Opportunity to provide input on prioritization for signing and marking bicycle lanes in Lee County

Here's another great opportunity to provide input to the Lee DOT staff about how to prioritize signing and marking of bicycle lanes. Please consider providing your input to Andy Getch by March 1st. Darla

From: Getch, Andrew [mailto:GETCHAJ@leegov.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 4:07 PM
To: Getch, Andrew
Cc: Gilbertson, Scott; Tisch, Michael; Loveland, David; Campbell, Harry; Jansen, Stephen
Subject: On-road bicycle facility prioritization method input
You are being sent this e-mail since you have indicated interest in bicycle facilities in Lee County.

The county Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) has previously developed a set of point scoring criteria to compare prospective projects. Points are awarded based on measurable criteria so that projects may be compared objectively. The most recent point scoring criteria was approved by BPAC in May 2003 (2003 BPAC scoring) and at that time primarily focused on pedestrian related projects. Areas of measurement are in latent demand, roadway (and crash) data, network completion and citizen support.

LCDOT staff has had discussions with BPAC on signing and marking bicycle lanes and will be looking for specific BPAC facility prioritization recommendations for on-road facilities, including signing & marking bicycle lanes, at the March BPAC meeting. LCDOT staff recommends use of a point scoring system to select specific projects and is looking for input from the bicyclist community on the proposed scoring method. The following sketch planning scoring method is suggested primarily based on information from (readily available) data identified in a Mode Shift Model and an Induced Recreational Bicycle Travel Model in the "FDOT Conserve By Bicycle Study, Phase II". The study can be found at this
link:
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/ped_bike_reports.shtm

The following is LCDOT staff suggestion for a set of scoring criteria.
It should be noted that, at their option, BPAC may or may not use scoring criteria in their recommendation of facility prioritizations to the Board of County Commissioners:

LATENT DEMAND

Future Land Use Map area (Total 3 points) If the proposed bicycle facility is adjacent to an area identified in the Lee Plan Future Land Use Map as:
Urban (and is mostly built-out) = 3 points Urban (and is partly built-out) = 2 points Suburban = 1 points Non-Urban = 0 points
NOTE: The Mode Shift Model identifies nearby population and employment as a factor. The Induced Recreational Bicycle Travel Model uses population as a factor. Measurement of actual or future population & employment is very data intensive, however, it is suggested that the Future Land Use Map is an indicator that Urban Areas will have the highest population & employment density, Suburban less & Non-Urban the least population & employment.

Points of Interest (Total 2 points)
The Induced Recreational Bicycle Travel Model identifies a regional park, beach, regional tourist attraction, college/university or multi-use trail & greenway as a point of interest. LCDOT staff suggests possible scoring as:
Along the facility = 2 points
Within one (1) mile = 1 point

NOTE: The 2003 BPAC scoring also includes criteria/points for adjacency to schools, parks, libraries & post offices. Parks are included in regional attractions. It is suggested that schools, libraries & post offices generally are located according to population density so the planned urbanization of an area would generally reflect the location of the facilities without requiring data collection.

ROADWAY DATA

Network Friendliness (Total 5 points)
This criteria is not in the 2003 BPAC criteria but is identified in the Conserve By Bicycle Study Mode Shift Model Based on the relative density of major and through roadways intersections. For purposes of this measurement a through roadway is considered a publicly accessible street identified on county maps that connects two major roadways. The density of intersections is based on one (1) road mile of distance from the bicycle facility under consideration. Twenty intersections per square mile represents a "grid" with approximately 1/4 mile spacing. The number of intersections could be divided by four to fit the point range.

Bicycle LOS (BLOS) (Total 5 points)
This criteria is not in the 2003 BPAC criteria but is identified in both the Mode Shift Model and Induced Recreational Bicycle Travel Model. The calculation uses FDOT provided software also used to calculate roadway level of service (LOS). Input factors are based on roadway data. Roadway data are the peak hour traffic volume, number of lanes, posted speed, width of outside lane, bike pavement condition and presence of a paved shoulder or bike lane. The letter grad could be used to reflect, LOS A =
5 points, LOS B = 4 points, LOS C = 3 points, LOS D = 2 points, LOS E =
1 point, LOS F = 0 points. However, the software provide a numeric measure to one hundredth of a point, with the lower the number, the better the LOS. Staff also evaluated using the numeric measure subtracted from six (6) with a maximum number of 5 points.

NOTE: The 2003 BPAC scoring also includes criteria/points for bicycle & pedestrian crashes, automobile crash rate, traffic volume and traffic speed. Traffic volume & speed are in the BLOS data inputs. It is interesting that a higher traffic volume and speed in the BLOS criteria results in a lower BLOS, while the 2003 BPAC criteria awards more points for a facility with higher traffic volumes and a higher posted speed.

NETWORK COMPLETION

Network Extension (Total 5 points)
Staff evaluated the measured number of existing on-road bicycle facility connections per mile with a maximum of five.

Length of Bicycle Facility (Total 5 points) Staff evaluated the length of analyzed bicycle facility, plus any existing through extensions in miles with a maximum of five.

Cost Effectiveness
This criteria is in the 2003 BPAC criteria based on cost estimates.
Relative cost can be determined based on the level of work to be done.
An existing Undesignated Bike Lane with all existing bicycle lane "keyholes" will have the lowest cost. The cost per mile increases relative to an existing paved shoulder with turn lanes per mile or lane lines requiring restriping. Required pavement addition is the most
costly:
Undesignated Bike Lane with all keyholes = 5 points Full Paved Shoulder = 5 points minus the average number of restriped turn lanes per 1/2 mile Restripe lanes to convert wide outside lane to 11 foot lanes + 4 foot bike lane = 2 points Add less than 1 foot width (average) paved shoulder = 1 points

NOTE: The 2003 BPAC scoring also includes roadway functional classification with the intent to focus retrofit facilities on arterial and major collectors. However, it is not recommended to exclude the possibility of bicycle facilities such as bike routes, bicycle boulevards, shared lanes, signed and marked bicycle lanes or similar facilities that may be on local streets and minor collectors.

CITIZEN SUPPORT
While factoring heavily in the 2003 BPAC criteria, points for citizen support are not part of the Mode Shift Model Induced Recreational Bicycle Travel Model and are not recommended at this time.


OTHER FACTORS NOT IN THE 2003 BPAC SCORING All of the Induced Recreational Bicycle Travel Model criteria are included. The remaining criteria in the Mode Shift Model are Motor Vehicle LOS, Transit LOS, median household income and a pedestrian connectivity factor. Motor Vehicle LOS and Transit LOS could also calculated with the same FDOT provided software as BLOS. Pedestrian connectivity measures network friendliness for the walking mode. Median household income data may not be available to the extent used in the Mode Shift Model.

Please feel free to forward this to other interested cyclists. Any
suggestions comment or input is welcome. Please provide comments or
input to me by Monday March 1 so that they can be considered in the
LCDOT staff analysis included in the March 17, 2010 BPAC meeting agenda.
The meeting will occur at 3 p.m. at the address below. Attendance at the
meeting by any members of the public is welcome and I hope to see you
there.


Andy Getch, P.E.
Engineering Manager I
Lee County Department of Transportation
3rd floor
1500 Monroe Street
Fort Myers, Florida 33901
direct line (239) 533-8510
LCDOT department line (239) 533-8580
FAX (239) 485-8520
getchaj@leegov.com