Regional Bicycle Plan Contents by liuqingyan

VIEWS: 4 PAGES: 168

									                                Regional Bicycle Plan
                                     Contents
Acknowledgements
Executive Summary
Chapter 1: Introduction
        Plan Background
        Plan Development
        “Home” for Plan
        Future Plan Updates

Chapter 2: Plan Development and Community Engagement Process
    7-Step Process

    1.   Public Involvement
    2.   Technical and Policy Analysis
    3.   Data Collection
    4.   Draft Facility Recommendations
    5.   Revised Draft Facility Recommendations
    6.   Draft Plan
    7.   Final Plan

    Plan Committees

        Citizen Advisory Committee
        Technical Advisory Committee

    Public Involvement

        Public Meetings
        On-line Public Survey
        Interactive Web Site
        Contacts Data Base
        Outreach to Under Represented Groups

    Outreach to other Agencies and Organizations




May 10, 2011                                                   1
Draft Outline for Discussion




Chapter 3: Vision, Mission, and Goals and Objectives
         Vision: The Regional Bicycle Plan will create the bicycle component to the regional
          transportation network that accommodates all users and promotes consistent design and
          development of bicycle facilities.
      Mission: Increase the number of people using bicycles for transportation while reducing the
     number of crashes involving bicyclists
         Goals and Objectives
     Integration of Goals and Objectives into Plan

Chapter 4: Existing Facilities, Plans, and Programs
         Overview of Existing Facilities
         Review of Relevant Planning Documents (including other bicycle planning efforts)
         Overview of Existing Programs
         Summary of Relevant Existing, Available Data
         Opportunities and Constraints

Chapter 5: Bicycle Facility Network
     Goal: Provide a prioritized system of routes that are contiguous and connected to other
     on- and off-road facilities.
     Introduction
     Definition of Facility Types
     Bicycle User Types
     Bicycle Facility Network
         Summary statistics
         Detailed, 900-mile on-street bikeway network
         Facility recommendations for all segments of the 900-mile on-street bikeway network
         Cross sections of all segments of the 900-mile on-street bikeway network
         Prioritization methodology and application to 900-mile on-street bikeway network
     Objective: Improve accessibility and added safety for bikes along on-street routes.
          Action 5.1: Integrate on-street bicycle facilities into appropriate state, county, and local planning
          documents.
          Action 5.2: Prioritize on-street bicycle facilities (further prioritization within the different public
          entity systems will be completed by appropriate state, county, and local transportation agencies
          based on the Regional Bicycle Plan’s priorities).
          Action 5.3: Implement on-street bicycle facilities identified in the Plan to improve accessibility
          and safety for bicyclists.




2                                                                                                      May 10, 2011
                                                                                         Draft Outline for Discussion



    Objective: Improve accessibility and safety for bikes around barriers like intersections and rivers.
         Action 5.4: Integrate identified barriers into appropriate state, county and local planning
         documents.
         Action 5.5: Prioritize identified barriers (completed by appropriate state, county and local
         transportation agencies).
         Action 5.5: Prioritize identified barriers (completed by appropriate state, county, and local
         transportation agencies).
         Action 5.6: Resolve barriers identified in the Plan to improve accessibility and safety for bicyclists
         on highways.
         Action 5.7: Include appropriate bicycle facilities in all new bridge projects and major
         rehabilitation of existing bridges.
    Objective: Improve the safety of existing facilities.
         Action 5.8: Conduct safety audits for existing facilities to identify design deficiencies and
         maintenance needs.
         Action 5.9: Work with appropriate state, county, and local agencies to adopt maintenance
         programs to routinely maintain and upgrade existing facilities.
         Action 5.10: Identify and focus resources on spot maintenance problems on existing streets,
         corridors, and neighborhoods where bicycle crashes occur.
         Objective: Reduce the rate of bicycle crashes by 50 percent by 2021.
         Action 5.11: Identify spot locations, corridors and neighborhoods where bicycle crashes are
         occurring.
         Action 5.12: Focus resources on spot locations, corridors, and neighborhoods where bicycle
         crashes are occurring.
         Action 5.13: Develop a Web site where users report crashes, bad pavement, concerns about road
         conditions, etc. Use community bike type tool in an ongoing basis.
         Action 5.14: Identify entities to collect data and report information
    Objective: Promote more bicycling through route signing and end of trip facilities.
         Action 5.15: Install a Signed Bicycle Route System with uniform signage to create a unified and
         defined network.
         Action 5.16: Require and install end-of-trip facilities.

Chapter 6: Design and Application of Guidelines and Standards
    Goal: Improve safety for all modes of transportation through the careful design and
    implementation of bicycle facilities.
    Introduction
    Summary of key provisions in AASHTO; MUTCD; MoDOT Engineering Design Manual; St. Charles and
    St. Louis County Design Manuals.

May 10, 2011                                                                                                       3
Draft Outline for Discussion



     Objective: Improve safety by designing all bicycle facilities to the latest AASHTO bicycle guidelines
     and 2009 MUTCD Standards.
          Action 6.1: Latest AASHTO bike guidelines and 2009 MUTCD are adopted by appropriate state,
          county, and local agencies.
          Action 6.2: Adopt additional guidance for installing bicycle facilities that builds on AASHTO
          guidelines and 2009 MUTCD Standards (see Appendix B for further guidance on bike lanes,
          shared lane markings, and signage).
          Action 6.3: Ensure consistent application of bicycle facility guidelines and standards through field
          checks to insure compliance to AASHTO guidelines and 2009 MUTCD Standards.
          Action 6.4: Identify creative solutions to unique issues that may be outside of standard design
          guidance.

Chapter 7: Education, Enforcement, and Encouragement
     Goal: Improve safety for all modes of transportation through the implementation of educational
     and enforcement programs.
     Introduction
         Bicyclists Rights and Responsibilities
         Crash Data Map (based on reported crashes)
         Summary – Behavioral Causes of Bicycle Related Crashes and How They Can be Prevented
     Objective: Improve safety and reduce the number of crashes involving bicyclists by expanding,
     developing and implementing education and enforcement programs through partnerships with
     community organizations.
          Action 7.1: Expand and support existing and new bicycling education programs for bicyclists and
          motorists through partnerships with community organizations and appropriate law enforcement
          agencies. This action includes programs taught by certified instructors through the League of
          American Bicyclists.
          Action 7.2: Expand safe routes to school programs, including curriculum and safety education
          programs, to encourage children to walk and bicycle to school at the elementary, middle, and
          high school levels.
          Action 7.3: Work with MoDOT to develop, update, and include educational materials regarding
          motor vehicles and bicyclists.
          Action 7.4: Add stronger language to the Missouri Driver Guide related to motorist-cyclist
          behavior and incorporate bicycle friendly training into driver’s education.
          Action 7.5: Identify agencies (champions) and not-for-profit groups that will collaborate on
          developing educational, promotional, and marketing materials for bicyclists, motorists, and
          transportation, education, and enforcement agencies.
          Action 7.6: Encourage local police agencies to participate in outreach activities such as bicycle
          rodeos and school assemblies.




4                                                                                                   May 10, 2011
                                                                                       Draft Outline for Discussion



         Action 7.7: Increase enforcement of motorists and bicyclists behavior to reduce bicycle- and
         motor-vehicle-related crashes. Follow up by compiling and reviewing statistics on where and why
         citations are issued to assess their consistency and focus.
    Objective: Educate staff in planning, design, maintenance, construction, and enforcement.
         Action 7.8: Implement semiannual training programs on AASHTO guidelines and MUTCD
         standards for educating planners, engineers, maintenance staff, the public, and others
         organizations.
         Action 7.9: Identify creative, low-cost ways to deliver education programs for planners and
         engineers (webinars and courses offered through APBP, PBIC, APA, Great Rivers Greenway,
         Trailnet, EWGCOG, MoDOT, etc). Programs should provide continuing education credits to
         encourage participation.
         Action 7.10: Identify a training program champion to administer, publicize, and seek funding for
         training. The training champion should coordinate with the EWGCOG to incorporate training into
         the long-range transportation plan.
         Action 7.11: Establish a communication system to promote education opportunities to
         municipalities, agency staff, crews, and law enforcement; establish funding mechanism to
         maintain the system.
         Action 7.12: Improve the consistency of enforcing traffic laws for motorists and bicyclists
         through training workshops for law enforcement officers and review of current laws and
         behaviors by motorists and bicyclists that lead to bicycle crashes.
         Action 7.13: Offer specialized training. Examples: Offer educational sessions (including Complete
         Streets) at meetings with the American Public Works Association, Police Department, City
         Manager, and Mayor.
    Goal: Expand the public’s view that bicycles are a viable /acceptable mode of transportation
    through encouragement programs.
    Objective: Establish ongoing regional encouragement programs.
         Action 7.14: Facilitate and/or support existing and new bicycling promotion events (including
         multi-jurisdictional events) through partnerships with community organizations, municipalities,
         and schools.
         Action 7.15: Encourage people to bike to community events by providing bicycle parking.
         Action 7.16: Challenge cities to do one bike event per year. For example, a city could create a
         series of “Bicycle Sunday” events where 1 to 5 miles of roadway are closed to motorists and only
         open only to bicyclists and walkers.
         Action 7.17: Revise, develop, provide, and maintain regional and local bicycle network maps.
         Action 7.18: Develop an interactive, Internet-based bicycle route way-finding program (may be
         possible to use or partner with other companies developing web-based wayfinding tools.)
         Action 7.19: Pursue League of American Bicyclists (LAB) Bicycle Friendly Community Award
         (business, city, county, and state levels).



May 10, 2011                                                                                                     5
Draft Outline for Discussion




Chapter 8: Supporting Policies
     Goal: Increase the commitment of public officials to support and/or initiate public policy for
     bicycling in all levels of government—state, local, and regional.
     Objective: Increase intergovernmental cooperation on bicycle policy and projects.
          Action 8.1: Identify and designate a regional entity to enhance, promote, and oversee
          cross-municipality and cross-county collaboration to ensure continued planning.
          Action 8.2: Designate (or create if needed) a citizen committee within the selected agency to
          support intergovernmental cooperation to implement the Plan and review plans for major
          projects as needed.
          Action 8.3: Identify key personnel and contacts in appropriate state, county, and local
          governments.
          Action 8.4: Identify process or steps for appropriate transportation agencies to take to modify
          standard plans for on-street facilities. Include all appropriate agencies to ensure uniformity of
          design practices.
          Action 8.5: Review local plans to identify planned facilities that do not connect to other
          jurisdictions; once identified, collaborate to change plans to create an interconnected system.
          Action 8.6: Identify process to make sure bicycle facility projects and elements of projects are
          implemented as planned.
          Action 8.7: Adopt Complete Streets ordinances or similar policies at local, regional, and state levels.
          Action 8.8: Collaborate to preserve and develop rail corridors for multi-purpose trails.
     Objective: Establish funding sources for implementation and ongoing maintenance.
          Action 8.9: Review and revise prioritization criteria by state, regional, county, and local
          transportation agencies to ensure that good bicycle projects (those that encourage use and
          improve safety) receive priority ranking for existing funds.
          Action 8.10: Review and revise application forms and scoring criteria used by state, regional, and
          local transportation agencies to ensure that good bicycle projects (those that encourage use and
          improve safety) receive priority ranking for existing funds.
          Action 8.11: Install bicycle facilities as part of normal public and private projects, development,
          and programs (also known as “routine accommodation”).
          Action 8.12: Identify local, county, or state dedicated funding sources for implementation of on-
          street bicycle facilities. For example, a certain percentage of capital improvements could be set
          aside for bicycle facilities, or regional agencies could offer grant programs for improved bicycle
          facilities.
          Action 8.13: Encourage local municipalities to fund a bicycle/pedestrian program coordinator,
          or, at a minimum, dedicate responsibility for bicycle/pedestrian facility planning,
          implementation, and programming to an existing position.
          Action 8.14: Create public/private partnerships to develop bicycle facilities such as on-road
          facilities, bicycle parking, or other support facilities.

6                                                                                                      May 10, 2011
                                                                                        Draft Outline for Discussion



         Action 8.15: Encourage multi-agency applications for funding projects.
         Action 8.16: Encourage municipalities or a group of municipalities or units of government to enact
         impact fees for new developments or redevelopments and require the installation of bicycle
         facilities.

Chapter 9: Implementation
    Introduction
     Approach
     Implementation phases: early, near-, medium-, and long-term
    Bikeway System Master Plan Project Prioritization Criteria and Methodology (includes maps)
    Bikeway System Master Plan - Prioritized Projects
    1.   Early Implementation Projects (2011)
    2.   Near-Term Projects (2012 – 2014)
    3.   Medium-Term Projects (2015-2017)
    4.   Long-Term Projects (2018-2021)

Chapter 10: Performance Measures and Accountability
    Introduction
         Action 10.1: Establish long-term performance measures.
         Action 10.2: Establish strategic performance measures.
         Action 10.3: Establish baseline data and data collection methods that can be used to measure
         success of the Plan.
         Action 10.4: Establish mechanisms for ongoing community input and accountability.
    Note: Report will include links to other relevant reports and plans.

Appendices
A   Public Process
B   Regional Bicycle Network Facility Illustrations
C   Bicycle Route Signage
D   Facility Maintenance
E   Funding
F   Bike Counts
G   Door Hangers
H   Reporting Progress
I   Local Jurisdiction Bike/Walk Plans
J   Complete Streets Policies
K   Review of Local Planning Policies and Regulations




May 10, 2011                                                                                                      7
Chapter 1: Introduction
Bicycling can take on many different meanings for the residents of the greater St. Louis region. For
children, those first tentative trips by bicycle provide a sense of adventure and are important steps
towards independence. Others see bicycling as a way to exercise and stay fit, and occasionally bicycle to
work or school during nice weather. Still others rely on bicycles as a primary means of transportation—
whether by choice, because they elect not to use a car, or because they cannot afford a car. Similarly,
some bicyclists are very comfortable riding in the road with motor vehicles, while others are more
cautious and prefer riding on separate paths and trails. Another important group is those who currently
don’t ride bicycles, but are interested in doing so in the future. And finally, there are residents who
choose not to bicycle but understand that it is important to their fellow citizens to be able to use
bicycles on the roadway for transportation.
Regardless of the underlying motivations or level of experience, the regional bicycle network must
provide a safe, high-quality experience for all people and skill levels. A viable transportation system
provides a number of travel choices, including travel by bicycle. Similarly, the transportation system
must afford travelers direct, efficient routes to reach their destinations, instead of requiring them to go
out of their way to get from point A to point B.

The Case for Bicycling
Presently, a number of key trends and indicators are converging and resulting in a ground swell of
interest in promoting bicycling as a transportation mode. Cities are facing many challenges in terms of
being able to repair and maintain infrastructure, address local and global environmental issues, and
distribute basic services fairly. There is great interest among citizens and stakeholders in pursuing
development and transportation solutions that are more sustainable—meaning less costly to maintain
over time, less polluting, and more equitable. More and more, the bicycle is being seen as a significant
part of sustainable transportation systems. These trends, as well as a growing demand from the public
for a safer and better connected bike network, point to the need for development of the Regional
Bicycle Plan (the Plan) and promotion of bicycling as a viable transportation choice in the greater
St. Louis region.
Benefits of bicycling in the St. Louis region include improvements in health and fitness, safer and more
vibrant communities, and a more balanced and environmentally sound transportation system. As the
St. Louis and St. Charles region continues to grow, bicycling is becoming an important quality-of-life
factor that people and businesses consider when choosing where to locate. Being able to bike from one
place to another safely and conveniently can help define the quality of a person’s experience in the
community.

Supporting the St. Louis Region’s Growing Bicycling Community
The St. Louis region is fortunate to have an enthusiastic and large existing bicycling community. Bicyclists
in the St. Louis region enjoy a gentle landscape and a fairly moderate climate, which make bicycle use a
practical option for much of the year. Bicycling can be an enjoyable family activity, a way to relieve
stress after work, or a way to incorporate daily exercise into busy lifestyles. Seventy-eight percent of
bicyclists nationally ride for exercise or recreation. 1 In the St. Louis region, the increasing popularity of
recreational bicycling is unmistakable as more bicyclists are seen on the streets and the ever-expanding
greenway system each year.


1
    Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2003

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                   1-1
Several bicycling clubs and groups promote bicycling in and around the St. Louis region. Many of the
groups organize group rides and even post their routes (both on- and off-road) publicly on the Internet.
Often, the route information includes descriptions of the terrain and pavement conditions so that others
may make informed decisions about local bicycling opportunities. Some of the groups also reach out to
the community by teaching safe cycling skills and tips to adults and children. One group offers practical
information for bicycle commuters, such as the best types of clothing to wear and how to take bikes on
Metro Link and Metro Bus. While many of the groups promote recreational riding, their members’
presence on the roads and trails increases awareness of all bicyclists.
In addition to recreational riders, many residents bicycle or use bicycle pathways for practical reasons,
whether out of choice or necessity. Two large sectors of the population benefit directly from
improvements to the nonmotorized transportation network. According to the 2009 U.S. Census
American Community Survey, about 33.5 percent of the St. Louis Metropolitan Statistical Area (which
includes the City of St. Louis, and St. Louis and St. Charles Counties) is under the age of 19, and just over
13 percent of the population is 65 years or older. For young people, walking and bicycling afford a sense
of independence, and for seniors, walking is a good way to stay active both physically and socially. In
addition, for those who choose not to or cannot afford to use motor vehicles, bicycling is an inexpensive
and effective means of transportation.

