A Bikesharing Blueprint for the Richmond Region

8/12/2019 A Bikesharing Blueprint for the Richmond Region

1/24

A Bike Sharing Blueprint for theRichmond Region

Sandra CamargoJonathan HammondBrendan McHugh

April 18, 2011


2/24

Introduction

Faced with the pressures of rising resource prices and the need to maintain a

stable and even growing economy, the greater Richmond region must adapt to the

requirements of a more sustainable future, particularly concerning active transportation.

As it stands now, while Richmond has made some strides in providing good transit within

its inner core, there are numerous hurdles to its transportation network and priorities

pertaining to equity, regional cooperation, and financial and ecological durability.

Barring unexpected breakthroughs in regional governance, this proposal seeks to use

tools currently at Richmonds disposal to provide a variety of affordable near-term public

and private solutions related to increasing the number of pedestrians and cyclists in

Richmond's core, by improving their access to safe and reliable means to transport

themselves through inner-city neighborhoods, namely bikesharing and the adoption of a

complete streets policy.

Prior to the most recent trend in planning, a majority of planning was not

pedestrian or bike oriented. Todays planning discussions include accommodations for

bikers and pedestrians through the implementation of complete streets. According to the

National Complete Streets Coalition, Instituting a complete streets policy ensures that

transportation planners and engineers consistently design and operate the entire roadway

with all users in mind - including bicyclists, public transportation vehicles and riders, and

pedestrians of all ages and abilities (14). Many people have criticized car oriented

planning and they wish to move towards sustainable modes of transportation, bike

sharing being one mode. A bike sharing program discussion is incomplete without

mention of the economic feasibility and economic benefit of the program.


3/24

Bike sharing is defined by Paul DeMaio of MetroBike LLC in Washington DC

as;"short term bicycle rental available at unattended stations". These rental stations are

available 24 hours a day in technologically secure stations. The stations are usually

located in larger cities where the stations are strategically placed throughout the city.

This short distance form of transportation can be positive for individuals as well as the

environment.

Bike sharing can be funded through a public-private partnership, (such as that of

Montreal, where modern bikesharing was first introduced) normally with an outdoor

advertiser such as JCDecaux. Many cities have operated for a publicly-funded system,

such as Capital Bikeshare, the jointly-operated system of Arlington County and the

District of Columbia. Regardless of its funding mechanism, many of these systems are

cheap to install and tend to break even or maintain a modest funding surplus.

Review of Literature and Relevant Documents

Various resources were used to understand the state of bicycling and bike

infrastructure in Richmond and throughout the world. The main documents that were

looked at were The VCU state of Cycling report and the Mayors Pedestrian, Bicycling,

and Trails planning commission report. These documents will be revisited in data

analysis. Other resources, such as journal articles and online news posts were used to

understand past planning designs, the emergence of bike sharing programs and their

successes or failures.

Recently, many cities have been implementing complete streets guidelines as a

means for improving their general environment. To understand the current need for bike

paths, Robertson, A. Kent explains the planning trends of the past. His article accepts that

pedestrians have been absent from planning designs for some time. While he never

mentions cyclists, it is safe to assume that cyclists are affected in a similar way. Walking

(as well as cycling) has become increasingly unattractive; especially in suburban areas

that require one to travel longer distances on a road designed for motor vehicles. He

argues that this type of planning has created a hostile, unwelcoming environment for


4/24

pedestrians (and cyclists). He then suggests ideas on how to remedy the situation; the

suggestions coincide with complete street guidelines.

The article, Bill tackles passing space around bicycles, by Katherine Carlos of

the Times- Richmond Times-Dispatch shows how the existing roads in Richmond, which

lack bike infrastructure, cause conflict between bikers and drivers. Neither of them feels

respected by one another. In addition, many blogs and commentator sites reflect the same

attitudes. One commentator in particular, understands the conditions for bicyclists in

Richmond and is working to inform the public. He writes, Im convinced by the number

of hits and comments I get every time I write about biking in Richmond, as well as by the

number of cyclists on the street, that we could actually change Richmond if we tried; we

need to institute some kind of safe, city-wide biking networkWhos with me? I

personally would like to see bike roads He goes on to explain the different forms of bike

lanes that exist throughout the world. Among them are, separated bike lanes, which are

lanes separated by some kind of barrier i.e. bushes or concrete. In his opinion, these lanes

are superior to painted lanes because they offer cyclists greater safety. His suggestions

were considered and will be mentioned in recommendations further in this paper. There

are two main documents that offered us with insight into current local initiatives and

provided us with useful data: The VCU state of Cycling report and the Mayors

Pedestrian, Bicycling, and Trails planning commission report. These documents will be

revisited in data analysis.

