cep 460 final

Campus Quality of Experience: Bicycles

Client Report

University of Washington Transportation Services

Prepared by CEP 460 Students: Katie McNett, Christopher Gandy & Brian Smith January 2015

Table of Contents

Introduction Grading System Themes Ease of Use Perceived Sense of Safety Aesthetics

Transformation Example

Considerations

Next Steps

Appendices Ease of Use Literature Review Perceived Sense of Safety Literature Review Aesthetics Literature Review

Special Thanks: Our CEP 460 team would like to thank the wonderful staff at UW Transportation Services who guided our project, Celeste Gilman and Ted Sweeney. We would also like to acknowledge the feedback and guidance of our course instructors Brandon Born and Jill Sterrett.

Introduction A key tool in developing vibrant, healthy, and sustainable spaces is having a foundation or a guide from which to build. If one has no sense of what to analyze, what is important, or a scale of hierarchy, space cannot be properly assessed or developed. This report’s main objective is to give context and understanding to the quality of bicycling space on the University of Washington’s Seattle Campus so that it may be mapped and strategically improved.

The​ WalkBikeRide​ project was visualized by the University of Washington Transportation Services and initiated by three students of the CEP 460 Studio in the autumn quarter of 2014.

This initial segment of the project focused on bicycling, but will eventually expand into all modes of transportation: bicycling, walking, riding transportation, and driving. The end goal is to provide the campus with a model fit to assess the experiential quality of campus space in order to foster a healthier, safer, and more beautiful environment.

The student team began by identifying research objectives, conducting a literature review, and studying other similar assessment tools. Through their research, three key themes were revealed: ​ aesthetics, ease of use, and perceived sense of safety​ . These themes, as part of a whole, encompass all the aspects of a bicyclist’s experience. The team also found that the individual value of each theme is increased when considered as part of a holistic evaluation.

The product of this initial phase is a report documenting the process and results of the research, as well as a tangible assessment tool that evaluates bicyclist quality of experience.

This tool enables UW Transportation Services to systematically evaluate all spaces on campus and be able to articulate and document the evaluation on a map to measure successes and performance gaps. Spaces that are of poor quality can then be identified and plans to improve them can be developed.

We hope you find this information relevant and meaningful for the future of this project and the vision for a sustainable campus.

Grading System

The assessment grades the spaces as green, yellow, or red. This three-color system is simple and straightforward, reflecting widely-known traffic light symbology.

★ Green is the ideal; it requires investment in all three categories and is hard to achieve. ★ Yellow is the average; it signifies investment with room for improvement. ★ Red is least desirable; it needs major improvement and is a high priority.

Connectivity The overall grade of the space reflects the interconnectedness of the themes. Perceived sense of safety is innately intertwined with ease of use and aesthetic is a part of both. For example, if there’s a busy four-lane road and only sharrows (ease of use), most users would feel unsafe (perceived sense of safety), but if there’s proper infrastructure that separates the cars and bikes, the road will feel more safe to more users. Similarly, a street with poor or no lighting feels unsafe, but if it’s aesthetically improved to have pedestrian-scale lighting the dark doesn’t seem as scary. Using this line of thought, an overall-green grade means all three categories are the best they can be. Yellow or red grades identify not only a space that needs improvement, but also in which themes and in which ways it could be improved.

Overall Grade Breakdown Theme 1

Theme 2

Theme 3

OVERALL

Green

Green

Green or ​ Yellow

Green

Green

Green

Red

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Green or ​ Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Yellow

Red

Red

Red

Red

Green or ​ Yellow

Red

Red

Red

Red

Red

General Rules: ● When at least two themes have the same grade, that is the overall grade. ● EXCEPT​ if the third theme has a red grade, then the overall grade is bumped down one level.

As you can see, it’s hardest to achieve a green rating and having one theme graded poorly as a red drags all three categories down an overall grade.

Themes ‘Theme’ for this grading system refers to the grouping of characteristics of a good bicycle experience. In this section, the main characteristics of the three themes will be listed as statements. These statements emphasize the optimal conditions for biking and may not conform to every space or situation, but can still be used as a general guide.

The most difficult aspect about using this rubric is the level of subjectivity. While we tried to make the assessment as objective as possible. The overall grading is fairly subjective and requires the assessor to use a degree of intuition, reason, and common sense. We’re grading the quality of experience, something that the user ​ feels​ , therefore the assessor needs to take their feelings of the space into account. Please see the appendix for statement explanations.

Ease of Use Facility Type ★ The appropriate facility type should be used depending on a street or path’s speed, volume, parking turnover rate, transit use, trucking use, width, and rate of collisions. ★ Different modes of transportation (walking, biking, driving) should be separated to reduce conflicts and increase predictability. ★ When possible, bicycle routes should utilize the existing network of low-volume, low-speed streets as bicycle boulevards or neighborhood greenways.

Intersections ★ Intersections need to protect all users and provide clear understanding of expected behaviors. ★ Bike lanes should continue through the intersection using markings. ★ Signals should be used when bike volumes are high and there are conflicts with pedestrians or vehicles.

Surfaces ★ Bike facilities should always be kept clean of broken glass, gravel, sand, and other debris and should be maintained to be smooth and free of hazards and damage. ★ Colored surfaces should be used to increase visibility and identify areas of conflict. ★ Bicycle movement should not be prohibited by stairs or curbs.

Wayfinding ★ The bicycle route should be comprehensively marked using signs or pavement markings. ★ Route changes such as turns, detours, or restricted areas should be well marked and obvious. ★ Decision signs should display common destinations, direction, distance, and when possible, estimated time of travel.

Parking ★ Bicycle parking should be intuitive, widely available, and easy to use. ★ There should be a variety of parking facilities to accommodate short and long-term parking and security needs. ★ Racks should be spaced 30 inches apart, support the bike in two places, and fabricated using non-circular tubing, stainless steel or zinc-coated steel.

Perceived Sense of Safety Infrastructure ★ If infrastructure is sufficient, ridership will increase and the ‘safety in numbers’ rule will increase the feeling of safety on the streets. ★ The cycling experience should be designed equitably for all ages, abilities and communities. ★ Bicycle facility should be location, separation, and connectivity must be factored into the design. ★ Infrastructure should be easy to understand and use in order to alleviate conflicts. ★ Traffic calming in highly connected residential neighborhoods should be implemented.

Lighting ★ Lighting should be appealing to the eye and mimic sunlight to create an intimate, inviting atmosphere. ★ Systems should be consistent and evenly spaced so as to not encourage crime. ★ Lighting systems should maximize the potential for informal surveillance. ★ Lighting should foster sustained activation of space, even during dark.

Preservation ★ Well-designed and located spaces induce investment. ★ If space is not preserved, it risks falling into decay along with the space’s perceived sense of safety. ★ Space placed in areas that foster debris will be more difficult to preserve.

Aesthetics Landscape ★ Participatory landscapes offer a sensory experience that engages the bicyclist in their surroundings. ★ Vistas should be designed where possible to engage the rider and give a sense of location.

Nature ★ Vegetation should be used to provide protection from the elements, noise, and other modes of transportation, as well as provide sensory engagement. ★ Integrated natural elements throughout bikeways provide environmental services and lead to decreased stress in users.

Scale ★ Spaces should be designed on pedestrian and bicycle scale with social spaces like benches and tables, fountains, courtyards, plazas, and features like lighting lower to the ground to encourage nightlife. ★ Homogenous scale bridges spaces together, creating a sense of connection.

Stylistic Uniformity ★ Uniformity and consistency should be considered in design to enable riders to adjust to their surroundings and be able to identify when places of importance like intersections and destinations appear. ★ When possible, indigenous and cultural elements should be used to create a sense of belonging, pride, and engagement.

Balance ★ The space should be designed so that there is balance in style and scale so that the cyclist feel welcome and can focus on their ride.

Transformation This series of street designs from NACTO Urban Street Design Guide shows the transformation of a street from red to green. This is the vision for this project, to transform the campus to a green.

This is a​ red because: ​ ● Ease of Use: It is designed for cars and has no bike lanes or facilities to separate modes of transportation, there’s no stop bar before the crosswalk encouraging encroachment by cars, the ADA corner ramps don’t face the direction of the crosswalks and there’s no bicycle parking.

● Perceived Safety: Parked cars pose a hazard to cyclists in the door zone, lack of consistent lighting along block, really wide car lanes encourage illegal parking and car movement. ● Aesthetic: The streetscape is barren of aesthetically pleasing elements like plants, streetlights, and social spaces. There is no pedestrian-scale design.

