JULY,1974
THE GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA
FOR
BIKEWAY AND BIKEPATH
NETWORK PLANNING
IN
METROPOLITAN CENTERS
I
53
\
Ul
CD
PREPARED FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK
NORTH CAROLINA, 27711
CONTRACT: 4-02-04395
BY
6201 Unburg Pike Suite 21!
Fills Church. Virgin!. 22044
-------
THE GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR
BIKEWAY AND BIKEPATH NETWORK
PLANNING IN METROPOLITAN CENTERS
PREPARED BY
IROQUOIS RESEARCH INSTITUTE
620] Leesburg Pike Suite 215
Falls Church, Virginia 22(M
FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Land Use Planning Branch
Research Triangle Park
North Carolina 277H
EPA Project Officer: Lewis D. Tamny
EPA CONTRACT NO. 4-02-0^395
JULY 9, 197*»
-------
EPA
A-02-04395
JULY 9, 197**
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter A
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
DETERMINATION OF NEEDS
BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION
BIKEWAY DESIGN CRITERIA
PRESENT AND MODIFIED RULES OF THE ROAD
PARKING AND SECURITY
ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EXHIBITS
1
3
II
16
20
23
27
32
3A
36
Figure 1, Page 18> entitled "Standard Superelevation for Bikeways" and Table
1, Page 19, entitled "Design Stopping Sight Distances for Bicycles" have been
reproduced with the written permission of the Oregon Highway Division.
-------
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
As part of the effort to implement transportation control strategies for the
improvement of air quality, these Guidelines have been developed to assist persons
engaged in planning and in establishing exclusive bicycle lanes outside the usual
roadway right-of-way (ROW); and of bicycle parking and security measures which will
instill confidence on the part of the bicycling public.
A separate document of Guidelines and Criteria for planning bikeways and
bikepaths within existing roadway right-of-ways will be undertaken in response to
public and regional demand.
1.2 CONTENT
These Guidelines include physical design criteria for exclusive bicycle lanes,
environmental assessment considerations, rules of the road for motorists or bicyclists
where exclusive bicycle lanes cross or intersect with established motor vehicle road-
ways, or with other publicly used trails or lanes outside roadway ROW.
Principally addressed by these Guidelines is the development of bicycle facilities
in a metropolitan milieu with emphasis on the access to and egress from the Central
Business District (CBD) and of adequate, secure parking.
Although these Guidelines address various bicycle transportation alignments
outside the usual roadway ROW, one option is presented wherein a bikeway parallels
a public road ROW and thus may be considered a useful guide for planning a bicycle
lane within such a ROW.
- 1 -
-------
The technical criteria, methods and procedures represent a synthesis and a
distillation of applicable bicycle facility planning experiences in the United States
and in foreign countries.
- 2 -
-------
CHAPTER 2
DETERMINATION OF NEEDS
2.1 EXISTING AND POTENTIAL BICYCLE COMMUTATION
The first and fundamental values to determine quantitatively are: (1) how many
residents of the region do now use bicycles to travel between their homes and frequent
destinations (called generator points) for all or for part of the transits, at what
times of day, how often, and along what routes of travel; and (2) how many additional
residents now using other modes of transportation would use a bicycle for all or part
of these transits if safe and convenient bikeways were made available.
These determinations should be established through accurate survey methodology
by which broad and representative population samples will identify the actual and the
probable bicycle users, their characteristics and their desired lines of travel. The
projected volume of use along identified desired lines of travel should be interpreted
logically and useably by establishing desire lines which penetrate completely from
collector areas to a generator point.
The latter may be a high employment point, a popular shopping point, a campus or
any other likely place. The desire line and the proposed penetrating alignment should
be compatible, with the desire line having been developed from user surveys and the
penetrator lines having been established from subsequent planning.
2.1.1 SURVEYS
2.1.1.1 Cordon Counts
Traffic engineering personnel should, when existing bicycle use so
justifies, establish cordon counts to inventory actual bicycle usage into and out of
the CBD and other target zones of interest. Cordon counts are only useful for
- 3 -
-------
determining existing volumes on an hourly basis. An additional effort to the
numerical count could provide origin and destination data, and depending on the
additional methodology employed, could provide user characteristics. The cordon
count will give the existing relationship of bicycle use to other transportation
modes used. There is insufficient experience and data to permit extrapolation of
cordon count values to predict volumes of bicycle use after improvements are made.
For epidemiological purposes, the probable rate of occurence of individuals
stating they are now commuting bicyclists is less than 5% in most areas of the
s
United States. A well known exception is Davis, California with 31% which matches
the actual use of bicycles on arterial streets in some major European cities, such
as Copenhagen.
2.1.1.2 Surveying at the Generator Points
For comprehensive planning purposes, reactive data collected through
surveys at generator points will usually provide the most valuable information on
both actual and probable bicyclists, their characteristics, the desire lines of
travel and other useful origin and destination data. Employers and building managers
will have an interest in the administration of such surveys because of the possible
employee benefits and improvements in traffic circulation.
Some generator points present a different evaluation process. A good example Is
a popular tourist generator point. When existing facilities already exist for bicycle
use and for bicycle parking, - and the fact is or will be made known to tourists,
slightly under k% of the visiting motor vehicles can be estimated to carry bicycles
on racks for use at the destination.
Prior experience has demonstrated that bicycle commutation Is more common when
penetrator distances are reasonable, where the bikeway grades are tolerable, and if
secure bicycle storage or parking is available. In order to obtain the most accurate
- 4 -
-------
estimates possible for potential bicycle usage, and thus of the required facilities,
the survey should be carefully framed to obtain realistic values from the survey
respondents. In projecting demands for utility bikeways the planner should maintain
a growth factor consistent with local demographic tendencies and land use plans.
2.1.1.3 User Group Surveys
Active bicycling groups or clubs can provide more expert advice on
existing needs and deficiencies than can the general population. The survey design
should reflect (1) the skewed nature of the population and (2) a much higher response
rate. For epidemiological purposes, individuals in this category occur 2% or less
and their likelihood of bicycling thirty miles or more in a week is 50%. For technical
operating data, i.e. specific impediments or hazardous conditions, this group will
provide the most valuable information.
2.1.2 OTHER PERTINENT DATA SOURCES
2.1.2.1 Local Police and Motor Vehicle Departments
The planner should avail himself of police and motor vehicle statistics
on injuries arising from motor vehicle and bicycle conflicts. These statistics will
provide situation data and will identify danger areas for bikeway alignments; and will
indicate areas and corridors which can benefit from corrective design or which must or
should be avoided; or may indicate justification for exclusive bikeway facilities.
