Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 16, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (2012)

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.

TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2012 www.TRB.org T R A N S I T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M TCRP REPORT 95 Research sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation Subscriber Categories Planning and Forecasting • Public Transportation • Pedestrians and Bicyclists • Operations and Traffic Management Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Chapter 16—Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities RICHARD H. PRATT JOHN E. (JAY) EVANS IV AND HERBERT S. LEVINSON Lead Chapter Authors SHAWN M. TURNER CHAWN YAW (C.Y.) JENG AND DANIEL NABORS Contributing Chapter Authors RICHARD H. PRATT, CONSULTANT, INC. Garrett Park, MD JAY EVANS CONSULTING LLC Washington, DC TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE College Station, TX PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF, INC. Baltimore, MD J. RICHARD KUZMYAK, L.L.C. Silver Spring, MD CAMBRIDGE SYSTEMATICS, INC. Bethesda, MD VANASSE HANGEN BRUSTLIN, INC. / VHB Vienna, VA GALLOP CORPORATION Rockville, MD MCCOLLOM MANAGEMENT CONSULTING, INC. Darnestown, MD HERBERT S. LEVINSON, TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANT Wallingford, CT K.T. ANALYTICS, INC. Bethesda, MD

TCRP REPORT 95: Chapter 16 Project B-12A ISSN 1073-4872 ISBN 978-0-309-25829-6 Library of Congress Control Number 2003108813 © 2012 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION 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 Transit Cooperative Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the Transit Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM The nation’s growth and the need to meet mobility, environmental, and energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Current systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to intro- duce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213—Research for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration—now the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem- solving research. TCRP, modeled after the longstanding and success- ful National Cooperative Highway Research Program, undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of tran- sit service providers. The scope of TCRP includes a variety of transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Pro- posed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was autho- rized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement out- lining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three cooper- ating organizations: FTA, the National Academies, acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB); and the Transit Development Corporation, Inc. (TDC), a nonprofit educational and research orga- nization established by APTA. TDC is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee. Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the TOPS Committee to formulate the research program by identi- fying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Committee defines funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel, appointed by the Transportation Research Board. The panels prepare project state- ments (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide techni- cal guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research pro- grams since 1962. As in other TRB activities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Because research cannot have the desired impact if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on dissemi- nating TCRP results to the intended end users of the research: tran- sit agencies, service providers, and suppliers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other support- ing material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners. The TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. The TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs. Published reports of the TRANSIT COOPERATIVE 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

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars 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 technical 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 Academy 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 achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest 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 Academy, 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 Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 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 individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

CRP STAFF FOR TCRP REPORT 95 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Stephan A. Parker, Senior Program Officer Megha Khadka, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natassja Linzau, Editor TCRP PROJECT B-12 PANEL Field of Service Configuration Paul J. Larrousse, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ (Chair) Patrick T. DeCorla-Souza, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC Keith Killough, Arizona DOT, Phoenix, AZ Reza Navai, California DOT, Sacramento, CA Neil J. Pedersen, Silver Spring, MD G. Scott Rutherford, University of Washington, Seattle, WA Darwin G. Stuart, Skokie, IL Eric Pihl, FHWA Liaison Richard Weaver, APTA Liaison Kimberly Fisher, TRB Liaison C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S

