A Master’s research project submitted to the Faculty of Science, University of the Witwatersrand, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in GIS and Remote Sensing. Johannesburg, 2017. / Recent initiatives by the city of Johannesburg to increase non-motorised transport through the installation of bicycle infrastructure were conducted without consulting the cycling preferences of the public. This study distributed a cycling preference survey, achieving fair reliability using the weighted Kappa statistic, in which potential users indicated the most important spatial factors for ideal cycling routes through Likert-scale answers. Importance rankings derived by Likert sums were combined with variability-explaining rankings derived by modified principal component analysis using polychoric correlation coefficients to produce a final list of retained spatial variables. These variables were quantified using secondary spatial data sets which were dichotomized into Boolean operators for network attributes in ArcGIS Network Analyst. The solved routes using the spatial factors derived by survey respondents were significantly different from the simple shortest-path routes between pre-defined origin and destination nodes. Shortcomings in the directness of the solved routes qualify their use as an initial step for non-motorised transport planning rather than a strict, unmodifiable route for bicycle lanes. Further experimentation with higher quality spatial data, custom routing algorithms, and a larger survey population may yield improved results in the future. The incorporation of local cyclists and future cyclists are a key factor in bicycle route design that should be included in non-motorised transport planning. / LG2018

Long popular in northern Europe, protected bike lanes, also known as "cycle tracks" or "separated bike lanes," are seeing increased interest in the United States. One of the primary benefits of protected bike lanes is that they may provide a higher level of comfort than a standard bike lane that is only delineated by an inches-wide painted stripe. Several methods exist for quantifying the quality of service provided by a roadway for a bicyclist; however, many of these models do not consider protected bike lanes and of those that do, none are based on empirical data from the US. This is problematic as engineers, planners, and elected officials are increasingly looking to objective performance measures to help guide transportation project design and funding prioritization decisions. This thesis addresses this gap by presenting a cumulative logistic model to predict user comfort on protected bike lanes using surveys conducted in the United States. The model is for road segments only and not signalized intersections. It is developed from the results of in-person video surveys conducted in Portland, Oregon. The survey was completed by 221 individuals who viewed 20 video clips each. The model is validated using 3,230 responses to a survey of those who have ridden on protected bike lanes in multiple cities around the US. A cumulative logistic model is used because it predicts the distribution of ratings, providing a clearer picture of a facility's performance than a mean value produced by a simple linear model. The resulting model indicates that buffer type, one-way vs. two-way travel, motor vehicle speed, and motor vehicle average daily traffic volumes are all significant predictors of bicyclist comfort in protected bike lanes. Survey results also show that protected bike lanes are generally more comfortable than other types of on-street infrastructure, consistent with previous research findings.

As bicycle transportation has increased, especially among commuters, so have the types of bicycle infrastructure facilities increased. This report focuses on the application of several of these innovative bicycle infrastructure treatments in three different scenarios: shared-lane facilities, bicycle-specific facilities, and high-conflict area treatments. The focus treatments include the sharrow, Sharrow Bicycle Priority Lane, Green Bicycle Priority Lane, Bicycles May Use Full Lane sign, green bike lane, bike-box, green lane in a conflict area, and elephant's footprint markings. The goal of this report is to gather how well bicyclists understand their meaning, how they would use each, and which treatments are most preferred among bicyclists. Data for this study was gathered in the form of an online survey administered to 1000 bicyclists of varying levels and purposes from different regions of the country. The survey gathers general rider characteristics, asks how each bicyclist would use each treatment in different traffic speed and volume scenarios, and finally each respondent rates each of the treatments in order of preference. Using the survey results, the effectiveness of each treatment is analyzed in detail by different population segments of those surveyed. Bicyclist riding characteristics and route choice factors are also examined in detail to better understand the sampled population of riders. The results are discussed and conclusions to the effectiveness of each treatment are made.

A before-and-after analysis was performed at eleven intersections where a bike box was installed in Portland, Oregon to explore the safety effects of the treatment. Video data were gathered prior to installation at 14 intersections where a bike box installation was planned by the Portland Bureau of Transportation. Cameras were set up to capture three full twenty-four hour days (72 hours) of data for each intersection from Tuesday through Thursday. Of the 14 original selected intersections, 11 intersections actually received the bike box treatment. Video data were again gathered for these intersections after the installation of the bike box for another three full twenty-four hour days (72 hours) between Tuesday and Thursday. One day of data (24 hours) was selected for observation from both the before and after periods in the analysis for each study intersection during midweek. Safety effects were evaluated by three metrics: 1) observed conflicts; 2) observed cyclist behavior for all conflicts as measured by head or shoulder checks; and 3) reported crash data. To develop the conflict data, a log was created of each motor vehicle and bicycle passing through the intersection for approximately 528 hours of video. All conflicts that were observed during the period were further reviewed by an expert panel that scored conflicts by severity. Following this review, a total of 18 conflicts were observed during the before period. The total exposure in the before period was 39,497 motor vehicles in the vehicle lane adjacent to the bike lane (10,454 of which were right-turning) and 7,849 bicycles. A total of 19 conflicts were observed during the after period. Total exposure was 42,381 motor vehicles in the vehicle lane adjacent to the bike lane (11,053 of which were right-turning) and 5,852 bicycles. The sample size of observed conflicts was insufficient to draw statistically significant conclusions for any of the specific intersections that were treated. When taking in account the total amount of conflicts, the limited data suggest a slight increase in the rate of conflicts when normalized against a product of right-turning vehicles and bicycles observed in the intersection. The data also suggest that the installation of a bike box at an intersection reduces the rate of conflicts per hundred motor vehicles and increases the rate of conflicts per hundred bicyclists. Data regarding head-checks from the bicyclist shows an increase in bicyclists observing the possibility of conflicts approaching from behind as they pass through the intersection. A review or crash data at each of the intersections shows an increase at three of the observed intersections and a decrease at the remaining five.