This is a yellow because: ● Ease of Use: There’s an appropriate bike lane for an urban, downtown street that continues through the intersection, there’s bicycle parking, the crosswalk has a refuge island shortening the distance to cross, and the bike lane is green to further denote bicycle designation. ● Perceived Safety: Pedestrian-scale street lights offer better, constant illumination and an intimate setting that encourages nightlife, the different modes of transportation are separated (Bus only lane, lane of parked cars separating bike lane from traffic), benches encourage people watching and increase sense of safety, and walk signals increase safety of crossing the intersection for pedestrians and pedestrian-cyclists. ● Aesthetic: It has improved social spaces and pedestrian-scale design with benches, trash cans, outdoor cafes, and vegetation in the form of street trees. The overall balance and vibrancy of the space is much improved.

This is a green because, along with the improvements mentioned in yellow: ● Ease of Use: Curbs are extended to eliminate illegal car movement and the bike lane now has a stop bar to indicate where cyclists should stop at the intersection. ● Perceived Safety: There is complete physical separation in the street segment, crosswalk now has better ADA ramps that face the direction of the crossing, and although not bike related, the bus stop now has a shelter to protect from the elements. ● Aesthetics: Planting strip of low-growing plants maintains street visibility and balances tall buildings and trees with street elements.

Example - 40th and Brooklyn Intersection

To better understand the envisioned use of the assessment, we’ve provided an example assessment of a space on campus. We use the three different lenses of ease of use, perceived safety, and aesthetics to show the process that assessing a space may go through.

An aerial sketch is provided to give better context and pictures are used to document observations. The intersection we assessed is Brooklyn Avenue and 40th where it becomes Lincoln Way.

AERIAL VIEW

This isn’t the best aerial view and Google Maps using earth view would have been prefered to see color and vegetation, however it is outdated and doesn’t include the new bike lanes or sidewalks and still has Lander Hall under construction. Therefore we used the map from the protected bike lane plan that has a more accurate though less appealing layout.

Leave blank, for fold out street view.

Leave blank, for fold out street view.

Enter scans from assessment of intersection.

Considerations

As with any fledgling project, there is room for improvement. We’ve developed an assessment that we feel to be comprehensive, however as technology and street design practices evolve there may be a need to revisit this project to add or change aspects.

The biggest consideration of this assessment is the human factor. Every human’s experience of space can be recorded differently depending on knowledge of design elements, rain, temperature, varying seasons affecting vegetation, and more. Therefore every assessor should try to assess the space from both a sensory and subjective standpoint and with an objective eye for infrastructure, trying to take into account all considerations and recording any biases or abnormal circumstances. The space should, for example, not be assessed during Dawg Daze or other events that drastically change the average, everyday experience, although such spatial needs might be important to consider.

An experience is what we’re assessing, therefore the assessor should experience the space as the user would. We recommend riding through the space on a bicycle as well as making participatory and non-participatory observations in order to experience all aspects of a space’s depth. Observe, experience, feel the wind, sense your alertness, gather a realistic experience.

Next Steps

This project, Campus Quality of Experience, will eventually encompass bicycling, walking, busing, and driving a car. These future guides should imitate the categories: ease of use, perceived safety, and aesthetics. With a common theme, there is uniformity across different modes. As we have opened the consciousness in understanding the quality of bicycling experience on UW campus, there must be others maintaining it. As long as UW is changing, there needs to be constant reassessment. This is not to say we are wrong, or that our rubric tool will go outdated, but in order to live up to the wholesome guidelines standards the rubric must be built upon as new standards, technology, and designs become available. We have created the tool, the next step will be for the client to implement the tool in a way that they see fit.

Appendix - Literature Reviews Ease of Use Literature Review - Written by Katie McNett

It’s no secret that bikes and cars sharing the road makes all users nervous. Yet every cyclist and driver has the right to that space. How can cities make roads safe, comfortable, and enjoyable for all users? One solution is to focus on infrastructure and create bike lanes to increase separation between modes. Whether it’s a stripe of paint, a physical barrier, or a grade separation, removing the vulnerable and slower bike users from the faster and car-encased drivers reduces stress for all road users.

As more bike lanes are designed into roadways, it’s important to not overlook the supplementary infrastructure that completes the bicyclist experience. Location, destination, parking, and trip duration are important to a bicyclist, just as they are to drivers. Yet, it tends to be that bicycle trips require a lot more work to have a successful journey. Some bike lanes just end, dumping you into traffic without signage to a better route. Some are riddled with hidden bumps, potholes, and hazards that cause crashes on a bicycle’s skinny wheels. Ease of Use is to ensure the rider has a smooth, easy ride with little stress and lots of enjoyment.

Facility Type Bike Lanes Bike lanes are defined as “as a portion of the roadway that has been designated by striping, signage, and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists.”1 Bike lanes are typically on each side of the street, to the right of and in the same direction of motor traffic.

By separating bike and car traffic, you increase the capacity of the street by allowing different modes of traffic to travel at their comfortable speeds and reduce the chance of collision by making positioning and interaction between cars and bikes more predictable. Bike lanes are most helpful on roads with: lower speeds of 25 mph or less, low traffic volumes of 3,000 average daily motor vehicle trips, high transit vehicle volume, low truck traffic, and/or low parking turnover.2 The bike lane should be between 4-6 feet depending on the drainage, parking, and curb characteristics with a 6-8 inch solid white line differentiating the bike lane from the travel lane and painted bike lane markings, symbols, and arrows.3

1

NACTO, P.1 NACTO, p.4­6 3 AASHTO, 1999 2

Bike Lane labike.wordpress.com

Buffered Bike Lane sdotblog.seattle.gov

Buffered Bike Lanes “Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane (NACTO, 2014, p. 9). Buffered bike lanes give the cyclists more room to maneuver away from opening car doors in the parking lane and to pass another cyclist without encroaching in the travel lane. In a study conducted by the Portland State University’s Center for Transportation Studies, cyclists indicated they felt a lower risk of being ‘doored’ in the buffered bike lanes and nearly nine in ten cyclists preferred a buffered bike lane to a standard lane (2011). This treatment is most helpful on roads that have: extra wide lanes, high speeds, high volumes, and/or truck traffic. On roads with transit stops, it’s convenient to ‘bump out’ the stops so that the bike lane can continue unimpeded between the stop and the sidewalk.4 Protected Bike Lanes Also known by their European name, cycle tracks, a protected bike lane (PBL) “is an exclusive bike facility that combines the user experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of a conventional bike lane.”5 According to People for Bikes (2014), PBLs have three key characteristics: 1. Physical separation: There must be some sort of physical, stationary, vertical separation between cars and bikes such as plastic posts, bollards, raised bumps, curbs, planters, or parked cars. PBLs can also be raised, using a curb as separation, to either at or below sidewalk height.

4 5

NACTO, p.11 NACTO, p.27

2. Exclusivity for people on bikes: The PBL is allocated for bicycles and isn’t meant for use by pedestrians or motor vehicles. If the PBL is at sidewalk height, there should be clear definition between the two facilities.

3. On or adjacent to the roadway: PBLs are part of the street grid, running parallel or proximate to the roadway in a one-way or two-way format. They aren’t the same as off-street paths that run along waterways or rail corridors and serve all non-motorized users.

The large appeal of protected bike lanes is that they offer a “higher level of security than bike lanes and are attractive to a wider spectrum of the public.”6 These types of facilities are recommended on roads that feel dangerous and stressful to cyclists, even with standard bike lanes. Roads that have: multiple lanes, parking lanes, high traffic volumes, high speeds, high parking turnover, high bicycle traffic volumes, and high collision rates between users.7 This is an extreme option that, while it reduces collisions and increases the sense of safety, is unwarranted for many locations.

Protected Bike Lane http://la.streetsblog.org/

Bicycle Boulevard bikewalklincolnpark.com

Bicycle Boulevards Also known in Seattle as Neighborhood Greenways, “bicycle boulevards are low-speed, low-volume streets that have been optimized for bicycle travel through treatments such as traffic calming and traffic reduction, signage and pavement markings, and intersection crossing treatments.”8 According to the Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning & Design, the key characteristics of a bicycle boulevard are: ● low motor vehicle volumes ● low motor vehicle speeds ● logical, direct, and continuous routes that are well marked and signed ● provide convenient access to desired destinations ● minimalist bicycle delay ● comfortable and safe crossing for cyclists at intersections 6

NACTO, p.27 NACTO, p.31 8 W ​ alker, Tresidder, & Birk, 2009, p. 2 7

Bicycle boulevards are attractive to all non-motorized users of all ages and abilities, city planners, and property owners. The facilities build upon existing infrastructure and can be an inexpensive way to lower vehicle speeds and encourage families to bike, walk, and play in their neighborhoods. This system would be beneficial to campus traffic on streets with motorized access.