Health Benefits
The health benefits of regular physical activity are far-reaching and include reduced risk of coronary
heart disease, stroke, and other chronic diseases, lower healthcare costs, and improved quality of life for
people of all ages. According to the Center for Disease Control, 35 percent of American adults do not
achieve the U.S. Surgeon General’s recommended 150 minutes a week of moderate physical activity. 2
And, with 30 percent of all Missouri adults meeting the Centers for Disease Control’s definition of obese,
the state is ranked among the highest obesity rates in the nation. 3 Giving people the option to bicycle to
the store, school, or work provides a time-efficient, low-cost way of attaining the weekly recommended
level of physical activity, which can help reduce obesity. Health studies have shown up to a 50 percent
reduction in Type 2 diabetes among people who engage in moderate physical activity—such as
bicycling—on a regular basis. 4
Incorporating bicycling and walking into daily routines is important for the health of young people. The
prevalence of obesity among children 6 to 11 increased from 6.5 percent in 1980 to 19.6 percent in
2008, nationwide. 5 The prevalence of obesity among adolescents aged 12 to 19 years increased from
5.0 percent to 18.1 percent. 6 Travel to and from school accounts for a significant part of a student’s daily
trips. Safe, convenient, and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle routes to schools are important for
students of all ages. By making trips on foot or by bike, students can make physical activity part of their
routine. However, even when it is possible, students normally do not walk or bike to school. A survey of
over 130,000 parents nationwide, conducted by the National Center for Safe Routes to School, shows
that about 15 percent of students Kindergarten through 8th grade walk home from school, and 2 percent

2
  Center for Disease Control State Indicator Report on Physical Activity, 2010
3
  CDC, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2010
4
  Journal of the American Medical Association, October 1999, based on a study by the Harvard School of Public
Health
5
  Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Curtin LR, Lamb MM, Flegal KM. Prevalence of high body mass index in US children and
adolescents, 2007–2008. JAMA 2010;303(3):242–9.
6
  National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2004 with Chartbook on Trends in the Health of
Americans. Hyattsville, MD; 2004.

                                                                                                  Regional Bicycle Plan
1-2                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
ride bicycles. 7 A generation ago, nearly 90 percent of students walked or bicycled to and from school. 8
While there are many reasons students are not walking or bicycling to school today, it is undeniable that
by opting to take cars when it is possible to walk or bike, students miss out on the health benefits of
active travel.

Economic Benefits
According to the League of American Bicyclists, a motor vehicle is the second-highest household
expense, after housing itself. 9 The American Automobile Association estimates that the average
American spends nearly $8,000 per year to own and operate an automobile, while bicyclists typically
spend less than $200 per year. 10 In some cases, bicycling can improve the mobility of residents without
access to a car and allow some households to own one vehicle instead of two.
Bicycling can also help bring tourist dollars into the region. Active vacations and recreational tourism are
one of the fastest growing sectors of the tourist industry. The St. Louis region, with its extensive network
of greenways, numerous points of interest, and location at the crossroads of several national bike
routes—including the Trans America Bicycle Trail, Katy Trail, Route 66, and Mississippi River Trail—is
well-positioned to benefit from further development of its bicycle network. According to a 1998 study,
recreational tourism on the Great Allegheny Passage trail in Maryland and Pennsylvania generated in
excess of $14 million each year, even though the trail was only partially completed at that time. 11 A 2004
study of the Northern Central Rail Trail (a 21-mile unpaved trail in Maryland) found that annual revenues
from the purchase of goods, services, and accommodations were about $10.3 million.
In addition to tourism benefits, studies have shown that proximity to greenways and trails can have a
positive effect on property values. A study by the Center for Urban Policy and the Environment in
focusing on the Indianapolis, Indiana, housing market found that “proximity to greenways generally has
positive, statistically significant effects on property values” and that, when added up across the city,
“these effects may be in the millions of dollars.” 12 Additionally, in a 2002 survey of recent home buyers
sponsored by the National Association of Realtors and the National Association of Home Builders, trails
ranked as the second most important community amenity out of a list of 18 choices. 13 The St. Louis
region has an excellent trail network that will continue to expand as the Great Rivers Greenway District
and municipalities complete more greenway and trail projects. An on-street network of bicycle facilities
will complement this trail network by connecting neighborhoods, employment centers, universities, and
other destinations, creating an extensive bicycle network that will attract residents and businesses alike.
Bicycle infrastructure projects, such as installing bicycle lanes and boulevards, have a positive effect on
local job creation. While it is likely that any infrastructure project will generate local construction jobs, it

7
  Safe Routes to School Travel Data: A Look at Baseline Results from Parent Surveys and Student Travel Tallies,
National Center for Safe Routes to Schools, January 2010.
8
  Kids Walk-to-School: Then and Now—Barrier and Solutions. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
accessed February 25, 2011
9
  Surface Transportation Policy Project. “Housing and Transportation,” Online,
www.transact.org/library/factsheets/housing.asp#_ednref1, February 23, 2004
10
   As estimated by the League of American Bicyclists
11
   Stephen Farber, An Economic Impact Study for the Allegheny Trail Alliance, University of Pittsburgh and
Pennsylvania Economic League, Inc., January 1999, i-ii
12
   Greg Lindsey, Public Choices and Property Values: Evidence from Greenways in Indianapolis, Center for Urban
Policy and the Environment, December 2003, 1
13
   Consumer’s Survey on Smart Choices for Home Buyers, National Association of Realtors and the National
Association of Home Builders, April 2002

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                          1-3
appears that bicycle and pedestrian projects may be beneficial to the local economy. Based on a study
conducted by the University of Massachusetts–Amherst, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects
can create more than just road repair and resurfacing jobs. 14 The study evaluated data on infrastructure
projects completed in Baltimore, Maryland. The conclusion was that because bicycle and pedestrian
projects can be more labor-intensive, more money is spent on labor than on materials. As explained by
the author,
“In this case study we find that investments in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure create the most
employment for a given level of expenditure. While road construction projects create approximately
7 jobs per $1 million spending, pedestrian projects create over 11 jobs for the same level of spending,
and bicycle projects create up to 14 jobs.”
Companies today are very mobile and choose to operate in places where they are likely to attract the
most talented and skilled workers. Many large employers are recognizing that their ability to recruit top
employees depends significantly on local culture and amenities. In many industries, the competition for
workers is on a global scale, and people are choosing employers not just on salary and traditional
benefits, but on external criteria such as lifestyle and quality of life. With modest investments in bicycle
infrastructure and programs, the St. Louis region can turn its conduciveness for bicycling into a primary
selling point for prospective companies and employees.
Lastly, across America and around the world, there is rising concern over oil and gas prices. As
households become more economically conscious of the cost of owning and driving a vehicle, the bicycle
will become a more attractive form of transportation. A survey of bicycle retailers from nearly 40 states
conducted by Bikes Belong in 2008, a year in which gas prices exceeded $4 per gallon in most parts of
the country, revealed 73 percent or respondents selling more bikes, 84 percent selling more accessories,
and 88 percent selling more service. According to the survey, 95 percent of shops said customers cited
high gas prices as a reason for their transportation-related purchases. 15

Environmental Benefits
Carbon dioxide accounts for over 80 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, and
transportation sources account for nearly one-third of that total. 16 The average combined daily travel of
automobiles in St. Louis is more than 72 million miles each day, and more than 88 tons of ozone-forming
volatile organic compounds are emitted into the air. 17 Ozone and greenhouse gases create both local
and global health and environmental impacts, and areas like the St. Louis region, which are designated
as non-attainment areas (for air quality standards) by the Environmental Protection Agency, are
required to reduce total emissions. Substituting bicycling trips for short auto trips reduces the amount of
pollutants generated by automobiles.
Furthermore, as a vehicle, the bicycle is very efficient in its use of public space. There is space for
approximately 10 to 12 bicycle parking spaces in one automobile parking space. 18 Often, it is possible to
improve and expand the bicycle network without an increase in pavement and other impervious

14
   Heidi-Garret Peltier, Estimating the Employment Impacts of Pedestrian, Bicycle and Road Infrastructure. Political
Economy Research Institute University of Massachusetts Amherst . December, 2010
15
   Gas Prices/Bike Sales Survey, Bikes Belong, http://www.bikesbelong.org/resources/stats-and-
research/research/gas-pricesbike-sales-survey/ accessed March 1, 2011.
16
   National Household Travel Survey News Brief,” The ‘Carbon Footprint’ of daily travel”, March 2009
17
   St. Louis Regional Clean Air Partnership website accessed April 20, 2011.
18
   Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, “Bicycle Parking: Costs”, Available online:
http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/engineering/parking.cfm

                                                                                                    Regional Bicycle Plan
1-4                                                                                              Greater St. Louis Region
surfaces that result in increased stormwater runoff. Many improvement strategies require only a new
directional striping pattern on the roadway. In some cases, the route already functions well for
bicyclists, and the only recommended changes are new signs in coordination with education and
encouragement programs.
Lastly, the bicycle, unlike a motor vehicle, introduces very few if any toxins such as oil and contaminants
into the environment through stormwater runoff from streets into water bodies.

Maximizing Transit Investments
The Bi-State Development Agency (Metro) has recently adopted its Moving Transit Forward Plan, a
blueprint for transit in the St. Louis region over the next 30 years. Pairing bicycle facility improvements
with transit gives people more transportation choices and expands the reach of the transit system. It has
been suggested that the farthest distance that the average person will walk for a trip of any kind is
¼ mile, or a 5- to 10-minute walk. The trip may end at the destination such as work or shopping, or it can
be part of a longer journey that involves motor transit. Therefore, it has been accepted practice to
assume that transit stops and stations will serve those who live or work within a ¼-mile radius of their
location.
Targeting the provision of safe and convenient bicycle facilities such as lanes, trails, and parking can
increase the service radius of a transit stop. Bicycles, like any vehicle, increase the efficiency and speed
at which the traveler is moving. Transportation planners generally estimate that people will opt to
bicycle up to 3 miles for their trips, and possibly less if the trips include a leg on mass transit. Even if the
transit rider will only bike up to 1 mile to the closest transit stop, ridership for that transit stop increases
significantly. It is important to note that St. Louis area residents may be more likely than residents of
other cities to bike (to transit stations and other destinations) because the terrain around St. Louis is
relatively flat and smooth, which is ideal for bicycle commuting.
Bicycles can also be part of the solution to what transportation planners refer to as the “last mile”
problem. This term refers to the situation in which a person’s place of work is located 1 mile or so away
from the closest transit stop, and out of convenient walking distance for most people. It is not
uncommon for commuters in this situation to choose to drive the entire trip, rather than take transit for
the first leg and walk the last mile to work. One solution for commuters with a “last mile” problem is to
use a bicycle to supplement another form of transit. Metro facilitates and encourages the use of bicycles
to extend transit trips by providing bicycle racks on the front of each vehicle and expressly allowing
bicycles to be brought on-board its light rail trains.
Another way to encourage commuters to bike the “last mile” is to provide bikes to borrow or rent at or
near the transit stations closest to their place of work. Such a service is commonly referred to as bike
share. Using such a service, the commuter can leave the transit vehicle and pick up a bike for the last leg
of the trip. The commuter uses the borrowed bike to return to the transit station in the evening, and
then boards the transit vehicle for the ride home. While bike share systems are more common in
Europe, a number of systems have been launched in North American cities, including Washington D.C
(Capital BikeShare), Philadelphia, Louisville (FreeWheelin), and Montreal (Bixi).

Plan Purpose
The primary purpose of the Plan is to provide a coordinated vision for accommodating and encouraging
bicycling as a viable transportation mode in the region. Incorporating citizen and stakeholder input, the
latest standards in facility design, and analysis of constraints and opportunities, the Plan is envisioned to
be the source reference document as the Regional Bicycle Network is developed over the next 20 years.


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                      1-5
Implementation of the Regional Bicycle Network will result from careful planning and project integration
among a variety of public agencies. It is anticipated that through coordination on new road construction
or refurbishment efforts throughout the region, opportunities to expand the bicycle network will arise
over time. As projects are planned and designed and funding becomes available, bicycle facilities should
be considered and implemented. A more in-depth discussion about Plan implementation and
responsibilities is provided in Chapter 9.
With the Plan in place, the St. Louis region will be well positioned to capitalize on and address the trends
discussed earlier in this chapter and become a truly great area for bicycling.

Plan Background
Over the past 10 years, the Great Rivers Greenway District (the District) has spearheaded the
development of the “River Ring”—a 600-mile, interconnected system of greenways, parks, and trails
that will connect the St. Louis region. Great Rivers Greenway is funded by a one-tenth of 1 cent sales tax
approved by voters in November 2000 in St. Louis County, St. Charles County, and the City of St. Louis.
The purpose of the River Ring system is to improve the quality of life throughout the region while
creating an enduring legacy that will be shared with future generations. Great Rivers Greenway has five
goals in building the River Ring: Connect Communities and Neighborhoods; Preserve and Connect
People to Nature; Improve Economic Vitality; Provide Transportation Choices; and Promote Good
Health. The Regional Bicycle Plan touches upon each of these goals and is a critical component of the
River Ring.
In 2009, Great Rivers Greenway Board of Directors allocated some of its resources to fund the Regional
Bicycle Plan for St. Louis County, City of St. Louis, and the urbanized communities of St. Charles County.
Close to 100 municipalities are located within the planning area of the RBP. In 2010, the Great Rivers
Greenway District hired consultants to develop the Regional Bicycle Plan. To ensure that a variety of
interests were represented in the planning process, and to build support for the Plan in order to ensure
successful implementation, development of the Plan included a wide-reaching public involvement
process and consultation with a number of stakeholders and agencies in the greater St. Louis region,
including the East-West Gateway Council of Governments (EWGCOG), Missouri Department of
Transportation (MoDOT), Metro, the City of St. Louis, the counties of St. Louis and St. Charles, numerous
municipalities, and Trailnet. In addition, a Citizen Advisory Committee and Technical Advisory
Committee were formed to provide more detailed review and feedback throughout the plan
development process. More information on the Plan development process is provided in Chapter 2.

Relevant City/Regional Plans and Documents
This Plan complements, builds upon, and lends more specificity to other relevant city and regional plans,
including the following:
•     St. Louis Regional Bicycling and Walking Transportation Plan developed by the EWGCOG

•     Downtown Next: 2020 Vision for Downtown St. Louis, St. Louis County Strategic Plan

•     the Missouri Department of Transportation’s (MoDOT’s) Long-Range Transportation Plan

•     Great River Greenway’s River Ring Plan

•     Bicycle and walking plans developed at the municipal level within St. Louis and St. Charles counties




                                                                                                     Regional Bicycle Plan
1-6                                                                                               Greater St. Louis Region
As implementation of this Plan moves forward and the aforementioned plans are implemented and
updated, it is anticipated that there will be opportunities to coordinate, synchronize, and otherwise
further align this Plan with the visions, goals, and objectives of each. These plans, and their relevancy to
the Regional Bicycle Plan, are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.

National Bicycle Planning Trends
Bicycling is making a comeback, and in the St. Louis region, as in many major metropolitan areas,
demand for a better bicycle network is growing. Transportation system planning in the latter half of the
20th Century has largely focused on the needs of automobiles, pushing the bicycle out of the picture. In
recent years, bicycling has re-emerged as a viable mode of transportation, especially with rising gas
prices, the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and a desire for more sustainable and livable
development patterns. Additionally, promotion of active transportation modes such as bicycling is seen
as a key component to fighting the national obesity epidemic.
Recent federal policy guidance supports the new research and design guidance, including a major policy
statement on bicycle accommodation released by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). In
March of 2010, Secretary of the U.S. DOT Ray LaHood, released a signed policy statement summarizing
key federal statutes and regulations regarding walking and bicycling. He reiterated the DOT policy to
“incorporate safe and convenient walking and bicycling facilities into transportation projects. Every
transportation agency, including DOT, has the responsibility to improve conditions and opportunities for
walking and bicycling and to integrate walking and bicycling into their transportation system.” 19 He goes
on to cite federal statutes that require state and Metropolitan Planning Organizations “to integrate
walking and bicycling facilities and programs in their transportation plans to ensure the operability of an
intermodal transportation system.” 20 This federal directive establishes a new opportunity for EWGCOG,
MoDOT, Metro, St. Louis and St. Charles counties, and the City of St. Louis to coordinate their
transportation projects and include appropriate bicycle facilities in all projects that benefit from federal
funding.

Bicycle Planning at the State, Regional, and City Levels
More than ever, states, regions, and cities across the United States are adopting and implementing
bicycle master plans. Many are initiating projects with the goal of increasing transportation mode-share
beyond single-occupant automobiles as a strategy to alleviate congestion and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. Other communities are responding to resident and elected official’s desires to provide more
and better transportation choices for commuters. And, some communities are combining both goals
along with increasing the quality of life among its residents by building a bicycle network.
The large number of cities that are promoting bicycling is reflected in League of American Bicyclists’
Bicycle Friendly Community Program, which has recognized more than 150 cities, including the City of
St. Louis, for actively supporting bicycling. 21 More recently, the League recognized seven states through
its Bicycle Friendly States award program. 22 The League also has a Bicycle Friendly Businesses program,
and several businesses in the St. Louis area have received awards.

19
   United States Department of Transportation Policy Statement on Bicycle and pedestrian Accommodation
Regulations and Recommendations; Signed on March 11, 2010 and announced March 15, 2010 (1)
20
   United States Department of Transportation Policy Statement on Bicycle and pedestrian Accommodation
Regulations and Recommendations; Signed on March 11, 2010 and announced March 15, 2010 (3)
21
   League of American Bicyclists; http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/bicyclefriendlyamerica/communities/
22
   League of American Bicyclists;
http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/bicyclefriendlyamerica/bicyclefriendlystate/rankings.php

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                   1-7
Cities being recognized for actively supporting bicycling have a number of things in common that reflect
national trends. Similarities include:
      •   An adopted bicycle master plan

      •   Support for implementing the bicycle master plan from elected officials and key staff members
          in planning, public works, and parks and recreation departments
      •   A comprehensive bikeway network that includes on- and off-street facilities

      •   Innovative facilities such as green bicycle lanes, cycle tracks (physically separated bike lanes
          adjacent to the roadway), and special intersection treatments such as bike boxes (marked areas
          for bicycle positioning between the stop bar for motor vehicles and the crosswalk for making
          through or left-turn movements).

