Introducing the Arlington County Bicycle Comfort Level Map

[Anonymous]

I don’t intend to suggest keeping track of individual potholes and whether or not they’ve been filled. If a new, or newly repaired, pothole or two is even noticeable, that’s not the condition of road I mean. I’m talking about the difference between whole stretches of pavement in generally good condition with relatively few potholes and cracks, and those roads that are heavily cracked and degrading with many potholes; the kinds of conditions I have in mind that realistically could make a difference between a borderline easy vs. medium or medium vs. difficult stretch of road don’t get that way overnight (or even over a single winter) and are generally not going to improve significantly without a repaving project. Sorry I’m not familiar enough w/ Arlington roads to give examples. I could take some pictures of roads I am familiar with though.

[bobco85]

@bobco85 122952 wrote:

At first glance, I find the orange and yellow lines to basically say “warning, not cycling friendly, stay away.” It makes a lot of areas look less appealing for cycling, especially in areas like the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor where it looks almost dangerous to attempt to access the Metro stations.

I like Steve O’s idea on expanding the comfort levels displayed, and I think that it should be rephrased in a way that communicates the comfort level versus difficulty to better help with route planning. The line colors could be on more of a gradient to help with assessing comfort level.

My interpretation of Steve O’s idea:
(Key: Old description -> Comfort Level – Line color)

Easy -> Very Comfortable – Carolina Blue
Medium -> Somewhat Comfortable – Lime Green
Difficult -> Less Comfortable – Yellow
Strongly Discouraged -> Not Comfortable – Orange

Still, this looks pretty great! I think that once some revisions are made, this will be very useful to a lot of people (perhaps even more useful than the regular Arlington bike map).

After playing in Photoshop for a bit, here’s what the above description would look like:

The full map (it’s a Jpeg and zoomed out, so details may be hard to see)
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9455&stc=1[/IMG]

a portion of the map to show more detail
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9456&stc=1[/IMG]

small changes to the map legend
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9457&stc=1[/IMG]

[KLizotte]

@Tim Kelley 122946 wrote:

I can understand your point about not using negative language. Since orange is already “difficult” how would you title the black section? How would you change the descriptor language in the text block?

Keeping in mind that this map isn’t for the regular all-conditions bike commuter who visits this Forum, but rather is for the age 8-88 interested but concerned group.

I see your point. When I think of sending say, a thirteen year old rider on his or her own, there are some routes that would be highly discouraged. Same with an out of town tourist riding around town on a Cabi, someone just learning how to ride, or an elderly person with limited sight/hearing/coordination.

I’m experienced riding in traffic but Columbia Pike scares the bejesus out of me. Badasses won’t be looking at a map like this, they ride wherever they want to ride. It takes a quite a bit of experience and know-how to traverse roads like Lee Highway and the Pike. People on this forum really underestimate how scared the average person is of riding a bike in traffic; they will only ride on trails even if that means driving to them (and they shouldn’t be riding on really busy roads if they don’t know how to do it safely – e.g., taking the lane at times).

[KLizotte]

@bobco85 123007 wrote:

After playing in Photoshop for a bit, here’s what the above description would look like:

The full map (it’s a Jpeg and zoomed out, so details may be hard to see)
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9455&stc=1[/IMG]

a portion of the map to show more detail
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9456&stc=1[/IMG]

small changes to the map legend
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9457&stc=1[/IMG]

Seeing this only a computer screen I think the green routes really pop out, not the blue ones. I like the idea of the green routes being the most comfortable since we use green paint for bike lanes. And green means “go” in traffic light lingo. So I’d switch green with the blue. I like the red for “badass only” routes.

[CaseyKane50]

@Amalitza 123001 wrote:

I don’t intend to suggest keeping track of individual potholes and whether or not they’ve been filled. If a new, or newly repaired, pothole or two is even noticeable, that’s not the condition of road I mean. I’m talking about the difference between whole stretches of pavement in generally good condition with relatively few potholes and cracks, and those roads that are heavily cracked and degrading with many potholes; the kinds of conditions I have in mind that realistically could make a difference between a borderline easy vs. medium or medium vs. difficult stretch of road don’t get that way overnight (or even over a single winter) and are generally not going to improve significantly without a repaving project. Sorry I’m not familiar enough w/ Arlington roads to give examples. I could take some pictures of roads I am familiar with though.

An example of available data on roads from Alexandria. If something like this exists for Arlington, it could be used to help inform the ratings of a particular route.

