. Bicycle Route Signage

Toole Design Group is live tweeting this webinar

Designing for Bicyclist Safety at Crossings and Intersections

INTRODUCTION. Intersections Treatments

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION APPLICATION

UNCONTROLLED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING GUIDELINES

Evolving Roadway Design Policies for Walking and Bicycling

Roadway Design Manual

4.1 CONTEXT. The existing terrain and sight conditions will affect available sight lines and approach speeds of bicyclists and motorists.

COMPLETE STREETS DESIGN STATE OF THE PRACTICE

Memorandum. Exhibit 60 SSDP To: Jenny Bailey, Senior Planner. From: Bill Schultheiss, P.E. (WA. P.E. #46108) Date: June 20, 2017

PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENT EVALUATION GUIDELINE FOR UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS

Brian D. Hare, P.E. Bureau of Design PennDOT PA APA Annual Conference Investing in a Sustainable Future October 5, 2009

IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT UNCONTROLLED CROSSINGS. Guidelines for Marked Crosswalks

Bicycle and Pedestrian Chapter TPP Update Overview. TAB September 20, 2017

AMATS Complete Streets Policy

Page 2D-10 Added the following language at the end of the paragraph under REFINING HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT ; See Chapter 2A, Section 2A-6.

PEDESTRIAN ACCOMMODATIONS DPS 201 AT INTERCHANGES

Agenda. Overview PRINCE GEORGE S PLAZA METRO AREA PEDESTRIAN PLAN

3 Bikeway Types & Design Guidance

Prince George s County plans, policies, and projects

ROUNDABOUTS/TRAFFIC CIRCLES

Designing On Road Bikeways

Complete Streets Training. Georgia Municipal Association June 27, 2016

Bicycle and Pedestrian Level of Service Measures

Defining Purpose and Need

Dr. M.L. King, Jr. Street North Complete Streets Resurfacing Opportunities HOUSING, LAND USE, AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MARCH 22, 2018

Chapter 2. Bellingham Bicycle Master Plan Chapter 2: Policies and Actions

Addendum to SDDCTEA Pamphlet 55 17: Better Military Traffic Engineering Revision 1 Effective: 24 Aug Crosswalk Guidelines

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety Innovations & Applications

2012 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.

Bowman-Melton Associates, Inc. june 2011

Recommended Roadway Plan Section 2 - Land Development and Roadway Access

Arlington County, Virginia ~ National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) Transportation and Land-Use Connections (TLC) Program

PEDESTRIAN ACCOMMODATIONS DPS 201 AT ROUNDABOUTS

Appendix T CCMP TRAIL TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION DESIGN STANDARD

Toolbox. City of Eden Prairie Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan Adopted 12/02/14 74

Safety Emphasis Areas & Safety Project Development Florida Department of Transportation District Seven Tampa Bay

DRAFT - CITY OF MEDFORD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Roadway Cross-Sections

GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION STREETS TABLE 1A CG-6 CURB AND GUTTER SECTION

Implementing Complete Streets in Ottawa. Project Delivery Process and Tools Complete Streets Forum 2015 October 1, 2015

City of Roseville Section 13 Design Standards. _Bikeways January 2016 SECTION 13 BIKEWAYS

FOR HISTORICAL REFERENCE ONLY

Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Shawn Turner, P.E. Texas A&M Transportation Institute

10.0 CURB EXTENSIONS GUIDELINE

Watertown Complete Streets Prioritization Plan. Public Meeting #1 December 14, 2017

Complete Streets: Policy to Pavement

Physical Implications of Complete Streets Policies

Connecting cyclists to work. Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council

Appendix A. Knoxville TPO Greenway Signage Guidelines. Appendix A: Knoxville TPO Greenway Signage Guidelines Knox to Oak Ridge Greenway Master Plan

Transcription:

2018 AASHTO Bike Guide Status Update NCHRP 15 60 Amalia Leighton Cody, PE, AICP & Kenneth Loen, PE Washington APWA October 4, 2018 Who is Toole Design Group? TDG is a full service engineering, planning and urban design firm with over 150 professionals in 14 offices across North America. Seattle, WA Portland, OR Oakland, CA Edmonton, Canada Denver, CO Minneapolis, MN Madison, WI Columbus, OH Boston, MA Baltimore, MD Silver Spring, MD 50 engineering staff 65 planning staff 15 landscape architects 5 research staff Spartanburg, SC Atlanta, GA Orlando, FL 1

Who is Toole Design Group? TDG has worked in over and developed 500 2,000 Communities designs for over Bike Lanes & Trails in the past 8 Years. Who is Toole Design Group? We understand how guidelines allow teams to deliver innovative solutions through our work on national, state and local research and publications AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities NCHRP 803 Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Along Existing Roads MassDOT Separated Bike Lane Planning & Design Guide FHWA Accessible Shared Streets 2