Throughout the country, localities have recognized the need for improved

infrastructure. Washington DC has recently joined the group and has implemented

guidelines roughly paralleling FABB/WABA's complete-streets recommendations for the

entire District of Columbia. It is to be expected that, in the future, the District will seek to

remodel its streets to consider the mutual needs of pedestrians, motorists, cyclists and

transit vehicles, either as part of regular maintenance or in an active campaign to improvevarious arterials.

Other newspaper and online articles discuss the emergence of bike sharing

programs. An article discussed the new bike sharing program in the University of

Richmond. The program has not been as successful as expected. The article prompted a


5/24

site visit to the school. The findings can be found in appendix C. It was determined that

the failure is due to the poor implementation of the program. There are many quirks

that need to be fixed.

The most immediate model for our bike-sharing proposal is Capital Bikeshare, theonly other bikesharing service of its size currently existing in Virginia. CaBi, as it is

sometimes abbreviated, is a collaboration between Arlington County, the District of

Columbia, and other private, corporate, and quasi-governmental contributors and

contractors. The most notable private contributor has been the Crystal City Business

Improvement District, underwritten by several major neighborhood employers and

landholders (i.e. Boeing and Vornado). Its chief contracting party is Alta, a company

related to Bixi, the Quebec-based firm producing the bicycles and stations on which CaBi

is based, which specializes in the maintenance of Bixi bikes and operating the system

they constitute. Although these bicycles primarily consist of an extremely durable

unibody constructionDan Malouff, transit and development writer and Arlington

County planner, calls them bombproof - Alta contractors regularly dispatch

maintenance issues ranging from imbalanced tires to station vandalism.

Capital Bikeshare was not the first bikesharing service to arrive in the Washington

region. Smartbike DC was a pilot project implemented in 2008; under the guise of the

District Department of Transportation, Clear Channel (the project's sponsor) installed 120

bikes at 10 stations. While the bicycles were less expensive than Bixi's, the SmartBike

system was not expanded in part due to Clear Channel's lack of interest in promoting it

the system was effectively the ancillary aim of a much larger outdoor advertising contract

and in part due to the prohibitive expense and complexity of SmartBike stations.

Anchored to the ground by cast concrete, the stations required significant excavation,

exacerbated by the District's policy requiring underground utilities downtown; several

streets were torn up for weeks for Pepco, the local electrical utility, to connect thestations.

With some initial skepticism, Arlington County's plan to install a Bixi-based

bikesharing service enabled the District to unwrangle the complexity of expanding its

bikeshare infrastructure and couple with the County in creating a public-private


6/24

intergovernmental entity for the provision of a modular and potentially regionwide

system across jurisdictions. Total implementation and operating costs for what is now a

118-station system with over 1100 bicycles has approximated $7.3 million for the first

year, with $6 million covered by a federal USDOT grant and $835,000 covered by a grant

from the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation. Additional revenues

from advertising in order to reduce or eliminate the operating subsidy to the system are

under discussion. (Flexible terms of membership and deals with social networks have

recently increased the number of members in the system, which also increases revenue.

The system has a total of over 8800 annual members.) [fee details founds in appendix D]

Although, again, Bixi's very hardy bicycles cost roughly $4000 per unit, the

flexibility of station siting and deployment has been the system's biggest advantage,

allowing Capital Bikeshare to deploy stations very quickly and move them according to

public needs. The solar-powered, modular stations are weighted down by their own

gravity and wirelessly operated, obviating the need for excavation and electrical

connections from the complicated downtown grid.

The success, so far, of Capital Bikesharerelative, at least, to the ill-used and

limited-range SmartBike DC programhas been aided by the investment of both

Arlington County planners and the District of Columbia Department of Transportation in

a complete-streets policy that increases the safety and visibility of bicycling throughout

those localities, even on small streets, despite the recalcitrance of the National Park

Service to provide or allot for bicycle infrastructure (primarily on account of the NPS'

reliance on monopolistic vendor contracts that prevent operators from sharing

infrastructure or routes with, say, Tourmobile). This has resulted in the shutting-out of a

large source of revenue from those tourists most likely to use bicycles to access sites such

as these. However, the adoption of cycle tracks on 15thStreet and Pennsylvania Avenue as

well as bike lanes and sharrows on most of Arlington and Washington's arterial streets hasincreased both the visibility of cyclists and the safety in isolation that can be provided for

them, despite issues of encroachment onto federal lands.


