This section reviews some commonly used terms use to measure the quality of bicycling and/or bicycle facilities as a mode or in relation to accessibility or user groups. There are many overlaps between terms and for the sake of conceptual clarity, this report adopts the following conceptual table (see Table 2.8); in bold and in the diagonal the feature or scope that uniquely characterizes the term.
These definitions are employed in final Section to discuss data gaps and applications that can be addressed utilizing or integrating smartphone data. Next section describes and summarizes existing bicycle and infrastructure related smartphone applications.
2.3.1 BLOS Methods
To define Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS) we essentially follow the 2010 HCM guidelines: BLOS is a performance measure used to describe the performance (comfort, safety, operation, etc.) of bicycle facilities and should reflect travelers’ perceptions, be useful to transportation agencies, and be directly measured in the field.
Some BLOS are complex and data intensive. Most BLOS are simple, user-friendly, with readily understandable calculations or scores, and not data intensive. An example of the former includes the 2010 HCM BLOS; examples of the latter include the Bicycle Suitability Score (BSS),
Bicycle Compatibility Index (BCI) and the Bicycle Suitability Assessment (BSA).
In this report BLOS is defined as any bicycle performance measure that can be computed (based on a formula or score) utilizing data/variables that are measured or observed in the field
(geometric, environmental, nuisance, or traffic variables).
2.3.2 Network BLOS
We define network BLOS as a performance measure (or weighted set of performance measures) used to describe the performance of bicycle facilities at the network level. Network BLOS
should also reflect bicyclists’ perceptions but they are measured not in the field but using network models (i.e. in networks defined by sets of nodes and links) and are usually best calculated using software packages (GIS systems or network algorithms).
Some bicycle network properties like connectivity may be used with different purposes. Connectivity can be used to reflect the number of large city blocks or dead end streets that increase travel distance (Cervero and Duncan 2003) or connectivity may be associated with safety when a bicycle route has a single connection that is beyond the user’s ability or comfort level (Mekuria et al. 2012).
Network BLOS methods are particularly useful in areas with underdeveloped bicycle networks, where basic connectivity is of greater concern than facility quality. It is also useful in area where bicycle networks are more developed, but adequate data is not available to employ standard BLOS methods.
2.3.3 Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
In the recent literature, level of traffic stress or (LTS) primarily refers to a specific evaluation method developed by Mekuria et al. (Mekuria et al. 2012). Level of stress is not a new concept, and previous work/methods have utilized similar language (e.g. the Bicycle Stress Level or BSL from 1994 is based on safety levels and physical/mental effort as a function of age).
Unlike BLOS or network BLOS methods, a LTS measure serves as a proxy for measuring the desirability of a bicycle facility for segments of the population with different levels of age, experience or skill. In this report LTS is defined as a performance measure that takes into account not only traffic/geometric characteristics of the riding environment but also the
suitability of the environment for different user groups within the population. LTS can be used to delineate islands of low-stress network connectivity, highlighting disconnections and
especially stressful links within a bicycle network.
2.3.4 Bikeability
Another term that is commonly used in the bicycle literature is “bikeability”. For example, McNeil (McNeil 2011) proposes a methodology that assigns points to various destination types, such as grocery stores or restaurants, and calculates a score out of one hundred for a given location by totaling up the points for destinations within a twenty minute bike ride. The method is similar to the popular Walk Score®, which calculates a score out of one hundred for an input address based on the number of destinations within walking distance (Walk Score 2014). The Bikeability Checklist (Pedestrian and Bicyle Information Center 2002), developed by the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC) at the University of North Carolina, is a simple form to be filled out by any citizen to assess the bikeability of their community. The user is asked to take a bike trip to one of their regular destinations and answer a series of questions about the comfort and convenience of their experience.
Unlike BLOS and LTS measures, in this report the definition of bikeability is a macro-level assessment of a network of bicycle facilities in terms of the accessibility to important
destinations.
2.3.5 Bicycle Friendliness
Some bicyclist advocacy groups have developed the concept of “bicycle friendliness”. The most well-known assessment of bicycle friendliness is conducted by the League of American
Bicyclists (LAB). Cities or municipalities can submit a paid application biannually to the LAB for potential recognition as a “bicycle friendly community” at either the platinum, gold, silver, or bronze designation; with platinum being the highest designation. The LAB evaluation is based on assessment of the municipality with respect to five categories: engineering, education, encouragement, enforcement, and evaluation. Oregon has ten bicycle friendly communities, as labelled in Table 2.7.
LAB also has a state level assessment based on five categories: legislation, policies, and programs; infrastructure; education; enforcement; and evaluation. Instead of an application process, LAB assesses every state in the country on an annual basis and ranks them on their statewide bicycle friendliness. Oregon was ranked number three on the 2013 ranking list; with Washington and Colorado being numbers one and two, respectively (League of American Bicyclists 2013a). LAB also has recently started evaluating bicycle friendly businesses and universities (also noted in Table 2.7). Other national and state organizations evaluate bicycle friendliness at various scales. Oregon’s Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BTA) developed the
Bike Friendly Report Card to compare the bicycle friendliness of cities throughout Oregon (Bicycle Transportation Alliance 2014).
Table 2.7: Oregon’s bicycle friendly designations (as of 2013) (League of American Bicyclists
2013b)
Bicycle Friendly Designation:
Platinum Gold Silver Bronze
Communities (i.e. municipalities): Portland Ashland Corvallis Eugene Bend
Sisters Albany Beaverton Gresham Salem
Universities Portland State
University
Oregon State University University of
Oregon Businesses Alta Planning +
Design Bike Gallery King Cycle Group Oregon Health & Science University Sera Architects BicyclingHub.com Frans Pauwels Memorial Community Bicycle Center Integral Consulting Inc. LifeCycle Adventures Nelson Nygaard Consulting Associates – Portland Standing Stone Brewing Co. Elliott Associates, Inc. Galois Jesuit Volunteer Corps Northwest Mill Inn Mountain Rose Herbs OMRI (Organic Materials Review Institute) PECI Regence Substance Sunnyside Sports The Standard Travel Portland Unico Properties
Table 2.8 : Overview of Terminology and Keywords (unique feature underlined) Term→ Feature/Scope ↓ BLOS Network BLOS Level of Stress Bikeability Bicycle Friendliness Segment/Intersection Network PMs User Group Accessibility Community & Government
In this report, the definition of bicycle friendliness is a macro-level assessment at the community and government level. Friendliness is related to the degree of acceptance of cycling within the community and with the adoptions of programs, laws, and policies that protect and promote cycling.