A Bicycle Safety Index for Evaluating Urban Street Facilities

References

• Access Minneapolis. Design Guidelines for Streets and Sidewalks. Minneapolis, MN: Author; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Access Minneapolis. City of Minneapolis Bicycle Facility Manual. Minneapolis, MN: Author; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Allen-Munley C. Development of a Multivariate Logistic Model to Predict Bicycle Route Safety in Urban Areas. Newark, NJ: Faculty of New Jersey Institute of Technology; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Bicycle Facilities. Washington, DC: Author; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Arup O. Cycle Infrastructure Design. Edinburgh, UK: Department for Transport; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Asadi-Shekari Z, Moeinaddini M, Zaly Shah M. Disabled pedestrian level of service method for evaluating and promoting inclusive walking facilities on urban streets. J Transp Eng. 2013a;139(2):181–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asadi-Shekari Z, Moeinaddini M, Zaly Shah M. Non-motorised level of service: addressing challenges in pedestrian and bicycle level of service. Transp Rev. 2013b;33(2):166–194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asadi-Shekari Z, Moeinaddini M, Zaly Shah M. A pedestrian level of service method for evaluating and promoting walking facilities on campus streets. Land Use Policy. 2014;38:175–193.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asadi-Shekari Z, Zaly Shah M. Practical evaluation method for pedestrian level of service in urban streets. Paper presented at: International Transport Research Conference; 2011; Penang, Malaysia.
   Google Scholar
• Ashland City Council. Street Standard Handbook. Ashland, OR: Department of Community Development; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Burden D. Street design guidelines for healthy neighborhoods. Paper presented at: Urban Street Symposium; 1999; Dallas, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Callister D, Lowry M. Tools and strategies for wide-scale bicycle level-of-service analysis. J Urban Plann Dev. 2013;139(4):250–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter DL, Hunter WW, Zegeer CV, Stewart JR. Pedestrian and Bicyclist Intersection Safety Indices: User Guide. Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA: Federal Highway Administration; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Charlotte Department of Transportation (CDOT). Charlotte's Urban Street Design Guideline. Charlotte, NC: Author; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• City of Aurora. Aurora Urban Street Standards in Transit Oriented Developments and Urban Centers. Aurora, CO: Author; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• City of Calgary. Pedestrian Policy and Design Report. Calgary, AB, Canada: City Council; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• City of Charles Sturt. Engineering & Open Space Development Guidelines—Road and Path Design Guidelines. South Australia, Australia: Charles Sturt; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• City of NewYork. Street Design Manual. New York, NY: Department of Transportation; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• City of Tacoma. Mobility Master Plan Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guidelines. Tacoma, CA: City Council; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• City of Whittlesea. City of Whittlesea Development Guidelines. Whittlesea, Victoria, Australia: Municipal Policy Direction; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Davis J. Bicycle Safety Evaluation. Chattanooga, TN: Auburn University, City of Chattanooga, and Chattanooga–Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Davis J. Bicycle test route evaluation for urban road conditions. Paper presented at: Transportation Congress: Civil Engineers—Key to the World Infrastructure; 1995; San Diego, CA.
   Google Scholar
• DELCAN. City of Ottawa Road Corridor Planning & Design Guidelines. Ottawa, ON, Canada: DELCAN Corporation, The Planning Partnership; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Dixon L. Bicycle and pedestrian level-of-service performance measures and standards for congestion management systems. Transp Res Rec. 1996;1538:1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Doong J-L, Lai C-H. Risk factors for child and adolescent occupants, bicyclists, and pedestrians in motorized vehicle collisions. Traffic Inj Prev. 2012;13(3):249–257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epperson B. Evaluating suitability of roadways for bicycle use: toward a cycling level-of-service standard. Transp Res Rec. 1994;1438:9–16.
   Google Scholar
• Hallett I, Luskin D, Machemehl R. Evaluation of On-Street Bicycle Facilities Added to Existing Roadways. Austin, TX: Center for Transportation Research, the University of Texas at Austin; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Hamann C, Peek-Asa C. On-road bicycle facilities and bicycle crashes in Iowa, 2007–2010. Accid Anal Prev. 2013;56:103–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harkey DL, Reinfurt DW, Knuiman M. Development of the bicycle compatibility index. Transp Res Rec. 1998;1636:13–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heramb C. Street and Site Plan Design Standards. Chicago, IL: Chicago Department of Transportation; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Hochmair HH. GIS-based identification of effective bicycle level of service improvement in street networks. Paper presented at: 12th AGILE International Conference on Geographic Information Science; 2009; Hannover, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Hu F, Lv D, Zhu J, Fang J. Related risk factors for injury severity of e-bike and bicycle crashes in Hefei. Traffic Inj Prev. 2014;15:319–323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter WW. Evaluation of innovative bike-box application in Eugene, Oregon. Transp Res Rec. 2000;1705:99–106.