7/24

LEFT: Bicycle infrastructure on Pennsylvania Avenue NW. RIGHT: Bike lanes and sharrows on 15th

Street NW.

Neighboring jurisdictions, particularly the town of Silver Spring and City

of Alexandria, are considering buying into the Capital Bikeshare system. While Silver

Spring is a densifying suburban

Sites containing information about other bike sharing programs were visited. The

article, thanks for sharing: communal bikes may be coming to a city near you discusses

bike sharing programs worldwide and the health benefits that come with it. He writes,

Bob Burns, the Trek executive who runs B-Cycle, says the interest in bike-sharing from

cities around the world is so hot that he hasn't spent more than five days in a row at home

in the last year. Ultimately, as it cuts pollution, relieves traffic, and makes you healthier,

bike sharing turns more people into cyclists," he says. Paris has already proved that, with

a 17-percent increase in the number of personal bikes used for commuting. Another


8/24

article in a newspaper based in London discusses health benefits of cycling to work,

Cycle to Work is a tax incentive aimed at encouraging employees to, er, cycle to work,

thereby reducing air pollution and improving their healthEmployers benefit from fitter,

more punctual, more wide-awake staff. Employees benefit from better health and better

bikes because their money goes further.

The literature suggests that, when implemented properly, bike sharing programs

can be extremely successful and have many benefits.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data was collected from The VCU state of Cycling report and the Mayors

Pedestrian, Bicycling, and Trails planning commission report. The data includes trends

and attitudes towards biking and bike infrastructure. Both of these documents comment

on the poor bike and pedestrian infrastructure

The Administration of Mayor Dwight C. Jones is currently working hard to

improve the quality of life for Richmond residents by following the Mayors triple

bottom line goals of sustainability. One area that the administration is focusing on is

transportation efficiency projects that can elevate energy and environmental awareness in

hopes of providing the opportunity to positively transform transit decisions for the long

term. The Mayors Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Planning Commission was created to

carry out these goals. To illustrate what plans need to be made for Richmond to become

more sustainable, the committee created the The Mayors Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails

Planning Commission Report.

The commission conducted a survey in 2010. While the survey is not statistically

valid and does not represent the entire city population, it does offer insight into trends as

to what is important to those who responded. When asked, How important is it to you

that Richmond is a bikeable/walkable city? Over 97 percent of respondents answered,

very important or important (37). When asked to describe the majority use of their bike

riding, only 36 percent said that they used it for running errands, commuting, etc. In


9/24


10/24

percent live three to five miles from campus, the remaining 33 percent (232) live more

than five miles from their home campus Given this information, one recommendation

suggested by the report is that all bycicling initiatves should be done within 5 miles

because, Five-miles is the established standard of a bycycle shed i.e. the distance most

people perceieve as an acceptable distance for bicycle tranportation (10)

As you can see in the graph below the more bike lanes options is at the top for

increasing ridership. This is conducive with the commission report survey.

Stakeholder Interviews

Interviews were conducted with the VCU Director of Sustainability, Co-Chairman of the Mayors Bike, Pedestrian and Trails Commission, andThese

individuals were asked, Has a bike sharing program been considered?; What would be

the cost of such a program?; how feasibleand realistic is such a program? Further

probing was needed in some instances. Additional interviews were conducted with

officials in the DC metropolitan area regarding the actions taken there and their attitudes

towards complete streets. Details of these interviews can be found in Appendix.

Jacek Ghosh, VCU's Director of Sustainability, is currently working to sponsor

and create an inter-campus bike sharing program in hopes of developing a path toward

active transportation for the entire city of Richmond. The VCU Sustainability Committee

has many great plans to help get the plan started. Some of the plans are concrete and

others are still in development.


11/24

Three major turnkey bikeshare vendors currently exist: Bixi, the largest in North

America; Bcycle, which has contracted with smaller bikeshare services such as

Chicago's; and SoBi. Bixi and its contractors, such as Alta Bicycle, have installed

successful systems in Montreal, Toronto, Minneapolis, Washington, D.C., and other

North American cities at an average cost of rougly $40,000 per station, or $1200 per

bicycle. Bcycle offers similarly-priced, scalable systems to institutions as well as mid-

sized and large cities such as Denver, Chicago, and Louisville, Ky. SoBi's proposal is

novel in that its startup costs are closer to $500 per bicycle, with users relying on GPS to

locate their bikes.