TCRP Report 95, Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition; Chapter 16, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities From a transportation and community perspective, objectives of pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements have evolved to include numerous aspects of providing viable and safe active transportation options for all ages, abilities, and socioeconomic groups. Pedes- trian and bicycle facilities appear overall to benefit the full spectrum of society perhaps more broadly than any other provision of transportation. A challenge in non-motorized trans- portation (NMT) benefit analysis is to adequately account for all the different forms in which pedestrian and bicycle facilities provide benefit. In this report, new as well as synthesized research is presented. This chapter examines pedestrian and bicyclist behavior and travel demand outcomes in a relatively broad sense. It covers traveler response to NMT facilities both in isolation and as part of the total urban fabric, along with the effects of associated programs and promotion. It looks not only at transportation outcomes, but also recreational and public health outcomes. This chapter focuses on the travel behavior and public health implications of pedestrian/bicycle area- wide systems; NMT-link facilities such as sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and on-transit accommo- dation of bicycles; and node-specific facilities such as street-crossing treatments, bicycle parking, and showers. Discussion of the implications of pedestrian and bicycle “friendly” neighborhoods, policies, programs, and promotion is also incorporated. The public health effects coverage of this chapter, and associated treatment of walking and bicycling and schoolchild travel as key aspects of active living, have been greatly facili- tated by participation in the project by the National Center for Environmental Health—part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This pivotal CDC involvement has included supplemental financial support for the Chapter 16 work effort. It has also encompassed assistance with research sources and questions, and draft chapter reviews by individual CDC staff members in parallel with TCRP Project B-12A Panel member reviews (see “Chapter 16 Author and Contributor Acknowledgments”). TCRP Report 95: Chapter 16, Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities will be of interest to transit, transportation, and land use planning practitioners; public health professionals and trans- portation engineers; land developers, employers, and school administrators; researchers and educators; and professionals across a broad spectrum of transportation, planning, and public health agencies; MPOs; and local, state, and federal government agencies. This chapter is com- plemented by illustrative photographs provided as a “Photo Gallery” at the conclusion of the report. In addition, PowerPoint slides of the photographs in full color are available on the TRB website at http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/167122.aspx. F O R E W O R D By Stephan A. Parker Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

The overarching objective of the Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook is to equip members of the transportation profession with a comprehensive, readily accessible, interpretive documentation of results and experience obtained across the United States and elsewhere from (1) different types of transportation system changes and policy actions and (2) alternative land use and site development design approaches. While the focus is on contemporary observations and assessments of traveler responses as expressed in travel demand changes, the presentation is seasoned with earlier experiences and find- ings to identify trends or stability, and to fill information gaps that would otherwise exist. Comprehensive referencing of additional reference materials is provided to facilitate and encourage in-depth exploration of topics of interest. Travel demand and related impacts are expressed using such measures as usage of transportation facilities and services, before-and- after market shares and percentage changes, and elasticity. The findings in the Handbook are intended to aid—as a general guide—in preliminary screening activities and quick turn-around assessments. The Handbook is not intended for use as a substitute for regional or project-specific travel demand evaluations and model applications, or other independent surveys and analyses. The Second Edition of the handbook Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes was published by USDOT in July 1981, and it has been a valuable tool for transportation professionals, providing documentation of results from different types of transportation actions. This Third Edition of the Handbook covers 18 topic areas, including essentially all of the nine topic areas in the 1981 edition, modified slightly in scope, plus nine new topic areas. Each topic is published as a chapter of TCRP Report 95. To access the chapters, see the project write-up on the TCRP website: http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProject Display.asp?ProjectID=1034. A team led by Richard H. Pratt, Consultant, Inc. is responsible for the Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition, through work conducted under TCRP Projects B-12, B-12A, and B-12B. REPORT ORGANIZATION The Handbook, organized for simultaneous print and electronic chapter-by-chapter pub- lication, treats each chapter essentially as a stand-alone document. Each chapter includes text and self-contained references and sources on that topic. For example, the references cited in the text of Chapter 6, “Demand Responsive/ADA,” refer to the Reference List at the end of that chapter. The Handbook user should, however, be conversant with the back- ground and guidance provided in TCRP Report 95: Chapter 1, Introduction. An updated Chapter 1 publication, anticipated for 2012, will include a four-level table of contents for all 16 published chapters. An outline of chapters is provided below.

