LibGuides: Intersection Design to Accommodate ADA Curb Ramps: Bike and Pedestrian Facilities to Address Safety Issues

Bike and Pedestrian Facilities to Address Safety Issues

Pedestrian Tool, updated 2021
The Pedestrian Facility Selection Tool is designed to help Australian and New Zealand practitioners select the most appropriate type of pedestrian crossing based on walkability, safety and economic outcomes. In 2020 the economic values were updated, the expected crash reduction factors were revised, and the Australian Transport Assessment and Planning guidelines were implemented within the tool. In 2021 three of the New Zealand economic parameters were updated.

Safe and Accessible Pedestrian Facility Inventory Model (SAPFIM): Planning and Design, 2020.
Cevallos. Pedestrian facilities like sidewalks, curb ramps, and crosswalks are critical elements that play a vital role in the life of a community. Continuous and accessible pedestrian networks improve mobility and livability for all pedestrians and are particularly important for seniors and pedestrians with disabilities. Pedestrian facilities are instrumental in encouraging walkability, which can help improve the quality of life of our citizens and the livability of our communities. Therefore, it is critical that local agencies have access to detailed information of pedestrian facilities to be able to make intelligent decisions. A tool to keep track of pedestrian facilities can assist local agencies in prioritizing investments for pedestrian improvements: repairs, improvements, and new construction projects. To accomplish this, there is a need to develop a software tool that can facilitate this effort. The main objective of this project was to plan and design a web-based software application that local agencies can use for the collection, storage, querying, analysis, and reporting of pedestrian facilities like sidewalks along public roads. Criteria for determining the accessibility of pedestrian facilities were based on the literature review including the Guidelines for Accessible Public Rights of Way (PROWAG) and the ADA Standards for Transportation Facilities (ADASTF). This report presents the research tasks for the planning and design of the Safe and Accessible Pedestrian Facilities Inventory Model (SAPFIM). It includes a review of the literature, a section on pedestrian facilities, the SAPFIM design including the main data elements, and the next steps towards the development and deployment of the SAPFIM web-based application.
Pedestrian network analysis using a network consisting of formal pedestrian facilities: sidewalks and crosswalks, 2019
Zhang, Zhang. Central to every pedestrian network analysis is the mapping of the network. Many studies have used street networks (SNs) to analyze connectivity. Recent studies suggest that analyses based on informal pedestrian networks (e.g., park trails, greenways, or shortcuts) may provide a more robust network representation, however, no studies have examined whether switching to a network consisting of formal pedestrian facilities (FPFs) (e.g., sidewalks and crosswalks) would provide more effective representation of real pedestrian movement and perceptions. Does it yield different outcomes compared to an SN? When does an SN still remain a good proxy, and when should a FPF network (FPFN) be adopted? How worthwhile is it to switch to a FPFN? To address these questions, this paper examines the difference between SNs and FPFNs and how the differences affect the outcomes of network measures. Four U.S. neighborhoods were selected to represent different types of networks. Four classic connectivity measures and four new measures related to crossings were evaluated using both SNs and FPFNs. Comparisons were conducted and the following conclusions drawn: (i) using FPFNs yields greatly different outcomes from using SNs, (ii) an SN can broadly describe the morphological features of a network, especially for a gridiron pattern with narrow streets and small blocks full of sidewalks and crosswalks; however, an FPFN performs much better in describing features which are invisible when using SNs; and (iii) using FPFNs can provide opportunities to develop new measures of performance, such as safety or convenience.

Non-motorised level of service: Addressing challenges in pedestrian and bicycle level of service, 2013.
Asadi-Shekari, Moeinadini, Zaly Shah. Motorised vehicle conditions have been evaluated by many researchers. In contrast, there are very limited studies on vulnerable and non-motorised users, such as cyclists and pedestrians, specifically children, the elderly and the disabled. Thus, this paper reviews prominent studies on street evaluations to identify effective indicators for non-motorised trips. The street condition for these trips is measured by the bicycle level of service (BLOS) and the pedestrian level of service (PLOS). In previous studies, different methods have been introduced for PLOS and BLOS. However, these methods have several major shortcomings. First, pedestrians and cyclists are assumed to be users who can share street facilities with motorised vehicles and thus are considered equivalent to cars. Second, the majority of these methods are complicated and time-consuming, and it is difficult to connect them to a design process. Furthermore, these methods support only a limited number of walking and cycling facilities; therefore, they may not be valid for a wide range of pedestrians and cyclists with a diverse variety of abilities and ages. This study discusses the challenges in the BLOS and PLOS research and attempts to introduce new objectives for further studies in this field to eliminate the aforementioned shortcomings. Would need to be requested.