The three vendors all have some of the same technology but each has unique

advantages. Bixi has a very durable bike that was built for every user, whereas Bcycles

bikes were adapted from an existing bike which might be harded to ride for some people.

Sobi has more than one type of bike but is slightly more advanced technologically and is

cheaper.

All of the systems are solar powered and weatherproof and include GPS on their

bike systems which helps keep them vandal proof. They are all connected through a

database which can be reached through the internet or smart phone. This system allows

the user to locate available bikes and reserve bikes all on a digital map. The user then

can purchase use of the bike with a credit card over the internet. The user just types in a

code or recieves a card which gives them access to the bikes.

This system is also very beneficial for the implementors of the bike sharing

program. It is able to insure that the bikes are safe through the use of the credit card

system and can be set up to locate broken bicycles in the area as well. It also helps keep

track of the overall system to know which bikes are being used more and which are being

neglected. This aspect helps analyze the good and bad areas to locate the racks.

Of these three, Bcycle or Bixi would work best for VCU. Sobi is a new and small

company and might not have the resources to provide VCU with a robust bike sharing

program in the long term, even though Sobi has newer and more sophisticated technology

for bike sharing. The current plan is for VCU is 30-50 bikes with 10 stations; six stations

will be on the Monroe Park Campus and four stations on the MCV campus. These

stations are modular and can be moved to the most suitable locations as users adapt to the


12/24

system. Ghosh has been in discussion with local businesses and property owners to

expand bikesharing facilities further than this, as well as to engage in a broader dialogue

with the existing cyclist community.

The pricing for the system will be similar to that of Capital Bikeshare: the first

thirty minutes will be free and then the user will be charged roughly every half hour. The

systems will most likely be accessed through credit card or VCU RamBucks and students

may be offered incentives for biking. This pricing system is standard for most bike

sharing programs. It encourages short trips to benefit as many users as possible.

Some promotion ideas for the program include creating a web portal and hosting

events such as, The Great Bike Roundup. The Great Bike Roundup is an event in

Richmond that supports the local biking scene. It takes place once a year in which bikers

of all experience and interest gather together to discuss biking and their personal interest

in the activity. The event includes bike repair experts who offer free tune-ups and will

answer any questions you may have about your bike.

According to Ghosh, the program plans have begun but it is unclear when VCU

bike sharing stations will be seen on campus. Ghosh hopes that the program will pave

the way for the Mayors Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Planning Commission. He hopes

that there will be mobility hubs around the city that will not only offer bike sharing but

also ZipCars and convenient bus service. This will perhaps even pave the way for local

employers to have their own bike sharing stations so their employees are encouraged to

live greener, more active lives.

Champe Burnley, a Co-Chair on The Mayors Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails

Planning Commission claims that initiative is the first step. He believes that there is no

initiative for citizens to bike Richmond. Because the city already has such a variety of

parking available to commuters, it leaves little incentive for them to consider alternate

modes of transportation. If the city created intitiatives for using public transit or penalties

for driving to the city, people would be forced to change. Before penalties can be

enforced, commuters need a decent form of public transportation. This action saw results

in London where there are multiple fees and penalties for driving in London. London and

Paris were announced joint winners at the Institute for Transportation and Developmental

Policy (ITDP) 2008 Sustainable Transport Award Ceremony. The city is the largest to


13/24

adopt the congestion charge and its success has inspired cities in the USA, such as New

York City and San Francisco, to consider implementing it. Prior to the charge, London

drivers spent 50% of their time in traffic jams, costing the city between 2-4 million

pounds every week. Now, Transport for London (TfL) said congestion has dropped 21%

in 2007 (23)

According to Burnely, the City of Richmond currently has no plan for bike

sharing however there have been some discussions with VCU. The plans that are

currently on the Mayors Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Planning Commission Report

include more infrastructure concerns and will begin implementation at the end of 2011.

The Mayors Commission is primarily composed of interested citizens and members of

the community and therefore did not conduct any type of comprehensive estimate for

building an entire bike lane network analysis. However, the Mayor of Portland claims in

an article in the Oregonian, that Portland spent on its bike infrastructure what it normally

would spend on a single mile of freeway.

