2 C I T Y S T A F F Meg Johnson Raymond F. Pfeifer Trina L. Reynolds David J. Spease Margaret Watson David Yatabe Kimland M. Yee Gary F. Ziegenfuss Administrative Analyst II Transportation, Public Works Sergeant Police Department Typist Clerk II Water, Public Works Landscape Architect Parks & Community Development Typist Clerk II Parking, Public Works Assistant Engineer Associate Civil Engineer Transportation, Public Works Associate Planner Planning
3 S A C R A M E N T O C O U N T Y COUNTY EXECUTIVE Robert (Bob) Smith BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Grantland Johnson Illa Collin Sandra Smoley Jim Streng First District Second District Third District Fourth District C. Tobias (Toby) Johnson Fifth District
4 C O U N T Y S T A F F Rodney Anderson Ann Baker Tom Boswell Ron Maertz Leighann Moffit Duong (Winn) Nguyen Ben Pugh Steve Tracy Chris Van Slyke Lois Woodruff Sheriff's Department Planning Department California Highway Patrol Planning Department Planning Department Water Resources Department of Public Works Plan Coordinator Planning Department SMAQMD Parks Department
5 S A C R A M E N T O C I T Y - C O U N T Y B I K E W A Y T A S K F O R C E Mark Drake Jim Kirstein Pete Baldridge Chairman Vice Chairman Secretary Rick Blunden Will Crozier Robert Grant Kent Link Judy Montgomery Susan Morris-Burns Tom Neumann Lois Weast Ron Wilburne
6 ACKNOW/BMP 7/15/91 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Sacramento City-County Bikeway Task Force is indebted to many public agencies and individuals who assisted in the preparation of the 2010 Bikeway Master Plan. In particular we would like to mention the following: County Planning Department - Cartographic Section County Parks Department - Planning Division & Maintenance Division All County Community Council Members County Dependent Park Districts Independent Park Districts City Planning and Community Development Department City Parks and Community Services Department All City Homeowners Associations All Other Individuals Who Attended Public Input Meetings Ray Onga Lin Toyama Tim Imai Jim Jester Carl Elan Mike Winter Surinder Singh Larry Robinson Virginia Hadley Linda Wessitsh County Planning County Planning County Planning County Planning County Planning County Planning County Planning SMAQMD County Planning County Transportation
7 T/CBKWYMASPLAN - 7/15/91 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S CHAPTER ONE - COMPENDIUM A Summary B Recommendations CHAPTER TWO - PREFACE A Introduction B Bicycle History C Sacramento County Bicycle Nostalgia D Previous Bikeway Studies E Definitions 1 General Bicycle 2 Traffic Signal F Bikeway Master Plan Area G Demographic Background CHAPTER THREE - GOAL A The Bikeway Master Plan Goal 1 Coordination Objective a Needs and Issues b Policy c Program 2 Safety and Security Objective 3 Design Objective 4 Maintenance Objective 5 Aesthetics Objective 6 Implementation Objective CHAPTER FOUR - BICYCLING A Bicycling Environment B Bicycle Types C Frame Styles D Mountain Bicycling Program 1 Description 2 Introduction 3 Legislation 4 User Conflicts
8 CHAPTER FOUR CONTINUED 5 Design Standard 6 Guidelines for Multi-Use Trails 7 Multi-Use Trail Corridor 8 Conclusion CHAPTER FIVE - PLANNING A General Planning Criteria I. Introduction II. Role of Bikeway III. Decision to Develop Bikeways IV. Selection of Type of Facility B Specific Planning Criteria C Bikeways as a Transportation System Management Tool CHAPTER SIX - BICYCLE ACCIDENT HISTORY/SAFETY A Introduction B Accident History - National C Accident History - Other Jurisdictions D Accident History - Sacramento County E Current Accident Statistics - Sacramento County F Accident History - City of Sacramento G Bicycle Safety CHAPTER SEVEN - EDUCATION A Bicycle Education CHAPTER EIGHT - ENFORCEMENT A Bicycle Enforcement B Bicycle Theft C Bicycle Registration CHAPTER NINE - DESIGN STANDARDS A Philosophy B Application of Standards 1 General 2 Approvals 3 FHWA and AASHTO Standards and Policies 4 Mandatory and Advisory Standards a Mandatory Standards b Advisory Standards c Permissive Standards d Mandatory Procedural Requirements C Class I Bikeways (Bike Path) 1. Widths 2. Clearance to Obstructions