Handbook Outline Showing Publication and Source-Data-Cutoff Dates U.S. DOT Publication TCRP Report 95 General Sections and Topic Area Chapters First Second Source Data Publication (TCRP Report 95 Nomenclature) Edition Edition Cutoff Date Date Ch. 1 – Introduction (with Appendices A, B) 1977 1981 2003 a 2000/03/12a Multimodal/Intermodal Facilities Ch. 2 – HOV Facilities 1977 1981 1999-05b 2006 Ch. 3 – Park-and-Ride/Pool — 1981 2003c 2004 Transit Facilities and Services Ch. 4 – Busways, BRT and Express Bus 1977d 1981 Future Future Ch. 5 – Vanpools and Buspools 1977 1981 1999-04b 2005 Ch. 6 – Demand Responsive/ADA — — 1999 2004 Ch. 7 – Light Rail Transit — — Future Future Ch. 8 – Commuter Rail — — Future Future Public Transit Operations Ch. 9 – Transit Scheduling and Frequency 1977 1981 1999 2004 Ch. 10 – Bus Routing and Coverage 1977 1981 1999 2004 Ch. 11 – Transit Information and Promotion 1977 1981 2002 2003 Transportation Pricing Ch. 12 – Transit Pricing and Fares 1977 1981 1999 2004 Ch. 13 – Parking Pricing and Fees 1977d — 1999 2005 Ch. 14 – Road Value Pricing 1977d — 2002-03b 2003 Land Use and Non-Motorized Travel Ch. 15 – Land Use and Site Design — — 2001-02b 2003 Ch. 16 – Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities — — 2007-11b 2012 Ch. 17 – Transit Oriented Development — — 2004-06b 2007 Transportation Demand Management Ch. 18 – Parking Management and Supply — — 2000-02b 2003 Ch. 19 – Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies 1977d 1981d 2007-09b 2010 NOTES: a Published in TCRP Web Document 12, Interim Handbook (March 2000), without Appendix B. The “Interim Introduction,” published as Research Results Digest 61 (September 2003), is a replacement, available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rrd_61.pdf. Publication of an updated version of Chapter 1, “Introduction,” as part of the TCRP Report 95 series, is anticipated for 2012. b Primary cutoff was first year listed, but with selected information up into second year listed. c The source data cutoff date for certain components of this chapter was 1999. d The edition in question addressed only certain aspects of later edition topical coverage.