Shared-Use Paths “Shared-use paths are designed for both transportation and recreation purposes and are used by pedestrians, bicyclists, skaters, equestrians, and other users.”9 Common locations for shared-use paths include along waterways, on college campuses, abandoned railway right of ways, planned developments, utility right of ways, along highways, and in parks. This type of facility is different from all aforementioned facilities in that the only interaction with motorized vehicles is at intersections with roadways. The bicycle is one of the fastest users of this space and must yield and slow down for slower users like pedestrians. WSDOT’s rule is, “accommodate all intended users, and minimize conflicts.”10 Crosswalk timing should be timed for the slowest user and slopes and ramps should be design for wheelchair access. There are instances where a shared-use path has restricted uses, especially on campuses where pedestrian traffic can be extremely heavy. In such cases, separation is desired or clear markings indicating a shared space.

Statements ● The appropriate facility type should be used depending on a street or path’s speed, volume, parking turnover rate, transit use, trucking use, width, and rate of collisions.

9

​ WSDOT, 2012, p. 1515-1 ​ WSDOT, 2012, p. 1515-2

10

● Different modes of transportation should be separated to reduce conflicts and increase predictability. ● When possible, bicycle routes should utilize the existing network of low-volume, low-speed streets as bicycle boulevards.

Intersections It doesn’t matter how safe and protected your bike lane is, if intersections are risky, stressful experiences.11 Intersections, no matter if you’re walking, driving, or riding, are typically a chaotic experience. Can you turn on red? Does this lane go where I want to go? What is that person doing? There are so many questions going through a person’s mind that you wonder, why don’t they make intersections easier to understand?

The Urban Bikeway Design Guide by NACTO, offers clear guidance for designing street intersections for all users, instead of just automobiles. Designs for intersections with bicycle facilities should reduce conflicts between bicyclists (and other vulnerable road users) and vehicles by heightening the level of visibility, denoting a clear right-of-way, and facilitating eye contact and awareness with competing modes.12 These design principles seem to also be relevant to bike and pedestrian intersections void of cars. By designing the bike lane or crossing as an integral part of the intersection, it increases the understanding of behaviors in a way that cars, pedestrians and bikes know how to behave at the crossing. By making intersection clear and simple, and increasing awareness of each other, intersections would be much less stressful.

Bicycle Priority There are several ways to increase awareness of bicycles and give them priority over cars at intersections. ● Bike Boxes​ , located in front of motor vehicles at intersections, are a way to group cyclists in front of cars so when the light changes, they are the first to move. ● The Protected Intersection​ , as described

by Nick Falbo, “brings the physical protection along with you as your ride through the crossing...with this design, riders will never feel stranded, exposed, or unsure of where to go and how to get 11 12

Falbo, 2014 NACTO, p.47

there.” At busy intersections with turning cars, this option reduces the stress of wondering when you turn as a driver and gives cyclists their own signal phase. An image of the proposed intersection is on the right. ● Bicycle Signals and Beacons ​ “make crossing intersections safer for bicyclists by clarifying when to enter an intersection and by restricting conflicting vehicle movement.” 13 They can be used for mid-street crossings and at intersections using bicycle detection. ● Marked Crossing ​ through the intersection, using color, dash marks, zebra striping, or bike markings, make it clear to a cyclists where the path continues and clear to a driver where there is a bicycle crossing and for all to use caution. ● Medians and Refuge Islands​ are used to provide a safe place to wait to cross traffic and also draw attention from the drivers to the crossing. They can also be used to calm traffic and divert cars onto arterials while allowing bicycles to continue on quiet streets.

Statements ● Intersections need to protect all users and provide clear understanding of expected behaviors. ● Bike lanes should continue through the intersection using markings. ● Signals should be used when bike volumes are high and there are conflicts with pedestrians or vehicles.

Surfaces In all design guidelines, it’s emphasized that bicycle routes need to be free of pavement damage. Notably dangerous to the cyclist are potholes, hidden bumps, and cracks in the pavement large enough to get a bicycle tire stuck. The surface material must also be skidless so that cyclists can stop quickly and turn without sliding. Metal plates and areas that develop seasonal road cover such as fallen leaves are hazards and should be design or maintained to enable cyclists to safely cross those areas. ​ Bike facilities should always be kept clean of broken glass, gravel, sand, and other debris.​ In rural areas that use chip seal or in areas with poor road quality that’s acceptable for cars but not for bikes, it’s possible to only repave the shoulder or designated bicycle area to create a smooth, bikeable lane of pavement. Changes in texture, such as brick, concrete, asphalt, and grooved pavement can also be used to denote areas of conflict and intersection when visual aesthetics are a concern.

Colored Surfaces Colored pavement within a bike lane increases the visibility of the facility, identifies potential areas of conflict, and reinforces priority to bicyclists.14 Colored markings can be used as a 13 14

NACTO, p.91 NACTO, p.114

corridor treatment, along the entire bike facility, or as a spot treatment, in areas of conflict, bike boxes, or special areas. Different materials are available with different benefits; these include overlays that go on top of pavement like paint, durable liquid pavement markings, thermoplastic and embedded treatments that color the pavement itself. Overlay tends to wear faster but cost less, embedded tends to wear better but cost more.

All overlay surfaces can be treated with reflective glass beads for retro reflectivity and sand for skid assistance. 15 Stairs and Curbs In non-motorized areas, such as a campus or trail, it’s important to keep in mind the differences between cyclists and pedestrians. For instance, bikes don’t go up and down stairs as easily as a pedestrian. Bicycle routes should avoid areas with stairs or provide a ramp or alternative route for bicycles. Bicycle are also not wheelchairs, and while it seems simple to use the wheelchair ramp as a bicycle ramp, wheelchairs can make much sharper, ninety-degree, turns than a bicycle. While ramps can be multi-purpose, if they are designed to ADA standards, they aren’t necessarily bicycle friendly.

Also of note, curbs should be appropriately placed so that bicycles don’t travel over them as this can cause flat tires and crashes. Street corners, intersection crossings, and bike paths should all have smooth transitions between path and street.

In instances where traffic calming or raised paths are desired, consider using speed humps and/or mountable curbs as alternatives.

Statements ● Bike facilities should always be kept clean of broken glass, gravel, sand, and other debris. ● Colored surfaces should be used to increase visibility and identify areas of conflict. ● The bikeway surface should be smooth and free of hazards and damage. ● Bicycle routes should avoid areas with stairs or provide a ramp or alternative route for bicycles.

15

NACTO, p.125

Wayfinding A bicycle wayfinding system consists of comprehensive signage and/or pavement markings to guide bicyclists to their destinations along preferred bicycle routes.16 There are three types of signs according to NACTO (2014): ● confirmation signs that confirm you’re on the route and are purely informational, ● turn signs or markings to indicate the bike route turns, and ● decision signs that mark the junction of two or more bikeways and indicate the direction and distance of destinations.

Common destinations include commercial centers, schools, transit stations, parks, hospitals, civic/community destinations, and places of cultural significance. Pavement markings such as sharrows, bicycles with arrows, and other markings can also be used in place of signs as markings are easier for bicyclists to see. Wayfinding systems familiarize users with the bicycle network, identify the best routes to destinations, overcome a “barrier to entry” for infrequent bicyclists, visually indicates to motorists that they are driving on a bicycle route, clarifies the distance and travel time to destinations, and creates a passive reminder of a unified presence throughout the bicycle network.17 Statements ● The bicycle route should be comprehensively marked using signs or pavement markings. ● Route changes such as turns, detours, or restricted areas should be well marked and obvious. ● Decision signs should display common destinations, direction, distance, and when possible, estimated time of travel.

Parking In a 2012 survey, the SFMTA found that over 80 percent of respondents were more likely to bicycle if secure bicycle facilities were available at destinations.18 The University of Washington has over 5,500 bicycle parking spaces on campus, but while we have quantity, the quality of the facilities is questionable.

