National Academies Press: OpenBook
Page i
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13929.
×
Page R1
Page ii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13929.
×
Page R2
Page iii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13929.
×
Page R3
Page iv
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13929.
×
Page R4
Page v
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13929.
×
Page R5
Page vi
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2006. Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13929.
×
Page R6

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N R E S E A R C H B O A R D WASHINGTON, D.C. 2006 www.TRB.org NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 552 Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration SUBJECT AREAS Planning and Administration • Highway and Facility Design Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities KEVIN J. KRIZEK GARY BARNES GAVIN POINDEXTER PAUL MOGUSH KRISTIN THOMPSON Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs University of Minnesota DAVID LEVINSON NEBIYOU TILAHUN Department of Civil Engineering University of Minnesota DAVID LOUTZENHEISER DON KIDSTON Planners Collaborative Inc. Boston, MA WILLIAM HUNTER DWAYNE THARPE ZOE GILLENWATER Highway Safety Research Center University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill RICHARD KILLINGSWORTH Active Living by Design Program University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 552 Price $36.00 Project 7-14 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 0-309-09849-1 Library of Congress Control Number 2006922678 © 2006 Transportation Research Board COPYRIGHT PERMISSION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. NOTE: The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished schol- ars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and techni- cal matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Acad- emy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Acad- emy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. William A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is a division of the National Research Council, which serves the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The Board’s mission is to promote innovation and progress in transportation through research. In an objective and interdisciplinary setting, the Board facilitates the sharing of information on transportation practice and policy by researchers and practitioners; stimulates research and offers research management services that promote technical excellence; provides expert advice on transportation policy and programs; and disseminates research results broadly and encourages their implementation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage more than 5,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 552 ROBERT J. REILLY, Director, Cooperative Research Programs CRAWFORD F. JENCKS, Manager, NCHRP CHRISTOPHER J. HEDGES, Senior Program Officer EILEEN P. DELANEY, Director of Publications KAMI CABRAL, Associate Editor NCHRP PROJECT 7-14 Field of Traffic—Area of Traffic Planning RICHARD HAGGSTROM, California DOT (Chair) DARRYL ANDERSON, Minnesota DOT (AASHTO Monitor) JOHN C. FEGAN, FHWA MARTIN GUTTENPLAN, Florida DOT CHRISTOPHER J. JOHNSTON, Delta Development Group, Inc., Mechanicsburg, PA ELLEN JONES, Downtown DC Business Improvement District, Washington, DC SCOTT E. NODES, City of Goodyear Public Works Department, Goodyear, AZ ANN DO, FHWA Liaison RICHARD PAIN, TRB Liaison

This report presents methodologies and tools to estimate the cost of various bicy- cle facilities and for evaluating their potential value and benefits. The results will help transportation planners make effective decisions on integrating bicycle facilities into their overall transportation plans and on a project-by-project basis. In the past, plan- ners and stakeholders have been faced with considerable challenges in trying to esti- mate the benefits of bicycle facilities. The authors have developed criteria for identi- fying benefits that will be useful and effective for urban transportation planning, and they have provided a systematic method to estimate both direct benefits to the users of the facilities and indirect benefits to the community. The research described in the report has been used to develop a set of web-based guidelines available on the Inter- net at http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikecost/ that provide a step-by-step worksheet for estimating costs, demands, and benefits associated with specific facilities under consideration. Transportation decision makers at the federal, state, and local levels are examining the role of bicycling in response to traffic congestion, increased travel times, and envi- ronmental degradation. Through federal highway legislation, funding has been made available to develop bicycle facilities, both on and off road; however, greater public investment in bicycle facilities warrants a more comprehensive analysis of the costs and benefits. The U.S. DOT National Bicycling and Walking Study (1994) called for dou- bling the percentage of trips made by bicycling and walking to 15 percent of total trips. To make the best use of transportation funds, there is a need for better information on (a) the effects of bicycle-facility investment on bicycle use and mode share and (b) the resulting environmental, economic, public health, and social benefits. Under NCHRP Project 07-14, “Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities,” a research team led by the University of Minnesota conducted an extensive analysis of the costs and benefits associated with bicycle facilities and developed a methodology that can be applied by transportation planners to assist with decision making in their own jurisdic- tions. The research results were used to develop web-based, step-by-step guidelines for evaluating the cost, demand, and potential benefits for bicycle facilities in support of investment decisions. These guidelines are available on a website maintained by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC) at www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikecost/. The PBIC is a clearinghouse for information about health and safety, engineering, advo- cacy, education, enforcement, and access and mobility. The interactive guidelines lead the user through a series of questions, starting with the geographic location and the type of facility under consideration, and working through more specific issues to an estimate of the costs, demand, and potential benefits of the proposed facility. PBIC is funded by the U.S. DOT and the Centers for Disease Control and Preven- tion. The PBIC is part of the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center. FOREWORD By Christopher J. Hedges Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY Background, 1 Estimating Bicycle Facility Costs, 1 Measuring and Forecasting the Demand for Bicycling, 2 Benefits Associated with the Use of Bicycle Facilities, 3 Benefit-Cost Analysis of Bicycle Facilities, 3 Introduction, 4 7 CHAPTER 1 Estimating Bicycle Facility Costs Identifying Costs, 7 Methodology for Determining Costs, 9 21 CHAPTER 2 Measuring and Forecasting the Demand for Bicycling Introduction, 21 Literature Review, 21 A Sketch Planning Methodology, 26 28 CHAPTER 3 Benefits Associated with the Use of Bicycle Facilities Previous Approaches, 28 Overview of Issues, 28 Proposed Benefits and Methods, 30 Conclusions, 36 38 CHAPTER 4 Benefit-Cost Analysis of Bicycle Facilities Introduction and Purpose, 38 Translating Demand and Benefits Research into Guidelines, 38 Benefit-Cost Analysis Tool, 40 Application to Pedestrian Facilities, 42 47 CHAPTER 5 Applying the Guidelines Federal Funding Sources, 47 Non-Federal Funding Sources, 48 51 ENDNOTES 53 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES A-1 APPENDIX A: Estimating Bicycling Demand B-1 APPENDIX B: Bicycling Demand and Proximity to Facilities C-1 APPENDIX C: Literature Researching Bicycle Benefits D-1 APPENDIX D: User Mobility Benefits E-1 APPENDIX E: User Health Benefits F-1 APPENDIX F: User Safety Benefits G-1 APPENDIX G: Recreation and Reduced Auto Use Benefits H-1 APPENDIX H: Community Livability Benefits I-1 APPENDIX I: Field Testing J-1 APPENDIX J: Primer on Designing Bicycle Facilities

Next: Summary »
Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 552: Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities includes methodologies and tools to estimate the cost of various bicycle facilities and for evaluating their potential value and benefits. The report is designed to help transportation planners integrate bicycle facilities into their overall transportation plans and on a project-by-project basis. The research described in the report has been used to develop a set of web-based guidelines, available on the Internet at http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikecost/, that provide a step-by-step worksheet for estimating costs, demands, and benefits associated with specific facilities under consideration.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!