TCRP Report 95, the Third Edition of the “Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes” Handbook, has been pre- pared under TCRP Project B-12, as amended, by Richard H. Pratt, Consultant, Inc., in association with Jay Evans Consulting LLC, the Texas Transportation Institute, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Inc., J. Richard Kuzmyak, L.L.C., Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc./VHB, Gallop Corporation, McCollom Management Consulting, Inc., Herbert S. Levinson, Transportation Consultant, and K.T. Analytics, Inc. Richard H. Pratt has been the Principal Investigator. Dr. Katherine F. Turnbull of the Texas Transportation Institute and John E. (Jay) Evans, IV, then of Jay Evans Consulting LLC, each assisted as co-Principal Investigators during individual project B- 12 phases. Lead Handbook chapter authors and co-authors, in addition to Mr. Pratt, are Mr. Evans (initially with Parsons Brinckerhoff and now with Cambridge Systematics); Dr. Turn- bull; J. Richard Kuzmyak, initially of Cambridge Systematics and latterly of J. Richard Kuzmyak, L.L.C.; Frank Spielberg of VHB; Brian E. McCollom of McCollom Management Consulting, Inc.; Herbert S. Levinson, Transportation Consultant; Erin Vaca of Cambridge Systematics, Inc.; and Dr. G. Bruce Douglas of Par- sons Brinckerhoff. Contributing authors include Dr. Kiran U. Bhatt, K.T. Analytics, Inc.; Shawn M. Turner, Texas Transporta- tion Institute; Dr. Rachel Weinberger, Cambridge Systematics (now with the University of Pennsylvania); Andrew Stryker, Par- sons Brinckerhoff; Dr. C. Y. Jeng, Gallop Corporation; and Daniel Nabors, VHB. Other Research Agency team members contributing to the preparatory research, synthesis of information, and development of this Handbook have been Stephen Farnsworth, Laura Higgins, and Rachel Donovan of the Texas Transportation Institute; Nick Vlahos, Vicki Ruiter, and Karen Higgins of Cambridge System- atics, Inc.; Greg Benz, Bill Davidson, G.B. Arrington, and Lydia Wong of PB, along with the late travel demand modeler/planner extraordinaire Gordon W. Schultz; Kris Jagarapu of VHB; Sarah Dowling of Jay Evans Consulting LLC; and Laura C. (Peggy) Pratt of Richard H. Pratt, Consultant, Inc. Dr. C. Y. Jeng of Gal- lop Corporation has provided pre-publication numerical quality control review throughout (limited to critical source materials in Chapter 16). By special arrangement, Dr. Daniel B. Rathbone of The Urban Transportation Monitor searched past issues. Assis- tance in word processing, graphics and other essential support has been provided by Bonnie Duke and Pam Rowe of the Texas Transportation Institute; Karen Applegate, Laura Reseigh, Stephen Bozik, and Jeff Waclawski of PB; others too numerous to name but fully appreciated; and lastly the warmly remembered late Susan Spielberg of SG Associates (now part of VHB). Special thanks go to all involved for supporting the coopera- tive process adopted for topic area chapter development. Mem- bers of the TCRP Project B-12/B-12A/B-12B Project Panel, named elsewhere, provided review and comments for what will total some 18 individual publication documents/chapters. They have gone the extra mile in providing support on call including leads, reports, documentation, advice, and direction over the decade-and-a-half duration of the project. Four consecutive appointed or acting TCRP Senior Program Officers have given their support: Stephanie N. Robinson, who took the project through scope development and contract negotiation; Stephen J. Andrle, who led the work during the Project B-12 Phase and on into the TCRP B-12A Project Continuation; Harvey Berlin, who saw the Interim Handbook through to website publication; and Stephan A. Parker, who has guided the entire project to its ulti- mate fruition including the publication of each final chapter/vol- ume. Editor Natassja Linzau has provided her careful examina- tion and fine touch, while Publications Director Eileen Delaney and her team have handled all the numerous publication details. TRB Librarian Jessica Fomalont provided invaluable literature procurement aid and TRB Intern Calvin D. Cheeks error-checked Chapter 16 tables. The efforts of all are greatly appreciated. Continued recognition is due to the participants in the devel- opment of the First and Second Editions, key elements of which are retained. Co-authors to Mr. Pratt were Neil J. Pedersen and Joseph J. Mather for the First Edition, and John N. Copple for the Second Edition. Crucial support and guidance for both editions was provided by the Federal Highway Administration’s Techni- cal Representative (COTR), Louise E. Skinner. Richard H. Pratt, John E. (Jay) Evans, IV, and Herbert S. Levinson are the lead authors for this TCRP Report 95 volume: Chapter 16, “Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities,” the first coverage of Non-Motorized Transportation in the “Traveler Response” Handbook editions. Contributing authors for Chapter 16 are Shawn M. Turner, Chawn Yaw (C.Y.) Jeng, and Daniel Nabors. Participation by the profession at large has been absolutely essential to the development of the Handbook and most espe- cially this chapter. Sincere thanks are due to the Transportation Research Board (TRB) Pedestrian Committee ANF10 (Shawn Turner, Chair) and Bicycle Transportation Committee ANF20 (Jennifer Dill, Chair) for aiding this participation and serving as a forum for Chapter 16 resource material information exchange and chapter review solicitation. Chapter size dictated that most reviews be focused on individual sections. Chapter or section reviews from a transportation perspective were provided by Greg Griffin, Susan Horst, Kara Kockelman, Michael Langdon, John LaPlante, Meghan Mitman, Gina Mitteco, Anne Vernez Moudon, Laura Sandt, Robert Schneider, and Charles Zegeer. Comments, contributions, and advice received have substantially benefited the final product. As acknowledged in the “Foreword,” the Chapter 16 develop- ment effort was joined by the National Center for Environmen- tal Health of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Dr. Andrew Dannenberg arranged the CDC financial involvement, provided and oversaw technical assistance, and served as a Chapter 16 reviewer. Reviews were also undertaken by CDC staff members Amy Freeland and Christina Dahlstrom. Assistance with public health literature procurement was pro- vided by the CDC reviewers and by Sarah Heaton. Dr. Arthur Wendel, following Dr. Dannenberg’s retirement from the CDC, has kindly coordinated follow-up activities. Independent of the official CDC involvement, Dr. Laura A. Pratt reviewed Chapter 16 public health and statistical discussions in the final version, and throughout assisted with source material and statistical and epidemiological interpretations. Finally, sincere thanks are due to the many other practition- ers and researchers who were contacted for information and unstintingly supplied both that and all manner of statistics, data compilations, and reports. Though not feasible to list compre- hensively here, many appear in the “References” section entries of this and other chapters. Special note is due of information procurement and interpretation contributions by Robyn C. Davies and Michael J. Langdon of the Department of Transport and Main Roads, Brisbane Australia; data assembly efforts by staff of the City of Boulder, Colorado; and of information assembly combined with a personal interview by Susan Horst, Whatcom Council of Governments, Bellingham, Washington. Posthumous acknowledgment, with highest regard, goes to the late Todd Heglund and the late Rodney E. Engelen, both retirees of Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. These gentlemen provided historical perspective and, in the case of Mr. Heglund, person- ally archived reports and papers. The contribution of each and all is truly valued. CHAPTER 16 AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