16

NACTO, p.139 NACTO, p.139 18 SFMTA, p.12 17

The above graphic shows the diverse varieties of bicycle parking the UW and the surrounding community provides. Short-term parking implies the rack is for daily use. Bike racks are widely available on campus and the throughout Seattle, bike corrals are available on University Ave. For long-term parking, solutions for overnight parking, there are bike rooms, lockers, houses, and bike valet. These facilities add extra layers of security, instead of leaving bikes outside in the open. Bike valet is a special service offered during UW football games, bicycles are parked inside the arena and monitored by an attendant to ensure no one steals bikes. Secure bike houses are essentially large cages that you pay quarterly to access and park with others who pay, this limits the number of people with access to the bikes and records the coming and goings of the users. Bike lockers are individual containers that can fit a bicycle and gear and are completely sheltered from the elements. Bike rooms are built into buildings with secure access and are available in newer buildings and dorms.

Of the parking offered on campus, almost all of it doesn’t fit the below criteria. Almost all of them are round and less than 30 inches from each other, this makes parking difficult for a wide range of bikes and more susceptible to theft. The ideal bike rack according to current technology and trends looks like the picture to the right. They support the bike in two places, are widely space, non-circular, stainless steel, and out of the way of pedestrian walkways.

Â

Statements ● Bicycle parking should be intuitive, widely available, and easy to use. ● There should be a variety of parking facilities to accommodate short and long-term parking and security needs. ● Racks should be spaced 30 inches apart, non-circular tubing, stainless steel or zinc-coated steel.

Ease of Use Bibliography: AASHTO. ​ Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities​ . 4th ed. Washington, D.C.: American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, 2012.

Evaluation of Innovative Bicycle Facilities: SW Broadway Cycle Track & SW Stark/Oak Street Buffered Bike Lanes FINAL REPORT.​ Portland: Portland Bureau of Transportation, Portland State University, Center for Transportation Studies, 2011.

Falbo, N. “Protected Intersections For Bicyclists.” Last modified February 14, 2014. http://www.protectedintersection.com/. Video file.

Mekuria, Maaza C., Peter G. Furth, and Hilary Nixon. ​ LOW-STRESS BICYCLING AND NETWORK CONNECTIVITY.​ Report 11-19. San Jose, CA: Mineta Transportation Institute, 2012.

NACTO. ​ Urban Bikeways Design Guide.​ 2nd ed. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2014.

SFMTA. ​ Bicycle Parking: Standards, Guidelines, Recommendations.​ San Francisco, CA: SFMTA, 2013. http://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/Bicycle_Parking_Guidelines.pdf.

The Green Lane Project’s Style Guide.​ PeopleForBikes, 2014. http://www.peopleforbikes.org/page/-/uploads/GLP/DefiningBetterBikeLanes,%20July %202014.pdf.

Walker, L., Mike Tresidder, and Mia Birk. ​ Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning & Design​ .

Portland: Portland State University, Alta Planning + Design, & Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation, 2009.

Washington State Department of Transportation. ​ WSDOT Design Manual, Chapter 1515 Shared-Use Paths.​ (M 22-01.09). Olympia: GPO, 2012.

Perceived Sense of Safety Literature Review - Written by Chris Gandy

Almost more important than actual safety, is the bicyclist’s perception of it. Decisions to cycle may be guided more by perceptions than empirical evidence; furthermore, perceived reductions in risk may have greater than proportional effects on encouraging or discouraging 19 cycling ​ . Safety is an evolving and sustained perception affected by multiple, interconnected variables. No one element alone can resolve and cause a bicyclist to feel at ease when operating in a public space; the variables must synchronize and build off of each other, sustained by preserving their functions’ initial state. Once a connected system is implemented, numbers conducive to establishing bicycling as a sustained norm will be reached.

When looking at the perception of safety, ​ two primary elements​ (and their subsequent features) stand out: 1. Design 2. Location These elements are broken down into ​ two physical systems​ critical to their success: 1. Infrastructure 2. Lighting Creating these systems, is not enough, however. They must created so that their ​ preservation will be kept in check, or else they will fall into a decrepit state of existence; thus, causing the numbers, use, and behavior associated with positive perception to regress.

When the primary elements are made into separate, interconnected facilities and properly preserved, a ​ behavioral ​ shift gradually occurs.

A major deterrent of perceived sense of safety is the behavior established at the time. For example, motorized vehicles that do not know how to drive safely near bicycles, vehicles going 20 faster than 50km/hr, and streets with mixed use. ​Behavioral norms are in place because of the structures that support and sustain them. In this case, cars not knowing how to deal with bicycles is due to the fact that there isn’t the safety perception built off of a holistic system present to encourage the behavior of cycling.

Furthermore, there are not enough cyclists in American cities for their behaviors to be predictable at a mass level; this comes with exposure and experience over time. When motorists and cyclists are unaccustomed to sharing the road (since bicyclists are such a low 21 number in the USA: 3.2% average trips for children 5-15, and only 0.4% for those 40 and older ) both parties may hold incorrect assumptions as to what the other party will do. Therefore, if cycling rates also increase, it may mean more motorists also use bicycles; thus, making them

19

Safe Cycling, S43 Impact of transport infrastructure, p.4 21 Making cycling irresistible, p.504 20

22

more attuned to cyclists and their movements. ​However, this can only be achieved by reaching a sustainable number of use. Without the numbers, it remains a side activity, not growing to become a part of normalized culture.

There is widespread agreement among researchers that safety perceptions form an important barrier to the societal transition towards higher bicycle mode shares, especially in emerging 23 24 cities. ​Injury rates have also been shown to decrease with increased cycling rates. ​However, 25 cycling levels are suppressed by the lack of facilities and by poor road traffic conditions. ​Thus, the systems in place are not in existence and/or not preserved if rideshare is low and the vicious circle of lack of use due to low safety perception ensues.

In order to create the numbers conducive to fostering bicycling behavior, as seen in The Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany is the coordinated implementation of ​ mutually reinforcing, multi-faceted 26 ​ facilities​ and policies. Once these facilities are established and connected, behavior will shift towards more bicycle use, more familiarity, and build upon itself. The general perception of safety when operating a cycle will have increased, and they will feel more at ease, inclined, and capable when cycling. Stimulating non-enthusiasts to desire cycling is the key, as they are the majority.

The phenomenon of ‘safety in numbers’ has consistently been found 27 to hold true over time and across centuries. ​Numbers can only increase if proper systems that focus on fostering them are established.

Ironically, while the USA has focused mainly on improving cyclist safety via helmets, the USA also has the highest number of non-fatal and fatal bicycle injuries. Meanwhile, the Netherlands 28 holds the lowest in these categories, ​in addition to high levels of rideshare. Opposites in almost every possible way. The Netherlands has build a system that is interconnected and highly successful, while the USA has enforced helmets as a prime measure to improve safety.

No doubt, largely due to the subpar design of bicycling systems that produces conflict situations; thus, leading to the need for a helmet.

Accidents are not prevented by helmet use, as only about 1% of Dutch adults wear helmets.

When asked why, respondents stated that they perceived helmets as discouraging to cycling, making it less convenient, comfortable, and giving the cyclist a sense of false safety; thus,

22

Impact of transport infrastructure, p.4 Perceptions of Safety, p.33 24 Impact of transport infrastructure, p.4 25 Evaluating the demand for new cycle facilities, p.241 26 Making cycling irresistible, p.525 27 Making cycling irresistible p.508 28 Making cycling irresistible, p.506 23

increasing risky behavior.

Contrary to what one may believe or think, safety accessories are not associated with an improvement in safety perception among cyclists; rather, it’s the opposite. They are actually shown to be associated with a decreased safety experience. Recommending or suggesting the use of safety accessories has been shown to be unsuccessful in encouraging their use among all cyclists and although their use decreases the risk of head injuries, enforcing mandatory use has had a detrimental effect on the mode share which does not outweigh the health benefits of 29 cycling.

Situations perceived as unsafe have led to the use of safety accessories, thus, making their use mandatory. This has little or no benefit when improving perceived safety to promote cycling as 30 a viable mode of transportation.

Safety accessories act as small bandages to crash statistics. If one has an accident, which has been shown to be much more likely in the US than anywhere else, at least the damages put on paper can be minimized. Maybe the reason why the infrastructure continues to lack is due to the nature of systems in our society that drive our values? Maybe it’s because our roads were built too long, with too narrow of a scope of the future in mind? Multi-faceted structures being sustained by a vicious cycle of short term goals which gives no opportunity for our nation to incentivize the long term fixes necessary for the future of sustainable public health. Bicycling behavior in the USA will never become widespread knowledge if myopic systems like helmet use remain a primary focus, while the interconnected network of safety perception receives neglect.