9 CHAPTER NINE - CONTINUED 3. Striping 4. Intersections with Highways 5. Separation between Paths and Highways 6. Paths in Medians 7. Design Speed 8. Horizontal Alignment and Superelevation 9. Stopping Sight Distance 10. Length of Crest, Vertical Curves 11. Lateral Clearance on Horizontal Curves 12. Grade 13. Structural Section 14. Drainage 15. Barrier Posts 16. Landscaping 17. Roundabouts (Traffic Circles) and Intersections 18. Stairway Ramps 19. Drainage Easement and/or Natural Stream Bikeways 20. Bikeway Capacity D E F G Class II Bikeways (Bike Lanes) I. Introduction II. Widths III. Striping and Signing IV. Intersection Design Class III Bikeways (Bike Route) I. Introduction II. On-Street Bike Route Criteria III. Sidewalk Bikeway Criteria IV. Destination Signing of Bike Routes Multi-Use Recreational Trail System Miscellaneous Bikeway Criteria I. Bridges II. Surface Quality III. Drainage Grates, Manhole Covers, and Driveways IV. At Grade Railroad Crossings and Cattle Guards V. Hazard Marking VI. Lighting CHAPTER TEN - UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES A Uniform Signs and Markings I. Introduction II. Maintenance III. Colors
10 CHAPTER TEN - CONTINUED IV. Class I (Bike Path) V. Class II (Bike Lanes) VI. Class III (Bike Routes) B Specific Traffic Control Devices 1 Signs a Application of Signs b Location and Position c Design d Regulatory Signs e Warning Signs f Guide Signs 2 Markings a Functions and Limitations b General Principles c Marking Patterns and Colors 3 Traffic/Bicycle Signals a Introduction b Summary c Bicycle Detection Currently in Use d Bicycle Detector Analyses e Combination Bicycle/Vehicle Systems f Bicycle Detector Location g Interim Bicycle Detection Improvement h Policy and Recommendation CHAPTER ELEVEN - USER SURVEY A City/County Bicycle Information Survey 1 Survey Background a Bicycle Count & Classification b Bicycle Usage c Bikeway Planning 2 Survey Methodology 3 Survey Results 4 Survey Conclusions B Clean Air Partnership, Public Opinion Survey CHAPTER TWELVE - PARKING A Bikeway Parking and Amenities I. Introduction II. Bicycle Parking Benefits III. Bicycle Parking Principles IV. Planning Bicycle Parking and Signing
11 CHAPTER TWELVE CONTINUED B Class I Bicycle Parking Facility - (Highest Security) I. Inside the Building II. Lockers III. Check-in IV. Monitored Parking C Class II Bicycle Parking Facility (High Security) D Class III Bicycle Parking Facility (Medium Security) E Bicycle Parking and Regional Transit F Zoning Ordinance - Bicycle Parking - Sacramento County G Zoning Ordinance - Bicycle Parking - City of Sacramento H Zoning Ordinance - Shower and Locker Facilities - Sacramento County I Zoning Ordinance - Shower and Locker Facility - City of Sacramento CHAPTER THIRTEEN - COSTS A Bikeway Costs I. Class I II. Class II III. Class III B C Bikeway Maintenance Costs I. Program Factors II. Assumptions III. Class I I & M Costs IV. Class II I & M Costs V. Class III I & M Costs VI. Composite Maintenance Factor VII. Program Cost Development Bikeway Program Costs 1 City On Street 2 City Off Street 3 City Bikeway Bridges 4 County On Street 5 County Off Street CHAPTER FOURTEEN - PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION A Introduction B Integrating Bicycle-Transit C Bicycle Transit Program D Bicycle Access to Transit Programs in Other Areas E Bicycles and Sacramento Regional Transit F Regional Transit/Bicycle Considerations
