• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
4-1
CHAPTER 4 : BICYCLE FACILITY NETWORK |BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN |DRAFT|JAN 2009
Overview 
The City o Raleigh’s Bicycle Facility Network represents a comprehensiveset o existing and proposed bicycle transportation acilities. The networkincludes shared roads, paved shoulders, bicycle lanes, side paths andgreenways. In total, there are approximately 435 miles o recommendedbicycle acilities, all o which are shown on pages 4-15 to 4-19.The ollowing sections o this chapter include 1) how the network wasdesigned; 2) brie descriptions o the types o acilities that make up thenetwork; and, 3) network maps.
 MethOdOlOgy fOr NetwOrk desigN
The bicycle acility network was designed by rst assembling all existingbicycle-related recommendations and inormation rom current plans andstudies (as outlined in Chapters 2 and 3, and in Appendices E, F, and G).The assembled inormation was then presented to the public, City sta, theSteering Committee, and various project stakeholders. Together, the inputrom these groups helped to inorm the overall network design; throughwriting and drawing on input maps, lling-out comment orms, directdialogue, and e-mailed comments. These and other key inputs are shown inthe diagram below:
CHAPTER 4 OUTLINE:
OverviewMethodology or Network DesignRecommended Facility TypesBicycle Stations and ParkingRaleigh’s Signed Bicycle RoutesRegional ConnectionsRecommended Bicycle Facility Network Maps
CHAPTER 4: BICYCLE FACILITY NETWORK
 
Existing Facilitiesand CurrentRecommendationsOnline Survey/Comment FormsAnalysisof CurrentConditionsStaff andCommittee Work-SessionsTripAttractors/DestinationsPublic Workshops/ Input MapsConnectivity/Gap AnalysisBicycleFacilityNetwork
This diagram illustrates themany inputs and levels o analysis used to design theBicycle Facility Network.
 
4-2
 
| CHAPTER 4: BICYCLE FACILITY NETWORKJAN 2009|DRAFT| THE CITY OF RALEIGH | NORTH CAROLINA
Key Factors for Network Design
•
Online Survey/Comment Forms
-
Locations most in need o improvements or bicyclists (intersections and high speed/highvolume roadways) were identied by over 700 people through theonline survey and were discussed during public meetings (see Chapter2 and Appendix A: Public Input Summary or more inormation).•
Existing Facilities and Current Recommendations
- Locations o existingand planned acilities were veried both in the eld and by City o Raleigh Transportation sta and Steering Committee members.Current recommendations were also taken into consideration, suchas matching recommendations or Raleigh’s Green Streets (see theComprehensive Plan Update) and the uture plans HillsboroughStreet.•
Connectivity/Gap Analysis
- Gaps in existing acilities or decienciesin acilities were highlighted by participants in public workshops andanalyzed by project consultants.•
Trip Attractors
/
Destinations
- Places which are likely to attractbicyclists were identied and ranked through the online survey andduring meetings with the public and project committees (see Map2.4 Trip Attractors). The drat network was analyzed to ensure thatit served local and regional trip attractors.•
 Sta and Committee Work-Sessions
- City sta met with theSteering Committee and consultants several times throughout theplanning process to discuss progress on the development o theplan, the overall bicycle acility network, and to oer critical inputto its design.
• Public Workshops / Input Maps-
Participants at two public open-house Bicycle Plan workshops (with over 200 people in attendance),a Southeast Raleigh Assembly meeting, a Downtown RaleighAlliance meeting, and a meeting or Raleigh Bike Plan Volunteers,provided suggestions, comments, and concerns about Raleigh’scurrent conditions or bicyclists and potential improvements. Mostinput rom these meetings was recorded through public input maps(see Appendix A Public Input Summary or more inormation)•
Analysis o Current Conditions
- Field analysis by project consultantsand project volunteers was also used to assess bicycling conditionson roads and intersections throughout Raleigh. Further analysiso current conditions was conducted through research and datacollection rom secondary sources (see Chapter 2 or moreinormation).
 
4-3
CHAPTER 4 : BICYCLE FACILITY NETWORK |BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN |DRAFT|JAN 2009
 recOMMeNded facility types
A variety o bicycle acilities are recommended due to 1) the range o skill and comort levels involved in bicycling,and 2) the range o conditions or bicycling on dierent roadway environments. These recommendations are at aplanning level only and will require urther analysis beore implementation.Raleigh’s bicycle route network is made up seven core types o bicycle acilities. Descriptions and standards oreach type are described in
Chapter 4: Bicycle Facility Standards
. The images and descriptions below are providedor a quick reerence when viewing the
Bicycle Facility Network Maps
(pages 4-15 through 4-19).A bicycle lane is a portion o the roadway that hasbeen designated by striping, signing, and pavementmarkings or the preerential and exclusive use o bicyclists. Bicycle lanes are always located on bothsides o the road (except one way streets), and carrybicyclists in the same direction as adjacent motorvehicle trac. The minimum width or a bicycle laneis our eet; ve- and six-oot bike lanes are typical orcollector and arterial roads.
Bicycle Lane
 See pages 7-12 to 7-16 or details.
It is recommended that bicycle shared lane markings(or ‘sharrows’) be approached incrementally as anew acility treatment. Shared lane markings areused on roadways where dedicated bicycle lanes aredesirable but are not possible due to physical or otherconstraints. Placed in a linear pattern along a corridor(typically every 100-250 eet), shared lane markingsmake motorists more aware o the potential presenceo cyclists; direct cyclists to ride in the proper direction;and remind cyclists to ride urther rom parked carsto avoid ‘dooring’ collisions.
 Shared Lane Marking (“Sharrow”)
 See page 7-11 or details
.
Wide Outside Lanes
 See page 7-8 and 7-10 or details
.A wide outside lane reers to the through lane closestto the curb and gutter o a roadway. The AmericanAssociation o State Highway and TransportationOcials (AASHTO) standard lane width toaccommodate both motorists and bicyclists is 14’.This acility type allows motorists to more saely passslower moving bicyclists without changing lanes.Wide outside lanes are intended or bicyclists withtrac-handling skills.
Note:
Bicycle lanes are the preerred type o on-road bicycle acility as determined by the Bicycle Plan SteeringCommittee and supported by the public input into this process. It was judged that bicycle lanes create clearlydesignated separated spaces that would encourage more bicycling among all user groups.
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...