   Google Scholar
• Hunter WW, Harkey DL, Stewart JR, Birk ML. Evaluation of blue bike-lane treatment in Portland, Oregon. Transp Res Rec. 2000;1705:107–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ichikawa M, Nakahara S. Japanese high school students’ usage of mobile phones while cycling. Traffic Inj Prev. 2008;9:42–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Traffic Safety Data and Analysis Group. Road Safety Annual Report. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson N, Gleason D, Gomberg B. Bike Lane Design Guide. Chicago, IL: The Chicago Department of Transportation; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen S. Pedestrian and bicycle level of service on road way segments. Transp Res Rec. 2007;2031:43–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kang K, Lee K. Development of a bicycle level of service model from the user's perspective. KSCE J Civ Eng. 2012;16:1032–1039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klobucar M, Fricker J. Feasibility Study for Bicycle Safety: Data Assessment and Network Evaluation. West Lafayette, IN: Indiana Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Koh PP, Wong YD. A user-rated serviceability model (LOSAM) for nonmotorized traffic in Singapore. ITE J. 2012;82(12):39–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krizek K. Estimating the Economic Benefits of Bicycling and Bicycle Facilities: An Interpretive Review and Proposed Methods. Minneapolis, MN: Essays on Transportation Economics; n.d.
   Google Scholar
• Landis BW. Bicycle interaction hazard score: a theoretical model. Transp Res Rec. 1994;1438:3–8.
   Google Scholar
• Landis BW. Bicycle system performance measures. ITE J. 1996;66(2):18–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis BW, Vattikuti VR, Brannick MT. Real-time human perceptions: toward a bicycle level of service. Transp Res Rec. 1997;1578:119–126.
   Google Scholar
• Landis BW, Vattikuti VR, Ottenberg RM, et al. Intersection level of service for the bicycle through movement. Transp Res Rec. 2003;1828:101–106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeinaddini M, Asadi-Shekari Z, Ismail CR, Zaly Shah M. A practical method for evaluating parking area level of service. Land Use Policy. 2013;33:1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moeinaddini M, Asadi-Shekari Z, Zaly Shah M. The relationship between urban street networks and the number of transport fatalities at the city level. Saf Sci. 2014;62:114–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozer D. Calculating Multi-Mode Levels-of-Service. Seattle, WA: International Bicycle Fund; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Narrabrr Shire Council. New South Wales Development Design Specification Geometric Road Design. New South Wales, Australia: Author; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• National Cooperative Highway Research Program. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Petritsch TA, Landis BW, Huang HF, et al. Bicycle level of service for arterials. Transp Res Rec. 2007;2031:34–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pima County. Subdivision and Development Street Standards. Pima County, AZ: Author; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Road Design Manual (RDM). Mn/DOT Road Design Manual. MN: Minnesota Department of Transportation; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Sorton A, Walsh T. Bicycle stress level as a tool to evaluate urban and suburban bicycle compatibility. Transp Res Rec. 1994;1438:17–24.
   Google Scholar
• Sutherland A, Morrish G. Street Design Guidelines. Parramatta, Australia: Landcom; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Toronto Bike Plan. City of Toronto Bike Plan. Toronto, ON, Canada: Author; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Turner S, Shafer S, Stewart W. Bicycle Suitability Criteria for State Roadways in Texas. College Station, TX: Texas Transportation Institute; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Unified Traffic and Transportation Infrastructure (Planning and Engineering) Centre (UTTIPEC). Pedestrian Design Guidelines. New Delhi, India: Delhi Development Authority; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Vanderslice E. Portland Pedestrian Design Guide. Portland, OR: Office of Transportation Engineering and Development; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Weigand L. A Review of Literature: Intersection Treatments to Improve Bicycle Access and Safety. Portland, Oregon: Initiative for Bicycle and Pedestrian Innovation Center for Transportation Studies, Portland State University; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Pedestrians, cyclists among main road traffic crash victims. 2013. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2009/road_safety_report_20090615/en/. Accessed July 4, 2013.
   Google Scholar