1 / 71

Ryan Martinson, P.Eng. @ryan_martinson November 5, 2012

Bicycle Level of Service and Usage : A Before-and-After study of 10 Street NW. Ryan Martinson, P.Eng. @ryan_martinson November 5, 2012. Bicycle Level of Service and Usage: A Before-and-After study of 10 Street NW. Some history.

gent
Download Presentation

Ryan Martinson, P.Eng. @ryan_martinson November 5, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Bicycle Level of Service and Usage:A Before-and-After study of 10 Street NW Ryan Martinson, P.Eng. @ryan_martinson November 5, 2012

  2. Bicycle Level of Service and Usage:A Before-and-After study of 10 Street NW

  3. Some history • Major connection into the Downtown from the north across the Bow River • Southern Alberta Institute of Technology and Alberta College of Art and Design located on the street • Was identified to have a bike lane in 2001 with implementation plan • Implementation of 10 Street bike lane followed repaving in 2011 • First bike box in Calgary • Public and Politicians were surprised • City of Calgary did have intersection turning movement counts for intersections located along the route from before and after the bike lanes were implemented • Enter: My study…

  4. Study Location

  5. 2001 Implementation Plan

  6. Before

  7. Categories of Calgary Cyclists

  8. After

  9. Study Objective The design of a facility has been shown to be an influence on whether people will walk or cycle. My study wanted to look at the following: • Is it true: If you build it, they will come. • Use the Multi-Modal Level of Service from HCM 2010 to see what affect the bike lanes had on bike Level of Service. • Using the MMLOS score in conjunction with usage data, a relationship between facility LOS and usage will be sought.

  10. Objective 1 If you build it, will they come?

  11. Usage

  12. Count and Segment Locations 2 1 3 4 5 4

  13. Usage Information • 6 hour counts were provided by City of Calgary’s Transportation Data Group • Before bike lanes were implemented • 10 St NW & 20 Ave NW - Thursday, August 26 2010 • 16 Ave NW & 10 St NW - Friday, May 22, 2009 • 10 St NW & 5 Ave NW - Friday, September 3, 2010 • After bike lanes were implemented • 10 St NW & 20 Ave NW - Tuesday, October 18, 2011 • 10 St NW & 13 Ave NW - Tuesday, October 18, 2011 • 10 St NW & 5 Ave NW - Tuesday, October 18, 2011 • Adjustments made to account for: • Day-of-the-Week • Month-of-the-Year • Yearly

  14. Volume Adjustments

  15. Before and After Volumes

  16. Objective 2 Use the Multi-Modal Level of Service from HCM 2010 to see what Effect adding bike lanes on 10 Street has on bike Level of Service.

  17. Bicycle Multi-Modal Level of Service

  18. Multi-Modal Level of Service • Methodology includes an array of performance measures that more fully describes segment operation for multiple travel modes • Measures serve as clues in identifying the source of problems and provide insight into the development of effective improvement strategies

  19. Link, Intersection Segment Facility General Terminology • A link and its boundary intersections are referred to as a segment. An urban street facility is a length of roadway that is composed of contiguous urban street segments and is typically functionally classified as an urban arterial or collector street. • Aggregation of segment performance measures to obtain an estimate of facility performance

  20. Bicycle LOS Methodology • 8-step process • Step 1: Bicycle Running Speed • Step 2: Bicycle Delay at Intersection • Step 3: Bicycle Delay at Intersection • Step 4: Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection • Step 5: Bicycle LOS Score for Link • Step 6: Link LOS • Step 7: Bicycle LOS Score for Segment • Step 8: Segment LOS • No LOS A or B in formula provided in HCM2010 • Data intensive • Time consuming analysis

  21. Count and Segment Locations 1 2 3 4 5

  22. Bicycle Level of Service

  23. Count and Segment Locations 2 2 1 3 4 5

  24. Bicycle Level of Service

  25. Count and Segment Locations 2 1 3 3 4 5

  26. Bicycle Level of Service

  27. Count and Segment Locations 2 1 3 4 4 5

  28. Bicycle Level of Service

  29. Count and Segment Locations 2 1 3 4 5 5

  30. Bicycle Level of Service

  31. Objective 3 Using the MMLOS score in conjunction with usage data, a relationship between facility LOS and usage will be sought.

  32. Before and After Volumes

  33. Bicycle MMLOS Summary

  34. LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E Observed Usage and Segment Bicycle LOS

  35. Conclusions • After bike lane implementation, bike usage increased by 39%, on average. • But, are they new users? • Bicycle MMLOS before and after bike lane • Bicycle MMLOS score has some explaining power with respect to increase in usage

  36. Limitations to Methodology • Count data available at different locations, resulting in assumptions being made in volumes and not as robust model • Volume adjustments based on automobile volumes applied to all modes

  37. Future Research • Analysis completed using counts completed at same intersections year-to-year • Adjustments to pedestrian and cycling usage needs to be further explored • Consider Auto, Transit, and Pedestrian LOS along the corridor • Cost-Benefit analysis of bike lane(include health benefits) • Future data collection include various users (gender, age, ability, etc.) • Extend evaluation to different bicycle facilities

  38. Ryan Martinson, P.Eng. November 5, 2012

  39. Take a stroll with a goal WalkTalk:Martindale

  40. Community Attachment • The top three drivers of community attachment, which have been shown to be consistent place to place, are: • Social Offerings - Places for people to meet each other and the feeling that people in the community care about each other • Openness - How welcoming the community is to different types of people, including families with young children, minorities, and talented college graduates • Aesthetics - The physical beauty of he community including the availability of parks and green spaces

  41. Objectives of the WalkTalk • Determine what influences an individual’s behaviour with respect to walking and active transportation; • Provide feedback to the researchers and, possibly, the municipality on how walkability can be improved in an area; • Engage and educate local residents in civic affairs, including walkability and transportation; and • Increase the number of connections people have within their community, ultimately affecting the social capital of the area.

  42. Methodology • What is Martindale? << SETS THE IDENTITY OF THE COMMUNITY, WHO ARE WE? • What is unique about your community? History? Geography? Industry? Institutions? Landmarks? Culture? • What is a walkable community? << SETS THE GOAL • Think of a walkable place that you enjoy, what does it have? What are all the elements? • What walking trips do you do? << SETS THE REALITY • How often? Where to? With who? What time? What is the purpose? • What is stopping you from going more? << SETS THE BARRIERS • What is good about your current walking trips? << BUILDS ON THE POSITIVES • What can we do to break down the barriers? << SETS THE SOLUTIONS • Place, Design, and Program based [Social Offerings (Infrastructure & Civility), Aesthetics, Openness]

  43. What is Walkability and Why is it Important?

More Related