Champe believes the most realistic near future change concerning biking in

Richmond will be the creation of bike sharrows. Bike sharrows are street markings

installed at locations in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

This marking is placed in the center of a travel lane to indicate that a bicyclist may use

the full lane. Burnley hopes for a fast transition to complete streets for Richmond, but

believes that it wont happen for another twenty years.

These interviews provide insight on the state of sustainability initiatives within

the city. VCUs sustainability director is more optimistic about the possibility of a bike

sharing program. The possibility of a bike sharing program has not been discussed with

seriousness in the mayors commission.VCU will most likely have a bike sharing

program before the city.

Goals and Objectives

The information that was gathered was used to create the following goals and

objectives, along with recommendations.


14/24

Short term

Goal: Bike Infrastructure

Objective: Creating bike sharrows throughout city

Why?: Alerts drivers that bikers are sharing the road.

Goal: Promote biking in Richmond

Objective 1: Create incentives to bike in Richmond

Why?: biking in Richmond lowers emmissions which is better for the

enviornment

Objective 2: Create media campaign aimed at biking in Richmond

Why?: To educate the importance of biking in Richmond

Mid Term


Objective: Create limited bike lanes throughout Richmonds Core

Why? : To create safe enviornment for bikers in Richmond

Goal: Provide alternative modes of transportation that reduce carbon emmissions

throughout Richmonds core. (see appendix F)

Objective: Establish limited bike sharing stations throughout Richmonds core

Why?: To test the potential success of bike sharing in Richmonds core and to

evaluate the degree of emmission reduction.

Goal: Create private sector promotion for biking in Richmond

Objective: Establish bike sharing stations for corporations in the downtown sector

Why?: To reduce city expenditures on bike sharing in Richmond

Long Term


15/24


Objective: Create a complete network of bike lanes throughout Richmond ( see

appendix A for details)

Why?: To create a safer environment for bikers throughout Richmond

Goal: Provide alternative modes of transportation that reduce carbon emmissions

throughout Richmonds core.

Objective: Establish a complete bike sharing program throughout Richmonds

core

Why?: A complete bike sharing program will provide the entire city with

alternative forms of transportation.

Goal: Maintain a successful bike sharing program

Objective: Continue to test best possible locations for bike sharing stations

throughout Richmonds core

Why?: A successful bike sharing program will keep the city provided with more

options of transportation

Recommendations For Implementation

Continual Involvement

Insure that the Mayors Pedestrian, Bicycle and Trails Commission stays active and

involve as much community participation as possible. By involving the community, the

greatest number of people can become involved thus increasing the chances of it staying

on the city agenda.


16/24

Bike Share Collaboration

VCU should collaborate with the City of Richmond concerning bicycling improvements

in the downtown area. This collaboration should work toward reducing carbon

emmissions therefor working towards the collective effort of sustainability throughout the

city. This includes a bike share program. The mayors commission should discuss this

idea in more detail so that the program has a chance of being implemented.

Uniform Bike Share System

VCU and the City of Richmond should collaborate in creating a uniform bike sharing

system. This will give the users the maximum amount of options concerning bike

sharing. The collaboration of VCU with the city can bring bike sharing beyond campus

perimeter.

Team

The bike sharing program in the City of Richmond should hire a bike sharing

management team. This team will focus on the day to day tasks of the bike sharing

program. These tasks will include maintenance, distribution, and data collection.

Through these tasks they will determine best locations for stations through their data

collection. They will redistribute bikes at the end of each day to the stations throughout

the city.

Promotion

Use media outlets to promote bike sharing throughout the city. The city should

collaborate with bicycling businesses such as Aggies and Bunny Hop. This collaboration

should create events and programs to encourage bike sharing in Richmond.

Funding

Richmond should include sustainability concerning bike sharing as a top priority in their

Capital Improvement Budget. For a program like this to be successful, funding is priority

number one. If the city were to promote the bike sharing program, the overall health of

the citizens will improve thereby cutting healthcare costs. If the program is successful


17/24

and the citizens of Richmond are healthier there is a better chance of receiving federal

grant money that endorses a sustainable lifestyle.

Public Transit

Richmond should create penalties for driving and incentives for public transit use. In

order for these programs to succeed, the city needs to create a complete public transit

system. This system should include either a more extensive bus system or a possible

light rail system.