If safety perception is low it is because the use of the system is low. The probability of describing cycling as safer than driving increases with the increased number of days cycled per 31 week. ​Moreover, once regularity of cycling is increased, the tendency to change to alternative 32 modes of transportation in adverse weather decreases. ​It is not the natural environment deterring people from grabbing the handle bar, so much as a lack of perception of safety due to a lack of supporting facilities. An interconnected system, satisfying safety elements and providing people with a sense of comfort and clarity while riding is essential.

In summary, the USA has focused on the wrong ideas to stimulate safety, which have had little to no effect on increasing the rideshare essential to fostering high level of safety perception. A helmet does not make a driver more aware or make the cyclist feel more at ease. It is in the facilities, their connectivity and preservation, which then leads to increased use. Once use increases, greater awareness of bicyclists’ behavior becomes achieved, further activating and normalizing the activity in society. Numbers will build on themselves when the proper system is implemented to foster the behavior. The elements and their systems are what make 29

Dublin City, p.500 Dublin City p.509 31 Dublin City, p.506 32 Dublin city, p.508 30

bicycling a safe experience, not forced regulations supplemented by partial attempts at specific infrastructure.

Design & Location Infrastructure The design and location of infrastructure systems plays a high role in the perception of safety; but, these elements must first be created. Studies show that a lack of bicycle infrastructure is one of the main barriers to cycling. This is because of the consequent lack of perceived safety, 33 as one would assume. ​If the infrastructure is not in place to foster the sense of safety, how can one expect rideshare to increase? However, just building the infrastructure is not enough.

Location must be factored into the design. It is critical to understand that cyclist behavior is greatly influenced by route preference and the cyclist’s perceived risk of the route or path 34 intended for their use. ​Making things clear, concise, connected, and providing all users with a lack of a confusion when using the space should be a primary goal. Another major goal is the proper separation of space depending on the context, as the road sharing experience is 35 associated with a sense of threat and high emotional stress among cyclists.

Would one think that having a car lane next to a train track, separated by only a white line, make either user feel comfortable? If no is the answer, then why should a cycle lane be placed between high volume traffic roads and next to parked cars, with the potential of being doored, or having their space interfered with? Cyclists feel sandwiched between traffic and parked 36 vehicles, while they feel safe when infrastructure layouts segregate cycle lanes.

Cycle lanes should have the possibility built into their design that locates them in such a way, so as to have their space infringed upon as little as possible. People have a preference for separated routes, not cycle lanes alone; this is very important to stress.

A study in Vancouver, B.C found that separated route types perceived as safe were ones with unpaved multi-use paths, bike paths and paved multi-use paths; these all rated very safe, while 37 cycle tracks and sidewalks rated more neutrally. ​Statistics like this do not showcase the true problem, as they leave context out of the equation. Vancouver B.C. is a city with very large lanes, much like America; a stark contrast to the cycle tracks of Groningen, NL, for example.

These users have different understandings in regards to what a cycle track is. Furthermore, if cycle tracks in Vancouver are compared to their paths (typically not next to a road), it becomes evident why perception of safety is higher. A key characteristic of developed countries with a 38 high cycling mode share ​ is their provision of cycle tracks and their interconnectedness. ​The 33

Safety Perceptions, p.33 USDoT, p.16 35 Safety Perceptions, p.32 36 Perceived Safety, p.39 37 Safe Cycling, p.S45 38 Safety of Urban Cycle Tracks, p.219 34

countries with the highest bicycle usage and top infrastructure are the Netherlands and Denmark; we should learn from their example.

What one should take away from this fact is how cycle tracks currently sit in our reality and mind and their relation to our overall city’s focus of design, scale, and geography. Separation based on context is what grants people the perception of safety; not systems in themselves.

This stresses a very important principle: that the design is not enough. If cycle tracks are merely created next to roads, that alone will not alleviate the problem, despite carrying about 39 th​ 1/10​ of the risk, of road use, they still carry this perceived moderate risk. ​A multitude of factors need to be considered while envisioning their placement as far as possible away from cars.

Perceived safety of infrastructure and the fear of traffic are correlated with cyclists’ self-exclusion from the road. Bicycle infrastructure that puts emphasis on network connectivity and segregated cycle paths like Copenhagen, appears to be an efficient solution for emerging 40 cycling cities. ​It is not just the design of the cycle path, but the integration. Proper integration and network connectivity based on the location is essential. The key to achieving high levels of cycling appears to be the provision of separate cycling facilities along heavily travelled roads and at intersections, combined with traffic calming of most residential neighborhood 41 complemented by ample bike parking and full integration with public transport.

Being as separated as possible, with as many interconnected systems is the only way to ensure high levels of safety perception.

Segregation does not only include separation from motor vehicles, but pedestrians, as well.

Bicycle safety is usually quantified by measuring one or more of the following metrics: injuries, crashes, and conflicts. A conflict is defined as an interaction between a bicyclist and another road user where at least one of the parties has to change speed or direction to avoid a collision.

42 Sidewalks and multi-use/shared use paths present higher risks than cycle tracks and bike only 43 paths. ​Most studies that have considered sidewalk-riding suggested that it is particularly 44 hazardous for cyclists, with estimates of 1.8-16 times higher of a risk than road cycling.

Forcing cyclists into any shared space increases the chance of a conflict. Therefore, if integrating cyclists with pedestrians is not a viable solution, the same principle should carry over to the road. If one creates a bike lane next to motor vehicles, they risk the chance of having bicyclists’ space overtaken. Space should not be easily crossed over. The provision for this is the cycle track if true separation (such as specific trails) cannot be achieved.

39

Safe Cycling, p.S45 Safety Perceptions, p.41 41 Making Cycling Irresistible, p.495 42 Impact of Transport Infrastructure, p.4 43 Safety of Cycle Tracks, p.223 44 Impact of Transport Infrastructure, p.15 40

The principal trend that emerges is that clearly-marked, bike-specific facilities (I.e cycle tracks at roundabouts, bike routes, bike lanes, and bike paths) has consistently been shown to provide improved safety for cyclists compared to on-road cycling with traffic or off-road with pedestrians and other users. The injury and crash reduction rates were found to be about half 45 compared to unmodified roadways.

However, it is neither possible nor necessary to provide separate bike paths and lanes on lightly travelled residential streets, but they constitute as an important cycling route network. Thus Dutch, German, and Danish cities have limited speeds to 19mph and often prohibit through traffic in residential neighborhoods via traffic calming. Also, road narrowing, raise intersections, crosswalks, traffic circles, extra curves and zigzag routes, speed humps, and artificial dead ends are alterations implemented. Traffic calming is shown to improve overall 46 traffic safety and should be considered where cyclists bike the most. ​Designing residential streets to be safer for all users, not just convenient for motorized vehicles will lead to a safer network for bicyclists.

To cyclists who disagree with shared space, and prefer to stay on the road should be allowed to do so. It is suggested that network design should consider that on-road cyclists might infringe the rules of the road, and design for these cases bearing in mind that cyclists are categorized as 47 vulnerable road users. ​The pioneers of the process are the largest risk takers, and will cycle constantly. We cannot base our perception of the future of a system based merely in what we interact with.

For the general population, and for the boosting of cycling overall, the risk perception must be created with a child’s safety in mind. Children, as previously stated, in the USA are the highest users of bicycles at this point in time. They require a network that is separated, connected and 48 reduces their fear of traffic; as this connectivity encourages them to cycle more often.

Furthermore, a connected network with an environment as cycle/walk-friendly, that is 49 convenient, pleasant, and with direct roots activates their choice to cycle even more. ​The best way to create convenient roots in America, when not in the neighborhood, is through the provision of separated cycle tracks parallel to major road ways. Convenience, separation, and network connectivity must all be in a harmonious balance to foster growth. Cycle tracks must be convenient.

Convenience is very important in America, and we have a grid system that is structured to represent this. Our network focuses primarily on car use, therefore placing them next to our major roadways (like Vancouver) appears to be a norm. Since this is the case, proper merging

45

Impact of Transport Infrastructure, p.15 Making Cycling Irresistible, p.495, 496 47 Dublin City, p.509 48 Perceived Safety, p.42 49 New Zealand Pedestrian Guide, p.29 46

50

(20m<) and provisions need to be put into place to ensure safety between intersections. ​The most frequent collision type found is when a driver turned right while a bicyclist was approaching perpendicularly from the right. Fifty one percent of bicycle crashes have occurred 51 at intersections or are related to intersections. ​The driver looks for other cars primarily, and only 11% of the drivers noticed the cyclist prior to the collision, while 68% of the cyclists saw 52 the motor vehicle in one study. ​Effective measures to improving this perception of risk include ending cycle tracks before an intersection, locating cycle crossings less than 3m from parallel roads, giving a special bicyclist phase on crossings controlled by traffic signals, and 53 grade separating crossings.

