1 / 29

Introductions

Gain insights into key findings and crash types from a detailed study analyzing bicycle crashes in urban and rural areas of Wisconsin. Discover how GIS and PBCAT tools were used to enhance the analysis.

vesely
Download Presentation

Introductions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Introductions • Tom Huber, WisDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator • Mike Amsden, Former WisDOT Research Analyst (now with T.Y. Lin, International)

  2. Funding • WisDOT Council on Research - $25,000 • Matched with State Planning and Research Funding - $15,000

  3. WisDOT Responsibilities for Bicycling • 12,000 mile long State Highway System • Manage federal funds for state highways and local roads • Provide technical assistance on variety of local needs including bicycle issues • Program assistance – State Patrol’s Bureau of Transportation Safety has had a long-standing bicycle safety program

  4. What will be Covered Today • Summary of the Bicycle Crash Analysis Effort - Tom • Overview of the Findings of the Bicycle Crash Analysis – Tom • Major crash types Identified – Tom • Major Steps in Doing the Crash Analysis – Mike • Tools that Aided the Analysis – Mike • Limitations and Benefits of the Tools - Mike

  5. Background • State is both Urban and Rural • 15 Metro Areas • Excellent Secondary and Tertiary Roadway Systems (County and Town Roads) • State Highway System – 12,000 miles with most having paved shoulders • Most urban arterials do not have bike lanes

  6. Why the Study? • Only Cursory Analysis in State Bicycle Plan – Recommendation of the Plan to Do More • Making Investments based on Limited Crash Information • Safety Programs, like “Enforcement for Bicycle Safety” using National Crash Types, not Wisconsin Specific

  7. Findings - Overall • Bicycle Crashes have Continued to Drop – 14% over 6 years. • Number of Fatalities over the Six Year Period were Similar

  8. Findings – Crash Locations • Crashes are Urban – 94% within an Urban Area and 83% within a City • Crashes Occur at Intersections – 66% • Crashes Occur on Main Streets – 56% on Arterial Streets

  9. Findings – Who are in Crashes • Male – 75% of Bicyclists • Ages - 50% between 10 and 19; 10% under 10; 8% over 49 • Alcohol a Factor in 4% of all Crashes (Either or both users of vehicles)

  10. Findings – Crash Rates • Relied on Household Travel Survey Data which provided Vehicle Miles Traveled (Wisconsin had an Expanded Survey in 2001/2002) • Urban Areas had a much greater Crash Rate than Rural Areas • Rural Areas had a much greater Fatality Rate than Urban Areas

  11. Finding – Crash Rates Continued • Milwaukee County had the Highest Average Crash Rate • City of Madison had the lowest Crash Rate based on Bicycle Miles Traveled • Based on Miles Traveled, the Crash Rate for Bicyclists was twice what it was for Motorists.

  12. Findings – Rural Roadways • Twenty foot Roadways had Double the Rate that 22’ Roadways had. • Twenty-two foot had a 40% higher Crash Rate than 24 foot Roadways • Overtaking Crashes were Significantly lower for 24 foot Roadways compared to 22 foot. • Crash Rates for 5’ paved shoulders considerably lower than 3’ shoulders

  13. Findings - Urban • Part of Urban Analysis Fizzled with Complications Due to Local Data • “Sidepath” Crashes Common – 29% of all Urban Crashes • Most Crashes Occurring on Arterial Streets

  14. Crash Type 141 - 14%

  15. Crash Type 144 - 7%

  16. Crash Type 212 - 6%

  17. Crash Type 322 – 5%

  18. Crash Type 151 - 5%

  19. Crash Type 232 - 3%

  20. Tools Used • GIS • Pedestrian & Bicycle Crash Analysis Tool (PBCAT) • Beta Tested for University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center

  21. Local Resources Used • State Highway Network File (STN) • Local Roads Inventory • MV4000 Reports

  22. Steps Involved • All Bicycle Crash Records for a Six Year Period (1999 – 2004) pulled from DMV Files • Six Year Trend Analysis Completed • Each Bicyclist Crash Record for 2003 manually pulled and Diagram Examined • PBCAT used to Type Crashes

  23. Steps Involved – Con’t • GIS Used to Plot 2003 Crashes • Additional Records Used for Adding to Rural Crashes (2002 & 2004 Crashes) • Sorts, Sorts, Sorts! • Analysis Written • Crashes Plotted Against Bicycle Suitability Map • Manual Written

  24. PBCAT • Ease of Use • Basic Steps Involved • How it worked with our data • How you would do it differently

  25. GIS • Version Used • Plotting Difficulties • Time it Took • What you would do Differently • Accuracy • Pay-off

  26. Sorts, Sorts, Sorts • Kept on Doing Sorts – GIS and Spreadsheets Permitted This • Our Study took a separate Urban and Rural Direction Early On

  27. Other Applications • Bike Suitability Maps • Easy Application Since Both Data Sources were in GIS

  28. User Manual • Need to Explain Steps for Future Updates – will Allow Time Series Analysis • Documented Every Step – especially since MV4000 Files are Involved and so are the GIS applications • Had a small contract for a Graduate Student (Mary Ebeling) to work on this • Available Upon Request

  29. Credits • Council On Research • Study’s Advisory Committee – Bremer, Schlabowski, King, Corsi, Glaze, McClain, Linsenmeyer, Fleming) • Mary Ebeling – Developed of the User Manual

More Related