      •   Ongoing and effective public involvement from planning, design, construction, and maintenance
          of bicycle facilities
      •   Adopt Complete Streets or Livable Streets Ordinances or Routine Accommodation policies
Examples of cities that have installed on-street bicycle facilities over the last decade include Seattle
(113 bikeway miles), Minneapolis (123 miles), Portland (250 miles), and Chicago (115 miles). Many cities
attempt to track the relationship between the provision of bicycle facilities, bicycle use, and bicycle
crash rates, but it takes time to generate sufficient data to establish a correlation. The City of Portland
has been tracking and analyzing ridership for nearly 20 years, and has identified two very encouraging
trends:
      •   Bicycle use increases as bikeway miles go up. In Portland, the bridges to downtown provide
          good bike counting points, and their use is a good indicator of overall ridership throughout the
          city; thus this figure juxtaposes bicycle traffic over the bridges with total number of bikeway
          miles citywide The graph in Figure 1-1 supports the “build it and they will come” school of
          thought. As the system becomes more connected and the city gets better at designing facilities,
          more riders are encouraged to use the system. It also shows that the presence of some cyclists
          tends to attract more cyclists—that is, there is a positive feedback loop.
      •   Crash rates decrease as bicycle use goes up. Figure 1-2 below shows the number of crashes
          holding fairly steady even while the total number of bicycles using the system more than
          quadrupled over a 17-year period. This trend points to an overall increase in bicycle safety,
          which can be attributed partly to facility design and partly to roadway users becoming
          accustomed to interacting within one another in a safe manner.




                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
1-8                                                                                       Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 1-1
Bicycle Traffic across Four Main Portland Bicycle Bridges Juxtaposed with Bikeway Miles 23




Figure 1-2
Combined Bicycle Traffic over Four Main Portland Bicycle Bridges Juxtaposed with Bicycle Crashes




23
  Portland Bicycle Count Report 2009;
http://www.bta4bikes.org/btablog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/bikecount2009reportfinal.pdf


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                           1-9
New Bicycle Facility Types
Over the last two decades, the design of on- and off-street bicycle facilities has evolved significantly and
become widely accepted throughout the United States. Nationally recognized publications such as the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities and the 2009 Edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) provide detailed guidance on the planning and design of bicycle facilities that are recognized
by the U.S. DOT. This guidance, along with new research, is giving local communities a variety of options
and opportunities for implementing on- and off-street bicycle facilities. The Regional Bicycle Plan will
take advantage of this evolution in thought and practice, and employ these new bicycle facility types in a
context-sensitive manner.
Dedicating space for bicycle facilities within the roadway system is imperative to increasing bicycle use
within the St. Louis region. While the River Ring 24 plan being developed and implemented by Great
Rivers Greenway provides a robust regional bicycle network serving a variety of needs, building trails
alone cannot significantly increase commuter and utilitarian bicycling trips since many do not provide
access to places of employment, rail stations, and other major destinations. On-street bicycle facilities—
including shared lane markings, bicycle lanes, buffered bicycle lanes, cycle tracks, and paved shoulders—
are key components of this Plan’s proposed bikeway system. Chapter 5 provides a definition and images
for each of the facility types.
Introducing a set of standardized on-street bicycle facility types will encourage the large population of
less confident riders (the “interested but cautious”) to use their bicycles more often by providing places
to ride that are compatible with motor vehicle traffic. As the number of bicyclists grows, safety also
improves as motorists come to expect the presence of bicyclists on all streets, as illustrated in Figure 1-2
above. This fact reinforces one of the Plan’s main strategies to improve bicycle safety.
The relative success of this strategy comes with one very important condition—good behavior on the
part of bicyclists and motorists. In that regard, most roadway contexts of the network represented in
this Plan will require the installation of the minimum bicycle facility designation, the “Shared Lane”
marking. This facility will require good behavior by motorists and cyclists to share the roadway and
respect each other.

Who Will Implement This Plan?
Numerous agencies and organizations will play a role in implementing the Plan. Historically, there has
not been any one agency or organization that spearheaded region-wide bicycle planning. It will be
important to establish a “home” for the Plan where implementation can be coordinated and tracked. A
discussion of the various agencies and organizations that have been involved in developing the Plan,
their missions, and their potential roles in implementing the Plan is included in Chapter 9.



24
   Great Rivers Greenway is spearheading the development of The River Ring, an interconnected system of
greenways, parks and trails that will encircle the St. Louis region, enhancing the quality of life for residents and
visitors. Eventually, The River Ring will comprise a 600-mile web of more than 45 greenways that will crisscross the
region and provide access to trail and greenway projects developed by the Metro East Park and Recreation District
in Madison and St. Clair counties, Illinois. The concept of The River Ring was the outcome of a 10-month citizen-
driven planning process completed in September 2003; http://www.greatrivers.info/Projects/TheRiverRing.aspx




                                                                                                    Regional Bicycle Plan
1-10                                                                                             Greater St. Louis Region
Plan Organization
The organization of this Plan follows a logical sequence with each chapter building on topics presented
in the previous chapter while reflecting the mission, goals and objectives that were developed through
the public involvement process. Actions and measures of the plan were generated and prioritized by
members the Citizen and Technical Advisory Committees.
•    Chapter 1: Introduction—Provides background, purpose and context.

•    Chapter 2: Planning Process—Describes the public involvement process and how it was used to
     develop the Plan.
•    Chapter 3: Vision, Mission, and Goals and Objectives—Developed by the Citizen and Technical
     Advisory Committees, these provides specific Plan guidance and organizational structure for the
     Plan.
•    Chapter 4: Existing Facilities, Plans and Programs—Describes current plans, projects, programs,
     and facilities.
•    Chapter 5: Bicycle Facility Network—Makes recommendations for the on-street bicycle network.
•    Chapter 6: Design and Application of Guidelines and Standards—Makes recommendations for
     providing uniform application of design guidelines and standards.
•    Chapter 7: Education, Enforcement and Encouragement—Describes program recommendations to
     support the Plan.
•    Chapter 8: Supporting Policies—Describes policy recommendations to support the Plan.
•    Chapter 9: Implementation—Details strategies for implementing the Plan.

•    Chapter 10: Performance Measures and Accountability—Provides performance measures to track
     and evaluate the Plan’s implementation.
The Chapters listed above and subsequent Appendixes comprise the Plan and provide the tools and
measures to make the greater St. Louis region a great place to ride a bike.




“St. Louis is on the cusp of a new wave of transportation policy. We have the opportunity to define St. Louis County
                                                                                            th
as a sustainable destination. As the Chairman of the Council and as the Councilman of the 6 District, I want to see
our transportation system transform into a multimodal system with strong alternatives to driving. This will
maximize our highway capacity, reduce wear and tear on our roads, combat traffic congestion, reduce our reliance
on oil, and decrease greenhouse gas emissions.”

Steve Stenger

Chairman St. Louis County Council




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                         1-11
Chapter 2: Plan Development and Community Engagement Process
Introduction
Development of the Regional Bicycle Plan began in December of 2009 with the assembling of the project
team and outlining of the stakeholder and public engagement process. A major focus of the Plan
development process was engage the public through a variety of outreach methods. The public
engagement process was coupled with an aggressive and wide-reaching engagement campaign targeted
at core stakeholders and municipal leaders. As the initial stages of the public engagement process were
being carried out, the project team began its extensive analysis of both the physical conditions of the
road network and the policy and planning framework of the region and the many jurisdictions that
comprise it.
The principal goal of the Plan development process was to create a detailed plan based on analysis of
over 900 roadways within the City of St. Louis City and St. Louis and St. Charles Counties, stakeholder
input on key destinations and route preferences, and the latest standards, guidelines, and best practices
in bicycle network planning and design.
This chapter provides details of the Regional Bicycle Plan development process, which consisted of
seven components:
1.   Community Engagement
2.   Planning and Advisory Committees
3.   Technical and Policy Analysis
4.   Data Collection—Visual Survey
5.   Facility Recommendations
6.   Draft Plan
7.   Final Plan
These seven components are discussed in greater detail below.

1) Community Engagement
The public engagement process targeted a variety of audiences with varying levels of interest in and
knowledge about instituting a bicycle plan. The project team strived to conduct a public engagement
process that:
•    Engaged the public on multiple levels, builds trust, acknowledged and addressed concerns, and
     moved participants into sharing useable information.
•    Defined key stakeholders, user groups, and organizations and included them in continued dialogue
     throughout the process.

•    Was inclusive and had a diverse demographic of participants.

•    Followed a transparent and meaningful process of communication.
•    Showed participants how their ideas were being incorporated into the projects, and why some were not.
•    Provided participants with key information and an opportunity to offer relevant and valued insight
     and opinions on issues.


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                   2-1
Greater St. Louis Region
•     Used multiple methods of outreach, mixing traditional methods with newer technology to broaden
      the cross section of interested participants.
The targeted audience for this engagement effort was multifaceted and included:

•     Core stakeholders. With input from the Great Rivers Greenway, the Core Stakeholder group was
      identified and consisted of key organizations in the region that are well-positioned to have influence
      on transportation planning efforts and are critical to the implementation process.
      o   The objectives for engaging this group were to develop an understanding of the most up-to-date
          thinking in bicycle network planning and design, and ultimately get broad support for the Plan
          and its implementation.

•     The public, including citizens, active commuters, recreational riders, future users, advocacy groups,
      pedestrians, and motorists.
      o   The objectives for engaging this group were to build awareness and educate the public in order
          to grow ridership and increase safety.
•     Municipal leaders, public works directors, public officials, and organization leaders.
      o   The objectives for engaging this group were to educate, create an understanding of the most
          up-to-date thought in bicycle network planning and design, promote cross-municipality
          communication and cooperation for improved planning, increase support, and inspire them to
          initiate and participate in project planning and implementation.

Initial Engagement Activities
Initial activities focused on identifying, engaging, and developing support for the Plan from key
stakeholder groups. These groups included the general public, specific roadway user groups such as
bicyclists and motorists, advocacy groups, municipal leaders, and other related organizations and
agencies. The initial engagement activities with public agencies focused on collecting data and
identifying bicycle facility recommendations that could be implemented as early as the summer of 2010.

Following the initial activities described above, a variety of public engagement methods were deployed.

Methods for Engaging a Multifaceted Public
In order to engage a diverse public on multiple levels, the team focused on building trust, presenting
information in a straight-forward manner, listening, and addressing concerns as they arose. The team
worked on developing a number of outreach strategies that would reach the widest audience possible.
Strategies for reaching the audience were both conventional (public meetings) and technology-driven
(online surveys, virtual Open Houses, and Facebook). Strategies included:

          A. Branding the planning effort

              A visually appealing image was created to help create a recognizable identity through printed
              materials, the Internet, and other communication materials over the 18-month planning and
              engagement process.




2-2                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
                Designing the Regional Bicycle Plan logo was a key part of providing continuity in the outreach,
                marketing, and communication strategy.


           B. Educational Forum
              In March of 2010, the planning team, in cooperation with Trailnet, planned and hosted a
              successful kickoff event at the Richmond Heights Community Center. The event was a day-long
              forum that targeted two different key stakeholder groups: (1) municipal leaders, and (2)
              engineers and city planners. The event focused on educating the groups about the Regional
              Bicycle Plan and other healthy living and quality-of-life initiatives in the region. Of the 150
              individuals invited to the forum, 100 attended. The highlight of the event was the lunchtime
              keynote speaker, Charles Gandy, who spoke about national design and trends in bicycle facility
              implementation. Mr. Gandy’s presentation provided a segue to the second part of the day,
              which was a more detailed educational course targeted to engineers and planners in the area
              and focused on regional design trends.

                Forum participants received a brochure that provided an overview of the Plan (Appendix A).

                The forum achieved its goals for generating excitement for the Plan, which will ultimately lead to
                vibrant communities with alternative transportation modes. The forum also offered the planning
                team a base for developing a contact distribution list. The list was added to by the public on the
                project Web site, as well as by attendees at other events throughout the project. The team used
                the list to share updates and meeting notices.

           C. Identifying the Stakeholders

                Identifying and including key stakeholders in a continued dialogue throughout the planning
                process was critical to the success of the Plan. The project team worked closely with Great Rivers
                Greenway to help define the key stakeholders. These stakeholders became involved either
                through the Core Stakeholder group or through participation in the Citizen and Technical
                Advisory Committees.

                Key stakeholders were identified by their role in implementing the Plan, and included local,
                regional, and state agencies and organizations.

           D. Outreach to Agencies and Organizations

                Outreach to agencies and organizations was extensive throughout the Plan development
                process. Meetings regarding policy issues and Plan recommendations were held with MoDOT, St.
                Louis and St. Charles Counties, the City of St. Louis, other municipalities within the two counties,
                and various advocacy and professional organizations. In addition, extensive follow-up on specific
                issues was conducted through phone calls and e-mail. In all, over 75 points of contact were
                made with agencies and organizations. A complete list can be found in Appendix A.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                            2-3
Greater St. Louis Region
      E. Municipal and Public Entity Survey

         A Municipal and County Leader survey was developed to garner information about community
         ideas, needs, and wants as they pertains to on-road bicycle accommodations. The survey
         questions were developed with the goal of determining key issues in the study area related to
         bicycle facilities and the community’s level of interest in updating those facilities or creating
         new ones.

         Great Rivers Green sent an e-mail with the survey link to 251 contacts representing 76 jurisdictions
         on June 14, 2010. Recipients of the e-mail included city administrators, elected officials, and staff
         from public works, parks and recreation and planning departments. The initial mailing included 20
         addresses in need of correction; of those, 10 were re-sent successfully on June 30. The survey,
         which was developed using the online survey tool Zoomerang, allowed responders to both select
         answers and provide detailed comments pertaining to bicycle facilities.

         Sixty-seven people responded to the survey and represented 46 of the 76 public entities sent a
         survey request. Of the entities that responded to the survey, six departments and 19 elected
         officials were represented. See Appendix A for the survey results of the survey.

      F. Communication Methods

         Multiple means of communication were used throughout the Plan development process to make
         the process as transparent as possible. The team recognized the need to have both traditional
         and electronic outreach methods. The following is a list of methods used:

            Project Web site
            Marketing materials
            Kickoff Open Houses
            Facebook page
            Organization presentations
            Draft Plan Open Houses

         Project Web site
         The interactive project Web site served as a repository for meeting minutes, meeting
         notices, project updates, newsletters, event information, and progress and event photos. As
         the plan documents began to take shape, the Web site was used to post draft chapters for
         review by the Core Stakeholders as well as the Citizen and Technical Committees.

         The site provided a virtual Open House for those people unable to attend the in-person
         Open Houses (more detail on the virtual Open house is provided below). Visitors to the site
         also had the chance to take an online survey and use the interactive mapping tool to provide
         the project team with more route and preference data.

         Over the course of the project, ___ visits to the Web site were recorded.




2-4                                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 2-1: Project Web site

                The Web site included a feature that allowed visitors to sign up for e-mail notifications
                about the Plan. A contact database that included visitors to the Web site who registered, as
                well as attendees at the Open House and Public Meetings, was maintained throughout the
                planning process. The database served as a distribution list for project updates and meeting
                notices. As of April 2011, 800 people have signed up for the e-mail distribution list.

                An e-mail newsletter was an important part of maintaining transparent communication with
                the public stakeholders. ___ e-mail newsletters were written and distributed to the list.

                In addition, the project updates and newsletters were sent to local agencies that agreed to
                forward information to their lists. Approximately ___ e-mail newsletters containing project
                updates were distributed by participating agencies.

                Great Rivers Greenway, the initiator and promoter of the Plan, raised awareness of the
                project through its internal and external communication. Their efforts included developing a
                project page on the Great Rives Greenway Web site, posting event notices on the event
                page, and including the project in several editions of Great Rivers Greenway’s monthly
                e-mail newsletter.

                Marketing Material
                Several marketing methods were used to notify the public of and encourage participation in
                the Open Houses, build awareness, and direct people to the project Web site. Eye-catching
                drink coasters and full-page posters were created and distributed at events, bike shops, and
                public places throughout the region.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                     2-5
Greater St. Louis Region
      Kickoff Open Houses
      On October 13 and 14, 2010, public Open Houses were held at the Maryland Heights
      Community Center and Richmond Heights Community Center, respectively. Notice of the
      meeting was sent to over 500 contacts in the project’s contact database and to the contact
      databases of Trailnet and Citizens for Mass Transit, and announcements were made at
      various professional organization meetings. A press release for the Ppen Houses was also
      issued, and an announcement was posted on the project Web site. Over 214 people
      attended the two Open Houses. The Open Houses offered the planning team an opportunity
      to collect critical information and feedback from the public. Attendees were asked to
      interact with a series of information stations and provide comments on the different
      elements that the Plan would address.

      Community comment forms were provided in two formats. A hard copy of the comment
      form was provided at both of the Open House locations, and a web-based comment form
      for those who were not able to attend the in-person Open Houses was posted on the
      project Web site. One hundred and forty-four people returned comment forms at the Open
      House meetings, and 57 people responded through the online comment form. The form
      gathered valuable information about current bicycle use, barriers to bicycling, and actions
      needed to increase bicycling within the Plan area (see Appendix A for the full survey results).