If these special provisions cannot be achieved, raised crossings are another option to be considered. They have been shown to reduce the turn speed of vehicles by 40% which leads to 54 a 51% risk reduction. ​Colored lanes are also a viable solution, however their location needs to be considered, as it plays on their effectiveness in terms of safety. If placed at a smaller intersection with lower traffic volume, blue crossings for example, have been shown to decrease collisions. However, at higher volume intersections the colors disperse the driver’s 55 focus among too many crossings and the effectiveness becomes diluted.

Furthermore, the location of cycle tracks should consider other location factors such as the 56 natural topography. Hilliness is a key distraction to cycling, ​ and they should be factored out of locations, if possible, to encourage use. If a hill cannot be factored out, cyclists’ ascent up a 57 steep grade may need additional operating width due to being less stable at low speeds.

Design must coincide with the location, in short. But convenience for both should be a key.

Facilities that reduce risk reduction for a given journey time are more important to cyclists than 58 reduced journey time ​ ; so, if possible, the location of the entire cycle track should be carefully considered. The biggest incentive to increased cycling was the introduction of a network of 59 safe, convenient cycle routes, with other safety related factors to the next important.

To conclude, infrastructure’s design and location are essential to the success of promoting a high perceived sense of safety. If these elements are not constantly cross referenced, bicycle usage may not be suitable for the cost of implementation, nor the stimulation of numbers.

Cycle tracks when placed along roads of poor location or high traffic result in higher perceived sense of risk. Meanwhile unpaved paths, something as dangerous as shared roads, receive a 50

Safety of Urban Cycle Tracks, p.219 USDoT, p.16 52 Safety of Urban Cycle Tracks, p.222 53 Safety of Urban Cycle Tracks, p.223 54 Safety of Urban Cycle Tracks, p.224 55 Safety of Urban Cycle Tracks, p.224 56 Demand for Cycle Facilities, p.242 57 USDoT, p.49 58 Demand for Cycle Facilities, p.245 59 Demand for Cycle Facilities, p.244 51

lower risk rating. It has to do with context of the location and design. Cycle tracks should be intelligently designed to reduce confusion if crossing an intersection/road in general, be connected to a convenient and concise network, and provide proper separation at the same time, as much as possible, in the environment they are built. In residential neighborhoods (where they cannot exist) proper networks of connectivity and design elements such as traffic calming should be implemented. The key is to make the road connected and safe for all users, not just automobiles. If we continue to design our streets as autocentric, the holistic nature of the community will suffer.

Statements ● When proper infrastructure is in place, the number of bicycle trips will be stimulated, and lead to an increase in safety perception. ● The cycling experience should be designed for all ages and abilities. ● Building cycle tracks is not enough; their location, separation, and connectivity must be factored into the design. ● Adverse weather will have no effect on cycling if infrastructure is safe, well designed, and fosters numbers to encourage the behavior of cycling. ● Infrastructure should be clear, concise, and consistent in order to alleviate conflicts. ● If cycle specific infrastructure cannot be created, traffic calming in highly connected residential neighborhoods should be implemented.

Lighting Infrastructure would not be of much good if its potential exists during only half of a day. In summary, the need for lighting designed and placed to capture the highest perception of safety is the other side of the equation. If the style of the pole is too high, the lighting too dim and not designed to mimic daylight, not adequately spaced (causing pockets of darkness and recession for crime to be stimulated), safety perception will surely decline. Corners cannot be cut if long term societal gains are a goal; the system of lighting should be as interconnected as the infrastructure it supports.

In most people’s minds, there is a simple and direct relationship between lighting and crime: better lighting will deter offenders who benefit from the cover of darkness. Improved lighting means that offenders are more likely to be seen by someone who might intervene, call the police, or recognize the offender. Even if this does not happen, some offenders who fear that it might would be deterred from crime. Studies from the United States and the United Kingdom concluded that improved street lighting led to a 21% decrease in crime with comparable control 60 areas. ​With improved visibility, potential offenders are more exposed and less likely to 61 commit crimes. ​“Eyes on the street,” as Jane Jacobs said exists as a timeless lesson that we should never forget when designing and locating our space.

60 61

DoJ, p.13 Streetlights and Community Safety, p.100

Though, streetlights do more than prevent crime to increase safety perception. Improved street lighting can make a community feel safer overall. They allow safer operation of vehicles at night, reduce accidents, and assist traffic flow. Better light can also promote the nighttime operation of businesses and increase pedestrian street use after dark, which leads to a more 62 active, enhanced neighborhood. ​Also, lighting can signal more community investment, pride, 63 and cohesiveness, which also can lead to discouraging crime. ​An interconnected cycle of increased safety perception is apparent; elements must work in conjunction with each other in order to harbor the desired effect of the system. If elements lack, aspects of reinforcement will be neglected, causing the cycle to lose effectiveness at boosting safety perception.

It is important for citizens to feel cared for, as well. A large problem is the relation with local government, or American government in general, as of late. If interest in communities is perceived as low, with new lighting it shows that the city government and police are determined to control crime, and can increase community pride and cohesiveness, as well. This further activates the community, as the citizens become more invested in their infrastructure as 64 well, and are more prone to interaction. ​When citizens care more for the infrastructure, they are more inclined to watch and maintain it. Lighting can encourage residents to spend more time on their stoops or in their front yards in the evenings and thus increase informal surveillance. It can also encourage more people to walk at night, leading to further informal 65 surveillance.

An active, enhanced neighborhood is the goal; as this is the network that pedestrians and cyclists will use the most. People should feel safe in their community at all hours, and should be able to go out in the community without a sense of doubt in regards to their surroundings.

Having any ordinary light structure will not suffice, however. Studies have shown that pedestrians in intensively used areas prefer lighting to mimic daylight. This means systems should avoid using low-pressure sodium lights, as the yellow light they can produce has a high 66 level of color distortion. ​This effect is worsened if the lights are mounted on tall columns.

Lights of this sort further detract people by reducing the level of intimacy in the public place.

67 Furthermore, lights closer to the ground may encourage vandalism or introduce glare, as well.

Lights should be designed at a comfortable height, sitting below the tree canopy and of a style that creates a friendly atmosphere that people want to cycle or walk in. The color of lighting can be made friendly by the type of bulb used. Low pressure sodium lighting, as listed above, should be avoided. Mesopic lighting (white/green/blue = shorter wavelength) has been proven 68 to reduce luminesce of road surface glare and provide better visibility. ​Drivers and 62

Streetlights and Community Safety, p.101 Streetlights and Community Safety, p.100 64 DoJ, p.6-7 65 DoJ, p.5-6 66 New Zealand Pedestrian Guide, p.155 67 New Zealand Pedestrian Guide, p.154 68 White Light Safety, p.2 63

69

pedestrians alike said they felt safer and could see better with lights tuned to mesopic vision ​ ; furthermore, perceptions of brightness from this type of lighting is associated with perception 70 of safety.

In conclusion, lighting systems play an integral part to improving safety and supplementing infrastructure. Without lighting designed to be attuned to people’s preferred vision, sense of intimacy, and properly distributed and placed, safety perception decreases as the network loses a valuable system of connectivity. Connectivity with infrastructure leads to the elements sustained effectiveness at all hours, in addition to boosting community cohesion overall.

Statements ● Lighting should be appealing to the eye and mimic sunlight to create an intimate, inviting atmosphere. ● Systems should be consistent and evenly spaced so as to not encourage crime. ● Lighting systems should maximize the potential for informal surveillance. ● Lighting should foster sustained activation of space, even during dark.

Preservation Facilities need adequate maintenance. Without it, systems that initially encouraged walking 71 and cycling can become hazards or obstructions to pedestrian movement. ​Without tending to the flame over time, the wonderful design and location elements of lighting and infrastructure systems can slowly burn out; moving from once something effective, to something that hinders the process. If the city and residents do not feel invested enough in the system that is implemented, it will most likely slip into a state of slow decay. People need to care enough about the space to want to maintain it. Its use via increased numbers is what sustains this, and the perception of safety of safety overall. Everything is connected. These structures need to be created initially with a child’s use as the basis and in a holistic manner that pulls the numbers in to use it. When enough numbers are invested, when problems and decay begins to occur, the people notice. Things can only be preserved if people want to preserve the space; if it is worth it to them.