C O N T E N T S 16-1 Overview and Summary 16-2 Objectives of Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements 16-4 Types of Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements/Programs 16-7 Analytical Considerations 16-20 Traveler Response Summary 16-34 Response by Type of NMT Strategy 16-34 Sidewalks and Along-Street Walking 16-46 Street Crossings 16-54 Pedestrian Zones, Malls, and Skywalks 16-68 Bicycle Lanes and Routes 16-89 Shared Use, Off-Road Paths and Trails 16-106 Pedestrian/Bicycle Systems and Interconnections 16-126 Pedestrian/Bicycle Linkages with Transit 16-151 Point-of-Destination Facilities 16-159 Pedestrian/Bicycle Friendly Neighborhoods 16-181 NMT Policies and Programs 16-205 Walking/Bicycling Promotion and Information 16-227 Underlying Traveler Response Factors 16-228 Behavioral Paradigms 16-233 Environmental Factors 16-250 Trip Factors 16-270 User Factors 16-283 Other Factors and Factor Combinations 16-290 Choice of Neighborhood/Self-Selection 16-297 Related Information and Impacts 16-297 Extent of Walking and Bicycling 16-308 Characteristics of Walking and Cycling Overall 16-314 Facility Usage and User Characteristics 16-333 Travel Behavior Shifts 16-337 Time to Establish Facility Use 16-341 Safety Information and Comparisons 16-357 Public Health Issues and Relationships 16-386 Traffic, Energy, and Environmental Relationships 16-390 Economic and Equity Impacts 16-406 Additional Resources 16-410 Case Studies 16-410 Special Mini-Studies in Montgomery County, Maryland 16-418 Pedestrian Activity Effects of Neighborhood Site Design—Seattle

16-419 50 Years of Downtown NMT Facility Provisions—Minneapolis 16-425 Bicycle Lanes in the Downtown Area—Toronto, Canada 16-426 Anderson Road Bicycle Lanes—Davis, California 16-429 Six Urban, Suburban, and Semi-Rural Trails—Indiana Trails Study 16-434 Variations on Individualized Marketing in the Northwest United States 16-442 References 16-479 Photo Gallery 16-490 How to Order TCRP Report 95