Review research and practice to address gaps in 2012 Guide Develop a framework for selecting appropriate facility and design features based on context Consider users of all ages and abilities, including children Harmonization with applicable standards and guidelines Revised AASHTO Chapter Outline 1. Introduction 2. Bicycle Operation & Safety 3. Planning 4. Facility Selection 5: Elements of Design 6. Shared Use Paths 7. Separated Bike Lanes 8. Bicycle Boulevards 9. Bike Lanes & Shared Lanes 10. Traffic Signals and Active Warning Devices 11. Roundabouts, Interchanges, and Other Intersections 12. Rural Area Bikeways 13. Structures 14. Wayfinding 15. Maintenance & Operations 16. Parking & End of Trip Facilities 3

Chapter 1 Introduction Design Values Minimum - the use of minimum values should not be considered a default for bicycle facilities Desirable or Preferable - the use of larger values should be used to maximize the safety and comfort benefits for bicyclists 5 Bike Lane 7 Parking Lane 4 Buffer 6 7 Bike Lane Chapter 1 Introduction Design Values Constrained The use of constrained values may degrade safety and reduce comfort for bicyclists, therefore, the use of these values should only be considered as an interim measure for limited distances where bike volumes are low 4

Chapter 1 Introduction Definitions Bikeway A bicycle boulevard or any other facility intended for bicycle travel which designates space for bicyclists distinct from motor vehicle traffic. A bikeway does not include shared lanes, sidewalks, signed routes, or shared lanes with shared lane markings because these treatments do not materially improve operating conditions for bicyclists.. Chapter 1 Relationship to Other Manuals FHWA Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide May 2013 FHWA Achieving Multimodal Networks Applying Design Flexibility & Reducing Conflicts August 2016 FHWA Accessible Shared Streets September 2017 FHWA Measuring Multimodal Network Connectivity February 2018 5

1.5.1 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) MUTCD defines design and application of traffic control devices (TCDs) AASHTO expands upon the application of TCDs This Guide includes TCDs: issued Interim Approval as of August 2018 requiring experimental approval by FHWA (located at the end of their respective section) Designers who wish to experiment with these traffic control devices must request and receive approval from the FHWA using the procedure outlined in Paragraphs 8 through 11 of Section 1A.10 of the MUTCD. Section 2.3 Bicyclist Design User Profile 4 7% Highly confident 5 9% Somewhat confident 51 56% Interested but Concerned lower stress tolerance higher stress tolerance source: Dill, J., McNeil, N. (2012). Four Types of Cyclists? Examining a Typology to Better Understand Bicycling Behavior and Potential. 6

4 7% 51 56% Experienced & Confident Cyclist AASHTO 2012 Interested but Concerned Cyclist AASHTO 2018 Photo Credits: Pasco County Schools Section 2.4 Safety and Performance Characteristics by Age 6 11 MPH 10 15 MPH 10 25+ MPH Children 6.5 11.5 mph Adults: Median Speed: 9.7 mph Design Speed: 15 mph Reaction Time 1.5 seconds (expected stop) 2.5 seconds (unexpected stop) 7

Section 2.5 Design Vehicle and Bicyclist Operating Criteria What is your design vehicle and their operating space? Section 3.8.2 Quality of Service and Bicycle Level of Service Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS) has significant limitations it was developed to analyze a limited set of bicycling conditions within shared lanes, paved shoulders, and bike lanes does not allow evaluation of shared use paths, separated bike lanes, or buffered bike lanes. Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) created to address deficiencies in the Bicycle LOS method. It is a method of classifying road segments and bikeway networks based on how comfortable bicyclists with different levels of confidence would feel using them. 8

Shared Lanes Max volume 3,000 ADT Max speed 25 mph Bike Lanes Max volume 6,000 ADT Max speed 30 mph Separated Bike Lanes More than 6,000 ADT Speed over 30 mph The go-to chapter for critical design elements - Design User - Design Speed - Assignment of Right of Way - Sight Distance - Geometric Design Elements - Intersection Design Objectives - Evaluating Bike/Ped Roadway Crossings - Treatments to Improve Intersection Safety - Signs and Markings - Design Near Rail Lines - Other Design Features 9

Chapter 5 Elements of Design 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Design User 5.3 Design Speed 5.4 Understanding Assignment of Right of Way 5.5 Sight Distance 5.6 Geometric Design Elements 5.7 Characteristics of Intersections 5.8 Intersection Design Objectives 5.9 Evaluating Bicycle and Pedestrian Roadway Crossings 5.10 Geometric Design Treatments to Improve Intersection Safety 5.11 Warning and Regulatory Traffic Control Devices 5.12 Pavement Markings 5.13 Bicycle Travel Near Rail Lines 5.14 Other Design Features 10