Police also will be able to assist in planning secure parking areas and to deter-
mine financial or manpower implications for patrolling exclusive bikeways. In recent
years, bicycle larceny has increased significantly, and the threat of the loss of a
bicycle is known to be a deterrent to utility bicycling.
Therefore, a comprehensive bicycle plan must address the multijurisdictional
problem faced by police in their attempt to reduce the incidence of bicycle theft
and to increase their return-to-owner rate of recovered bicycles. Therefore, the
- 5 -
-------
plan should address at least two objectives: (1) regional agreement on registration
and (2) a central file for reported stolen bicycles.
2.1.2.2 Local Planning
Zoning, land use and park experts can make significant contributions by
identifying or designating land space for possible bikeway corridors and for project-
ing demographic and land use values. The comprehensive plan should incorporate these
factors when establishing penetrator routes to accommodate desire lines of travel.
Park and Recreation planners have unique qualifications to assist in the regional
plan since there are heavy demands on them for recreational bicycling. The combination
of recreational and utilitarian justification for certain alignments should not be
ignored. This follows from the fact that many CBD's are in riverine setting and
tributary stream valleys are often designated parkland. Under appropriate environ-
mental safeguards, this land may be usable for exclusive and safe bikeways.
Recreational bike trail alignments are rarely utility motivated and bike trail
design criteria in parkland differs considerably from that of utility bikeways in
similar settings. But, the multipurpose design can sometimes be effected through
reasonable design compromises, environmentally and economically. The differences
should be quantified.
2.1.2.3 Legal Considerations
City attorneys or community solicitors should be Involved early in the
planning process. Many localities have existing regulations related to bicycle
movement, rules of the road, authorized travel areas, prohibited areas and some form
of bicycle registration.
Many such regulations were enacted when the use and design of bicycles were
significantly different than the situation today. While the evolution of new traffic
control warrants for utility bicycling is fluid, the distinction between former and
- 6 -
-------
present use and design is quite apparent. For example, the design of some roadway
intersections and the legal constraints governing movement of bicycles make it impos-
sible for bicyclists to negotiate some intersections safely or legally.
In case of a bicyclist approaching an intersection along a street with a right-
turn-only lane he may be confronted with the following problems: (1) • legally he may
be confined to the right-turn-only lane (local ordinances often state that bicycles
must be ridden only on the extreme right side of the roadway) and cannot either
legally or safely cross motor vehicle lanes to make a left turn; (2) he will be in
violation of law if he makes a left turn or proceeds straight through the intersection
from the right-turn-only lane; and (3) even in making a right turn he will be in
danger of colliding with a right-turning motor vehicle.
The traffic control warrants for solving this particular problem may take one or
a combination of the following: (1) if bicycles will be allowed to turn left at
the intersection they should be allowed to move to the left-turn (center lane) before
arriving at the intersection or (2) be provided with and required to use an exclusive
bike crossing lane adjacent to the pedestrian crosswalk (if such is present), in which
case the left turn would be accomplished by two successive street crossings similar to
the maneuvers of a pedestrian; (3) for bicycles proceeding straight through the
intersection allow them to move to the through motor vehicle lane or alternatively
cross the intersection in a bike crossing lane on the pedestrian signal phase, in
which case the bicyclist would be subjected to danger of conflict with right-turning
motor vehicles similar to that of pedestrians; (A) only special signal phases for
bicycles could eliminate most conflicts in such intersection situations.
In many localities such engineering design changes as those suggested above
are subject to state or local laws and to judicial precedence on questions of public
liability where no specific statute covers all the obligations and rights of bicyclists
- 7 -
-------
in unique situations. Certain roadway ROW situations fall under Federa) Law which
prohibits bikeway alignments. In particular, the legal review will identify legal
constraints and possible legal remedies both of which should be addressed in the
planning.
2.2 INVENTORY OF EXISTING RESOURCES, CONDITIONS AND MOTIVES
2.2.1 Motives and Interests
The motivating forces behind comprehensive bikeway planning may differ
from community to community. Generally, utility bicycle proponents may be health
enthusiasts, environmentally concerned citizens, commuters exhausted by motor vehicle
costs or from fuel shortages. Such user characteristics may be useful in the planning
to determine general propensity to use a bicycle arising from socio-environmental
settings of the demographic units under study.
Employers, for example, may want their employees to have an additional economical
choice of mode of travel to the. point of employment. The employer and the employee
union will have a direct interest in any bicycle network plan involving parking
facilities on one hand and the possibility of significant gains in employee spendable
income reserves.
Retail business has a vital interest in the city core as well as in a suburban
shopping area. The increased use of bicycling for some forms of shopping has been
taking hold and retail groups are concerned about secure and convenient bicycle
parking and handling in relation to other customers and to parcel pick-up areas.
2.2.2 Existing Resources and Conditions
The community should appropriately baseline the relevant existing
facilities and resources to determine actual public use of facilities such as road-
ways, parklands, and parking facilities; and to determine which might be made available
for bicycle lanes, trails, exclusive bikeways and other bicycling infrastructure.
- 8 -
-------
2.2.3 Existing Transportation Network Conditions
Main arterials into the CBD should be evaluated and classified according
to their intensity of motor vehicle use and to their legal or regulatory status. A
classification such as that devised by the State of New Jersey is a particularly
useful step in the planning process.
In New Jersey the state-controlled highway system was inventoried and classified
as to acceptability for bicycle use into the following four classes:
GREEN: conducive to safe riding, shoulder wide and in good condition, traffic volume
very low; BLUE: caution when using, shoulder fair to good, traffic volumes could
cause safety hazard; AMBER: extreme caution when using, shoulder in poor condition
or less than six feet wide, traffic volumes would cause definite problem; RED:
avoid, no shoulder, curbed, extensive parking, state or Federal highway with re-
strictions on bicycle use.
The intended classification should reveal which arterials are under excessive
motor vehicle pressure and which, for reasons of volume or of speed, may be hazardous
for bicycling. This determination is as valuable as the classification of suitable
roadways to neatly ascertain, on a status quo basis, the inventory of available
bikeway penetrators. Where there is an obvious gap between an important desire line
and a lack of potential penetrators, an exclusive bikeway is indicated.