Eugene pedestrian and bicycle facility design toolkit, 2008
Coates, Peterson, et al. This design toolkit draws on national, state and local design and planning documents to integrate these resources into one convenient, easy to use facility design guide. Specifically, it seeks to: (1) collect and summarize the existing standards into one
document; (2) offer guidelines for determining what type of design is appropriate for a given situation; and (3) present information about innovative designs that may be in use in some cities, but lack standardization in current design guides
PEDSAFE: Pedestrian safety guide and countermeasure selection system, 2004
Harkey, Zegeer. This report was produced under the FHWA contract "Bicycle and Pedestrian Technical Information Center," directed by John Fegan (AOTR). The task manager was Tamara Redmon (FHWA). The technical manager was Leverson Boodlal. Pedestrian Safety Consultant of KLS Engineering. Report layout and graphics support provided by Lisa Jusino of LEJ Graphics; case study solicitation and support provided by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals; web/CD application programming provided by Dwayne Tharpe of HSRC; and web/CD application design support provided by Zoe Gillenwater of HSRC.
Pedestrian facilities users guide: providing safety and mobility, 2002.
Zegeer. The purpose of this guide is to provide useful information on how to identify the safety and mobility needs of pedestrians within roadway rights-of-way.
Pedestrian and bicycle planning: a guide to best practices, 2000.
Litman. This guide covers all aspects of pedestrian and bicycle planning. It is intended for policy makers, planners and advocates who want the best current information on ways to make their communities better places for walking and cycling. It provides basic information on various planning and design concepts, and offers extensive references to help implement them. It describes general nonmotorized planning practices, how to measure and predict nonmotorized travel, how to evaluate and prioritize projects, and how to implement various programs that support nonmotorized transportation. It covers planning for paths, sidewalks, bikelanes, street improvements, road and path maintenance, road safety, personal security, universal access (including features to accommodate people with disabilities), nonmotorized traffic law enforcement, education and encouragement programs, and integration with a community’s strategic plans and various other programs. There are also appendices that provide more detailed
information on planning, design and evaluation.
Bicycle and pedestrian level-of-service performance measures and standards for congestion management systems, 1996.
Dixon. The Gainesville Mobility Plan Prototype was developed as the congestion management system plan for Gainesville, Florida, and incorporated level-of-service (LOS) performance measures for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The LOS evaluations describe the degree of bicycle and pedestrian accommodation in a transportation corridor. The bicycle LOS measures are designated basic facility provided, conflicts, speed differential, motor vehicle LOS, maintenance, and provision of transportation demand management programs or intermodal links. Pedestrian LOS criteria are similar and incorporate specific pedestrian features. The Gainesville bicycle and pedestrian LOS performance measures use a point scale resulting in an LOS rating system of A through F. The scoring system was developed with sensitivity to characteristics that may be mutually exclusive or inclusive to determine all possible combinations of points. The methodology hypothesizes that there is a critical mass of variables that must be present to attract nonmotorized trips. The methodology is applicable for corridor evaluations on arterial and collector roadways in urban or suburban areas. The criteria include measures of programmatic and off-street projects such as rail-trails, bicycle parking, bikes-on-transit, employer-based programs, and so forth, in addition to traditional on-street facility improvements. By measuring such improvements recommendations for more diverse projects can be supported. This analysis was applied to several roadways with promising results that generally corresponded to user perceptions of the facilities. LOS evaluation was used as a tool of the congestion management system to develop project recommendations and priorities, but it may also be useful in concurrency and long-range transportation planning.