12 CHAPTER FIFTEEN - IMPLEMENTATION A Bikeway Funding Philosophy B Funding - Federal Sources 1 Urban Mass Transportation Act 2 Federal Aid Highway Program 3 Community Highway Safety Program C Funding - State Sources I. Proposition 116 II. Bicycle Lane Account III. Transportation Development Act IV. Propositions 108, 111 and Related Programs D Funding - Local Sources 1 Measure A Sales Tax 2 Motor Vehicle Registration Surcharge 3 Development Fees and Building Permits a Quimby Act b Facilities Benefit Assessment District c South Natomas Community Improvement Fund d County Roadway and Transit Development Fee 4 Bicycle Registration 5 Air Quality Attainment Plan E Bikeway Development Priorities F Bikeway Advisory Committee 1 Introduction 2 Need 3 Purpose 4 Composition 5 Selection of Members 6 Membership Appointment 7 Committee Operation 8 Citizen Participation 9 Recommendations CHAPTER SIXTEEN - INVENTORY A Inventory Introduction B Bikeway Studies C The 2010 BMP Inventory 1 Total Program and Cost Summary 2 Total Program Spreadsheets by Community 3 Five-Year Program Summary 4 Ten-Year Program Summary D Bikeway Mileage BMP BMP
13 CHAP1/BMP 7/16/91 CHAPTER ONE - COMPENDIUM A. SUMMARY: The 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan was developed to serve the recreational and transportation needs of the public. Use of the bicycle will reduce the amount of vehicle emissions and therefore improve air quality. Because there has been a 42.9 percent increase in population from 1977 to 1990, there is a need for alternative transportation such as the bicycle. A hobby horse with foot pedals was introduced in 1835 which was the forerunner of our modern bicycle. The earliest record of a bicycle (velocipede) in the Sacramento Valley was an article in an August 1880 edition of the Sacramento Bee about the Marysville District Attorney riding in Capitol Park. A cycling club called the Capital City Wheelmen was formed on June 25, Many cycling events occurred during the late 1880's between clubs and cities. Several studies and reports have been produced for Sacramento during the past 30 years which detail bicycling, hiking, and horseback riding facilities. These are detailed in Chapter 2-D. This Bikeway Master Plan includes all of Sacramento County which consists of 997 square miles and 3,887 miles of public roads. The cities of Folsom, Galt, and Isleton are included as conceptual plans only. The goal of the 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan is to develop a comprehensive plan which will meet the needs of all bicyclists. Bicycle travel can be enhanced by improved street maintenance and by upgrading existing roads used regularly by bicyclists. On new construction and major reconstruction projects, adequate width should be provided to permit the shared use by motorists and bicyclists. Bikeways are one element of an effort to improve bicycling safety and convenience. Off-street bikeways in exclusive corridors can be effective in providing new recreational opportunities and/or commuter routes. On-street bikeways can serve to enhance safety and convenience of both the motorist and bicyclist. Air quality and traffic congestion continue to be two of the major issues for the Sacramento region The Sher Bill (California Clean Air Act) mandates the Sacramento Region to reduce air pollutant emissions by an average of five percent annually. Most of the air pollution problems we are facing are caused by the use of automobiles.