2.3 ESTABLISHING VOLUME/CAPACITY CRITERIA OF A BIKEWAY NETWORK
2.3.1 Limi tations
Applicable traffic control warrants to identify criteria for establishing
exclusive bikeways do not yet exist in the United States. Some such criteria does
exist in a few foreign countries. In some cases, the criteria is unattainable in the
very jurisdiction which established the values. Criteria is generally based on a
certain number of bicyclists per hour or per day passing a measuring point, and of
- 9 -
-------
motor vehicles; the results of which provide additive combinations to determine the
type, number and width of bicycle lanes or bikeways.
2.3.2 Volume Criteria on Exclusive Bikeways
Volume capacities should be reported or estimated as a function of number
of lanes and of one-way or two-way traffic flow. Criteria and computations used in
the Netherlands is representative of other foreign criteria, though somewhat more
conservative. The Netherlands criteria is summarized as follows:
Traffic
Di rection
One-way
One-way
Two-way
Two-way
Number of Lanes
1
2
1
3
Effective
Lane Width
3.2 ft.
3.2 ft.
3.2 ft.
3.2 ft.
Estimated Capacity
Bicycles/hr.
1 ,700 -
3,400 -
850 -
1,700 -
2,000
A, 000
1,000
2,000
2.3.A Procedure
The network plan should quantify the expected differences in mix of
transportation modes along a penetrator route on the basis of a safe bikeway design
having been made available. The capacity of the bikeway, whether one or more lanes
and either one or two-way, and its design should be rationalized on the basis of
safe handling by an average utility bicyclist at the time of peak capacity.
- 10 -
-------
CHAPTER 3
BIKEWAY CONSTRUCTION
3.1 GENERAL
Five particular task studies should be undertaken prior to the selection of
final penetrator alignments:
(a) The probable size and geographical extent of the bicycling infrastructure.
(b) The desire lines from collector areas to generator points or zones.
(c) Present and projected bicycle use for each desire line or corridor.
(d) The locations of significant generator points and numbers of commuters
and modes of commutation associated with each.
(e) Available locations for parking and/or intermodal transfer points.
The results of these studies will enable the planner to align the penetrators
either within or outside of ROW, and to determine the exclusive bike lanes that are
needed and their infrastructure. Where utility bicycling can not be safely or
efficiently located in a ROW, the alternative alignments outside the ROW should be
found to accommodate utility bicyclists.
3.1.1 Suitable Exclusive Bikeway Sites
3.1.1.1 Parklands
Some parklands are often ideal locations for bikeways, primarily for
recreational bicycling but increasingly for utility bicycling as well. For utility
use, linear parkland is the most advantageous, although any parcel of parkland may
be usable if it falls along the desired penetrator route.
Parklands often provide the safest bikeway routes but in some instances have the
extra corresponding protection of environmental regulations. In some instances the
- 11 -
-------
adverse impact caused by bikeway construction could be unacceptable (23 U.S.C.
138: A2 U.S.C. ^331 (b)). In many cases the potential adverse impacts can be
reduced to an acceptable level through the application of suitable design and con-
struction criteria and performance stipulations. While these might increase con-
struction costs, the total cost of implementing a bikeway network may be less than
if other alternatives are used.
These cautionary considerations are not meant to steer planners away from park-
lands as sites for exclusive bikeways. They are intended to highlight the judgment
factors to be considered. Because parkland characteristics are so variable, some
parkland may be unsuitable for bikeways because the adverse environmental Impact will
be unacceptable and some may be unsuitable for other reasons, such as adverse topo-
graphy over which it would be prohibitively expensive to build bikeways.
3.1.1.2 Utility Corridors
Utility corridors have the advantages of being cleared linear spaces
connecting suburban power, sewer and water treatment plants with cities. Gravity
sewer routes are usually free of steep grades; but often have the disadvantages
associated with numerous stream crossings, being discontinuous at road crossings,
and often traversing poorly drained land. Water and sewer lines are often publicly
owned while other transmission facilities such as gas, petroleum, telephone and
power, might be publicly or commercially owned.
Utility rights-of-way are often only easements across numerous parcels of
private property and any agency proposing to use such a right-of-way for a public
bikeway would have to negotiate new and specific easements with each of the land-
owners, as well as with the utility company, for use of the right-of-way; and assume
liability for the operation of the bikeway as a public facility. If the right-of-way
is owned outright by the utility or if the utility is publicly owned, easements and
- 12 -
-------
assumptions of liability might be more easily negotiated.
3.1.1.3 Abandoned Railroads
In recent years much railroad ROW has been abandoned. A major portion
of which is in rural areas. A railroad ROW offers the advantage of direct routings
penetrating into an urban core, easy gradients, a stabilized roadbed and the oppor-
tunity to construct bikeways without creating new adverse environmental impacts.
Building a bikeway within the ROW of an operating railroad is often not feasible for
reasons of safety and liability. Even a seldom used siding ROW may be unsuitable
for the same reasons unless satisfactory technical and safety features can be
established.
3.1.1.** Canal Banks^ Floodways and Levees
These areas are usually publicly owned or are covered by publicly
owned easements. They are often contiguous to or part of parkland areas. Paved
floodways in urban settings make suitable sites for utility bikeways if flooding is
infrequent and the routing matches a needed penetrator corridor.
Flash flooding can be a serious hazard for floodways and provision should be
made, in appropriate cases, for: (1) flood warnings, (2) emergency exiting from
depressed floodways, and (3) rapid and effective bikeway closure during a flood
warning or flood alert. These alignments offer nearly level routes except for short,
steep bank ascents and descents.
Where a motor vehicle road already exists on a canal bank or levee, a bikeway
paralleling this road might be preferable to paralleling other roads, as routes
would have few steep grades and usually fewer intersections with roads and streets.
Displacement of, and conflict with motor vehicles would be low or nil for a floodway
which passes under intersecting roadways. This important advantage should be weighed
against available overhead clearances and local flooding hazard history.
- 13 -
-------
3.1.1.5 Shores of Lakes and of Reservoirs
The shores of natural and man-made lakes or reservoirs are suitable for
exclusive bikeways when they: (1) are relatively undeveloped and publicly owned,
(2) are watershed which can accept the impact of bikeway construction, and (3)
provide routes that have continuity of a penetrator route without being excessively
ci rcui tous.
The last criterion is usually the most limiting factor for utility alignments.
If the body of water is within a stream valley park it will be protected by the same
environmental safeguards as other parkland routes.