      The Virtual Open House
      During the same time the public Open Houses were held in October 2010, the team
      developed an online Open House for those unable to attend the in-person meetings. Virtual
      Open House materials were presented in the same order and format as the in-person Open
      Houses. Online visitors could click on graphics and be linked to the information presented at
      the individual stations.




2-6                                                                                   Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                   Greater St. Louis Region
                Visitors to both the Virtual Open House and the Richmond Heights Community Center and
                the Maryland Heights Center meetings were able to vote on their bicycle facility
                preferences.

                Community Map Tool
                A online interactive mapping tool was utilized to collect geographically specific information
                about issues affecting bicycle travel, such as informal connections, desirable routes,
                roadways of concern, maintenance issues, challenging crossings, and so on. More than
                260 comments were gathered using this tool. The information was used to refine the
                Regional Bicycle Network plan and guide policy recommendations. Figure 2-2 is a map that
                shows areas where people commented on existing bicycle conditions. Summary results are
                found in Appendix A.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                       2-7
Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 2-2: Interactive Mapping Tool




              Facebook Page
              Staff members at Great Rivers Greenway developed and maintained a project Facebook
              page that currently has over 700 fans. The page is used primarily to announce upcoming
              events and project updates.

              Custom Presentations
              Over 75 points of contact were made with agencies that are involved in the region’s
              transportation planning, design, construction, operations, and maintenance. In many cases,
              custom presentations were created on issues of interest to professional organizations
              throughout the region whose buy-in and understanding were critical to the Plan’s
              development and implementation. The following are organizations to which custom
              presentations were given:

              •    Transportation Engineers of Metropolitan St. Louis (TEAM STL)
              •    American Planning Association (APA)—St. Louis Metro Section
              •    American Public Works Association (APWA)
              •    St. Louis Area City Managers Association (SLACMA)




2-8                                                                                       Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                       Greater St. Louis Region
                Meeting Notices and Marketing for May 2011 Open Houses

                May 2011 Open Houses

                May 2011 Open House Comment Forms

                May 2011 Virtual Open House


2) Planning and Advisory Committees
Core Stakeholder Group
The Core Stakeholder Group consisted of entities or organizations in the region that play key roles in
transportation planning, and are likely to play an active role in Plan implementation. Addressing the
issues, concerns and needs of these entities helped cultivate the support needed to make the Plan a
reality. Some individuals included from the Core Stakeholder Group also participated on the Technical
Advisory Committee (TAC). The Group was comprised of the following entities and organizations:

•    East-West Gateway Council of Governments
•    Great Rivers Greenway
•    Missouri Department of Transportation
•    Metro
•    City of St. Louis
•    St. Charles County
•    St. Louis County
•    Trailnet

Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)
The Citizen Advisory Committee, comprised of area residents interested in bicycle facilities (users of the
system), provided considerable thought and advice for draft Plan components, as well as volunteer
support at events. Great Rivers Greenway solicited interested residents to participate on the committee
through generating a media release, and also requested recruitment assistance from regional
organizations and agencies in the greater St. Louis region that represented all modes of transportation.
Committee members were selected through an application process conducted by Great Rivers
Greenway with input from the Core Stakeholder Group. Citizens were selected based on the type of
bicycle users they were—that is, whether they were commuters, recreational riders, or non-bikers—as
well as on demographic and socioeconomic diversity criteria. Thirty-three applicants were invited to
attend 6 meetings throughout the planning process. Eighteen members remained involved in the group.

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members were selected from the numerous agencies and
organizations that will be involved in the Plan’s implementation (owners of the bicycle network system).
An invitation letter was sent by Great Rivers Greenway to 33 individuals throughout the region; 24
responded. The twenty-four TAC members attended seven meetings throughout the planning process
and volunteered at the Open House events. Economic and demographic diversity were among the
criteria used for selecting committee members. Whereas the CAC was convened to bring public opinion
and feedback to the dialogue, the TAC was formed to represent technical and organizational voices.



Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                    2-9
Greater St. Louis Region
Both Committees helped develop and review the following key items:
•      the Plan’s Vision, Mission, and Goals and Objectives
•      Tasks
•      the bicycle network
•      maps with specific bicycle facility recommendations
•      the Plan outline
•      the draft Plan.

3) Technical and Policy Analysis
Technical and policy analysis was conducted to gain a full understanding of current ways bicycles are
incorporated into transportation planning, and to identify opportunities and constraints for developing
the Plan. There were three primary parts to the analysis:

       1. Document Review
          A complete review of existing city and transportation planning documents was conducted.
          Appendix M contains details on the plans that were reviewed, including how each jurisdiction or
          agency addresses bicycles in terms of policy and planning.

       2. Municipal and County Leader Survey
          As mentioned above, an e-mail with a link to an online survey was sent to 251 contacts
          representing 76 jurisdictions, including city administrators, elected officials, and staff from
          public works, parks and recreation, and planning departments. Sixty-seven people responded to
          the survey, representing 46 of the 76 public entities sent a survey request. Results of the survey
          can be found in Appendix A. The survey was important for identifying the issues of greatest
          concern to transportation agencies so that the project team could make sure that these issues
          were put on the table for discussion and addressed through the planning process.

       3. Agency and Organization Meetings
          Meetings were held with various jurisdictions and agencies in the Plan area, and over 75 points
          of contact were made. In many cases, custom presentations were given on issues of interest to
          the particular agency.

4) Data Collection—Visual Survey
It was important to understand the typical conditions and cross sections of roadways within the Plan
area so that appropriate facility recommendations and implementation mechanisms could be
developed. Four two-person teams conducted a bicycle facility feasibility analysis of over 900 miles of
roadways within the planning area over 2 weeks during the fall of 2010. Taking into account observed
and recorded traffic volumes and existing roadway widths, the field work teams identified
approximately 900 miles of roadway that could include context-appropriate bicycle facilities without
acquiring additional right-of-way.

5) Facility Recommendations
Draft Facility Recommendations
Taking into account field work data and other factors, facility recommendations were identified for the
900 miles of roadway determined to be appropriate for bicycle improvements. As a result, the



2-10                                                                                          Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
recommended Regional Bicycle Network establishes an interconnected bikeway system on a variety of
street types, including arterials, collectors, and local streets.

Revised Facility Recommendations
Maps with the draft facility recommendations were reviewed by the CAC, TAC, St. Louis and St. Charles
Counties, various municipalities, MoDOT, and the City of St. Louis. Public Open Houses were held on
October 13 and 14, 2010, and over 200 people had an opportunity to review and comment on the maps
and other materials. Comments and feedback from the various review parties and the public were
incorporated into the revised bicycle facility recommendations. Taking into account field work data and
other factors introduced during the public and committee review processes, over 1,000 miles of
roadway are included in the recommended Regional Bicycle Network.

6) Draft Plan
Over a period of 5 months, the draft Plan was developed using the input received from public and
stakeholder outreach efforts, results from the visual survey of the planning area, and review of
preliminary recommendations by the CAC and TAC. In April 2011, the draft Plan text, along with revised
facility maps and other elements to be incorporated into the Plan were reviewed by the CAC and TAC.
This was followed by a series of four public Open Houses held in different parts of the region in
May 2011. ___ people had an opportunity to review and comment on the draft Plan and maps.

7) Final Plan
Comments and feedback from the public Open Houses held in May 2011 and the CAC and TAC meetings
were incorporated into the revised final Plan. Upon completion of the Plan, EWGCOG, Great Rivers
Greenway, MoDOT, St. Louis City, St. Charles and St. Louis Counties, and local jurisdictions will be
encouraged adopt or endorse the Regional Bicycle Plan in their own plan documents. Chapter 7 provides
a complete list of engineering, education, encouragement, and enforcement Tasks that public entities
are encouraged to adopt.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                               2-11
Greater St. Louis Region
Chapter 3: Vision, Mission, and Goals and Objectives
The Plan’s vision, mission, and goals and objectives were developed through a series of interactive
exercises with the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), as well
as from information provided at the two kickoff open house meetings in October 2010 and virtual
kickoff open house meetings. For the many stakeholders that helped form this Plan, there is an
overarching desire to have a Plan that is both visionary in how it sets the tone for bicycling as a truly
viable transportation mode, and concrete in terms of defining the Regional Bicycle Network and how it
will be implemented over time. The Plan, and how it is structured, reflects this desire.
Specific actions for achieving the goals and objectives are identified in Chapters 5 through 9. The actions
relate to policy, program, and facility improvements and additions that will both facilitate successful
implementation of the Regional Bicycle Plan and promote bicycling as a viable and widely accepted
means of transportation. Each of the goals, objectives, and actions has a corresponding performance
measure, which can be found in Chapter 10, so that the progress of Plan implementation may be
tracked over time.

Vision
The Regional Bicycle Plan will create the bicycle component to the regional transportation network that
accommodates all users and promotes consistent design and development of bicycle facilities.

Mission
Increase the number of people using bicycles for transportation while reducing the number of crashes
involving bicycles.

Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives of the Plan were developed using input from the two kickoff public open house
events, as well as input from the TAC and CAC, and they form the framework of the Plan. A brief
discussion of each goal and its objectives is provided below. Specific actions for achieving these goals
and objectives are provided in Chapters 5 through 8.
Goal 1: Provide a prioritized system of routes that are contiguous and connected to other on- and off-
road facilities.
    Objective: Improve accessibility and “added” safety for bikes along on-street routes.
    Providing a connected network of safe and accessible on-street bicycle facilities within the Plan area
    is fundamental to achieving the goals of this RBP. On-street routes will help connect people to jobs,
    shopping, transit, schools, parks, and other destinations, as well as tie together the region’s ever-
    growing system of greenways and off-road trails.
    Objective: Improve accessibility and safety for bikes around barriers like intersections and rivers.
    Addressing barriers that impede accessibility and create unsafe bicycling conditions is critical to
    developing a continuous and connected bicycle network that invites a wider spectrum of bicyclists.
    Objective: Improve safety of existing roadway facilities.
    The County and City of St. Louis and St. Charles County, and many towns and cities within them,
    have a number of planned and existing bicycle facilities in place. These facilities should be
      incorporated into the regional bicycle network as needed, and, in some cases, retrofitted based on
      the recommendations in this Plan. The latest American Association of State Highway and
      Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)
      guidance to improve safety and ensure consistency across the Bicycle Facility Network will be
      consulted as projects are designed and constructed.
      Objective: Reduce the rate of bicycle crashes by 50 percent by 2020.
      The bicycle crash rate (number of bicyclists divided by number of reported crashes) is a key indicator
      of the safety of on-street facilities, the acceptance of bicyclists on the roadway, and good roadway
      behavior on the part of both motorists and bicyclists. Reducing the crash rate by 50 percent by 2020,
      while also increasing bicycle ridership through an expanded Bicycle Facility Network, will hinge upon
      well-designed facilities, addressing problem areas where crashes are occurring, and building
      awareness among motorists and bicyclists about their respective rights and responsibilities for using
      the roadway. The RBP identifies a number of implementation actions addressing each of these
      elements.
      Objective: Promote more bicycling through route signing and end of trip facilities.
      Installing way-finding signage that provides directional information to major destinations assists
      bicyclists through complicated and confusing portions of the network, and reaffirms route choice
      will help bicyclists feel more comfortable and confident using the Bicycle Facility Network. End-of-
      trip facilities, such as adequate and secure bike parking/storage at destinations and, for bicycle
      commuters, amenities such as changing areas and showers are also important for attracting
      ridership and making bicycle transportation more convenient.
      NOTE: Specific actions for achieving Goal 1 and meeting the objectives discussed above are provided
      in Chapter 5.
Goal 2: Improve safety for all modes of transportation through the careful design and implementation
of bicycle facilities.
      Objective: Improve safety by designing all bicycle facilities to the latest AASHTO bicycle guidelines
      and 2009 MUTCD Standards.
      The AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities provides design and construction
      guidelines, and operation and maintenance recommendations for bicycle facilities. The 1999 Guide
      is being revised, and is currently under review by Departments of Transportation across the country.
      The MUTCD 2009 edition provides standards for signs, signals, and pavement markings in the United
      States. These latest guidelines and standards provide clarity and additional guidance for on-street
      bicycle facilities, addressing many of the issues and questions that previous guidance was silent on.
      Following these standards and guidelines will allow local agencies to move forward with confidence
      that what they are doing is consistent with the latest thinking on safely accommodating bicycles.
      Furthermore, it is important for all transportation agencies involved in implementing this Plan to
      follow the latest standards and guidelines to ensure that facilities throughout the network are
      designed in a uniform manner.
      NOTE: Specific actions for achieving Goal 2 and meeting the objective discussed above are provided
      in Chapter 6.




3-2                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
Goal 3: Improve safety for all modes of transportation through the implementation of educational and
enforcement programs.
     Objective: Improve safety and reduce the number of crashes involving bicyclists by expanding,
     developing, and implementing education and enforcement programs through partnerships with
     community organizations.
     The Bicycle Facility Network is designed to provide safe, convenient access for bicyclists to travel
     throughout the planning area. Like facilities for other transportation modes, this network of bicycle
     facilities must be used appropriately to be effective. For example, bicycle facilities are designed
     under the assumption that bicyclists ride the correct direction on streets (with the flow of traffic)
     and stop at red traffic lights. It is also assumed that motorists yield to bicyclists when turning and do
     not drive or park in designated bicycle lanes.
     Therefore, it is not acceptable for bicyclists or motorists to disregard traffic rules. Breaking these
     laws puts bicyclists and other roadway users at risk and is inconsistent with the RBP’s goal of
     increasing safety for all modes. Efforts must be made to encourage, among motorists and bicyclists
     alike, a culture of respect and shared usage that welcomes new riders to the region’s roads and
     trails. The education, enforcement, and encouragement programs recommended in Chapter 7 are
     intended to help grow the number of bicyclists while also increasing safe and appropriate behavior
     by bicyclists and all other roadway users.
     Objective: Educate staff in planning, design, maintenance, construction, and enforcement.
     Numerous jurisdictions and organizations within the planning area that have an interest in and/or
     impact on implementation of the Regional Bicycle Plan. And, within each of these jurisdictions there
     may be departments and staff members who have influence over how roadways are planned,
     designed, constructed, and maintained, and how laws are enforced. Successful implementation of
     the Plan is contingent upon all these parties being educated about the Plan, and the facilities and
     actions it recommends, as well as trained on the latest standards and guidelines that inform the
     Plan’s recommendations. During 2010, many professionals and advocates were trained on a variety
     of subjects that involve inclusion of alternative modes of travel into our roadway network. For
     example, over 100 individuals attended the Vibrant and Connected Communities Forum on
     March 26, 2010. Other training included Complete Streets training by the American Public Works
     Association (APWA) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers, hosted by the St. Louis APWA.
     NOTE: Specific actions for achieving Goal 3 and meeting the objectives discussed above are provided
     in Chapter 7.
Goal 4: Expand the public’s view that bicycles are a viable/acceptable mode of transportation through
encouragement programs.
Objective: Establish ongoing regional encouragement programs.
     A number of organizations and agencies active within the planning area have programs to
     encourage people to bicycle, including Trailnet, the East-West Gateway Council of Governments,
     Bike St. Louis (through the Great Rivers Greenway), and the Missouri Bicycle and Pedestrian
     Federation. These programs and additional incentives and events that encourage bicycling will build
     demand for and utilization of bicycle facilities. Increasing the number of people bicycling helps to
     increase the awareness of bicycles being on the road, further enhancing bicycle safety.



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                    3-3
      NOTE: Specific actions for achieving Goal 4 and meeting the objectives discussed above are provided
      in Chapter 7.
Goal 5: Increase the commitment of public officials to support or initiate public policy for bicycling in
all levels of government—state, local, and regional.
      Objective: Increase intergovernmental cooperation on bicycle policy and projects.
      Given the number of agencies with influence and responsibility over the roadway network within
      the planning area, intergovernmental cooperation on bicycle policy and projects is critical for
      successful implementation of the RBP. This objective relates back the Plan’s vision for promoting
      consistent design and development of bicycle facilities across jurisdictions, which can only be
      achieved if all agencies collaborate and work together.
      Objective: Establish funding sources for implementation and ongoing maintenance.
      Implementation of the Plan will be a collaborative effort between a number of jurisdictions and
      agencies. Every transportation project offers an opportunity to implement a part of this Plan. Therefore,
      institutionalizing bicycle improvements at all levels of government will be essential for successful
      implementation of this Plan. Adoption of Complete Streets policies in all jurisdictions will ensure that
      road projects will include bicycle facilities where feasible. Complete Streets are streets that provide for
      the needs of drivers, public transportation vehicles and patrons, bicyclists, and pedestrians of all ages
      and abilities. Local governments that adopt Complete Streets policies ensure that this goal is achieved in
      the planning, programming, design, construction, reconstruction, retrofit, operations, and maintenance
      of streets.
      NOTE: Specific actions for achieving Goal 5 and meeting the objectives discussed above are provided
      in Chapter 8.