14 Sacramento City/County is projected to have an additional 450,000 residents within the next 20 years. Rapid population growth will result in additional vehicles on the roads with the peak hour traffic volume doubling. The traditional method of expanding the existing roadway system to accommodate the increased traffic volumes is no longer the best solution, in light of air quality considerations. Steps must be taken to reduce automobile use and thus decrease the total number of auto trips. A solution to reduce the use of the automobile is to encourage alternative modes of transportation such as public transit, vanpooling, carpooling, bicycling, and walking. In an effort to improve air quality and mitigate traffic congestion, the City of Sacramento and County of Sacramento each have adopted two Trip Reduction Ordinances which require developers and employers to formulate trip reduction programs and transportation systems management plans. Bicycling is a component of TSM programs. The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) has also identified bicycle safety, facilities, and enforcement as important transportation and indirect source control measures within its 1991 Air Quality Attainment Plan. Improved bikeway design does not totally address the bicycle safety problem. There is a need for a strong bicycle safety/education and public awareness program. Much of the safety problem is an attitude problem. In approximately 70% of the bike/auto accidents the bicyclist is riding in violation of the vehicle code, and the major bicyclist infraction is riding the wrong way (facing rather than with traffic). Almost all bicycle/auto accidents are due to the bicyclist or motorist disobeying the law. Education would minimize the unintentional infractions and strict enforcement would limit both intentional and unintentional infractions. The bikeway development process seeks to provide a degree of mobility that is in balance with other values. Social, economic, and environmental effects must be considered fully along with technical issues in the development of transportation projects. Projects must be selected for implementation on the bases of benefits and community goals, plans, and values. These decisions should emphasize different transportation modes working together effectively. Highway design criteria and polices from the Caltrans Design Manual provide a guide to exercise sound judgement in applying standards to the design of projects. Design standards should equal or exceed the minimum given in the Manual. In addition to the standards of the Design Manual, the Caltrans Traffic Manual contains standards relating to signs, delineation, barrier systems, signals, and lighting. Bikeway signs and markings should be standardized to provide universal understanding by bicyclists and motorists alike. Bicycle signs and markings should be properly maintained to command respect from both the motorist and the bicyclist.
15 The Bikeway Task Force requested that a random sample survey be conducted to gather information about the bicycling public. A total of 10,000 survey forms were mailed and 1,039 questionnaire forms were returned. The return rate was 10.4% which is considered very good. This survey obtained three types of information: 1. Bicycle Count and Classification 2. Bicycle Usage 3. Bikeway Planning The first item revealed that 95% of all residents own a bicycle. Fifty-three percent (53%) of the total bicycles are lightweight multispeeds and seventeen percent (17%) are mountain bikes. The second item detailed that 70% of the total residents participate in bicycling. Eighty percent (80%) of total bicycle trips are recreational/exercise with work trips contributing to twelve percent (12%) of total trips. The bikeway planning question found that the most important facility requested was more Class I Bike Paths. The two most important destinations were parks (1st) and schools (2nd). Also, we were pleasantly surprised to learn that 79% of the respondents knew where the designated bikeways were in their community. It was found that secure and convenient bicycle parking is a major factor which would encourage the use of bicycles. Bicycles left unattended are prone to vandalism and theft. Bicycle parking systems have been developed which offer adequate security, especially when the location is well lighted and highly visible. The cost per mile for each type of bikeway was developed as a joint effort between City/County Public Works and Parks and Recreation Departments. A detailed analysis of this process is found in Chapter Thirteen. The factors used are: Class I (Bike Path) $100,000 (with exclusions) Class II (Bike Lane) $ 2,500 (without construction) Class III (Bike Route) $ 500 The composite maintenance cost for Class I (Bike Path) is $6,380 per mile per year, and for Classes II and III is $1,563 per mile per year.
16 The Bikeway Program costs are as follows: On-Street 5-Year Program 10-Year Program City $958,000 $1,880,000 County $3,057,000 $5,854,000 5-Year Program Off-Street 10-Year Program City $1,375,000 $1,773,000 County $237,000 $554,000 An aggressive bicycle/transit program can enhance the movement of people throughout the metropolitan area. Bikes-on-bus and bikes-on-fixed-rail cars have met with great success in many areas. Being lightweight and compact, bicycles can be carried aboard buses or rail cars. By combining the best features of both modes, bike-on-rail/bus can provide a high quality metropolitan and intracity mobility without relying on the automobile. To provide a safe and convenient bikeway system implementation funding will be necessary. Some bikeway funding sources have evaporated, and new sources have been created. The City and County should seek to maximize the use of all funding sources to provide the bikeway plan as herein defined. A Bicycle Advisory Committee is recommended to assist with the implementation of the Master Plan. The 2010 bikeway inventory is detailed in Chapter Sixteen of Volume I and Appendices I and J of Volume II. Total mileage as proposed in this Master Plan is as follows: On-Street Off-Street City County TOTAL 1, During the five-year program the Master Plan outlines the mileages as follows:
17 On-Street Off-Street City County TOTAL During the ten-year program the Master Plan outlines the mileage as follows: On-Street Off-Street City County TOTAL
18 B. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. That the City Council/Board of Supervisors accept 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan as presented with consideration to the following recommendations: a. From Chapter 4: (1) Request a feasibility study be conducted on the following recreational corridors to determine their suitability for multiuse trail systems: (a) (b) (c) Natomas East Main Drainage Canal Dry Creek Floodway Sacramento Northern Railroad Bike Path b. From Chapter 6: (1) Request a staff report be prepared on the advisability of establishing a Bicycle Safety Program. c. From Chapter 7: (1) Request a staff report be prepared on the advisability of establishing a subcommittee to the Bicycle Advisory Committee which would focus on bicycling education programs. d. From Chapter 8: (1) Request a staff report be prepared on the advisability of establishing a bicycle law enforcement and registration program. e. From Chapter 12: (1) Request a feasibility study be conducted to fund and install additional bicycle parking facilities throughout the City/County. f. From Chapter 14: (1) Requested a staff report on the advisability of encouraging Regional Transit to implement new programs which would interface bicycling and public transit.