3.1.1.6 Maintenance Roads
Seldom used maintenance roads often lead to power and sewage treatment
plants or parallel public utility and transmission lines. If publicly owned or
covered by publicly owned easements through private property, bikeways can often be
accommodated with minor changes in existing arrangements regarding easements or
liability.
3.1.1.7 Easements Through Private Property
Easements can be most readily obtained in areas of new development or
of urban renewal and new land use where bikeway plans and easements can be required
through local ordinance. For example, Fairfax County, Virginia, has amended the County
Subdivision Control Ordinance (Chapter 23 of the County Code) by adding the following
to Section 23~2(i):
"In addition trails or walkways shall be constructed by the developer
in accordance with the general locations shown on adopted comprehensive plans
together with such other connecting trails or walkways within the subdivision.
When such trails or walkways are to be constructed, fee title or easements
shall be conveyed to the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Fairfax County
Park Authority, Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority, or a Homeowners
Association, as deemed appropriate by the Director. The final location and
design of trails or walkways is to be determined by the Director after
review by the Fairfax County Park Authority and/or the Northern Virginia
Regional Park Author!ty..."
- 14 -
-------
3.1.1.8 Purchase of Private Land
The fee simple purchase of land for exclusive bikeways may sometimes
be economically prohibitive in the CBD or in some high land value zones but may be
the only reasonable link or method to complete an otherwise reasonable penetrator
route.
3.1.1.9 Other Public Lands
Relatively few communities have public forests, military reservations,
research stations, and other public facilities or land which are either extensive
or close enough to the CBD to provide potential and usable bikeway routing. Public
school lands are most adaptable when contiguous to other public lands such as parks.
They are often discontinuous, however, and sometimes present particularly sensitive
security problems to school administrators.
While all bikeway network planning requires that adequate safety and security
provisions be incorporated, the planner should meet the security requirements
peculiar to school administration when alignments through or next to school land is
under consideration.
- 15 -
-------
CHAPTER
BIKEWAY DESIGN CRITERIA
k.\ GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Because comprehensive utility bikeway planning is new and is to be superimposed
upon a complex infrastructure of man-made and natural features in a metropolitan
setting, the physical parameters to be established should be flexible and reasonable.
Rigid adherence to an ideal lane width, for example, could result in a determina-
tion that a particular penetrator route is unfeasible. On the other hand, too great
a relaxation of minimum standards may result in an unsafe or unused bikeway. The
first planning step should be to incorporate into the planning process the individuals
experienced in weighing trade-offs among factors of safety, routing, traffic, security,
engineering design, cost and environmental assessment.
^.2 SPECIFIC DESIGN CRITERIA
1».2.1 Width
It is general and accepted practice today to establish the minimum width
of a two-way bikeway at 8 feet. Within this width, it is possible for two bicycles
to meet, pass and maneuver safely at reasonable speed under conditions of moderate
bikeway volume. This width also permits the passage of maintenance vehicles of
average dimensions. Since maintenance and keeping bikeways free of litter is one of
the major requirements for safe bicycling, this minimum width is usually required for
one-way bikeways intended for utility bicycling. From the cost considerations, the
average linear cost per foot for an 8 foot width is generally more cost-beneficial
than for the narrower 6 foot width, the minimum acceptable width for virtually all
circumstances and settings.
- 16 -
-------
4.2.2 Side Clearances
Side clearances should be a minimum of two feet on either side of a two-
way bikeway with greater clearances on the inside of curves, especially on curves of
short radii and where the pavement has some banking. A recommended course is to
slightly widen the pavement on curves. Bike trails in densely wooded settings should
be cleared of undergrowth and of low hanging tree branches, particularly on the inside
of curves. One-way bikeways generally require the same lateral clearances except on
the outside of curves.
A.2.3 Vertical Clearances
Little rationale for criteria to determine vertical clearance to static
objects is given in domestic or foreign literature. The minimum can be quantified
on a physical basis up to a certain distance beyond which various psychological and
safety margins are added. The State of Oregon has determined the desirable minimum
clearance to be 9-5 feet and the minimum to be 8.5 feet, subject to the on-site
engineer's approval.
k.2.k Grades
Local standards rather than technical criteria are often the basis in
establishing the "maximum" or the "tolerable" grade for a given distance of travel.
In the Netherlands where flatland is generalized, a 5% grade is considered unacceptably
steep. However, in Denver, Colorado, an 8% grade for short distances is acceptable.
The maximum short distance grade should not exceed 10% and this should be acceptable
only if no other reasonable alternative exists.
Except for banked curves, cross sloping should be 0.02 foot/foot for both
drainage and ridability.
4.2.5 Curves
Criteria for curve radii and banking (superelevation) of bikeways should
- 17 -
-------
conform in the first instance to the design speed of the bikeway. The State of Oregon
has computed the following chart of values which has since been adopted by the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHO).
Figure 1
Standard Superelevation for Bikeways
j en
140
u_
U
°70
•o
rr
60
50
40
30
20
10
L
\
£
0
\
K
o
c
g
tc
OJ
01
s
VI
E
E
•>
^
1_
1
X.
>v
^
"*»
^^^^
•
X.^*
0,
<^
~~^£Ofr,.DA
J^_I5
V=10
m.p.h
~~~- — ;
m.p.h.
1
pte,o.-^u«Sli±I
,|R 1 r tan fl
\
"•"•s^^^
^
where: V - velocity, ft. /sec.
d = acceleration due to
R "- radius of curvature, ft.
I - coefficient of friction '
tan 8 - superelevation rate.
ft./ft.
<
^
0
c
o
m Curvature shall be
•5- based on a normal design
^ speed of 20 m.p.h. Within
01 limits shown, either the
E
3 radius or the superelevation
r x may be varied to fit
5 individual situations. The
^_^ | dependent variable may be
1 selected from the adjacent
chart. Descending grades in
have a design speed of 30
m.p.h. Climbing grades in
j excess of 3 percent may
use a 15 m.p.h. design
I
speed. The descending grade
determines the design speed
— | on two-way bikeways.
p| S
-------
The routing planner should eliminate as many safety and engineering problems as
possible by avoiding sharp curves at the bottom of steep or of long grades. In this
situation, the degree of curve banking to provide increased safety to the descending
bicyclist may be unnegotiable for the ascending bicyclist. One alternatative in such
cases is to safely design for slower descending speed.
k.2.6 Stopping Sight Distance
The sight distance necessary for bicycling safety is related to the
visibility available to the bicyclist in seeing danger or hazards in his line of
intended travel and to have adequate time to brake or to take evasive action.