3-4                                                                                              Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                              Greater St. Louis Region
Chapter 4: Existing Facilities, Plans, and Programs
Overview of Existing Facilities
The Regional Bicycle Plan builds on existing bicycle routes and lanes that have already been developed
through the Bike St. Louis program and other efforts in St. Louis County, St. Charles County, and the City
of St. Louis. However, not all efforts meet the latest standards and guidelines found in the 2009 Manual
of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (1999). One of the
primary goals of the RBP, as recommended by the Citizen and Technical Advisory Committees, is to
apply the guidelines and standards consistently as facilities are built or upgraded. Therefore, 12 existing
bicycle facilities within the region were analyzed using the 2009 MUTCD to assess the wayfinding
signage and striping. The AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities was used to assess the
on-road facilities in St. Louis County, St. Charles County, and the City of St. Louis. The 12 facilities were
selected because they represent a full range of facility types. The findings of this analysis were included
in the Bicycle Facilities Master Plan Review, which is summarized in Table 4-1 below.
Table 4-1 provides a general overview of the facilities along with an assessment of the types of existing
system elements that should be updated or are acceptable based on current guidelines and standards.
In addition to identifying installations that meet current standards, the analysis also points out ways to
upgrade existing installations to make sure consistency is achieved for bicycle facilities throughout
the region.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                   4-1
Table 4-1

                             Facility Type
                                              Pavement          Pavement                               Intersection       Elements to be
Facility                     and                                                   Signage
                                              Condition         Marking                                Treatment          Updated
                             Description
Olive Blvd. (Rte. 340)       Two thru         Bike lane is      MUTCD-             Bike Lane Ahead     Bike slots         Bike lane signage should
west of I-270 to Mason Rd.   travel lanes     part of asphalt   approved bike      and Bike Lane       (minimum of        be updated to reflect
                             with bike lane   roadway           lane symbols       Ends signage not    4-foot-wide        guidance and standard
                             adjacent to      section and is    with directional   consistent with     lanes) provided    signs found in Part 9 of
                             curb and         in good           arrows             MUTCD because       at signalized      the 2009 edition of
                             gutter.          condition and     between two        the diamond is      intersections.     MUTCD.
                                              free of debris.   solid white        used on the         Appropriate
                                                                lines.             signs. Begin        dashed             At potential conflict
                                                                Appropriate        Right Turn Yield    pavement           points such as right
                                                                dashed line at     to Bikes signs      markings used      turns, green bike lanes
                                                                developed right    used at select      in locations       should be considered to
                                                                turn lanes and     intersections at    where vehicles     enhance safety.
                                                                at vehicle         the beginning of    are expected to
                                                                crossing for       right turn lanes.   merge across
                                                                right turns                            the bike lane.
                                                                without a                              Begin Right
                                                                separate right                         Turn Yield to
                                                                turn lane.                             Bikes signs used
                                                                                                       at select
                                                                                                       intersections at
                                                                                                       the beginning
                                                                                                       of right turn
                                                                                                       lanes.




                                                                                                                                         Regional Bicycle Plan
4-2                                                                                                                                   Greater St. Louis Region
                               Facility Type
                                                Pavement         Pavement                               Intersection      Elements to be
Facility                       and                                                  Signage
                                                Condition        Marking                                Treatment         Updated
                               Description
Lewis & Clark Outer Roadways   Two one-way      Bike lane        MUTCD-             Bike lane signage   Bike slots        The solid edge line
north of I-270                 travel lanes     pavement is      approved bike      consistent with     (minimum of       should not cross the
                               with bike lane   part of the      lane symbols       current MUTCD       4-foot-wide       bike lane where bike
                               striped on the   asphalt          with directional   standards. Begin    lanes) provided   lanes cross right turn
                               right-hand       roadway and      arrows             Right Turn Yield    at signalized     lanes.
                               paved            is in good       between two        to Bikes signs      intersections.
                               shoulder.        condition and    solid white        used at most        Appropriate       The skips for both sides
                                                generally free   lines. In many     intersections at    dashed            of the bike lane should
                                                of debris.       locations, the     the beginning of    pavement          continue to the bike
                                                                 bike lane lines    right turn lanes.   markings used     lane at the intersection
                                                                 are                                    in locations      approach.
                                                                 appropriately                          where vehicles    Bike lanes throughout
                                                                 dashed at the                          are expected to   this corridor should
                                                                 beginning of                           merge across      continue through
                                                                 developed right                        bike lane. No     private driveways as a
                                                                 turn lanes.                            bike slot was     solid line.
                                                                                                        provided on the
                                                                                                        approach to       Though not required,
                                                                                                        Redmond Rd.       bike lanes could be
                                                                                                        along the         dashed through
                                                                                                        southbound        intersections where the
                                                                                                        outer roadway.    side street is
                                                                                                                          stop-controlled.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                             4-3
                            Facility Type
                                             Pavement          Pavement                             Intersection      Elements to be
Facility                    and                                                  Signage
                                             Condition         Marking                              Treatment         Updated
                            Description
Lake St. Louis Blvd. from   One travel       Bike lane         MUTCD-            Bike Lane Ahead    No intersection
                                                                                                                      Add directional arrows
Highway 40 to Route N       lane each        pavement is       approved bike     and Bike Lane      treatments
                                                                                                                      to bike symbol along
                            direction with   part of the       lane symbols,     Ends signs used    provided.
                                                                                                                      bike lanes.
                            paved            asphalt           minus             at the beginning
                            shoulder. Bike   roadway and       directional       and end of the                       It is not apparent by the
                            lane on paved    is in good        arrow and solid   bike lane                            Bikes Keep Left,
                            shoulder         condition and     white roadway     corridor. Bike                       Pedestrians Keep Right
                            northbound       free of debris.   edge line         Route and Bikes                      sign if bikes should
                            and                                separating        Keep Left,                           continue on the
                            southbound,                        through traffic   Pedestrians                          shoulder or shift to the
                            transitions to                     and the           Keep Right signs                     path. If bikes are
                            multi-use side                     shoulder.         are used along                       intended to stay on the
                            path on                                              the side path.                       shoulder, pavement
                            northbound                                           Signs are                            markings should be
                            side.                                                consistent with                      added using standard
                                                                                 current MUTCD                        bike lane markings on
                                                                                 standards.                           the shoulder because
                                                                                                                      they are used south of
                                                                                                                      where path begins.




                                                                                                                                     Regional Bicycle Plan
4-4                                                                                                                               Greater St. Louis Region
                                  Facility Type
                                                   Pavement          Pavement                              Intersection       Elements to be
Facility                          and                                                   Signage
                                                   Condition         Marking                               Treatment          Updated
                                  Description
Olive Street/Lindell Blvd. from   Each direction   Bike lane         Bike lane          Right Lane Bike    Bike lanes were    Add Begin Right Turn
                 th
Grand Ave. to 20 St.              of travel has    pavement is       symbols with       Only signs and     terminated into    Lane Yield to Bikes signs
                                  two thru         part of the       directional        Bike St. Louis     the parking/       where needed.
                                  travel lanes     asphalt           arrows             route signs (not   right turn lanes
                                  with a bike      roadway and       between two        MUTCD-             at intersections   Faded and worn
                                  lane adjacent    is in good        solid white        approved) were     and no bike        pavement markings
                                  to parking       condition and     lines. Bike lane   observed along     slots were         should be re-striped.
                                  lane.            free of debris.   lines are          the corridor. No   provided.
                                                                     typically dashed   Begin Right Turn
                                                                     at right turn      Yield to Bikes
                                                                     lanes and bus      signs were
                                                                     stops.             observed.
                                                                     Pavement
                                                                     markings are
                                                                     faded and worn
                                                                     in some
                                                                     locations.

Wydown Blvd. from Hanley Rd.      The facility     Bike lane         Bike lanes are     The corridor has   Dashed             Continue bike lanes and
to Skinker Blvd.                  reviewed has     pavement is       marked with        Bike St. Louis     pavement           appropriate signage
                                  a bike lane      part of the       two solid white    route signage      markings and       from Clayton city limit
                                  between a        asphalt           lines and bike     (not MUTCD-        bike slots.        into the City of St. Louis
                                  single travel    roadway and       lane symbols       approved) and                         ending at Skinker Blvd.
                                  lane and         is in good        and directional    Bikes Keep Left,
                                  parking in       condition and     arrows that are    Pedestrians
                                  each direction   free of debris.   consistent with    Keep Right signs
                                  with a                             current MUTCD      consistent with
                                  landscaped                         standards.         current MUTCD
                                  median.                            Striping was       standards.
                                                                     dashed at bus
                                                                     stops and right-
                                                                     hand turns
                                                                     where vehicles
                                                                     would merge
                                                                     across the bike
                                                                     lane.

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                                   4-5
                                   Facility Type
                                                   Pavement          Pavement                              Intersection      Elements to be
Facility                           and                                                 Signage
                                                   Condition         Marking                               Treatment         Updated
                                   Description
Natural Bridge Rd. from Union to   Much of the     Bike lane         Bike St. Louis    Bike St. Louis      Bike slots were   Bike St. Louis signage
Grand                              roadway is a    pavement is       emblem            signs (not          provided at       and pavement markings
                                   five-lane       part of the       directional       consistent with     most signalized   should be updated with
                                   section with    asphalt           arrows            MUTCD). Begin       intersections.    signage and pavement
                                   parking in      roadway and       between two       Right Turn Yield    Appropriate       markings that are
                                   both            is in good        solid white       to Bikes signs      dashed            consistent with MUTCD
                                   directions.     condition and     lines. In many    were used at        pavement          2009.
                                   Bike lanes      free of debris.   locations, the    many                markings were
                                   striped                           bike lane lines   intersections       used in           Recommendation:
                                   between the                       appropriately     near the            locations where   Continue the skips on
                                   right travel                      dashed at the     beginning of        vehicles are      the right side of bike
                                   lane and the                      bus stops and     right turn lanes.   expected to       lanes through bus stop
                                   parking lane                      right-hand turn                       merge across      locations and at
                                   in each                           lanes.                                the bike lane.    intersections.
                                   direction.                                                                                Eliminate Bike St. Louis
                                                                                                                             marking when
                                                                                                                             resurfacing occurs.

Highway 370 bridge over            Multi-use       Concrete          No bicycle        Sign instructing    Not applicable.   Barrier separation on
Missouri River                     path on         pavement          facility          bicyclists to use                     bridge should be added
                                   bridge          across bridge     pavement          roadway                               in both directions.
                                   approach        is in good        markings on       shoulder across
                                   connecting      condition and     bridge.           bridge located                        Buffered bike lane
                                   with            free of debris.                     before trail                          should be added as an
                                   shoulders                                           connects with                         interim step to the
                                   across the                                          shoulder.                             barrier design across the
                                   bridge.                                                                                   bridge.

                                                                                                                             Add directional
                                                                                                                             pavement markings.




                                                                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
4-6                                                                                                                                      Greater St. Louis Region
                                 Facility Type
                                                  Pavement          Pavement                               Intersection        Elements to be
Facility                         and                                                   Signage
                                                  Condition         Marking                                Treatment           Updated
                                 Description
Telegraph Rd. south of I-255     Two thru         Bike lane         MUTCD-             Bike Lane Ahead     Bike slots          Consider adding dashed
                                 travel lanes     pavement is       approved bike      and Bike Lane       provided at         pavement markings at
                                 each direction   part of the       lane symbols,      Ends signs used     select              right turn lanes.
                                 with bike lane   asphalt           bike lane lines    at the beginning    intersections.
                                 adjacent to      roadway. In       dashed at some     and end of the      Dashed              Install Begin Right Turn
                                 concrete curb    good              intersections      bike lane           pavement            Yield to Bikes signs at
                                 or paved         condition         and right turn     corridor. Begin     marking are         locations where not
                                 shoulder.        except south      lanes. Bike lane   Right Turn Yield    dropped before      presently installed.
                                                  of Christopher    symbols are        to Bikes signs      the right turn      Replace worn and faded
                                                  Dr. where         worn and faded     were used at        lane. Begin         pavement markings; use
                                                  pavement is       south of           select              Right Turn Yield    paint or grind pavement
                                                  rough with        Christopher Dr.    intersections.      to Bikes signs      smooth before applying
                                                  sediment and      Some bike lanes    Mississippi River   used at select      marking.
                                                  debris.           were dropped       Trail signage was   intersection at
                                                                    before the right   observed            the beginning       Eliminate solid-edge line
                                                                    turn lanes.        throughout the      of right turn       crossing the bike lane at
                                                                    Solid-edge line    length of this      lanes.              intersection
                                                                    crosses the bike   facility.                               approaches.
                                                                    lane in some
                                                                    locations.

Grand Ave. from Arsenal St. to   Two thru         Bike lane         Bike St. Louis     Bike St. Louis      Bike lanes          Replace Bike St. Louis
Shaw Ave.                        travel lanes     pavement is       emblem             route signing       continued up to     pavement markings and
                                 each direction   part of the       direction          observed along      intersections. In   route signage with
                                 with bike lane   asphalt           arrows             the corridor. No    the case of         MUTCD compliant
                                 adjacent to      roadway and       between two        Begin Right Turn    developed right     markings and signage.
                                 concrete curb    is in good        solid white        Yield to Bikes      turn lanes, the
                                 or paved         condition and     lines. Bike lane   signs were          pavement            Add Begin Right Turn
                                 shoulder.        free of debris.   lines dashed at    observed.           markings            Yield to Bikes signage as
                                                                    right turn lanes                       dashed              budget permits
                                                                    where vehicles                         appropriately at    according to current
                                                                    merge across                           the southbound      MUTCD standards.
                                                                    the bike lane.                         approach to
                                                                                                           Arsenal St.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                                   4-7
                              Facility Type
                                                Pavement          Pavement                               Intersection        Elements to be
Facility                      and                                                    Signage
                                                Condition         Marking                                Treatment           Updated
                              Description

Russell Blvd. from Broadway   One travel        Bike lane         Bike St. Louis     Bike St. Louis      Bike lanes          Bike St. Louis pavement
Blvd. to Gravois Blvd.        lane, a bike      pavement is       emblem             route signing       continued to        markings should be
                              lane, and a       part of the       direction          observed along      intersections.      eliminated from bike
                              parking lane      asphalt           arrows, bike       the corridor.                           lanes when practical,
                              in each           roadway and       lane symbols       Bike lane signage                       and bike lane signage
                              direction.        is in good        with directional   with diamond                            with diamond symbols
                                                condition and     arrows, and        symbols also                            should be updated
                                                free of debris.   two solid white    observed. No                            according to current
                                                                  lines. Bike lane   Begin Right Turn                        MUTCD standards.
                                                                  symbols with       Yield to Bikes
                                                                  directional        signs were                              Replace faded and worn
                                                                  arrows             observed.                               bike lane symbols and
                                                                  generally faded                                            directional arrows.
                                                                  and worn.

Broadway / 7th Blvd. from     Two thru          Bike lane         Bike St. Louis     Bike St. Louis      Generally, bike     Bike St. Louis pavement
Sidney to Park                travel lanes, a   pavement is       emblem             route signing       lanes continued     markings and bike lane
                              bike lane, and    part of the       direction          was observed        to intersections.   signage with diamond
                              a parking lane    asphalt           arrows, bike       along the           For                 symbols should be
                              in each           roadway and       lane symbols       corridor. Bike      intersections       updated according to
                              direction.        is in good        with directional   lane signage        with developed      current MUTCD
                                                condition and     arrows, and        with and without    right turn lanes,   standards.
                                                free of debris.   two solid white    diamond             pavement
                                                                  lines. Bike lane   symbols was         markings            Replace faded and worn
                                                                  symbols with       observed. Begin     typically dashed    bike lane symbols and
                                                                  directional        Right Turn Yield    and Begin Right     directional arrows.
                                                                  arrows were        to Bikes signs      Turn Yield to
                                                                  generally faded    were observed       Bikes signs
                                                                  and worn.          at some             were used.
                                                                                     locations.




                                                                                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
4-8                                                                                                                                     Greater St. Louis Region
                           Facility Type
                                            Pavement          Pavement                              Intersection      Elements to be
Facility                   and                                                   Signage
                                            Condition         Marking                               Treatment         Updated
                           Description
Southwest Ave. at I-44     Short            Bike lane         MUTCD-             Bike Lane Ahead    Appropriate       Relocate Begin Right
                           segment of       pavement is       approved bike      and Bike Lane      dashed            Turn Yield to Bikes sign
                           bike lane        part of the       lane symbols       Ends signs used    pavement          to the beginning of the
                           through a        asphalt           with directional   at the beginning   markings used     right turn lane at the
                           railroad         roadway and       arrows             and end of the     at the            point at which vehicles
                           bridge           is in good        between two        bike lane,         developed right   may begin to merge
                           underpass        condition and     solid white        consistent with    turn lane that    across the bike lane.
                           and interstate   free of debris.   lines. Bike lane   current MUTCD      provided entry
                           highway                            lines were         standards. A       to the            Appropriate intersection
                           underpass.                         appropriately      Begin Right Turn   interstate        treatment just south of
                                                              dashed at the      Yield to Bikes     highway. The      I-44 should be
                                                              developed right    sign located at    Begin Right       considered.
                                                              turn lane, which   the radius point   Turn Yield to
                                                              provided entry     of the turn onto   Bikes sign is
                                                              to the             the entrance       located beyond
                                                              interstate         ramp, after        the point at
                                                              highway.           vehicles would     which vehicles
                                                                                 already be         begin to merge
                                                                                 merging across     across the bike
                                                                                 the bike lane. A   lane.
                                                                                 Bike St. Louis
                                                                                 route sign was
                                                                                 observed just
                                                                                 before the
                                                                                 beginning of the
                                                                                 bike lane.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                         4-9
Summary and Recommendations
A number of bicycle facilities are already in place in the City of St. Louis and the towns and cities of
St. Louis and St. Charles Counties. However, there is a lack of uniformity throughout the region with
regard to marking and signing. Facilities should be retrofitted and new signs installed, based on the
recommendations in the RBP and the latest AASHTO and MUTCD guidance, to improve safety and
ensure consistency across the Regional Bicycle Network. The revisions may be implemented during
resurfacing projects or in the process of re-striping or signing the facilities.

Review of Relevant Planning Documents
Numerous planning documents developed by agencies in the region address transportation, street
design, and land use. The documents set the context for the RBP, so it is important to understand how
they support the RBP. Each relevant document that was reviewed is listed below with a brief discussion
about how it relates to the RBP.