Chapter 5.4 Understanding Assignment of Right of Way Mutual Yielding (or stopping) 1) Motorist & Bikes must yield to pedestrians 2) Pedestrians cannot suddenly leave the curb if vehicles too close to stop 3) Motorists must exercise due care to avoid colliding with bikes/peds Chapter 5.6.4.3 Tapers BUT 2:1 (longitudinal:lateral) applicable for specific situation 11

Chapter 5.8 Intersection Design Objectives 1) Minimize Exposure to Conflicts 2) Reduce Speeds at Conflicts 3) Communicate Right of Way Priority 4) Provide Adequate Sight Distance 5) Transitions to Other Facilities 6) Accommodating Persons with Disabilities Chapter 5.9 Evaluating Bicycle & Pedestrian Roadway Crossings Tier 1: Signing & Markings Tier 2: RRFB & Geometric Improvements Tier 3: HAWK, Signal, or Grade Separation 12

Chapter 5.10 Geometric Design Treatments to Improve Safety 5.10.1 Raised Crossing Islands, Median Island, Hardened Centerlines 5.10.2 Curb Extensions 5.10.3 Curb Radius 5.10.4 Mountable Truck Aprons 5.10.5 Raised Crossings 5.10.6 Multiple Threat Crossing Treatments Chapter 5.11 Traffic Control Devices Chapter 5.12 Pavement Markings 13

Chapter 6.3.1 Width and Shy Space 10-feet no longer the default width 14 minimum for Urban trails Use SUPLOS Calculator for width & for guidance when to separate bikes and pedestrians Separation may be appropriate if > 300 total users in peak hour and > 30% pedestrians 15 min for a SUP with a marked 2-way pedestrian space Passing and side-by-side riding Chapter 6.4.1 Restricting Motor Vehicles Bollards are a last resort - Post No Motor Vehicle signs - Use different materials - Use a center island approaches - Use targeted enforcement - Consider flex posts before bollards 14

Chapter 7.9.12 & 7.9.13 Accessible Parking and Loading - Accessible parking should be provided on block perimeter - Best provided at intersections - Midblock requires additional ramps - Loading zones have the same characteristics as accessible parking space, but with different signs Chapter 7.9.14 Transit Stops Review 5/25/2017 design meeting training Basic design principles, but nuanced design Vertical detectable edges preferred, but directional indicators allowed MassDOT outdated 15

Chapter 9.6 Buffered Bike Lanes Establishes a standard for buffered bike lanes Chapter 10 Traffic Signals and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons 10.2 Design Guidance for Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs) 10.3 Design Guidance for Traffic Signal Control 10.4 Traffic Signal Phasing for Managing or Reducing Conflicts 10.5 Traffic Signal Timing for Bicyclists 10.6 Bicycle Signal Design Considerations for Bicyclists 10.7 Detection for Bicycles 16

Chapter 12 Rural Area Bikeways and Roadways (draft) 12.1 Introduction 12.2 Safety Context of Rural Roads 12.3 Design User Profiles 12.4 Rural Bikeway Treatments 12.5 Pavement Surface Quality on Rural Roadways 12.6 Shared Use Paths and Sidepaths 12.7 Design Considerations for Bridges, Viaducts, and Tunnels in Rural Areas 12.8 Bicycle Travel Along Interstates, Freeways, and Limited-Access Highways 12.9 Roundabouts 12.10 Wayfinding Section 12.3 - Design User Profiles (draft) Design User: Between Towns & Villages Highly Confident In Towns & Villages Interested but Concerned 17

Section 12.4.2 Signs for Shared Roadways Section 12.4.3 Paved Shoulders Draft content: paved shoulders beneficial on roads with: traffic volumes that > 3,000 vehicles/day motor vehicle speeds > 50 mph inadequate sight distances for the typical operating speed grades in excess of 5 % heavy vehicles > 10% Section 12.4.4 - Advisory Shoulders - draft (Experimental) Draft Figures from the Guide 18

Section 12.4.4 Advisory Shoulders - draft (Experimental) Advisory shoulders may be considered in all contexts on roads with: Low operating speeds < 25 mph preferable < 35 mph desirable Low to moderate motor vehicle volumes < 3,000 vehicles/day preferable < 6,000 vehicles/day maximum Infrequent heavy vehicles Adequate passing sight distance for motorists Regular bicycle traffic Draft Figure from the Guide Section 12.6 Rural Shared Use Paths and Side Paths (draft) Shared use paths in rural areas can: enhance connectivity for the Interested but Concerned user expand rural recreational bicycling opportunities add economic value to rural communities by attracting touring bicyclists Connect neighborhoods, town centers, and schools in rural towns 19