When bicycle brakes conform to standards of the U. S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission, i.e. stopping in fifteen feet for certain types of bicycles at 10 mph,
and for other types at 15 mph; and perception-reaction time is 2.5 seconds, the
minimum stopping sight distance on an exclusive bikeway would be 70 feet on a level,
dry surface for a bicycle approaching an obstacle at 15 mph. A considerable number of
bicycles have been found to be operated with defective brakes. Therefore, it is
recommended that planners take into account the AASHO Design Stopping Sight Distance
for bicycles:
Table 1
DESIGN STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCES FOR BICYCLES
DESIGN SPEED
MPH
10
15
20
25
30
For
0%
FEET
50
85
130
175
230
downhill gradients of:
5%
FEET
50
90
140
200
260
- 19 -
10%
FEET
60
100
160
230
310
15%
FEET
70
130
200
300
koo
-------
CHAPTER 5
PRESENT AND MODIFIED RULES OF THE ROAD
5.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Local regulations for bicycles now range from various forms of tolerated use to
rules providing special consideration and encouragement. Rules of the road for
bicyclists involve their relationship with motor vehicles and with pedestrians,
motorcyclists, equestrians and other bicyclists. Basically, when bicyclists are
given equal status and equal rights with motor vehicles, the bicyclists have a
higher incidence of fatalities and severe injuries from conflicts with motor vehicles
than from any other category of bicycling-related conflicts.
It is important to consider the rules of the road related to bicycling in context
of today. Roadways are congested with motor vehicles in metropolitan areas. Bicycles
have become more popular and their utility use is increasing. Bicycling injuries are
the most common type of injury treated in hospital emergency rooms according to the
National Electronic Injury Surveillance System.
Rules are needed which will efficiently and safely regulate both bicycle and motor
vehicle travel while taking into consideration the different maneuvering capabilities
and potential for injury in bicycle-motor vehicle conflicts.
5.2 RULES FOR ROADWAY/BIKEWAY INTERSECTIONS
Whether a bikeway alignment is on-road or off-road, the route will eventually
cross a motor vehicle roadway or merge into an intersection area. In such cases, a
sign warning should be provided to advise the bicyclist of a potential hazard area.
Although nationally accepted warrants have not yet been established for intersection
design involving a significant mix of bicycles and of motor vehicles, there are
- 20 -
-------
established traffic control criteria for safely merging lanes onto a main roadway.
Generally speaking, where there is a choice for bringing an off-road bikeway into a
roadway intersection, a controlled, signalized intersection is safer for the
bicyclist than an uncontrolled intersection, so long as there are appropriate warning
signs and controls advising the motorist of the new intersection mix.
Prior European studies demonstrate the wisdom of bringing a bikeway onto a
roadway gradually during the merge, and with good visibility for the motorist to
see the bicycles and to recognize the new roadway mix. These considerations are
needed to offset the false sense of security held by the bicyclist enjoying the pro-
tection of an exclusive bikeway.
5.3 ACCIDENT INCIDENT
One of the best examples of "false sense of security" by bicyclists Is provided
by the I960 analysis of bicycle injuries in a French national sampling of 1.08 billion
motor vehicle/bicycle miles. The study was published by I'Organisme National de
Securite Routiere. For relevancy, the accident/death rates in Tables 2 and 3 have
been converted to a one million vehicle mile rate for the situations involving motor
vehicle and bicycle conflicts, and other conflict situations.
For the two traffic situations below, Case #1 involves conflicts at Intersections,
and Case #2 involves conflicts which did not occur at intersections:
TABLE 2
BICYCLIST INJURY/106 BIKE MILES BICYCLIST FATALITY/106 BIKE MILES
2-W Bikeway 1-W Bikeway No Bikeway 2-W Bikeway 1-W Bikeway No Bikeway
#1 2.70 4.12 7.08 0.26 0.29 0.23
#2 4.69 3.2V 5.28 2.60 0.00 0.46
- 21 -
-------
This study was based on controlled data collection for 296 road segments totalling
521 miles in length and involving a total of 1,016 bicycle accidents causing either
an injury or fatality. The size of this sample provides a reasonable basis for con-
cluding that bicyclists seem to drop their guard when an exclusive bikeway merges
into a motor vehicle roadway setting, which is more apparent if rates in Table 2 are
compared to corresponding rates in Table 3:
TABLE 3
INJURIES ON
B 1 KEWAYS
9.81
2.89
4.62
NO Bl KEWAYS INJURIES ON
OR AT INTERSECTIONS
6.59
16.48
152.69
ROADWAY
Bike on Bike
Bike / pedestrian
Bike / motor vehicle
Data: Courtesy of Ministere des Travaux Publics
et des Transports, Paris (1972)
It is also apparent that the bicyclist's vigilance is only part of the safety
considerations, and that increasing motorist vigilance is an integral goal for a
comprehensive bikeway plan.
5.4 OFF-ROAD BIKEWAY SIGNS
Standard Uniform Traffic Code signs and pavement markings (15) should be used
whenever possible to preserve continuity and familiarity in traffic controls. Shapes,
color and legends which are recognized by the public should, whenever possible, be
maintained.
However, for reasons of safety in off-road situations, signs along bikeways
which have dense vegetative backgrounds should avoid color combinations with poor
visibility in these settings. Dual border colors around black legends on white
background are recommended, the dual colors being bright against both spring and fall
foliage patterns. The minimum off-road sign size is 18 in. x 18 in.
- 22 -
-------
CHAPTER 6
PARKING AND SECURITY
6.1 GENERAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
As bicycling increases in popularity as an acceptable mode of transportation it
becomes immediately evident that parking facilities are a paramount requirement for
any circumambient ring through which desire lines penetrate toward the CBD. It is
within this ring, located about two miles from the CBD, that a transistion from one
mode of travel to another is most apt to occur. The planner should establish this
ring, or belt, so that it will accommodate mixed mode transits involving bicycles
for those banlieu residents* who will most benefit from the faci1ities.
This planning aspect addresses the need to accommodate the commuter who may
travel to the peripheral area by motor vehicle and then use a bicycle to travel two to
four miles to his destination in the CBD.
Facilities might be located at or made available by public agencies, service
organizations, associations of parking lot owners, or by private interests. For
example, local churches with large parking lots might make weekday use available.