Complete Streets

The Mayors Pedestrian, Bicycle and Trails commission should collaborate with Public

Works to create an effective and practical complete streets design. This design should be

respectful to bikers, drivers and pedestrians alike. A preferred design concept of bike

lanes is separated barrier design. This design should follow AASHTO guidelines. A

proposed bike lane design can be found in Appendix A.

A Healthy City

If Richmond should promote a bicycle oriented lifestyle as a health benefit for its

citizens. Bike sharing cuts down on pollution by reducing the number of drivers. The

reduction in pollution and the exercise through bike sharing creates healthier citizens.

Bike Sharing Vendor

At the moment, the bike sharing vendors that Richmond should consider are Bixi and

Bcycle. Their bikes have sophisticated systems and credibility throughout the world. In

addition, their bikes should include lazer lane technology for bicycle safety at night (See

Appendix B).

References


18/24

1. -http://www.tfl.gov.uk/,Transport For London, (Accessed on April 17, 2011).i2. -http://www.governmentsustainability.co.uk/content/view/157/2/,London wins

sustainable transport award, Government Sustainability.Co.Uk, The Business

Magazine For Sustainable Government, 2011.

- http://www.richmondgov.com/sustainability/index.aspx,Sustainability,City of Richmond, 2011.

3. Quinn, F. and Wright, B. Guide for Reviewing Public Road Design andBicycling Accommodations for Virginia Bicycling Advocates. FairfaxAdvocates for Better Bicycling, Fairfax, Virginia, 2010.http://www.fabb-bikes.org/guide/ (accessed 18 February 2011).

4. Government of the District of Columbia. Department of Transportation.DDOT Complete Streets Policy. Departmental Order No. 06-2010, DistrictDepartment of Transportation. Washington, D.C., 18 October 2010.'

5. Martinez, Matt. "Washington, D.C., launches the nations largest bikeshare program". Grist (20 September 2010),http://www.grist.org/article/2010-09-20-washington-d.c.-launches-the-nations-largest-bike-share-program/(accessed 21 February 2011).

6. Carlos, Katherine, Bill tackles passing space around bicycles, RichmondTimes-Dispatch, February 14, 2011,http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2011/feb/14/tdmet01-bill-tackles-passing-space-ar-840798/

7. Richmond, VA Master Plan, Richmond, VA , 2000-2010,http://www.richmondgov.com/planninganddevelopmentreview/documents/masterplan/05Transportation.pdf

8. Robertson, A. Kent., Pedestrians and the American Downtown, The TownPlanning Review 64, no.3 (1993): 273-286, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40113233

9. The Walkman, "University of Richmond Creates Bike Share Program",Virginia Bicycle Federation,http://www.vabike.org/university-of-richmond-creates-bike-share-program/,April 7, 2011.

10.Wallack, M.. "Thank You For Sharing."2010.http://www.bicycling.com/news/advocacy/thanks-sharing (accessed Apr. 12,2011).
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/http://www.governmentsustainability.co.uk/content/view/157/2/http://www.richmondgov.com/sustainability/index.aspxhttp://www.richmondgov.com/sustainability/index.aspxhttp://www.governmentsustainability.co.uk/content/view/157/2/http://www.tfl.gov.uk/


19/24

11.Mayors Bicycling and Trails Planning Commission Report, Mayors Bicycling

and Trails Planning Commision. Richmond, VA, Nov. 2010http://www.richmondgov.com/mayor/documents/MayorsPBTCommissionReportOpt.pdf

12.1999 Guide for the Development of bicycling facilities, American Associationof State highway and transportation officials. Washington DC, 1999.http://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/AASHTO_1999_BikeBook.pdf

13.Dan Hoagland, interview by J.D. Hammond, Washington Area BicyclistAssociation, March 9, 2011.

14.Champ Burnly, interview by Brendan McHugh, Mayors Pedestrian, Bicycle andTrails Commission,

15.Jaseck Gosh, interview by Brendan McHugh, VCU sustainability director,

Appendix

A.

The 1999 AASHTO guidelines were used to determine acceptable width and lane

creation. AASHTO, as explained by Champ Burnley of the Mayors Pedestrian, bicycle

and Trails Commission, was used as a guide for determining Complete Street Guidlines.

As Figure 1 shows, bicyclists require at least 1.0 m (40 inches) of essential operating

space based solely on their profile. An operating space of 1.2 m (4 feet) is assumed as the

minimum width for any facility designed for exclusive or preferential use by bicyclists.