Observational Studies indicate that a large proportion of injuries and conflicts result from falls 72 and from collisions with route infrastructure. ​These conflicts occur due to potholes, raised sidewalks, and the sort of discrepancy that occurs over time when space does not have the incentive or resources to be maintained. Furthermore, this process is self-sustaining. If people do not care for the space, it will become neglected slowly over time, which then leads to a 69

White Light Safety, p.3 White Light Safety, p.5 71 New Zealand Pedestrian Guide, p.157 72 Safe Cycling, p.S42 70

sustained level of low safety perception. The strongest aversion felt for cyclists in Dublin has 73 been proven to be roads with poor quality surface. ​Possibly, in cities that prioritize cars, where people walk very little, there is little investment in the infrastructure since people do not become attached to their surroundings at a personal level?

Furthermore, location needs to factor in preservation when choosing a cycle track. If the track is placed near an area that generates debris; it will add a cumbersome process to keep up on.

Dirt, litter, glass, etc may accumulate where cyclists travel. This debris may puncture tires or 74 cause loss of control, especially on downgrades or curves.

The point of this factor is very simple: space needs to have design and location in mind that give people the incentive to use it. If use is increased, the chance of the space being preserved will also increase, as people feel more invested in it. If the space has a rocky foundation to begin with, it can slowly slip into decay, and perceived sense of safety with it. Once this process occurs, the vicious circle is hard to break and the space will most likely need to be redone entirely. Preservation is key to sustaining levels of safety necessary for use, and use is necessary for preservation.

Statements ● Well designed and located spaces induce investment. ● If space is not preserved, it risks falling into decay along with the space’s perceived sense of safety. ● Space placed in areas that foster debris will be more difficult to preserve.

73 74

Dublin City, p.504 USDoT, p.52

Perceived Safety Bibliography: Chataway, Elijah Steven, Sigal Kaplan, Thomas Alexander Sick Nielsen, and Carlo Giacomo Prato.

"Safety Perceptions and Reported Behavior Related to Cycling in Mixed Traffic: A Comparison between Brisbane and Copenhagen." ​ Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour​ , 2013, 32-43.

Clarke, R. V. G. ​ Improving Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas​ . Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2008. 1-62.

Farrington, Welsh, David P., Brandon. "Effects of Improved Street Lighting on Crime: A Systematic Review." In ​ Home Office Research Study 251​ , 1-60. London: Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, 2002.

Hopkinson, P., and M. Wardman. "Evaluating the Demand for New Cycle Facilities." ​ Transport Policy​ 3, no. 4 (1996): 241-49.

Lawson, Anneka R., Vikram Pakrashi, Bidisha Ghosh, and W.y. Szeto. "Perception of Safety of Cyclists in Dublin City." ​ Accident Analysis & Prevention​ , 2012, 499-511.

Moore, Eli, and Swati Prakash. "Streetlights and Community Safety." In ​ Measuring What Matters Neighborhood Research for Economic and Environmental Health and Justice in Richmond, North Richmond, and San Pablo​ . Oakland, CA: Pacific Institute, 2009.

Morante, Peter. "Mesopic Street Lighting Demonstration and Evaluation." <i>Lighting Research Center</i> Final Report (208): 1-70.

Nabors, Dan. ​ Bicycle Road Safety Audit Guidelines and Prompt Lists​ . Final Report. ed.

Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 2012.

1-87.

NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide​ . Washington, D.C.: National Association of City Transportation Officials, 2011.

Neighborhoods for People​ . Copenhagen: Gehl Architects, 2010. 50.

Pedestrian Planning and Design Guide​ . Wellington, N.Z.: Land Transport New Zealand, 2009.

188.

Pucher, John, and Ralph Buehler. "Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany." ​ Transport Reviews​ 28, no. 4 (2008): 495-528.

Reynolds, Harris, Teschke, Cripton, Winters, Conor, M. Anne, Kay, Peter, Meghan. ​ The Impact of Transportation Infrastructure on Bicycling Injuries and Crashes: A Review of the Literature​ . Vancouver: BioMed Central, 2009. 1-16.

Street Design Manual​ . Second ed. New York City: New York City Department of Transportation, 2013. 1-264.

Thomas, Beth, and Michelle Derobertis. "The Safety of Urban Cycle Tracks: A Review of the Literature." ​ Accident Analysis & Prevention​ , 2012, 219-27.

Winters, Babul, Becker, Brubacher, Chipman, Cripton, Cusimano, Friedman, Harris, Hunte, Monro, Reynolds, Shen, Teschke, Meghan, Shelina, Jack, Jeffery R., Mary, Peter, Michael, Steven, Anne, Garth, Melody, Conor, Hui, Kay. "Safe Cycling: How Do Risk Perceptions Compare With Observed Risk?" ​ Revue Canadienne De Sante Publique​ 103, no. 3 (2012): S42-S47.

Aesthetics Literature Review - Written by Brian Smith

All our distinct senses, in our entire body, work collaboratively to give us a perception of the world. Our eyes, ears, nose, speed, memory, and spatial engagement of the body, all transform how one experiences the space around them. For bicyclists, feeling safe and purposeful on a ride are foremost concerns, the beauty and enjoyment of the ride tend to be forgotten until the other two factors are met.

“In recent years, it has become evident that not only functional and infrastructural qualities influence the affective, evaluative response to a city, but its aesthetic qualities play a crucial role as well”75 It is important to understand that everyone has a different opinion based on objectives, attitudes, needs, preferences, and expectations. Furthermore, any opinion is never perfect, and inside any subjective circumstance there is always an ideal at the end of the path. The Aesthetic portion of this evaluation is to ensure the rider is given the opportunity to enjoy the beauty around them in a way only a bike ride can provide.

Landscapes The notion of distance, how far or close something is, represents where objects are in relation to the bicyclist. “The distance between the perceiver as well as distance between elements in the space, help shape an overall picture important to the aesthetic experience”.76 Regarding landscape and distance there are two distinct modes: participatory and panorama. The participatory landscape is nearby and accesses more senses due to its close proximity and enclosed feeling. In participation with their surroundings, the bicyclist is stimulated by smells, sounds, temperature, weather, and quickly changing visuals. In contrast, the panorama landscape presents an open, far away or inaccessible region. It is also more likely that this mode be on or near a road or a viewpoint.

75 76

​ Aesthetics of Streetscapes, p. 128 ​ A Theoretical Perspective on How Bicycle Commuters Might Experience Aesthetic Features of Urban Space,​ p. 504

Statements ● Participatory landscapes offer the most senses. ● Participatory landscapes isolate bicyclists allowing for comfort to survey their surroundings. ● Participatory landscapes offer a sense of continuity.

Vegetation The natural-flora world encompasses diverse characteristics: growth, change in color, smells, and a bonding relation with a diverse group of fauna. Throughout the year, these characteristics change with the weather, and are adapted to the climate. They are as much living as we are. “Not surprisingly, the most influential dimension in aesthetic environmental perception in this study is Factor I: Vegetation. Various positive effects of vegetation like the reduction of fear and crime rates in a number of settings (Kuo & Sullivan, 2001) and aiding recovery from stress and fatigue (Cackowski & Nasar, 2003) have been reported.77 The presence or absence of vegetation clearly had the strongest influence. Especially scenes with the combined presence of the factors Symmetry and Vegetation were strongly judged toward the beautiful”. 78 In their study, any addition or reduction of trees caused drastic changes in their rankings. They concluded that vegetation served as a primary spatial boundary, which seems fit considering vegetation is found on the exteriors of buildings, alongside paths, streets, corridors, parks, lobbies...anyplace seeking to give some appeal. It should be a reminder that native population vegetation serves a dual purpose, both restoring the physical world and human mind.

77 78

Aesthetics of Streetscapes, p. 139 Aesthetics of Streetscapes, p. 144

Statements ● Naturalness consists of diversity, movement, and change, which imitates our living self. ● Vegetation helps both the physical environment and the bicyclist. ● Vegetation serves multiple purposes: provides protection, smells, and colors.