6.2 MIXED MODE COMBINATIONS
The mixed modal transit might take many forms including that, for example, of
fringe parking and then completing the transit by use of public transportation. It is
important to note that there are several mixed mode combinations involving the use of
Banlieu From "banlieue" (Fr.) which means: the collection of neighborhoods
and districts outside the central city and contributing to its
existence.
- 23 -
-------
bicycles. A number of such combinations include the following:
1. Bicycling into the circumambient, 3. Travel to the zone by motor
or buffer zone, and continue by vehicle and continue to the
bus into the CBD. CBD by bicycle.
2. Bicycling to a subway or rail k. Bicycling all the way to CBD.
station, store bicycle and enter
CBD by public transportation. 5- Use bus or rail to zone and
May use second bicycle at CBD. bicycling from there to CBD.
The planner should initiate an inventory of available space in the buffer zone
for determining what potential parking facilities are available for bicyclists.
Consideration should also be given to additional space becoming available for bicycles
as automobile parking spaces are withdrawn through programs of attrition or through
new local regulations. Attrition can take many induced forms such as reassigning a
parking place given up by a subscribing motorist and making that space available for
a number of commuting bicyclists. The space itself, when privately owned, would still
return rental income to the owner through reasonably established parking or storage
rates for bicycles.
The planner will also need to evaluate the suitability of the various bicycle
storage systems for the various sites where bicycle parking will be needed; especially
the degree of security afforded, the costs to the parking facility owner and
bicyclist, and the manpower needed to operate the storage system. Denver, Colorado
bikeway planners (3) evaluated four systems where bicycles would be locked to
racks of various designs, including the standard rack which was the most economical
but had a low security rating and was recommended only for schools and other high
activity areas. The cost of the storage racks ranged (in 1972) from $1^0.00 to
$350.00 per twelve unit rack. Completely enclosed bicycle storage lockers cost
$150.00 or more per single bicycle storage unit.
- 24 -
-------
6.3 PARKING AND SECURITY CRITERIA
In addition to existing public parking facilities, other potential parking space
may be made available for overnight use, or during particular times of the day or of
the week. The inventory of actual and potential parking facilities should be
quantified under local conditions. Some of the elements to be used when establishing
the criteria for the inventory are:
1. Location of the facility and the number of bicycles to be accommodated
are assigned priorities as determined from generator surveys and the
subsequent analysis.
2. Location is near or on a route penetrating to the CBD or providing
continuity from one demonstrated collector area to a generator.
3. Origin and destination factors reconciled to the length of the desire line.
k. Protection against theft of stored or parked bicycles.
5. Safe access to and egress from parking facilities.
6.4 POTENTIAL BICYCLE PARKING SITES
Potential and actual bicycle parking facilities can exist in a variety of locales
among which the following should be examined:
i
Existing parking facilities Subway, train and bus terminals
School and educational areas Business and Government office buildings
Recreation and park areas Airports and boat docking areas
Libraries Apartment building grounds
Community and shopping centers Banks and other financial facilities
6.5 ASSURING THE AVAILABILITY OF PARKING FACILITIES
Some commercially owned automobile parking facilities are often used at capacity
while other facilities a quarter mile away are used well below capacity. Even some
of those parking facilities operating at capacity can often accommodate substantial
bicycle parking without depriving motor vehicles of their allotted spaces and without
interference to egress/access patterns of those motor vehicles. Nonetheless, the
planner should consider, where it is necessary, a program of administrative, and legal
measures to redistribute motor vehicle parking and thus assure the availability of
- 25 -
-------
bicycle parking under secure conditions. Administrative action through an amend-
ment in the operating business license approval process or legal action through a
local ordinance setting a required ratio of automobile to bicycle parking spaces
are two methods available to accomplish this.
6.6 PROVISIONS FOR SECURITY
Bicycle theft is an unfortunate social companion of today's increasing popularity
of bicycling and the theft rate in many areas of the country has reached alarming
rates. Bicycle theft is a quantifiable deterrent to utility bicycling. A compre-
hensive bikeway network should incorporate the active planning participation of local
police to address the issues of (1) reducing bicycle theft and (2) increasing the
return-to-owner rate of those bicycles recovered by the police.
- 26 -
-------
CHAPTER 7
ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA
7.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
7.1.1 The Need for Quantitative Assessment
Although the general promotion of bicycling is often considered beneficial
for the environment and for the well being of the bicyclist alike, a planner should
take into consideration the probable impact associated with the building of the public
infrastructure of an exclusive bikeway network. The actual and comparative environ-
mental impacts are best determined by a careful quantitative assessment. The magnitude
of the needed assessment should be dictated by the size of the network and by the
existing nature of natural and man-made resources involved or potentially involved by
the network.
The first step should be the determination of construction and of design criteria
against which the environmental assessment can be measured and the impact determined.
Whether on-road or off-road, the planning must be interdisciplinary and the baseline
established on-site, as, for example, the procedures used by Brooks and McFaden (1)
for measuring impact of off-road vehicles on vegetation.
7.1.2 Safeguarding Values
Any off-road bikeway plan should incorporate the means to minimize the
adverse environmental impact that may occur. One criteria is to prevent the reduction
in water quality in a watershed where the bikeway would be located. Erosion and
siltation are just two factors to consider in protection of the quality of land and
of water.
- 27 -
-------
Of nearly equal importance, but more difficult to quantify, are the locally
held aesthetic values that deserve protection, such as an existing parkland vista,
from an undue intrusion by the alignment or associated landscaping of a bikeway.
For air quality protection, the distinction between improving air quality by
bicycling and the short term reduction in air quality during bikeway construction
should be remembered. One of the primary methods of improving air quality Is to
reduce the exhaust emissions of motor vehicles. When motorists are motivated or in-
duced to substitute bicycling for motoring as a transit mode, a quantifiable improve-
ment in air quality becomes possible to establish.
7.1.3 Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Stream valleys by their delicate nature require unique and careful baseline
and environmental assessment and special construction criteria. Depending on the
applicable local, state and federal regulations which affect the stream valley's
potential use, the planner should determine to what degree a bikeway on such land is
responsive to protective and to land use policies. While a utility bicyclist often
prefers a direct route to his destination, the pleasant and natural surroundings of a
stream valley bikeway would probably offset any loss in commuting time.
The land-elevation-stream settings are so varied and complex that no general rule
or guideline can be established, except that an environmental baseline should invariably
be the first planning step to determine the eventual advantages and disadvantages of
alternate alignments.