19 g. From Chapter 15: (1) Request staff to investigate and prepare a report detailing all available funding sources to implement the Bicycle Master Plan. (2) Take the necessary action to implement the Bicycle Advisory Committee.
20 CHAP2A 4/25/91 CHAPTER TWO A. INTRODUCTION FOR THE 2010 BIKEWAY MASTER PLAN: The Sacramento City/County Bikeway Master Plan is an effort to coordinate and develop a bikeway system that will benefit the recreational and transportation needs of the public. This plan also recognizes the use of the bicycle as an alternative form of transportation which will reduce the amount of vehicles emissions in this geographic area and contribute to an improvement in air quality. In addition, the provision of bikeways in Sacramento City and County increases the mobility of those people who rely upon bicycles for transportation because they cannot, or choose not, to own and operate a motor vehicle. The revised Bikeway Master Plan also reestablishes the inclusion of bicycles as a consideration in traffic planning and project funding. Previously, the bicycle was viewed largely in terms of recreation. Although the prior plan recognized it as an alternative form of transportation and cited it as a means to improve individual physical fitness, the 1977 plan concentrated on the bicycle for recreation purposes. Since the 1977 Sacramento Bikeway Master Plan was adopted, Sacramento's area population has increased and the needs and attitudes of the residents have changed. While the increase in population benefits the community in terms of cultural resources, commercial prosperity, and tax dollars for social programs and public improvements, the growth in population also brings associated problems. Increasing awareness by the public of environmental problems, such as decreasing air quality and diminishing natural resources, has and continues to subtly shape attitudes towards individual responsibility towards the environment, and conservation. Although the emissions from the combustion engine vehicle are not the sole source of Sacramento's air pollution, auto emissions contribute significantly to the amount of the region's critical pollutants. Furthermore, legislation has been enacted (federal, state, and local) mandating a reduction in the amount of air contaminant emissions. Increasing the use of the bicycle as an alternative form of transportation will reduce the amount of vehicle emissions and contribute to an improvement in air quality. Due to the combined growth of Sacramento City and County, there is a tremendous need for alternative transportation. From 1977 to 1990, Sacramento City and County has grown in population to a total of 1,026,800, a 42.9 percent increase. As the County has grown in its employment base and jobs/housing ratio, the number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) has also increased for commute and noncommute trips. While reliance upon the automobile has remained strong in the United States
21 for total trips traveled, many Western European nations are using alternative transportation for a significant portion of their total trips. It is interesting to note that Netherlands and Denmark use bicycles for 29.4 percent 20.0 percent, respectively, of their total trips. In comparison, the United States used bicycles for 0.7 percent of total trips (1978 data). Implementation measures of the Sacramento County Draft General Plan Circulation Element encourage the use of transportation alternatives and improving facilities for modes of transportation within employment, public activity, and other development which do not rely on the use of the automobile. The Land Use Element presents strategies for accommodating growth that include land use-transit linkage. This strategy describes a new form of development, Transit-Oriented Development (TOD), that also benefits and promotes bicycle and use and access. This Bikeway Master Plan recognizes the use of the bicycle not only in terms of recreation, but also for its increasing prominence as an alternative transportation source. BICYCLE OWNERSHIP AND USE IN SELECTED COUNTRIES The Worldwatch Institute in Washington, DC recently produced an interesting paper on bicycles entitled "The Bicycle: Vehicle for a Small Planet". Selected statistics are shown below the Worldwatch Institute is an independent, nonprofit research organization created to analyze and to focus attention on global problems. BICYCLE AND AUTOMOBILES IN SELECTED COUNTIES (circa 1985) Country Bicycles (millions) Autos (millions) Cycle/Auto Ratio China India South Korea Egypt Mexico Netherlands Japan West Germany Argentina
