USA

(Nicaj et al., 2009)

• Infrastructure:
  • Complete 200 miles of bicycle facilities (paths, lanes and routes) over the next three years on NYC streets.
  • Focus on introducing new bicycle paths and improving and maintaining existing ones.
  • Conduct a pilot program of easily identified green-colored lanes to reinforce on-street striped lanes.
  • Install chevron markings, bicycle logos, and special signs for bicycle routes designed to improve how bicyclists and motorists share the road.
  • Accelerate the placement of outside bicycle parking racks citywide.
  • Conduct follow up analyses to better ascertain locations which have disproportionately high fatalities or injuries in relation to exposure. Study these locations for possible safety improvements.
  • Aggressively pursue grant funding for new greenway construction. Upgrade and improve existing greenway infrastructure within City parks.
• Legislation:
  • Support state legislation requiring large vehicles to be equipped with cross over mirrors. These mirrors, commonly seen on school buses, increase a vehicle operator’s ability to see in front of the vehicle.
  • Support legislation to increase the fine for motor vehicles that park in bicycle lanes within city parks.
  • Explore the utility of legislation as a means to increase helmet use.
• Improve Data Collection:
• One of the limitations of this study was the incomplete or inconsistent data on bicyclist fatalities and injuries. To improve data collection the City will take the following steps:
  • Train health care providers to better document contributing factors in medical records
  • Submit a proposal to the NYS Department of Motor Vehicles to modify the recording of bicycle crash information on the police accident form. Such a change may lead to improved, more standard documentation of bicycle crash information

(Active Living by Design, )

• Evidence is mounting that automobile-oriented land use policies reduce transportation choice, adversely affect air quality and safety, and discourage physical activity.
• Most communities are designed to favor one mode of travel – the automobile. Building roads, schools, shopping centers and other places of interest only for convenient access by cars often keeps people from safely walking or biking around town.
• How land-use patterns can encourage physical activity:
  • Transit use and walking increase with density and more integrated land uses.
  • Integrated land use can increase the number and percentage of walking and biking trips.
  • Averaging across 11 studies, residents of high walkable neighborhoods reported more than twice as many walking trips per week as residents of low walkable neighborhoods (3.1 daily trips vs. 1.4).
  • Residents in a highly walkable neighborhood engage in about 70 more minutes per week of moderate and vigorous physical activity than residents in a low-walkability neighborhood.
  • Forty-three percent of people with safe places to walk within ten minutes of home met recommended activity levels, while just 27% of those without safe places to walk were active enough to benefit their health.
  • An 11-year study […] in Seattle […]found that people increased trips by transit, bicycling and walking as a result of moving into more walkable neighborhoods.
  • A national study of 448 metropolitan counties found that people living in sprawling, low-density counties walk less, weigh more and are more likely to be obese or have hypertension than people living in more compact counties.
• Current land-use plans increase automobile dependency, and resultantly:
  • Between 1982 and 1997, urban land density in the U.S. dropped by more than 20% […] Population grew 17% while the amount of urbanized land increased 47% and vehicle miles traveled increased 55%.
  • Average urban land densities are roughly one-tenth what they were before motorized transportation.
  • The number of walking trips children take to school declined 60% since 1977.
  • Less than 15% of students between ages of five and 15 walk to or from school and 1% bike, compared to 48% of students walking and biking to school in 1969.

(McGrath, )

• Governments and citizen groups seeking to promote bicycle transportation in the United States traditionally have employed what are known as the “Five E’s”: engineering, education, enforcement, evaluation and planning, and encouragement.
  • “In the following sections we will review evidence supporting a few of E’s, including engineering, education and encouragement, and also an important variable that is not currently counted among the Five E’s: land use.”

Engineering (bike lanes, parking)

• Nelson and Allen’s aptly-name study If You Build Them, Commuters Will Use Them. The authors found that every new mile of bikeway per 100,000 people is associated with a .069 percent increase in bicycle commuting. More recent investigations by Dill and Carr and Barnes strengthen the case that bike lanes lead to more people riding more often.
• Conversely, it appears that the installation of new automobile capacity can depress walking, biking, and transit rates.
• Bicycle lanes have benefits beyond merely stimulating riding. They contribute to more traffic flow, are liked by cyclists, and create a safer riding environment.

Education (cycling classes, motorist awareness programs) and Encouragement (events, promotion campaigns)

• The State of Washington’s Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program […] requires large employers to develop and implement a program to encourage employees to choose modes of travel other than the single-occupant motor vehicle.
  • In workplaces with over 100 full-time employees, one person is designated as an “employee transportation coordinator”:  He or she distributes informational material about transportation options and company-led incentives for non-single occupant vehicle commuting.

Land Use

• Density – or the number of people or jobs in a given area – is a key determinant of driving and bicycling rates. The denser a city, the less its residents tend to drive and the more they tend to walk, bike, or use transit.

(League of American Bicyclists, 2007) – March/April 2007. League of American Bicyclists

• Bicycle-friendly communities edition
  • Judged based on the 5 E’s: Engineering, Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Evaluation & Planning
  • Given one of four ratings: platinum, gold, silver, bronze
• Single Platinum: Davis, CA
  • Education:
    • “City residents voted to get rid of public school buses many years ago, so many children walk or bike to school. There is a comprehensive local bike map with tips and resources on the back, and the university offers BikeEd courses and has League cycling Instructors on staff.”
  • Encouragement:
    • Bicycle volumes are so high on campus that there is a car lockdown during class changes
    • Bicycling is so core to this community’s identity that the city’s logo is a bike
    • In the process of establishing a west coast bicycle museum
    • Davis has had a city/university bike map in one integration or another since the 1970s
      • Map is updated every few years, contains routing/distance/travel time on one side, and bike-ed info on the back
      • Map is free, and distributed through the city, university and local bike shops
  • Enforcement:
    • The community lowered the fines for cycling offences to encourage police officer to increase enforcement. The local police officers give away blinking rear lights to people who don’t have them.
  • Engineering:
    • Davis has bike lanes on approximate 95 percent of all its arterials and collectors
    • Has 27 grade separations for bicycles and pedestrians
    • Invested heavily in cycling before it was common to do so – they had identified the “quality of life” issues even before they were a part of national dialogue
  • Evaluation:
    • There are more bikes in Davis than there are cars, and 17% of trips are by bike
    • The only US community that has two full-time bike coordinators, staff, and two bike advisory committees
    • They had developed their own guidelines before any national guidelines existed
      (California Dept of Transportation later based their guidelines loosely off of Davis)

(Active Living by Design, ) – Primer
Mixed Land Use and Opportunities for Physical Activity

• For trips less than one mile, mixed-use communities generate up to four times as many walking trips per week as low-walkability neighborhoods.
• Residents in a highly walkable neighborhood engage in about 70 more minutes per week of moderate and vigorous physical activity than residents in a low-walkability neighborhood.

Transportation Policies Make a Difference

• People who report having access to walking/jogging trails are 55% more likely to be physically active.
• Walking trips increase with good connectivity of the street network, a greater number of intersections and blocks, and streets with low speeds that are narrow and visually interesting.

The Impact of Accessible Parks, Trails and Greenways

• In a survey of U.S. adults, people with access to neighborhood parks were nearly twice as likely to be active as those without access.
• Greenways have contributed the most to community quality of life through health and fitness, followed by access to natural areas and recreation, land use patterns, pride in the community and community identity.
• Walking trails may be beneficial in promoting physical activity among women and people in lower socioeconomic groups.
• Greenways can have positive effects on cities by protecting open space, attracting investment, revitalizing cities, reducing personal stress and protecting the environment.