A bikeway offers a unique opportunity for public access to parkland which might
be a stream valley, ft should be remembered, however, that metropolitan parklands have
high value for public recreation and are enjoying increasingly conscientious protection
from an environmentally concerned public which will insist on careful environmental
assessment.
- 28 -
-------
7.2 CRITERIA AND ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES
7.2.1 Construction Criteria
In order that the environmental assessment accurately reflect the environ-
mental effects of bikeway construction, the construction criteria should be drawn up
in considerable detail prior to assessment, i.e. the assessment should quantify such
matters as soil excavation and tree removals which are based on construction criteria
for allowable cuts and fills and planned width of the bikeway. Construction criteria
which will minimize damage to natural resources should be delineated by both engineers
and environmental specialists so that construction methods and procedures can be
defined for each differing bikeway segment.
For off-road bikeways one environmentally protective construction criteria is
the reconciliation of construction access routes with utility bicycling access routes
to the main bikeway. This reconciliation is often possible and will reduce the total
environmental impact of bikeway construction.
7.2.2 Multiple Use Considerations
Sewer lines often follow stream valleys because of the obvious advantages
of gravity flow and use of these corridors for bikeways is economically and environ-
mentally advantageous If the design criteria for both are imposed during initial
alignment studies for the utility. A lesser economic advantage is likely if the
multipurpose approach is adopted after alignment or construction of the utility. The
greatest economies and least total environmental effects are affected when the
multiple purpose uses are concurrently planned and concurrently or successively con-
structed; i.e. bikeway built along utility corridor immediately after completion of
the utility and using the same cleared space, access roads, etc.
- 29 -
-------
7.2.3 Principal Environmental Factors
7.2.3.1 Air Quality
One of the principal goals of implementing bikeways and encouraging
bicycle use is the improvement of air quality by reducing motor vehicle exhause
emissions. In most urban areas existing and projected air quality parameters are
available and these baseline data should be used to project the effects of implementing
bikeway plans on air quality.
7.2.3.2 Noise
Noise level standards for the construction phase and for the pro-
jected long term phase are design criteria. Representative sound level readings on
the db(A) scale should be taken during the baselining on a linear basis to permit a
quantification of impact determination for subsequent construction criteria and for
bicycling safety design. In cases where a bikeway may be in a high noise zone and
also in a roadway intersection zone, bicyclists may be put into a prejudicially
hazardous posture by being exposed to dangers that in other settings they would be
able to hear. Where adverse noise levels are apt to be generated during the con-
struction phase, the plan should include proposed controls for abatement measures.
7.2.3.3 Water Quality
Water quality standards and local regulations are design criteria.
The most likely effect on water quality from a new bikeway will result from hydrologlc
changes. There will be changes in existing drainage patterns and increases in local
rainfall run-offs from surfaced areas and possible increases in erosion and sedimenta-
tion. These effects are both short term and long term. The plan should include sound
hydrologic protection standards and sediment control plans. Increased run-offs should
be safely and lawfully handled by the drainage design.
7.2.3.^ Land Use and Conservation of Natural Resources
Of first importance is the quantification of those land, vegetative
and wildlife resources that would be irreversibly committed to the project. Use of the
- 30 -
-------
resources are most amenable to being conserved by careful bikeway planning and
implementation practices. In comparison to highways, damage to these resources can
be avoided by careful routing and special construction criteria to a relatively
greater degree since bikeway design speeds are lower, bicycle handling parameters
are less severe, and construction equipment is smaller.
A careful field quantification procedure will provide the planner with the
necessary quantification of environmental data and of construction data. This dual
set of data will provide the means and elements to make precise cost comparisons
among alternate alignments.
- 31 -
-------
CHAPTER 8
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
8.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The guidelines have already addressed the value of incorporating expert citizen
participation during the early data collection phase of comprehensive bikeway planning.
General citizen participation may take several forms during the early phases of planning
in addition to the forum of public hearings which are required after a plan is drafted.
Two specific forms of citizen participation are recommended to the planner for im-
plementation before the draft comprehensive plan has been administratively adopted
and promulgated for formal public review and comment.
8.2 REPRESENTATIVE OPINION
A record of representative opinion should be maintained. There are two courses
of action which fulfill this goal. The first is to mail out a letter announcement to
those public and private organizations who will obviously be affected beneficially
or adversely on the project. The letter should briefly describe the project and should
contain the general description of various actions or changes likely to occur if it
should be implemented, and the study procedure should be outlined in a manner clearly
understandable to the average citizen. The letter should request advice or comment on
any aspect or intent of the program and on the methodology intended to be followed
by the planner in the study. The second course is to follow up about thirty days
later by telephoning any organization which has not answered the written request for
comment and advice. All reasonable advice so received should be incorporated into
the goals or methodology of the study.
- 32 -
-------
8.3 SPECIFIC OPINION
Once the field data and background data has been collected and the analysis has
taken place out of which the desire corridors manifest themselves, the planner should
prepare a document which indicates some of the principal alternatives of precise
penetrator routes. This document should be made available for review and comment by
organizations previously contacted with a special emphasis on reaching groups and
private interests along or situated within obvious zones of influence of the alterna-
tive penetrator alignments.
The specific comments generated by this review will provide invaluable guidance
to the planner for evaluating public acceptance or public preferences for some
alternates and public opposition for others.
During the review phase for specific opinion, the planner should include all new
groups in which the generator point surveys have identified as existing or probable
bicycle users.
- 33 -
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Brooks, PhD., Cecil R. and Dennis M. McFaden
November, 1972
Cook, Walter L.
May, 1965
3. Denver, City of
October,1972
4. Dougherty, Nina
June, 1974
5. Espeseth, Robert D.
June, 1974
6. Goldberg, S.
September, 1972
"Percent Ground Cover Destruction on a Silt Loam
Soil Caused by the Dynamics of an Off-Road Vehicle:
A Preliminary Comparison of Relative Ground Cover
Loss of Fifteen Indicator Species." Technical Paper
100-ORRV-1172, Iroquois Research Institute, The
Arctic Company, Ltd., Falls Church, Virginia.
"Bike Trail and Facilities: A Guide to their Design,
Construction, and Operation." American Institute
of Park Executives, Inc., Wheeling, West Virginia.
"The Bikeway Plan," Denver Planning Office, Denver,
Colorado (Second Printing, August, 1973).
"The Bicycle vs. The Energy Crisis," from Bicycling.',
reprinted by Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C.