Homogeneity of Scale Homogeneity of Scale is otherwise known as symmetry between the scale or size of objects that share a space. When riding down a path or street, do the sizes and scales of buildings, trees, and other street elements feel “right”? An open space edged with a tall tree line, or four-story building can be unappealing or too drastic—out of scale. An example of this from Weber is, “When there were buildings on one and trees on the other, a picture would improve in rating when the boundaries were of equal height and thus the spatial figure in between the two was symmetrical”.79 Overall, an out of scale area may or may not be of aesthetic value. The key word is natural, according to R. Weber, et al, state, “A strong positive effect could be observed for the removal of a large, out-of-scale office building”.80 Another way to differentiate between what is out of scale is how it affects different users, “To be effective, they read both at a scale that relates to vehicles and pedestrians, and are visually effective at vehicle speed, (bicycle speed), and walking pace”.81 Statements ● In-scale landscape and architecture eases a sense of conflict and disparity. ● Equal scale prevents stark, obtrusive contrasts that distract bicyclists’ attention. ● Homogenous scale bridges spaces together, creating a sense of connection

Stylistic Uniformity An aesthetic has some form of uniformity, even in an art piece of seemingly disparate elements there is structure. Single pathways that have continuity and follow a theme have high judgmental value. A consistent theme enables a bicyclist to enjoy their ride, reduce commute time, and it helps creates a sense of belonging and familiarity. In choosing a theme, “Create a distinctive identity or character for the transit facility that resonates with the identity of the community at large. Select a theme that will be universally valued by the diversity of users”.82 Incorporating cultural or natural characteristics that are indigenous to the area are just one style that can blend and give authenticity to the area.

79

Aesthetics of Streetscapes, p. 143 Aesthetics of Streetscapes, p. 139 81 ​ City of Boulder Transit Village Area Public Art Master Plan, p. 82 82 ​ City of Boulder Transit Village Area Public Art Master Plan, p.80 80

Gate-like or grand entrances act as nodes and landmarks, serving to delineate themes that can create “aesthetic uniformities”, similar to theme parks. To add to this, stylistic uniformity provides recognition, location awareness, and a feeling of safety. similar design shapes, artistic features, colors and surface textures separating pedestrian and biking zones are always simple thematic reminders of separation.

Statements ● Uniformity and consistency allows the users senses to adjust and relax— to get into the flow and enjoy surrounding elements. ● Consistent themes help recognition and building of value judgments. ● Indigenous and cultural elements create a sense of belonging and pride.

Balance “The interrelation of order and complexity is, according to Kaplan and Kaplan (1982), the product of the human need for involvement and comprehension”.83 A balance refers to a state of equilibrium, where the elements are in equal weight to each other. For example, having too many houses doesn’t look natural and having too many trees doesn’t look civilized.

“For example, access is not simply an instrumental quality to be maximized. “Access cannot be measured by the sheer quantity of things that can be reached at given levels of cost and expenditure of time. Mere quantity loses its meaning once a satisfying level is attained. Value then turns to the degree of choice offered among accessible resources (Lynch 1984, p. 191)”.84 In other words, if there were an overflow of bike lanes, an emphasis on varieties of choice would essentially scaffold the perceived aesthetic quality based on a premise that is human-created. Too much instrumental value, or stress on creating more and better bike facilities, might detract from what could be a subtler, comfortable approach. Rather than go the extra step, it is nobler, and even easier to take steps back; find balance within an authentic, original source. Essentially balance is recognition of what can be taken away, and what should be left alone. Balance can exist on the level of maintenance or as stated above as option.

Sometimes balance is virtually impossible or even worse, not aesthetically valuable, ultimately a balanced list of positives and negatives might help pursue viable options. Farash gives a good account of the stressing of balance, “The structure may not display messages with text, or contain any words or alphanumeric characters. The artist’s insignia may be inscribed or etched on a small plaque affixed to the artwork, or placed on the artwork itself. The insignia shall not be visible from the roadway so as to not cause a distraction for drivers or cyclists”.85 83 84

85

Aesthetics of Streetscapes, p. 130 ​ A Theoretical Perspective on How Bicycle Commuters Might Experience Aesthetic Features of Urban Space,​ p. 508 Chapter 9: Landscape and Community Features, p.9-11

Statements ● Balance prevents disallows infrastructure problems from getting carried always and allows bicycle critics to focus on what’s actually important. ● A balance in order and complexity satisfies a wholesome need for people to feel welcome and not out of place. ● Balance keeps bicyclist centered and better able to focus on what’s in front of them.

Reflection The criterions given are scaffolds or templates from which future applications should adhere.

They are the outlines only, uncolored structural frames on an empty substrate. Myself, as part layman and barely expert, recognize that flowing in the right direction is fundamentally what’s at stake; start by asking if the space has the basic qualities from the rubric and then allow for a discussion​ on the higher, more in-detail aesthetics. Follow the snowpack I have set to the river, along its channels and inevitable river banks, and before emptying into an ideal, monotonous ocean, pullback into the delta—a place of constant change and diversity.

Mainly, one needs to account for how that aesthetic is perceived on the spectrum of an individual bike rider, to a group of out-of-towners taking a walk, to a larger level of what the aesthetic of University Washington represents as a whole. Create an aesthetic that is naturally pleasant to. The question is, do we build a unifying aesthetic or separate, autonomous aesthetic that conforms to the individual’s needs who encounter them most often?

Not only can aesthetics bear a subjective attitude, but can quickly become a hot political debate as a change in circumstances quickly affects expectations. Mostly problematic, concerning UW specifically, is the diverse backgrounds of students, faculty, and public who enter campus for entirely different reasons. Will commuters feel obstructed by the wants and needs of the leisurely rider, or does a stronger emphasis on bicycle friendliness clash with pedestrian and vehicle perceptions? Ultimately, I hope to have conveyed that a good quality aesthetic involves the seamless integration (rather than separation) of walking, biking, and riding into a beautiful place for all.

Aesthetics Bibliography: Cazeaux, Clive. "From Sensation to Categorization: Aesthetic Metaphor in Locke and Merleau-Ponty." ​ Journal of Visual Art Practice​ 4.2 & 3 (2005): 111-24. Print.

"Chapter 9: Landscape and Community Features." ​ Plans Preparation Manual: Design Criteria and Process​ . Ed. Scott Farash. Vol. 1. Tallahassee, Florida: Florida Department of Transportation, 2014. 9-1 to 9-16. Print.

"City of Boulder Transit Village Area Public Art Master Plan." (2009). StudioTerra, Inc., Tarras LLC, Christian Muller Inc. Web. 20 Nov. 2014. <https://www-static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/tvap-public-art-master-plan-1-2013041 81635.pdf>.

Gemzoe, Lars. "Quality for People: A set of quality criteria for the design of pedestrian places and networks - with people in mind." The 7th International Conference on Walking and Liveable Communities. Walk21-VII. "The Next Steps", Melbourne, Australia. 24 Oct. 2006. Reading.

Holdhuson, Bruce. ​ Minnesota: Department of Transportation: Bikeway Facility Design Manual​ .

Minnesota: Kuen Lai-Nelson, 2007. Print.

Lovasi, Gina S., Ofira Schwartz-Soicher, Kathryn M. Neckerman, Kevin Konty, Bonnie Kerker, James Quinn, and Andrew Rundle. "Aesthetic Amenities and Safety Hazards Associated with Walking and Bicycling for Transportation in New York City." ​ Annals of Behavioral Medicine​ (2012): 76-85. Print.

Scharnhorst, Eric, and Katherine Wimble. ​ Neighborhoods for People​ . Seattle: Seattle Toolkit, 2010. Print.

Shkuda, Aaron. "Art, Artists, and the Image of the Twentieth Century City." ​ Journal of Urban History​ (2011): 444-50. Print.

Staniæ, Branimir, and Darko Vujin. "NEW AESTHETICS OF THE CITY – DESIGN OF CYCLISTS TRAFFIC SIGNS." ​ TRANSPORT​ (2005): 257-64. Print.

Stefansdottir, Harpa. "A Theoretical Perspective on How Bicycle Commuters Might Experience Aesthetic Features of Urban Space." ​ Journal of Urban Design​ 19.4 (2014): 496-510. Print.

Tufts, James H. "On the Genesis of the Aesthetic Categories" ​ The Philosophical Review​ XII.1 (1903): 1-15. Print.

Weber, Ralf, Jorg Schinier, and Thomas Jacobsen. "AESTHETICS OF STREETSCAPES: INFLUENCE OF FUNDAMENTAL PROPERTIES ON AESTHETIC JUDGMENTS O F URBAN SP AC." 106 (2008): 128-46. Print.