22 Tanzania Australia United States CYCLING AS A SHARE OF DAILY PASSENGER TRIPS FOR SELECTED CITIES City Country Percentage of Daily Trips Tianjin China 77 1 Shenyang China 65 Groningen Netherlands 50 Beijing China 48 Delft Netherlands 43 Erlangen West Germany 26 Odense Denmark 25 Tokyo Japan 25 2 Moscow Soviet Union 24 2 Delhi India 22 Copenhagen Denmark 20 Basel Switzerland 20 Hannover West Germany 14 Manhattan United States 8 3 Perth Australia 6 Toronto Canada 3 3 London England 2 Sydney Australia 1 1 Share of non-walking trips 2 Share cycling or walking to work 3 Vehicle trips (versus passenger trips)
23 BICYCLE USE: MORE PEOPLE RIDING FOR ALL REASONS The following estimates were developed by the Bicycle Institute of America, the bicycle industry's promotion organization, and provide a sense of the magnitude of various kinds of bicycle growth and trends. Of particular note is the increase in bicycle commuters, a trend expected to continue as more people discover bicycling as a way to circumvent urban traffic congestion. BICYCLE USE IN 1989 U.S. Bicyclists In Millions Percentage Male/Female Ratio (%) Adults (Persons 16 and over) Children TOTALS Category of Use 1989 Level (In Millions) Percentage Estimated Increase Adults cycling regularly (average once a week) Bicycle commuters Adults cycling in competition (racing) All-terrain bike users Tourists/Vacationers on bikes Recreational event participants
24 SUMMARY: (in millions) Total U.S. Bicyclists Adults Riding Regularly Bicycle Commuters All-terrain Bike Users Tourists & Vacationers Event Participants N/A Racing (in thousands) 40K.04 75K K K.12 50K K K 0.2 THE U.S. BICYCLE MARKET 1 (Shipments in Millions of Units) Year Domestic Imports Total SOURCE: Bicycle Manufaturers Association of America, 1990
26 CHAP2B/BMP 5/16/91 B. BICYCLE HISTORY: The bicycle has evolved to its present form and popularity over an uneven, and sometimes unlikely course. First considered an expensive plaything of the elite in Europe, then an odd transportation vehicle viewed with skepticism if not hostility, virtually ignored for nearly seventy years following the invention of the automobile, and now rediscovered as a transportation alternative an healthy, recreational outlet accessible to and affordable for nearly everyone. The relationship of bike and car is an old and interesting one. Many of the people whom we associate with the development of the automobile--henry Ford, Glen Olds, and George N. Pierce--were bicycle mechanics before they manufactured the cars bearing their names. Their transition from bikes to cars was, of course, momentous for the history of transportation as well as their personal careers. When these men turned their attention to motor vehicles, the bicycle--which appeared headed to replace the horse as the primary vehicle of personal transportation--was relegated to the background and finally even to the realm of a child's toy. 2 The following table provides highlights of the bicycle's bumpy ride along its evolutionary trail. BICYCLE HISTORY HIGHLIGHTS YEAR ITEM NAME 1791 Wooden horse with two wheels introduced Comte de Sivrac No front fork, not steerable, no drive mechanism 1816 Hobby Horse or Draisenne introduced Baron Karl von Draise Steerable, no drive mechanism 1821 Rack and pinion added to Hobby Horse Lewis Gompertz 1835 Foot pedal added to the front wheel of the Hobby Horse Kirkpatrick MacMillan 1861 Manufacture of first pedal-driven bicycle Michaux Brothers 1866 Wire spoke wheels first appear 2 Bicycle History, 1972