"Linear Park Design," Park Maintenance, Madisen
Publishing Division, Appleton, Wisconsin 54911
"Accidents Sur Pistes Cyclables," Organisme National
de Securite Routiere, Bulletin No. 1, France.
7. Institute of Transportation and Traffice Engineering at UCLA
April, 1972 "Bikeway Planning Criteria and Guidelines," Los
Angeles, California (Reprinted by Federal Highway
Administration, U. S. Department of Transportation,
November, 1972).
8. Koninklijke Nederlandsche Toeristenbond
June, 1970 "Fietspaden en -oversteekplaatsen," Verkeers-memo-
randum No. 4, The Netherlands.
9. National Transportation Safety Board
April 5, 1972 "Special Study: Bicycle Use as a Highway Safety
Problem, Report Number NTSB-HSS-72-1," Washington
D. C.
10. New Jersey Department of Transportation, Division of Planning and Research
1973 "New Jersey Bikeways for State Highways: A Study
of Dual Use," New Jersey.
11. Oregon Department of Transportation, Highway Division
February, 1973 "Oregon Bikeways Progress Report," Oregon.
- 34 -
-------
12. Oregon State Highway Division
January, 1974 "Bikeway Design," Salem, Oregon
13. Poirier, Bernard, Director, Iroquois Research Institute
November, 1973 "Researchers Report Highlights of Bicyclist Survey
Analysis," Research Briefs, Parks and Recreation,
Volume VIII, Number 11, Arlington, Virginia.
14. Standing Committee on Engineering and Operations
January, 1974 "Guide for Bicycle Routes," American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials.
15. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration
1971 "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for
Streets and Highways," Washington D.C.
16. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration HRS-41,
1974 "State of the Art '74: Bikeway Planning and Design,"
Washington, D. C.
- 35 -
-------
PARKING FACILITIES
COPYRIGHT 1974
LOCATION MAIN ENTRANCE
Interviewer
1 Name of principal person i
Title of
2Facil ity owned by
i
Job No. Date
nterviewed at facility
person Telephone no.
Mai 1 ing address
3 TYPE OF PARKING FACILITY
QOpen parking lot only
<
DBuilding (s) and lot ^
QBuilding (s) only
4
Number of entrances QSingle parking level
5 7
Number of exits DTwo levels
l ' <
D Three levels ^
9
D Four levels
10
DFive or more levels
4 Entrance No. 1 on
Entrance No. 2 on
Entrance No. 3 on
Entrance No. k on
5 Special facilities noted:
6 Ownership: D Local
36
/Access: D Public
39
8 Total square footage: Lot
Total auto spaces now: Lot
Total bike spaces now: Lot
12
Exit No. 1 on
20 30
Exit No. 2 on
21 31
Exit No. 3 on
22 32
Exit No. *t on
23 33
Guards?
35
QAbsentee D Other
3/ Jd
QPrivate DOther
ft.2 Bldg. ft.2 1 i.
Bldg. 1
Bldg. 1 11
Total motorcycle spaces now: Lot Bldg. 1. .•"
9Verified by
on at
(date) (time)
w^wjf
n
CO
u
•o
>
>
X
%
1
•k
- 36 -
-------
B
IttttttHtC
Your assistance In providing the following information will be very valuable to
determine what type of bicycle paths or bicycle lanes would be most beneficial
in this community. Please complete this questionnaire as accurately as possible.
Then return It In the manner Indicated at the time you received It. Thank you.
PLEASE PRINT YOUR REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONS IN THIS SECTION
1. What Is today's date?
2
2. What Is the postal ZIP CODE where you normally live?
3. Name two streets at the first intersection you pass when you leave your home for:
WORK and
< i
SCHOOL and
6 7
ERRANDS and
8 9
4. If you received this questionnaire on your way to work or to school, please Indicate the
approximate distance from your home to:
If the distance Is less than one mile, WORK ml les SCHOOL ml les
give the fraction: i.e. 3/4 mile. '° " •*
5. If you have completed another questionnaire by Iroquois Research Institute within the last sixty
days, please indicate where or how you received it and whether you completed the questionnaire:
6. Give the address of your destination at the time you received this questionnaire:
PLEASE PLACE A CHECK MARK OR A CROSS IN THE APPROPRIATE SQUARES FOR YOUR REPLIES TO QUESTIONS BELOW
OR PRINT YOUR ANSWER - WHICHEVER APPLIES. THANK YOU.
7. Is the address of the destination you provided as a reply to question 6 above that of:
("(Your regular place of employment? I[other
20 24
QYour school or place of study? Explain:
[[A place you regularly shop at?
33
[HA recreational area?
8. Print the approximate time when you were given the questionnaire:
AM OR PM T 30
9. What Is your sex? QJMale (^Female 10. Are you married? QYes [DNo
31 32 33 34
II. Place a circle around the number which shows the highest school year you have completed.
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL COLLEGE
1 2 3 14 5 6 7 8
9 10 II 12 1 2 3 4 5 6
12.
What was your personal income last year? 13. What Is your present age group?
QNO Income [3]$IO,000 to $11,999. [3] 14 years or less Q]40 to
-------
SUITE 215. 6201 LF.ESUUflG PIKE
FALLS CHURCH. VIRGINIA 22O44
TEL: 703 - 534-8200
0
FIELD JOB NUMBER
o
DAY
MO.
COPYRIGHT 1973
19 BY
122
123 124
8
9. WATER QUALITY.
STATION NO. OR SITE SAMPLE NO. VOLUME OF SAMPLE DATE TIME 24HOO
10. NOISE
STATION NO. OR SITE HEADING TEMP.8c DATE WIND VEL. CEILING
LABORATORY NO.
ASSIGNMENT
701
702
703
704
READING db
801
802
803
804
805
11. TREES AND OTHER TALL VEGETATION. R = REMOVE
USE LONG FORM 2A FOR
AFFECTED
LONG SEGMENTS
D6H
R
A
R
A
R
A
R
A
R
A
R
A
R
A
TOTALS R
TOTALS A
<- 2"
138
238
2 - 6"
139
239
QUANTITIES
6 - 10"
140
240
10 - 14"
141
241
]k - 18"
142
242
18 - 2V
'
143
243
> 24"
TOTALS
R 125
A «5
R 126
A 226
II R 127
II A 227
|| R 128
II A 228
|| R ,29
l| A 229
|| R 130
|l A 230
|| R 13,
II A
144
244
R 145
A 245
38
-------
|