Legacy 2030 (EWGCOG)
The East-West Gateway Council of Government’s (EWGCOG’s) Legacy 2030 plan is a long-range vision
for development of the surface transportation system within the seven-county St. Louis region over the
next 25 years. A major component of Legacy 2030 is the planning, design, and development of the
region’s transportation system in relation to land use, with the goal of improving mobility and safety
while increasing travel choices. Similarly, the RBP calls for a Complete Streets approach by making
routine accommodations for other modes when developing or designing a transportation project in
order to allow for a safe, convenient, and efficient transportation system accessible to all users.

St. Louis Regional Bicycling and Walking Transportation Plan (EWGCOG)
EWGCOG’s St. Louis Regional Bicycling and Walking Transportation Plan was developed in 2005 as a
result of the region’s transportation plan, Legacy 2030. It departs from conventional master plans, which
often focus on the development of priority corridors for bicycling and walking improvements, and
instead places emphasis on defining the nature of bicycling and walking environments and providing
guidance on the elements common to model bicycling and walking facilities. Rather than specify where
facilities should be located, the plan serves as a “how-to and when-to” resource document for
communities and agencies developing facilities. The RBP provides more specificity in terms of improving
existing bicycle facilities, designing, prioritizing, and placing new facilities, and addressing opportunities
and constraints within the greater St. Louis region.

St. Louis Great Streets Initiative (EWGCOG)
The goal of EWGCOG’s St. Louis Great Streets Initiative is to trigger economic and social benefits for
communities by centering them on interesting, lively, and attractive streets that serve all modes of
transportation. Since 2006, the St. Louis Great Streets Initiative has helped communities expand the way
they think of their streets. As part of the Initiative, a “digital design guide” was created to provide
resources and a design tutorial that walks a community through the elements of and steps for designing
streets that are safe, comfortable, and attractive for pedestrians and bicyclists. The guide offers
resources and guidelines for accommodating bicycles in a range of different contexts, including
downtown main streets, office employment areas, and commercial corridors. The guide is available at
www.greatstreets-stl.org.




                                                                                              Regional Bicycle Plan
4-10
Moving Transit Forward: St. Louis Regional Long-Range Transit Plan (Metro)
Moving Transit Forward was developed by the Bi-State Development Agency (Metro) as a blueprint for
transit in the St. Louis region over the next 30 years. It establishes a vision for using transit more
effectively. MetroBus and MetroLink currently accommodate bicycles and the Moving Transit Forward
plan acknowledges the advantages of integrating Metro’s transit services within a multimodal system.

Missouri’s Long-Range Transportation Plan (MoDOT)
Missouri’s Long-Range Transportation Plan developed by the Missouri Department of Transportation
(MoDOT) states that bicycle and pedestrian facilities should be incorporated in the transportation
system when appropriate, particularly in instances that improve the ability to cross major roadways and
provide a link for neighborhoods, schools, medical facilities, employment centers and shopping areas.
The MoDOT plan offers no specific recommendations for bicycle facilities.

St. Louis County Strategic Plan
Every 5 years, St. Louis County creates a strategic plan that aims to align resources with the most critical
issues facing the County. The St. Louis County Strategic Plan 2000–2004 (and 2008 update) identifies the
need for investing in transportation alternatives to alleviate traffic congestion and increase mobility and
accessibility. Developing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is identified as a key strategy for giving
people transportation alternatives. The Strategic Plan discusses development of on-street bicycle
facilities, barriers to bicycling, and integration of bicycle facilities with MetroLink. The 2008 update lists
the following strategies for enhancing multi-modal connections between neighborhoods and nearby
commercial services, schools, community facilities, jobs, and recreational opportunities:
•    Update County transportation standards to reflect current pedestrian and bicycle policy
     requirements.
•    When appropriate and feasible, develop bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
•    Integrate bicycle and pedestrian facilities with transit.
•    Partner with municipalities for development of “Complete Streets” and “Great Streets.”

One of the St. Louis County Strategic Plan’s performance measures is the number of lane miles of Share
the Road and bike routes. No specific bicycle routes or facilities are identified.

St. Charles County Envision 2020 Master Plan
Among the goals of St. Charles County’s Envision 2020 Master Plan are (1) providing an efficient,
congestion-free, and well-managed road system, and (2) providing alternative and affordable modes of
transportation. Strategies for achieving these goals include:
•    Promoting the use of alternative modes of transportation, including public transit, bicycle routes,
     and on-street bike lanes
•    Encouraging the use of public transit and proving other modes, including bikeways, sidewalks, and
     trails

The Envision 2020 Master Plan also sets land use policy that promotes bicycling, stating that new
neighborhoods should be developed using traditional neighborhood design—that is, connected streets
and sidewalks, smaller blocks, etcetera. It also says that streets and sidewalks within residential
neighborhoods should provide connections to make it safe and convenient for people to walk and ride
bicycles.



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                  4-11
City of St. Louis Strategic Land Use Plan
The City of St. Louis Strategic Land Use Plan clearly identifies the established neighborhoods, historic
districts, and business areas the city is committed to maintaining and enhancing while also identifying
areas where new directions are possible and encouraged. The Strategic Land Use Plan also sets the stage
for initiatives to raise development standards throughout the region with new and innovative
development approaches. It is expected that the city’s efforts to develop a land use plan that is more
responsive to lifestyle and real estate trends and will complement and support efforts, including the
RBP, that offer a broader range of transportation choices.

Downtown Next: 2020 Vision for Downtown St. Louis
The Downtown Next Plan was developed by the Partnership for Downtown St. Louis as an update to the
Downtown Development Action Plan of 1999 (Downtown Now!). The Downtown Next Plan is focused on
making the St. Louis Central Business District (CBD) a desirable place for investors and residents. It
identifies accessibility as a key component of creating a vibrant and livable downtown, and provides a
number of objectives and strategies for increasing accessibility and connectivity in the transportation
network. Chief strategies for increasing accessibility include enhancing pedestrian and bicycle facilities
within the CBD, improving connections to adjacent neighborhoods, and making it easy to get around
without an automobile. The Downtown Next Plan also calls for pursuing Complete Streets and Complete
Bridges where possible. The RBP builds upon these strategies and offers specific recommendations and
mechanisms for improving accessibility within and connectivity to the CBD.

Bicycle Planning and Policy in Municipalities in St. Louis and St. Charles
Counties
Many municipalities within St. Louis and St. Charles Counties have incorporated nonmotorized or
bicycle-specific policies into their comprehensive plans. Some have gone further and developed bicycle
and pedestrian master plans through individual efforts, or in partnership with Trailnet or other
municipalities. Given that each one of these cities lies within a close-knit urban region, it is important
that facilities, wayfinding signage, and other standards related to the Regional Bicycle Network are
consistent and interconnected. The RBP was developed in the context of a multi-jurisdictional region,
and through its actions and recommendations is intended to provide direction and a unified vision for
developing a cohesive and continuous bicycle network that assists local municipalities in cross-
jurisdictional projects, events, and activities.

Overview of Existing Programs and Organizations

Bike St. Louis
Bike St. Louis is an outgrowth of a partnership between the Cities of St. Louis, Clayton, Maplewood, and
Kirkwood and the Great Rivers Greenway District. The Bike St. Louis system totals 77 miles of dedicated
bike lanes and shared traffic lanes in St. Louis City and County.

Great Rivers Greenway
The Great Rivers Greenway District (the District) was established in November 2000 by the successful
passage of the Clean Water, Safe Parks and Community Trails Initiative (“Proposition C”) in St. Louis City,
St. Louis County, and St. Charles County. The District is funded by a one-tenth of 1 cent sales tax. To
deliver its mission, the District is spearheading the development of The River Ring, an interconnected
system of greenways, parks and trails that will encircle the St. Louis region, enhancing the quality of life
for residents and visitors. Since 2002, Great Rivers Greenway has implemented many projects across the



                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
4-12
district, often in partnership with municipal, governmental and public agencies, as well as private and
not-for-profit organizations. Great Rivers Greenway is also funding the development of the RBP.

Trailnet
Trailnet is a St. Louis based not-for-profit organization with a 20-year history of promoting active living—
a way of life that encourages people to integrate physical activity into their daily routines. Trailnet
actively promotes biking and walking in the St. Louis bi-state region through educational and
promotional programs, community planning, and advocacy. Trailnet has also developed bikeable-
walkable community plans for several municipalities in the St. Louis region and organizes bicycle
promotion and education events throughout the year.

EWGCOG’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Program
EWGCOG is the metropolitan planning organization for the bi-state area comprised of Franklin,
Jefferson, St. Charles, and St. Louis Counties, the City of St. Louis in Missouri, and Madison, Monroe, and
St. Clair Counties in Illinois. Its Board of Directors, which consists of elected officials from each of the
counties, the City of St. Louis, and six regional citizens, is responsible for selecting the road, bridge, and
transit projects in the region that will receive federal funds. EWGCOG’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Program
works to enhance access and mobility throughout the St. Louis region by encouraging the coordinated
development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Missouri Bicycle Federation
The Missouri Bicycle Federation is a statewide, not-for -profit, membership organization that advocates
for bicycling and pedestrian access, safety, and education in Missouri.

Summary of Relevant Existing and Available Data
Relevant existing data is available for bicycle-related crashes, but not bicycle counts. Great Rivers
Greenway currently performs counts on trails in its Greenway network, but through cooperation of
state, county, and local entities throughout the region, this analysis can be expanded to bicycle counts
on roadways to gather critical information about people using our roads for bicycling. Suggestions for a
count program are provided in Chapter 10.
Bicycle-related crashes are reported to the Missouri Highway Patrol by county and local jurisdictions.
While there is significant data provided, additional details on type of crashes and where they occur
would be critical information in identifying exact locations of safety concerns, as well as in providing
more details about the causes of crashes involving bicyclists.

Opportunities and Constraints
Existing conditions within the planning area will both facilitate and present challenges to
implementation of the RBP. It will be important to establish quick wins in the initial phases of
implementing the Plan in order to demonstrate immediate progress and build momentum. These quick
wins will likely be the “low hanging fruit” opportunities rather than the controversial or difficult to
overcome barriers. It is equally important to understand the magnitude of the constraints that will need
to be overcome in order to develop a continuous and connected Regional Bicycle Network. The main
opportunities and constraints of the Plan are discussed below, including excess motor vehicle capacity
on streets, intersection safety and access improvements, bicycle connectivity and safe access to transit
and trails, barriers, bridges, and signage.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                   4-13
Excess Street Capacity
The 2010 Census shows population decreases in both the City of St. Louis and St. Louis County, while
St. Charles County has become the state’s third most populous county. As a result of this population loss
and general trends that show a decrease in vehicle miles traveled nationwide, many roadways within
the planning area have excess motor vehicle capacity, while others may experience congestion. Natural
features such as the Mississippi and Missouri River corridors, built features such as freeways and rail
lines, and destinations such as employment centers often direct traffic toward a limited number of
streets, which then become over-utilized and congested, while other streets in the system are under-
utilized.
There is an opportunity to capitalize on this excess roadway capacity and create one of the most robust
bicycling networks in the nation. Typically, space in the developed street right-of-way is a scarce urban
resource with motor vehicles, transit, parked cars, sidewalks, landscaping, and bicycle facilities often
competing against each other for the same space. Many of the streets in the City of St. Louis and
elsewhere in St. Louis County do not have this problem. The excess capacity means that street space can
be more easily re-allocated, often by simply using paint to channel traffic in ways that create space for
on-street bicycle facilities.

Intersection Safety and Access Improvements
Intersections are where most on-street bicycle crashes involving motor vehicles occur. Public input,
verified by field review, identified numerous intersections that present safety and access challenges for
bicyclists. In some cases, challenges exist because of intersection geometrics that allow for high-speed
motor vehicle turns. In other cases, they could be attributed to traffic control practices involving signal
timing, pavement markings, and signs. In all cases, problematic intersections discourage bicycling,
especially by novice bicyclists who consistently identify fear of unsafe and unlawful motorist behavior as
the number one reason for not bicycling more frequently.
While challenging intersections can be a constraint for bicyclists, they may also present an opportunity
to increase bicycling at relatively low costs. Changes to signal timing and traffic channelization using
paint and signs are often relatively inexpensive. Once an intersection is improved, it has the potential to
make an entire corridor more inviting and bike-friendly.

Bicycle Connectivity and Safe Access to Transit and Trails
The River Ring trail system establishes a strong foundation upon which to develop and connect a
network of on-street bicycle facilities. Providing bicycle facilities that connect neighborhoods to and
from existing transit stations and trails will help to address unmet bicycling demand for commuting,
recreation, and short utilitarian trips.

Barriers
Freeways, railroad tracks, super blocks (long blocks with no through access), closed or blocked streets,
and rivers can all create barriers for bicyclists and other road users. Where barriers exist, bicycles and
other modes of transportation are often funneled into the same pinch points, such as highway over- and
underpasses. In many cases, these pinch points are hostile environments for bicyclists because there is
little or no excess space on the roadway and sidewalks, which usually provide alternate space for
bicyclists to ride.
Since pinch points are often locations where all modes experience congestion and higher crash rates
exist, they frequently qualify for state and federal funding opportunities for congestion mitigation,
especially if they are within state rights-of-way. As cooperation among various transportation agencies


                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
4-14
and local municipalities improves, there is potential for more opportunities to enhance bicycle safety
and access in conjunction with other capital projects. There is support at the regional level (East-West
Gateway and Great Rivers Greenway) for pilot projects in critical corridors to implement the plan
recommendations on network routes. These pilot projects would serve as examples of community
partnership and consistency of facility improvements across municipal boundaries. In other cases, there
may still be a need for stand-alone projects that improve upon or establish a bicycle facility. As barriers
are identified and removed, system connectivity is increased and opportunities for destination-based
bicycling become viable.
Barriers can be good candidates for pilot projects. Pilot projects help to identify new design approaches
that can benefit subsequent projects. Often, funding agencies may have special funds available for pilot
projects because they see such projects as being replicable and having benefits that reach beyond the
project itself. Bridges and signage systems may be good candidates for a pilot project, and are discussed
further in Chapter 9.

Bridges
Safe, convenient, and easy access across bridges is critical to creating a bicycle friendly St. Louis region
and providing continuity along cross-country bicycle routes such as the Katy Trail. In a region where
there are multiple river and creek systems in addition to many highway and rail corridors, bridges of all
sizes provide the connectivity necessary to create a complete, integrated bicycle network that is a truly
viable alternative to the automobile. The lack of bicycle facilities on bridges presents a major barrier to
increasing bicycle use in the City of St. Louis and surrounding areas. Since bridges are often built to last
more than 50 years, missing an opportunity to install a bicycle facility on a bridge can create a gap in the
bikeway network that lasts for two or three generations.
There will be many opportunities to improve and expand bicycle access leading to and across bridges as
the region moves forward in rehabilitating and replacing existing bridges and constructing new ones. In
some cases, bicycle tracks or shared-use paths separate from motor vehicle traffic will be necessary. In
other cases, on-street bicycle facilities will be more desirable. In all cases, creating access to the bridge
on both ends will be equally important. A Complete Streets policy adopted by the transportation
agencies that build and operate the region’s bridges would ensure bicycle facilities are included as part
of future bridge projects. Additionally, federal funding criteria require that bicycle facilities be
incorporated on all bridges where feasible. The costs to incorporate bicycle facilities are small compared
to the overall construction costs of a new or refurbished bridge.
The following are critical locations in the Regional Bicycle Network where existing bridges present
barriers to bicyclists, or where a new bridge or major bridge project could accommodate bicycles:
•    Route 141 over Meramec River
•    Route 370 over the Missouri River
•    I-64 over the Missouri River
•    Manchester Road from Des Peres Road to Ballas Road (through I-270 interchange)
•    N. Grand Boulevard from Lindell Boulevard to south of I-64 (through I-64 interchange)

Other critical barriers are located at interchanges of a crossroad and an interstate highway. These
locations are on and under bridges, which are numerous in the network and have significant impacts on
bicycle safety.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                  4-15
Signage
The Cities of St. Louis, Clayton, Maplewood and Kirkwood currently have approximately 77 miles of
signed, on-street bicycle routes, and there are on-street facilities and bike routes scattered among the
other jurisdictions within St. Louis and St. Charles Counties. The size, color, lettering, and placement of
the “Bike St. Louis” signs funded through Great Rivers Greenway were not consistent with the MUTCD
recommended practices at the time of installation. The signs have been maintained relatively well over
the years and still provide bicyclists with useful wayfinding information to a variety of destinations.
The 2009 edition of the MUTCD provides new guidance on wayfinding signage (see Appendix C). It
reflects best practices from Europe and the United States with regard to sign placement and design. The
Cities of Seattle, Portland, and Chicago have installed wayfinding signage for bicyclists according to the
guidance provided in the MUTCD.
The St. Louis region has an opportunity to create a world-class bicycle signage system by taking
advantage of lessons learned in Seattle, Portland, and Chicago. As facilities recommended in the RBP are
installed, existing route signs can be removed and new ones installed. The removal of existing signs
could be accelerated if an aggressive wayfinding signage program were in place to “stake out” the entire
Regional Bikeway System even before the on-street facilities are implemented.