Where motor vehicle traffic volumes, motor vehicle or bicyclist speed, and the mix of

truck and bus traffic increase, a more comfortable operating space of 1.5 m (5 feet) or

more is desirable. However, where 1.2-m (4-foot) widths cannot be achieved, any

additional shoulder width is better than none at all.
http://www.richmondgov.com/mayor/documents/MayorsPBTCommissionReportOpt.pdfhttp://www.richmondgov.com/mayor/documents/MayorsPBTCommissionReportOpt.pdfhttp://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/AASHTO_1999_BikeBook.pdfhttp://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/AASHTO_1999_BikeBook.pdfhttp://www.richmondgov.com/mayor/documents/MayorsPBTCommissionReportOpt.pdfhttp://www.richmondgov.com/mayor/documents/MayorsPBTCommissionReportOpt.pdf


20/24

These guidelines were further used in creating appropiate designs for some

streets. The blog regardging biking in Richmond also provided useful ideas. These

included the seperated barriers. The following images are photoshopped images of

possible bike designs. They were created by Brendan McHugh.


21/24

Description:

Franklin Street- measurement is 8 feet 4 inches (from edge of tree box to end of

sidewalk). This sidewalk is between Harrison and Ryland facing West.


22/24

Harrison- measurement is 8 feet 9 inches (from edge of electric pole to end of sidewalk).

This sidewalk is between Franklin and Grace facing North.

B

The vendors that were contacted for VCUs bike sharing program use an intense security

system. Their system protects against bike theft and is therefore ideal.

Bixi, Sobi use the following system:

In addition to this technology, this document recommended the Laser bike lane

technology. It costs $50 per bike. (http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/02/lightlanes-

lase/)

C

University of Richmond Bike share program: this program was created about 2 years ago

by a student. The bikes are donated bikes and have no high tech characteristics. There is


23/24

really no way of tracking the bikes. A student stated, you just find a bike, if your lucky,

and ride it and leave it wherever This has caused a loss of bikes, many have been thrown

into the river. The following images show the carelessness of students regarding the bike

program. The bikes are not respected. The program is considered a failure.

D

Bike sharing fees

E

Interview details:

Dan Malouff, interview by J.D. Hammond, Arlington County Government

Center, March 8, 2011.

Dan Malouff is a transit planner with Arlington County, currently focusing on its

two major streetcar projects on Columbia Pike (possibly in collaboration with Fairfax

County) and along the Jefferson Davis corridor toward Potomac Yards (in collaboration


24/24

with the City of Alexandria). He also edits BeyondDC, a transit blog for the greater

Washington and mid-Atlantic regions. Malouff was part of the decision-making process

behind Arlington's initial implementation of Capital Bikeshare, including the decision to

go with Bixi and Alta as vendor and contractor. He also explained the history of

Arlington's bicycle and active-transportation infrastructure over the past 20 years, and

pointed to other stakeholders in the continuing process of redeveloping Crystal City from

a quasi-arcology complex of enclosed buildings to an open, pedestrian-friendly

neighborhood.

Jim Maslanka, interview by J.D. Hammond, City of Alexandria Department of

Transit Services and Programs, March 8, 2011.

James Maslanka is the director of transit services and programs for the City of

Alexandria, to include paratransit, carpooling and active transportation. He and other

members of the department have worked with Malouff et al. towards the development of

cohesive transit improvements along the Route 1 corridor through and beyond

Alexandria, as well as the mitigation of traffic problems from Pentagon mission growth

in the city's suburban west end. He provided examples of bicycle infrastructure the City

has provided both in the west end (to include trails and other separate-use facilities) as

well as mixed-use infrastructure in the historic Old Town, and also explained the city's

active-transportation expansion plans. (NB: Maslanka was the author's former employer.)

Daniel Hoagland, interview by J.D. Hammond, Washington Area Bicyclist

Association, March 9, 2011.

Dan Hoagland is the WABA bicycle ambassador to the greater Washington

region. The interview discussed bicycle infrastructure and facilities plans for other

jurisdictions in northern Virginia as well as plans to expand Capital Bikeshare. He

expounded upon the issues of enabling localities to provide active transportation

infrastructure in Virginia, being a Dillon rule state, and the vagaries of bicycle issues in

Richmond, both in terms of the reception of the Commonwealth government and the

transportation needs of the greater Richmond region.

F

Proposed bike station locations:

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	jonathan-d-hammond
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times