27 1868 Rubber Shod wheels first appear 1869 Early version of the Velocipede or Boneshaker introduced in U.S. Riding academies with indoor rinks spring up 1872 Penny-Farthing or the Ordinary emerges in England with a five-foot wheel 1873 First Safety bicycle built and ridden H.J. Lawson 1876 Ordinaries imported to U.S. Colonel Albert A. Pope 1878 Ordinaries manufactured in Boston Colonel Albert A. Pope 1880 League of American Wheelmen formed 1884 First person to cross the U.S. on bicycle - Oakland, CA to Boston, MA Bicycles allowed on the Haddonfield NJ turnpike 1885 Safety bicycle with 28-inch wheels and brakes invented thomas Stevens J.K. Stanley 1888 First pneumatic tire invented Dr. J.B. Dunlop Governor of New York revokes all restrictions against bicycles 1894 First woman to tour the world Annie Londonberry First derailleur patented, 4 speeds 1897 Two million bicycles manufactured in the U.S. in this year alone (One for every ten people) Linley and Biggs 1898 Coaster brakes added to the Safety New Departure Company 1902 Bicycle racing champion wins his first automobile race 1942 League of American Wheelmen folds 1950's 1960's Adults in the U.S. rediscover th bicycle as healthy, light recreation European 3-speed lightweights popularized in the U.S. Barney Oldfield 1964 League of American Wheelmen reactivated Joe Hart 1970's New biycle sales surpass new car sales 10-speeds popularized
28 1980's 1990's Mountain biking popularized Bicycling returns as a viable transportation alternative
29 S A C R A M E N T O C O U N T Y B I C Y C L E N O S T A L G I A F R O M T O BY BEN PUGH Sprung articulated bicycle proceeds with action of an inchworm, gait of a cantering horse when pedaled.
30 CHAP2-C/BMP 1/24/91 C. SACRAMENTO COUNTY BICYCLE NOSTALGIA: Since most urban dwellers prior to 1890 depended on streetcars and railroads for transportation, their trips and excursions were confined to those areas served by public transportation, and by operating schedules. It is no wonder, then, that the advent of the bicycle was received as a symbol of freedom. Working men bought bicycles to ride to work, while other acquired them for social, recreational, or health purposes. As one historian has noted: "no sport...attracted so many participants as bicycling;...it was recommended by physicians, and it helped to bring about more rational fashions for women." An early form of the bicycle, the velocipede, had been invented in Europe between 1855 and Popularly called "the boneshaker," it consisted of a high wooden wheel with iron tires in front, with a small wheel in the rear. The diameter of the front wheel was constantly enlarged to permit greater speed. The velocipede had been brought into the valley by 1878, when the Marysville District Attorney and an ex-constable raced along "D" Street for a one thousand dollar bet. The Sacramento Bee also noted in August 1880 that: A young man attracted considerable attention in Capitol Park last evening by his skillful management of a Columbia bicycle, such as is used by members of the eastern clubs. The high wheeled concern moved along noiselessly and smoothly and, when its rider so desired, with remarkable speed. It would seem that the bicycle might well answer the same purpose of a saddle horse, with this advantage - it costs nothing to feed it. The bicycle had become so popular in the eastern United States by 1880 that the League of American Wheelmen was organized in that year, with memberships confined to cycling clubs in various cities. Sacramento joined this organization on June 25, 1886, when the Capitol City Wheelmen were organized. The new cycling club had relatively few members and received only limited publicity in local newspapers until Most of its activities seemed to involve racing, which meant that only the select few joined the organization. The annual relay races between the Capitol City Wheelmen of Sacramento and the Oak Leaf Wheelmen of Stockton began on April 24, 1892, and, with the exception of 1895, were held every year until The first race consisted of a five-man relay team for each side, riding fifty-two miles and delivering that day's newspaper
TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I: BACKGROUND...1 1.0 INTRODUCTION...1 1.1 A Brief History of Bikeway Initiatives in HRM...1 1.2 Past Studies...2 1.3 The Overall Goal of the Bike Plan...2 1.4 Planning Principles...3
Revised January 2015 Bicycle Policy & Design Guidelines Maryland State Highway Administration RECORD OF CHANGES TO THE MAY 2013 BICYCLE POLICY & DESIGN GUIDELINES Introduction The 2013 Bicycle Policy &
A Guide to School Area Safety February 2009 A Guide to School Area Safety February 2009 a publication of the OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC ENGINEERING & OPERATIONS SECTION AND TRAFFIC SAFETY