                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
4-16
Chapter 5: Bicycle Facility Network
Introduction
One of the main goals of the Regional Bicycle Master Plan (the Plan) is to create a fully interconnected,
seamless, and safe Bicycle Facility Network that connects areas within the Great Rivers Greenway
jurisdiction. The Plan focuses primarily on roadways functionally classified in the collector and arterial
categories, although local roadways are considered. Context-appropriate bicycle facilities have been
developed with input from the public, St. Louis and St. Charles Counties, MoDOT, the City of St. Louis, the
EWGCOG, Metro, a number of advocacy organizations, and municipalities within the Plan area. While
recommended facilities were based on extensive stakeholder input, they are grounded in field review of
existing roadway conditions and constraints. Additionally, recommended facilities reflect the policies and
design guidelines of the owners of the roadways (state, county, municipalities). This is important since only
the owners of the roadways can implement the facility recommendations found in the Plan.
In some cases, agencies may be able to develop a higher order bicycle facility than is recommended, if,
for instance, they are completely reconstructing a roadway. Conversely, an owner may need to
implement a form of bicycle facility lesser than is recommended because of facility design details or
other community characteristics not identified initially, the key being to implement a bicycle facility of
some type. Bicycle facility improvements must be complemented by a robust policy, education,
encouragement, and enforcement program that supports the physical network and follow-up evaluation
to measure progress over the next 20 years.
This chapter defines a set of recommendations and actions to create an integrated bicycle facility
network. They are visionary yet practical action strategies to make the greater St. Louis region a great
place for bicycling. They were developed with the following functional criteria in mind:
•    Connections to destinations: Streets chosen for inclusion in the bicycle facility network are intended
     to provide access to major employment centers, retail centers, transit, schools regional parks, and
     other destinations. For this reason, the primary focus for developing on-street bicycle facilities is on
     arterial and collector roadways, which typically provide the most direct access to destinations. There
     are also better funding opportunities for these roadway classifications.
•    Land use and facilities: Recommended bicycle facilities and designs are intended to fit adjacent land
     use patterns. For example, on rural roadways with generous shoulders or right-of-way to add
     shoulders, bicycle route signing may be all that is required, while arterials in higher density
     neighborhoods may require buffered bike lanes.
•    Trail connectivity: Some of the streets in the bicycle facility network were selected to connect
     existing and planned regional trails. The intent is to make sure that all trails can be accessed through
     on-street bicycle routes.
•    Traffic conditions: Recommended bicycle facilities and designs reflect existing roadway traffic
     conditions, including traffic volume, speed, and roadway capacity. In some cases, excess capacity
     provides an opportunity to reduce the number of general purpose lanes and add bicycle facilities
     such as bike lanes and cycle tracks. In other cases, the lack of existing capacity may be a constraint
     that prevents the installation of bicycle facilities.

•    Interjurisdictional connectivity: Many points in the bicycle facility network connect to adjacent
     communities. The on-street part of the network complements and builds on efforts of Bike St. Louis



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                      5-1
      and the Great Rivers Greenway’s River Ring, which is a 600-mile network of more than
      45 greenways, parks and trails that will encircle the region.
•     End-of-trip facilities: End-of-trip facilities like bike parking and amenities like showers and bike
      lockers at transit stations and other major destinations have the potential to increase usage and
      extend the network to include other modes. Allowing bikes on transit extends the network even
      farther as bicycle travel can occur on both ends of the transit trip. The importance of extending the
      system by tying it into the transit network is reflected in the Prioritization Map in Chapter 9, which
      gives high priority to on-street bicycle facilities that connect to transit stations.
While the goal of this document is to help engineers and designers develop roadway designs that meet
all of the requirements set forth by city, county, state, and national guidance (as described in Chapter 6),
it is understood that flexibility is needed to develop safe and efficient roadway designs that serve the
widest range of users. Since geometric and land use conditions vary frequently from location to location,
this guidance provides key design considerations for each type of bicycle facility to help identify
opportunities to alter elements of the roadway cross section to develop safe and efficient roadway
designs that serve the widest range of users.
Note: The following guidance is not a design standard, and should not be used as such. Application of
this guidance requires the use of engineering judgment when retrofitting the streets of the City of St.
Louis and St. Charles and St. Louis Counties to provide optimal bicycle facilities. Also, this guidance should
be revisited and updated periodically (every 3 to 5 years) as the transportation system or land-use
patterns change, or as new best practices, guidelines, and standards are developed.

Bicycle User Types
Before discussing the various types of bicycle facilities recommended in this Plan, it is important to
understand the different types of users of the Regional Bicycle Network. The AASHTO Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities includes the Federal Highway Administration’s definition of bicycle
user types by comfort and skill level:
•     Advanced or experienced riders are generally using their bicycles as they would a motor vehicle.
      They are riding for convenience and speed and want direct access to destinations with minimum
      detours or delays. They are typically comfortable riding with motor vehicle traffic; however, they
      need sufficient operating space on the roadway or shoulder to eliminate the need for them or a
      passing motor vehicle to shift position.
•     Basic or less confident adult riders may also use their bicycles for transportation purposes, such as
      to get to the store or to visit friends, but prefer to avoid roads with fast and busy motor vehicle
      traffic unless there is ample roadway width to allow easy overtaking by faster motor vehicles. Basic
      riders are comfortable riding on neighborhood streets and shared-use paths and prefer designated
      facilities such as bike lanes or wide shoulder lanes on busier streets.
•     Children riding on their own or with their parents may not travel as fast as their adult counterparts
      but still require access to key destinations in their community, such as schools, convenience stores,
      and recreational facilities. Residential streets with low motor vehicle speeds linked with shared-use
      paths and busier streets with well-defined pavement markings between bicycles and motor vehicles
      can accommodate children without encouraging them to ride in the travel lanes of major arterials. 1


1
 Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, 1999.

                                                                                                 Regional Bicycle Plan
5-2                                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
Up to 95 percent of bicyclists are basic or child bicyclists. Consequently, if bicycle use is to increase,
there is a need for a variety of facility types to accommodate these less experienced or less confident
bicyclists.
Table 5-1
Summary of Needs and Appropriate Accommodations for Varying Bicycle User Types

Type of Bicyclist                        Needs                                           Accommodations
A – Advanced                              •    Direct access to destinations             •   Enforced speed limits
(5% of all riders)                        •    Ability to ride at a maximum speed        •   Wide curb lanes (urban)
                                               with minimal delays
                                                                                         •   Paved shoulders (rural)
                                          •    Sufficient operating space
B – Basic                                 •    Comfortable access to key                 •   Lower speeds
                                               destinations
C – Child                                                                                •   Bike lanes, paths, or
                                          •    Low speeds and low volumes                    routes
(combined 95% of all
riders)                                   •    Well-defined separation on roadway        •   Paved Shoulders
Source: FHWA/FTA, 2008, Peer Exchange on Best Practices in Bicycle Facilities Planning


A Network to Meet the Needs of Different Types of Bicyclists
The proposed Regional Bicycle Network includes a variety of facility improvements that respond to the
different types bicyclists and their needs. Some of the Bicycle Network will be located along independent
corridors and greenways that are separated from roadways. Other parts of the network will require
motorists and bicyclists to coexist in the same right-of-way. Even among “on-road” bikeways, a variety of
design treatments will be used, depending on traffic volumes and speeds, roadway constraints, and
adjacent land uses. Providing a mix of bicycle facility types will allow the three types bicycle users to reach
all desired locations in a variety of ways, depending on skill and comfort level.

Definition of Facility Types
On-street bicycle facilities can include a range of design treatments such as bike lanes, striped shoulders,
shared lane markings, cycle tracks, and signed routes. The goal of on-street facilities is to improve
bicycling conditions on roadways while providing a visible reminder for motorists to share the road with
bicyclists. On busy streets, an important purpose of these facilities is to provide lateral separation
between bicyclists and motor vehicles and to encourage proper behavior among bicyclists and
motorists. Another purpose and use of on-street bicycle facilities is to establish a consistent,
interconnected bicycle network. It is important to note that some roads in the Regional Bicycle Network
with relatively low speeds and volumes do not require any new treatments. For example, Alt Road in the
Wildwood area currently has “Share the Road” signs, low traffic volumes, and a 25 mph speed limit,
which are adequate facilities for a safe bicycle network.
Professional engineering analysis is critical for implementing an optimal bicycle facility. For this Plan,
engineers and designers analyzed roadways to determine feasible cross sections for bicycle facilities
given existing roadway and traffic characteristics. Detailed intersection designs will need to take place
when specific projects move to the engineering phase.



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                               5-3
Two main steps are taken during the analysis phase:
•     First, the designer should consider which elements of the existing roadway could be modified to
      provide space for the bicycle facility. The following questions should be asked:
      o   Can any existing lanes be narrowed?
      o   Can any existing lanes be removed (consider travel lanes, center turn lanes, and parking lanes)?
      o   Can the existing pavement be widened, or can the curbs be moved?
•     Second, the designer should consider factors that affect the potential to modify the roadway in any
      of the three ways listed above. These factors include:
      o   Existing and planned land uses
      o   Pedestrian traffic and streetscape uses
      o   On-street parking demand and turnover rates (if applicable)
      o   Vehicle capacity, volume, and speed (including heavy vehicle traffic such as trucks and buses)
      o   Roadway grade and horizontal alignment (hilly or curved roadway sections)
      o   Pavement surface condition
Table 5-2
Bicycle Facility Categories and Types

       On-street Bicycle          Bicycle Lanes
       Facilities
                                  Buffered Bicycle Lanes
                                  Wide Shoulders
                                  Bicycle Boulevards
                                  Signed Routes
                                  Shared Lane Markings
       Physically Separated       Shared-use paths
       Bicycle Facilities
                                  Cycle Track
       Spot Improvement           Intersection Improvements
       Considerations
                                  Road Diets
                                  On-street Parking
                                  Climbing Lanes
                                  Neighborhood Connections
                                  Bridges




                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
5-4                                                                                      Greater St. Louis Region
On-Street Facilities
Bicycle Lanes
Bicycle lanes are portions of the roadway that have been designated for the preferential or exclusive use
of bicyclists, and are established through striping, signage, and other pavement markings. 2 On two-way
streets, bike lanes should ideally be provided on both sides of the road so that bicyclists can ride in the
same direction as adjacent motor vehicle traffic. Bike lanes should be at least 4 feet wide on roadways
with open shoulders, and 5 feet wide on roadways with curb and gutter. Five-foot bicycle lanes are
typical, but wider (6-foot) lanes are often used on roadways with high motor vehicle traffic volumes or
adjacent to on-street parking. If bicycle lanes are provided on a street, bicyclists still have the right to
use the travel lanes on streets with bicycle lanes to avoid obstacles, such as open car doors or bus stops.
It is important to note that many cars can park in lanes that are striped at 7 feet or wider, which can
raise unintended enforcement issues.
Bicycle lanes can provide the following benefits:
•    Increase the comfort of bicyclists on roadways.
•    Increase the amount of lateral separation between motor vehicles and bicycles.
•    Indicate the appropriate location to ride on the roadway with respect to moving traffic and parked
     cars, both at mid-block locations and approaching intersections.
•    Increase the capacity of roadways that carry mixed bicycle and motor vehicle traffic.
•    Increase predictability of bicyclist and motorist movements.
•    Increase driver awareness of bicyclists while driving or opening doors from an on-street parking space.
•    Provide a traffic calming effect by visually narrowing motor vehicle travel lanes.
Chapter 6 offers guidance for the application and installation of bicycle lanes.
The MUTCD offers the following guidance on making and signing bike lanes:
•    If used, the bicycle lane symbol marking shall be placed immediately after an intersection and at
     other locations as needed.
•    The bicycle lane symbol marking shall be white.
•    If the bicycle lane symbol marking is used in conjunction with other word or symbol messages, it
     shall precede them.
•    If the word or symbol pavement markings are used, Bicycle Lane signs shall also be used, but the
     signs need not be adjacent to every symbol to avoid overuse of the signs.
•    A through bicycle lane shall not be positioned to the right of a right turn only lane.
•    When the right through lane is dropped to become a right turn only lane, the bicycle lane markings
     should stop at least 100 feet before the beginning of the right turn lane.


2
 The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) voted unanimously, at the January 20th,
2006 committee meeting, to allow jurisdictions the flexibility to designate bicycle lanes without bicycle lane signs
(R3-17) – striping will be sufficient to designate bicycle lanes.

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                          5-5
       •   Through bicycle lane markings should resume to the left of the right turn only lane.
       •   An optional through right turn lane next to a right turn only lane should not be used where
           there is a through bicycle lane. If a capacity analysis indicates the need for an optional through
           right turn lane, the bicycle lane should be discontinued at the intersection approach.
       •   Posts or raised pavement markers should not be used to separate bicycle lanes from adjacent
           travel lanes 3
Appendix C offers additional guidance on bicycle route and wayfinding signage.
Figure 5-1: Bike Lane Design—Plan and Cross Section




3
    MUTCD for Streets and Highways, Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities (Part 9), 2009 Edition.

                                                                                                        Regional Bicycle Plan
5-6                                                                                                  Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 5-2
Roadway Intersection Design for Bike Lanes




Source: AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, Exhibit 4.15, 2010 Edition
Buffered Bicycle Lanes
In some locations, buffers may be added to bicycle lanes to provide horizontal separation from moving
or parked cars. Buffers can have positive effects on bicyclist safety and comfort. Ideal candidates for
buffered bicycle lanes are roadways with high vehicle speeds, excess capacity, and few curb cuts or
turning movements.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                              5-7
On the side of parked cars, adding pavement markings to the bicycle lane creates a buffer that can
encourage bicyclists to ride away from the opening doors of parked vehicles. This treatment could be
particularly useful to delineate the “dooring area” where:
•     Bicycle lanes are adjacent to a 7- or 8-foot wide on-street parking area parking
•     Bicycle lanes are adjacent to high-turnover parking
•     There are a high number of locations of “dooring” complaints or crashes.
Figure 5-3
Buffered Bike Lane Examples—Plan and Cross Section




Shared Lane Markings (Sharrows)
Shared lane markings on the pavement guide bicyclists to the safest location to ride. Shared lane
markings alert automobile drivers to the presence of bicyclists and encourage bicyclists to ride outside
of the door zone of parked cars. They can reduce wrong-way bicycling and tend to increase the distance
between bicyclists and passing cars. Shared lane markings are generally used where there is not enough
space for separate bicycle lanes and cyclists should be encouraged to use the full traffic lane.
Shared lane markings have the following benefits:
•     Provide a visible cue to bicyclists and motorists that bicycles are expected and welcomed on the
      roadway
•     Indicate the most appropriate location to ride on the roadway with respect to moving traffic and
      parked cars
•     Can be used on roadways where there is not enough space for standard-width bicycle lanes

                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
5-8                                                                                      Greater St. Louis Region
•    Connect gaps between other bicycle facilities, such as a narrow section of roadway between road
     segments with bicycle lanes
•    Complement wayfinding and point out difficult sections on signed routes
The shared lane pavement marking should be placed:
•    A minimum of 11 feet from the face of the curb when used adjacent to a parking lane
•    A minimum of 4 feet from the face of curb or roadway edge when not used adjacent to a parking
     lane
•    Immediately following intersections and spaced at intervals up to 250 feet thereafter
•    With consideration of bicyclist riding over the shared lane marking adjacent to parked cars
The shared lane pavement marking should not be placed in bicycle lanes, on paved shoulders or trails, or
on roadways with speed limits posted above 35 mph. Shared lane markings should also not be used as
the primary means of wayfinding or identifying routes if guidance on appropriate lane position is not
warranted.
Figure 5-4
Shared Lane Marking (Sharrow) Plan and Cross Section Diagram




Source: AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, Exhibit 4.5, 2010 Edition




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                               5-9
Figure 5-4




Climbing Lanes
Climbing lanes are a hybrid bicycle facility that include a 5-foot bicycle lane on one side of the roadway
(typically in the uphill direction) and a shared lane marking on the opposite side of the roadway. This type
of facility allows slower-moving, uphill bicyclists to have a designated bicycle lane while climbing, and
allows motor vehicles room to pass easily. It also allows faster-moving, downhill bicyclists to have a shared
lane marking, which alerts motorists to expect faster moving bicyclists in the travel lane. The bicycle lane
and shared lane markings also indicate the proper direction for bicyclists to travel on either side of the
street. Climbing lanes can be used on streets where there is not enough space for standard-width bicycle
lanes on both sides. All other guidelines and considerations that apply to bicycle lanes and shared lane
markings, as described above, also apply to facilities installed as components of a climbing lane.




                                                                                              Regional Bicycle Plan
5-10                                                                                       Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 5-5
Climbing Lane Plan and Cross Section




Wide Shoulders
Wide, striped, and bikeable shoulders are another facility that can be considered for roads in the Plan
area with higher traffic volumes and speeds. Shoulders on roadways have benefits to all roadway users.
They increase the comfort of bicyclists by providing greater lateral separation between automobiles and
bicycles, provide additional clear zone and recovery areas for vehicles, and provide additional buffer or
space for pedestrians in rural areas where sidewalks may not exist. Routine maintenance should be
performed to keep shoulder areas free of debris and maintain bicycle compatibility.