Alexandria did a comprehensive evaluation of all of their streets in 2013. Results are here

Pavement Rating

The City’s pavement maintenance efforts are based on field condition evaluations of pavement conditions utilizing the City’s Pavement Management System. Pavement management systems are sets of tools or methods that can assist decision-makers in finding cost-effective strategies for providing, evaluating and maintaining pavement in serviceable condition.

The pavement management system consists of two basic components:

A comprehensive database which contains current and historical information on pavement conditions, pavement structure and traffic
A set of tools that allows the City to determine existing and future pavement conditions, predict financial needs and identify and prioritize pavement preservation projects.
Based on field inspection data, objective pavement rating indices are calculated by the computer model. This establishes a baseline that allows the City to objectively evaluate the pavement condition of one roadway over another.

Condition Rating Index Definition
Good 86-100 Stable, no cracking, no patching and no deformation. Very good riding qualities.
Satisfactory 71-85 Stable, minor cracking, generally hairline and hard to detect. Minor patching and possibly some minor deformation evident. Dry or light colored appearance. Good riding qualities. Rutting less than ½”.
Fair 56-70 Generally stable, minor areas of structural weakness evident. Cracking is easier to detect, patches evident. Cracking is easier to detect, patched but not excessively. Deformation more pronounced and easily noticed. Ride qualities are good to acceptable.
Poor 41-55 Areas of instability, marked evidence of structural deficiency, large crack patterns (alligatoring) heavy and numerous patches, deformation very noticeable. Riding qualities range from acceptable to poor.
Very Poor/Serious 11-40 Pavement in extremely deteriorated condition. Numerous areas of instability. Majority of section showing structural deficiency. Ride quality is poor.
Failed 0-10 Pavement structure failed. All of section showing severe structural deficiency.

[americancyclo]

@Tim Kelley 122989 wrote:

Maybe? If the facilities actually make it feel safer? The example I like is the bike lanes on Wilson Blvd from Rosslyn to Clarendon are much less comfortable than riding on the parallel Key Blvd where there are no bike lanes or facilities.

That’s a good example, but is it the exception or the rule? That also makes me wonder if facilities should be indicated at all then? It would remove one level of complexity from the map.

@Tim Kelley 122989 wrote:

Or is it? Telling brand new riders to watch out for Columbia Pike and Glebe is pretty important, right? We’ve had a couple professional bike advocates in other jurisdictions say how much they like the black lines and the “strongly discouraged” wording because of it’s honesty.

Also, have you seen a print version in person compared to an online pdf? Some people say that the PDF appears to be much more nasty.

That being said–we played with a bunch of different color schemes before settling on this one. We can certainly continue playing with in the future.

I think that depends on how you define important for this map. Is it more important to alert people to danger, where they will be uncomfortable, or is it more important to show them where cycling can be easy and comfortable?

I don’t know the results of telling people “go here” vs. “don’t go here” when it comes to bike facilities, but from what I understand about human behavior, people tend to respond better to encouragement and empowerment rather than regulation and enforcement.

I think you’re right that it’s honest to say cycling may be challenging on those roads, but it doesn’t have to draw so much focus.

@Tim Kelley 122992 wrote:

Like this? http://www.northeastern.edu/peter.furth/connectivity-of-low-stress-bicycle-networks/ That’s what the $45K grant for the Low Stress Bicycling Mapping project Arlington County received is for: http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee-documents/lFxfXlpd20150716105445.pdf

That’s cool! Summer 2016 we can expect to see that map?

@bobco85 123007 wrote:

After playing in Photoshop for a bit, here’s what the above description would look like:

The full map (it’s a Jpeg and zoomed out, so details may be hard to see)
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9455&stc=1[/IMG]

Can you tone down the saturation of the red roads to make them less eye-catching?

[bobco85]

@americancyclo 123019 wrote:

Can you tone down the saturation of the red roads to make them less eye-catching?

Sure. I have the red lines on a separate layer, so it will be easy to modify. I’ll come up with something later this evening to show.

[dasgeh]

@Tim Kelley 122992 wrote:

Don’t use the Comfort Map to identify gaps.

Wait. What? Doesn’t an interested-but-concerned (IBC) cyclist need to know when there’s a gap in their route. So if someone wants to bike from Penrose to Pentagon City, don’t they need to know that the only direct option involves a really scary road? Isn’t that the point of the whole project? The way the map works now, you don’t even see roads like I-66 and 50, because they’re gray. It would be unlikely someone would unwittingly plan those into their route.