City of Toronto Bicycle/Motor-Vehicle Collision Study Works and Emergency Services Department Transportation Services Division Transportation Infrastructure Management Section 2003 City of Toronto Bicycle/Motor-Vehicle
WHEN MAIN STREET IS A STATE HIGHWAY BLENDING FUNCTION, BEAUT Y AND IDENTIT Y A HANDBOOK FOR C OMMUNITIES AND DESIGNERS MAR YL AND ST A T E HIGHW A Y ADMINISTRA TION DISTRICT MAP GARRETT 6 7 ALLEGANY WASHINGTON
CITY OF CHICAGO RICHARD M. DALEY, MAYOR Mayor's Bicycle Advisory Council January 2006 Inside front cover BIKE 2015 PLAN CITY OF CHICAGO Contents Contents 1 Contents Executive Summary 2 Introduction 4 Chapter
Safer Journeys for people who cycle Cycling Safety Panel Draft Report and Recommendations 25 September 2014 Consultation Document Send your comments to: email@example.com By 24 October 2014
DISCLAIMER This document is the product of a project financed in part by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The contents
City of Boise Cycling Safety Task Force Final Report Cycling Safety Task Force Final Report Contents Executive Summary... 5 Task Force Members...11 Detailed Recommendations...13 Appendix 1: Proposed Changes
HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL 1000-1 CHAPTER 1000 BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION DESIGN Topic 1001 - Introduction Index 1001.1 Bicycle Transportation The needs of nonmotorized transportation are an essential part of all
Flexibility in Highway Design U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Page i Page ii This page intentionally left blank. A Message from the Administrator Dear Colleague: One of
PART 3 QUALITY OF SERVICE CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. QUALITY OF SERVICE FUNDAMENTALS... 3-1 Overview... 3-1 Definitions... 3-1 Levels of Service... 3-2 Level of Service Framework... 3-2 Transit Performance Measures...
Project #BD549 38 FINAL REPORT Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation Research Center Prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida March 2009 Disclaimer
Department of Transport Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Guidelines 1 TITLE: PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITY GUIDELINES Engineering manual to plan and design safe pedestrian and bicycle facilities STATUS
Portsmouth Master Transportation Plan PART II: Recommendations January 26, 2010 Mount Vernon Street Conceptual Redesign Acknowledgments The consulting team of Wallace, Roberts & Todd, LLC with Kimley-Horn
Senate Department for Urban Development and the Environment NEW CYCLING STRATEGY FOR BERLIN 1. INTRODUCTION The first cycling strategy for Berlin was adopted by the Senate in November 2004. It is an integral
Wakefield Council Cycle Strategy for Wakefield 2013 A guide to delivering cycle infrastructure www.wakefield.gov.uk - A guide to delivering cycle infrastructure Executive Summary This document presents
MODULE 3 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OVERVIEW 2.1 Module Objective This module describes the basic components of a Pavement Management System, as well as provides some historical perspective on the evolution
CYCLE TRACKS: A TECHNICAL REVIEW OF SAFETY, DESIGN, AND RESEARCH City of Cambridge June, 2014 This paper has been prepared by Toole Design Group for the City of Cambridge. Photographs have been provided
Parking Strategies to Support Livable Communities April 2012 PARKING STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT LIVABLE COMMUNITIES Parking Strategies to Support Livable Communities This report is the result of a collaborative
1. Report No. FHWA/TXDOT-06/0-5157-1 4. Title and Subtitle Evaluation of On-Street Bicycle Facilities Added to Existing Roadways 7. Author(s) Ian Hallett, David Luskin, and Randy Machemehl 9. Performing
Limited Contract No. TD 100/2002 Final Report April 2004 in association with CONTENTS PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE...1 1.1 Introduction and Purpose of this Report...1 1.2 Definition of Terms and Full
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Initial Transportation Asset Management Plan (Pilot Version February 2015) February 2015 Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Initial