[Tim Kelley]

@dasgeh 123027 wrote:

Wait. What? Doesn’t an interested-but-concerned (IBC) cyclist need to know when there’s a gap in their route. So if someone wants to bike from Penrose to Pentagon City, don’t they need to know that the only direct option involves a really scary road? Isn’t that the point of the whole project? The way the map works now, you don’t even see roads like I-66 and 50, because they’re gray. It would be unlikely someone would unwittingly plan those into their route.

I meant from a engineering/planning point of view. Sorry that wasn’t more clear from the links that immediately preceded that statement.

Yes, IBCs should absolutely use it for route planning, including gaps.

[Tim Kelley]

@Amalitza 123001 wrote:

I don’t intend to suggest keeping track of individual potholes and whether or not they’ve been filled. If a new, or newly repaired, pothole or two is even noticeable, that’s not the condition of road I mean. I’m talking about the difference between whole stretches of pavement in generally good condition with relatively few potholes and cracks, and those roads that are heavily cracked and degrading with many potholes; the kinds of conditions I have in mind that realistically could make a difference between a borderline easy vs. medium or medium vs. difficult stretch of road don’t get that way overnight (or even over a single winter) and are generally not going to improve significantly without a repaving project. Sorry I’m not familiar enough w/ Arlington roads to give examples. I could take some pictures of roads I am familiar with though.

This wouldn’t be feasible for a document that is meant to have any sort of medium to long term shelf life. Arlington roads are constantly going through a cycle of repaving.

Yes it would be nice. Maybe for an online tool? But even that is well out of the scope of what we have the resources to do.

[dasgeh]

@bobco85 123007 wrote:

After playing in Photoshop for a bit, here’s what the above description would look like:
[…]
small changes to the map legend
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9457&stc=1[/IMG]

Awesome. You have some mad skillz. Is it easy to play around more? I agree that the green pops more now, and the red pops more than I’d like. Could you make both darker? Maybe change the red to a red-and-gray dashed line.

Thinking about facilities, I think they’re helpful for wayfinding, especially because the generally correspond with comfort. Let’s say you’re planning on biking west through Clarendon and want to turn at Irving. You might note that you’ll be on Wilson until the bike lane ends, then turn right. So if you are suddenly on a road without a bike lane, you know you’ve gone to far.

[Tim Kelley]

@bobco85 123007 wrote:

After playing in Photoshop for a bit, here’s what the above description would look like:

The full map (it’s a Jpeg and zoomed out, so details may be hard to see)
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9455&stc=1[/IMG]

a portion of the map to show more detail
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9456&stc=1[/IMG]

small changes to the map legend
[IMG]http://bikearlingtonforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9457&stc=1[/IMG]

Now we’re getting somewhere!

[Tim Kelley]

@americancyclo 123019 wrote:

That’s a good example, but is it the exception or the rule? That also makes me wonder if facilities should be indicated at all then? It would remove one level of complexity from the map.

It’s the rule–it’s what we had in mind when creating this map Level of comfort was based off of motor traffic volume/speed and perceived safety.

I think that depends on how you define important for this map. Is it more important to alert people to danger, where they will be uncomfortable, or is it more important to show them where cycling can be easy and comfortable?

Why not both?

That’s cool! Summer 2016 we can expect to see that map?

I don’t know much else about that project. It a planner/engineer/GIS project, if I hear more about the timeline and what comes out of it I’ll let the forum know.

[Tim Kelley]

And just food for thought, here’s what a Stress Map looks like based on the Peter Furth model:

http://mapoftheweek.blogspot.com/2013/05/improving-city-biking.html

Full report: http://transweb.sjsu.edu/PDFs/research/1005-low-stress-bicycling-network-connectivity.pdf

Two other cities have comfort ratings.

Here’s what Austin did:

https://austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/COA_bike_map_v12_FULL_web.pdf

And here’s what Boston did:

http://www.cityofboston.gov/images_documents/BostonBikeMap_web3_tcm3-14074.pdf

What do you think?

[americancyclo]

@Tim Kelley 123040 wrote:

What do you think?

I think you’ve done a great job taking all the suggestions and nits very graciously!

Also, boston is hard to read a looks like a bus map.
Austin is ok, but takes forever to load.

[Author]

Posts