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                              5-11
To be considered bikeable, shoulders should be at least 4 feet wide on roadways with open drainage
and 5 feet wide on roadways with curb and gutter. Additional shoulder width is desirable on roadways
with high motor vehicle traffic volumes, high vehicular speeds, or a high percentage of trucks, buses,
and recreational vehicles. It is important to note that at intersections, additional symbols, signage,
arrows, or short sections of bike lanes may be needed to provide direction to bicyclists and reduce
potential conflicts between bicyclists and turning cars.
There are two types of bikeable shoulders identified in the Plan; the difference is in whether parking is
allowed on the shoulder. In rural areas, no parking is allowed and shoulders should be provided as
discussed above. In some areas within the City of St. Louis and other parts of the Plan area, shoulders
may function as a parking lane. In areas where there are low occupancy rates of parking, the shoulder
can function as bikeable space the majority of the time. In these instances, there is no need to provide
an additional dedicated bicycle facility, and bicyclists should proceed with caution when overtaking
parked vehicles. It should be noted that this situation should be regularly re-evaluated. If on-street
parking occupancy rates increase, shared lane markings may be added to provide location-specific
guidance to bicyclists and motorists. Buffered bicycle lanes may also be considered on steep roadways
where higher bicycle speeds can be expected and where more severe dooring crashes can be expected.
Buffered and unbuffered bicycle lanes may be accompanied by signs reminding drivers to look for bikes
when opening their doors.
Figure 5-6
Paved Shoulder Design—Plan and Cross Section




                                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
5-12                                                                                    Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 5-7




Shared Bus/Bike Lanes
More exclusive bus lanes are likely to be added to area roadways as the region’s transit systems expand.
In appropriate locations, these lanes can create car- and truck-free space for both transit vehicles and
bicycles. When bus/bike-only lanes are developed, it is desirable for the lanes to be wide enough (at
least 15 feet) for buses and bicyclists to pass each other comfortably in the lane. Shared bus/bike lanes
that are part of a bikeway system should include shared lane markings. Failure to allow bikes in bus
lanes will require bicyclists to use the second travel lane or refrain from using the roadway (almost
never desirable). If entire roadways are identified for priority use by transit, the roads should also be
open to bicycles. It is preferable to have wide outside lanes on these roadways to create safe bus and
bicycle passing opportunities. Enforcement of non-bus motor vehicles and parking restrictions in the
shared bus/bike lane is important to ensuring the safe and free movement of both bicycles and buses.
Bicycle Boulevard
Bicycle boulevards are local street routes that have been enhanced to favor through bicycle movements
while also restricting through motorized vehicle movements. Bicycle through movements are facilitated
by orienting stop signs to cross traffic, applying signage and pavement markings, and diverting through
vehicle traffic every few blocks while retaining local access. Bicycle boulevards are characterized by low
vehicular speeds and traffic volumes, which encourage bicyclists to use the full roadway. They are most
appropriate in locations with an established roadway grid where the bicycle boulevard may be located
parallel to a busy vehicular or commercial strip. Bicycle boulevards are also often paired with enhanced
crossings of arterial roads, railroads, or other significant barriers.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                               5-13
Figure 5-8




Source: Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, Oregon Department of Transportation, 1995.

Figure 5-9
City of Portland, Spokane and 13th Street




                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
5-14                                                                                     Greater St. Louis Region
Signed Route/Shared Roadways
Signed routes are identified as streets and roads where bicyclists can share the travel lanes with motor
vehicles. Signed routes form essential links in a connected bicycle network for the Plan area and can be
identified as preferred routes for bicycle use. Usually, these are local streets with relatively low traffic
volumes and/or low speeds that do not need special bicycle accommodations in order to be bicycle-
friendly. There are many low-volume local streets in the Plan area that are excellent for bicycling in their
current condition and need no further street improvements to be bicycle compatible.
Streets identified for signed routes will be included in a comprehensive wayfinding system based on
connecting regional and local destinations in the Plan area. The signed routes can be identified on
bicycle maps that were produced to educate the community about these preferred routes. Bike route
wayfinding signs and pavement markings can also be posted on local routes to indicate a particular
route has advantages over others. An optional treatment for signed bicycle routes is custom pavement
markings to enhance wayfinding; the “Bike Dot” used in Seattle and Portland is a good example
(Appendix C).
Share the Road signs can be used on signed routes to remind motorists to share the road with bicyclists.
These signs can increase awareness of bicyclists, especially in areas where bicyclists may not be
expected or where many drivers are not local. A new fluorescent yellow/green color has been approved
in the MUTCD and can be used on Share the Road signs. Signs should be used judiciously, as too many
signs can cause visual clutter and lead to noncompliance. The Share the Road sign is a warning and
should not be used for directional signing of a bicycle route. More guidance on signage is provided in
Appendix C.
Appropriate bicycle signage is required when transitioning from a roadway with a designated bicycle
facility to one without any designated bicycle facility (and vice versa). Bicyclists have the right to use all
roads, regardless of whether the roads have designated bicycle facilities, unless specifically prohibited,
such as on a controlled access freeway.
Figure 5-10
Bike Dot Symbol




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                    5-15
Figure 5-11
MUTCD Bike Route Sign




Off-Street Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Paths and Trails
Shared-use paths are separated from the roadway and provide a high-quality walking and bicycling
experience away from vehicle traffic. These paths should be a minimum of 12 feet wide for bi-
directional traffic, and should be paved. Wider shared-use paths may be desirable if relatively high
volumes of travelers are anticipated. Shared-use paths can be constructed along a roadway corridor, in
their own corridor (such as a greenway trail or rail-trail), or a combination of both.
On high-speed roadways, shared-use paths may be needed in addition to bicycle lanes or shoulders.
Shared-use paths should not be used to preclude on-road bicycling, but rather to supplement a system
of on-road bicycle facilities for less experienced bicyclists. Shared-use paths also provide essential
facilities and connections for pedestrians where they may not already exist.
Considerations for Pathways Parallel to Roadways
Ideally, shared-use paths are provided on both sides of the roadway and bicyclists use the paths as one-
way facilities (traveling in the same direction as adjacent motor vehicle traffic). Due to right-of-way and
budget constraints, though, they are often provided only on one side of the roadway. Shared-use paths
should be designed to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists. They can function well if the
following key design features are achieved:
•      A 5-foot (minimum) buffer between the outside travel lane and edge of pathway can be built (a
       42-inch vertical barrier is also acceptable).
•      Conflicts with intersecting roadways and driveways (which may or may not be signalized) should be
       minimized.
•      Paths work particularly well where they are parallel to expressways and railroad rights-of-way
       because they are limited access in nature. However, paths parallel to divided highways must be
       designed carefully, especially near crossings of high speed ramps.
•      Visibility of cyclists at all crossings.
•      Crossings of free flow highway access ramps should be avoided, or minimized and made sufficiently safe.
•      Conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists are minimized by having adequate width, clear space at
       the side of the path, and sight distance at locations where pedestrians cross or enter the facility.

                                                                                               Regional Bicycle Plan
5-16                                                                                        Greater St. Louis Region
Street trees are recommended where possible (30 to 60 feet on center). Berms and/or vegetation can
be used to separate paths from adjacent areas; however, it is not desirable to place the pathway in a
narrow corridor between two barriers (such as fences, bollards, or a knee-wall) for long distances. This
prevents path users from leaving the path in the event of an emergency, and creates an uncomfortable
experience for the user.
Considerations for trails and greenways
Design considerations for pathways are also applicable to trails and greenways. Additional design
considerations for trails and greenways include the clear zone of trees, signs and other objects near
trails. Information on clear zone requirements from the 1999 AASHTO Guide for the Development of
Bicycle Facilities is included below.
•    A 2-foot-wide (minimum) graded area with a maximum 1:6 slope should be maintained adjacent to
     both sides of the path; however, 3 feet or more is desirable to provide clearance from trees, poles,
     walls, fences, guardrails, or other lateral obstructions.
•    Where the path is adjacent to canals, ditches, or slopes steeper than 1:3, a wider separation should
     be considered. A 5-foot (minimum) separation from the edge of the path pavement to the top of the
     slope is desirable. Depending on the height of embankment and conditions at the bottom, a physical
     barrier such as dense shrubbery, railing, or chain link fence may need to be provided. 4




4
 Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, 1999.

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                     5-17
Figure 5-12
Shared-use Path Plan and Cross Section




                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
5-18                                     Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 5-13
Shared-use Path Plan and Cross Section Example




Side Paths
Side paths are shared-use paths adjacent to a roadway. However, side paths are often located only on
one side of a road, and are intended to provide two-way bicycle and pedestrian travel. Sometimes this
type of facility is the only option in a narrow roadway corridor. Side paths can function well if the
following key design features can be achieved:
•    Sufficient width is available to build a facility with at least a 5-foot buffer between the outside travel
     lane and edge of pathway (a 42-inch vertical barrier is also acceptable).
•    The path can be located in an area where conflicts with crossing roadways (which may or may not
     be signalized) can be minimized. Side paths work particularly well where they are parallel to
     expressways and railroad rights-of-way because they have limited access by nature. However, paths
     parallel to expressways must be designed carefully—grade separation is preferred at freeway
     interchanges.
•    Crossings of free-flow ramps can be avoided, minimized, or made sufficiently safe.
In the Plan area, there are few opportunities for alternative facilities and other considerations, so the
use of side path facilities for bicycling should be considered in a limited number of specific locations.
Special attention will be required in the design process to ensure user safety on side paths.
Cycle Track
Cycle tracks create a physically separated and buffered space for directional bicycle travel. Cycle tracks
are currently more popular in European countries, but have been implemented selectively in U.S. cities,
including New York, Portland, San Antonio, and Seattle. They are different from shared-use paths in that
they are for the exclusive use of bicyclists and are operationally related to the overall roadway, whereas


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                    5-19
shared-use paths operate on their own alignments unrelated to roadways that may be adjacent for
sections. The physical separation from other vehicles on the roadway can consist of curbs, striping,
bollards, flexible posts, landscaping strips, or parked vehicles. The cycle track can be at the same grade
as the adjacent roadway or raised to the level of an adjacent landscaping buffer or sidewalk.
Cycle tracks are intended to connect urban destinations with large volumes of pedestrians and bicyclists
of various experience levels. Experienced cyclists may prefer to continue to use the roadway and
operate in mixed vehicle traffic.
Figure 5-14
Separated Cycle Track Cross Section Diagram




                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
5-20                                                                                      Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 5-15
One-Way Cycle Track with Floating Parking Design—Plan and Cross Section




Figure 5-16
Two-Way Cycle Track Design—Plan and Cross Section




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                  5-21
Sidewalks
Missouri State law prohibits bicycles on sidewalks within business districts only. Other laws regulating
bicycle use on sidewalks may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Sidewalks may be useful for bicycling
for a number of reasons:
•      Bicycle access is needed, but bicycle volumes and/or pedestrian volumes are expected to be low.
•      In situations where right-of-way is constrained or there are traffic safety concerns (high speeds, high
       volumes, numerous trucks, etc.), a sidewalk may be the only option, especially if bicyclists are
       traveling up a steep hill. However, bicyclists should not travel faster than the design speed of the
       sidewalk (which is often the speed of a typical jogger and difficult to determine).
•      Sidewalks can be designed to accommodate separated, one-way bicycling on each side of the road
       so that bicyclists can safely and easily transition to and from the road at each end of the segment.
       Sidewalk bike routes should not result in bicyclists riding opposite to motor vehicle traffic when they
       re-enter the roadway.
•      Sidewalks should be a minimum width of 6 feet for one-way bicycle travel and a minimum of 8 feet
       if two-way travel is expected.
Sidewalk facilities for bicycling may be considered in a limited number of specific locations where there
are short segments with limited opportunities for alternative facilities, and yet a connection is critical.
Special attention will be required in the design process to ensure safety on sidewalks.

Bicycle Facility Network
The geographic scope of this Plan includes St. Louis County, the City of St. Louis, and the urbanized parts
of St. Charles Counties. The facilities recommended by the Plan are designed to meet the needs of all
types of bicyclists. One of the most important outcomes of the Plan is a thorough assessment of the
Region’s roadway network, which has resulted in detailed recommendations for on-street bicycle
facilities as part of the bicycle network. The Regional Bicycle Network Map (see fold-out maps,
quadrants A through D) identifies the location and initial facility recommendation for approximately
1,000 miles of bicycle facilities, which include approximately 77 miles of existing facilities that may
require upgrading. Appendix B provides cross-section illustrations that show the types of bicycle
facilities and roadway configurations that will comprise the Regional Bicycle Network.
Some roadways that are part of the bicycle network do not offer straightforward opportunities to
include bicycle facilities through the process of striping narrower lanes, removing lanes, adding
shoulders, or making other physical improvements due to right-of-way constraints and traffic volumes.
Other roadways are scheduled for complete reconstruction but are still in the planning phase. Some of
these roadways represent critical connections between major destinations in the bicycle facility
network. In order to make recommendations on how to improve these roadways for bicyclists,
additional, detailed studies that are beyond the scope of this plan will need to be completed. These road
segments are where further study is needed are identified in the network maps.
Intersections
Improving intersections to safely accommodate bicycles is critical to creating a connected and safe
Regional Bicycle Network. Intersections were not specifically studied as part of the analysis because they
often demand unique engineering solutions. While accommodating bicycles at intersections can be as
straight-forward as narrowing existing through and turn lanes and extending a bicycle lane or shared

                                                                                               Regional Bicycle Plan
5-22                                                                                        Greater St. Louis Region
lane marking to the intersection, some intersections, such as highway interchanges or the intersection
of two multi-lane arterials, can be more complicated. MoDOT has used bike slots at many intersections.
Bike slots are 4-foot-wide (minimum) bike lanes placed between the right turn lane and outside through
lane. Bike slots direct bicycles to the appropriate position for crossing the intersection and reduce
conflicts with right-turning vehicles. Other possible intersection treatments include bike boxes, through
bike lanes, combined bike lane/turn lane, and median refuge islands.
Bicycle Facility Network Statistical Summary
The following tables give a quick overview of the Regional Bicycle Facility Network by facility type.
Table 5-3
Network Summary

Network Summary                         Miles        Percent (%)

On-Street facilities                     942               95

Off-Street facilities                     52                  5

Total Miles                              994              100



Table 5-4
Summary of On-Street Facilities

                                                    Percent
                                                    (%) of
Summary of On-Street                                Network
Facilities                              Miles       Miles

Bike lanes                                156            17

Shared Lane Markings                      192            20

Climbing lanes                              6             1

Cycle track/buffered bike lane             55             6

Shared Roadway (incl. Bike
Boulevard)                                 64             7

Wide Outside Lane                          65             7

Paved shoulder                            201            21

Sub-Total                                 739            79

Further study needed*                     203            21

TOTAL MILES                               942           100
* Further Study Needed: Streets where design solution not immediately apparent.

Off-street facilities such as trails and greenways were not studied as part of this Plan. However, 52 miles
of shared-use paths are included as recommendations for the roadway network to assure there is
continuity of the on-street system, where there are challenges with providing on-street


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                5-23
accommodations. The central theme of this plan is to complement and build upon the tremendous
network of greenways and trails that exist and planned by connecting these facilities with a robust
on-street bicycle network.

Objectives and Actions for Developing the Regional Bicycle Facility Network
Below are the objectives for developing the Regional Bicycle Network and specific actions for meeting
these objectives. The actions have been framed so that they can be tracked as performance measures
over time to evaluate the success of the Plan’s implementation.
Objective: Improve accessibility and added safety for bikes along on-street routes.
       Action 5.1: Integrate on-street bicycle facilities into appropriate state, county, and local planning
       documents.
       To ensure the Plan’s implementation, it is important that all planning documents of relevant
       agencies responsible for transportation planning, design, construction, and maintenance reflect the
       on-street bicycle facilities recommended in the Plan. This action may be tracked by evaluating state,
       county, and local planning documents periodically to see that on-street bicycle facilities identified in
       the Plan have been integrated.
       Action 5.2: Prioritize on-street bicycle facilities (further prioritization within the different public
       entity systems will be completed by appropriate state, county, and local transportation agencies
       based on the Regional Bicycle Plan’s priorities).
       While the provision of on-street bicycle facilities identified in this Plan should be a part of all road
       projects, recommended facilities must be prioritized in order to identify near-term projects with the
       greatest benefits for bicyclists, such as making critical links to and among major destinations and
       addressing barriers that create significant impediments to safe and efficient bicycling. The Plan
       identifies implementation priorities by taking a number of factors into consideration (see Chapter 9).
       However, state, county, and local entities involved in implementing transportation projects may
       have reasons to modify these priorities based on their individual work programs or other specific
       needs.
       The Bicycle Facility Network Prioritization Map identifies areas for near-, medium-, and long-term
       prioritization, as well as specific early implementation and demonstration projects.
       Action 5.3: Implement on-street bicycle facilities identified in the Plan to improve accessibility and
       safety for bicyclists.
       All entities involved roadway planning, design, construction, and maintenance should consult the
       Plan when planning and working on projects. On-street bicycle facilities identified in this Plan should
       be integrated into the work programs of these entities. The facilities should be implemented
       whenever major road projects are undertaken, and funding sources for implementing other facilities
       that make critical links or address major safety concerns in the network should be identified.
Objective: Improve accessibility and safety for bikes around barriers like intersections and rivers.
       Action 5.4: Integrate identified barriers into appropriate state, county and local planning
       documents.
       Barriers such as bridge crossings, complicated intersections, railway crossings, or corridors with
       other particular challenges indentified in the Regional Bicycle Plan should be integrated into the

                                                                                                 Regional Bicycle Plan
5-24                                                                                          Greater St. Louis Region
     transportation plans and work programs of MoDOT, St. Charles and St. Louis Counties, the City of
     St. Louis, and other, smaller jurisdictions. These planning documents should also specify any
     interjurisdictional coordination that must occur in order to effectively address these barriers.
     Action 5.5: Prioritize identified barriers (completed by appropriate state, county, and local
     transportation agencies).
     Barriers that have been identified in the Regional Bicycle Plan should be prioritized in terms of how
     significant they are for making critical links in the network and improving safety.
     Action 5.6: Resolve barriers identified in the Plan to improve accessibility and safety for bicyclists
     on highways.
     Action 5.7: Include appropriate bicycle facilities in all new bridge projects and major rehabilitation
     of existing bridges.
     Bridges help to weave the region together, providing critical links between neighborhoods and
     commercial centers, and thus they are extremely important components of the bicycle facility
     network. The following are critical locations in the Regional Bicycle Network where there are
     existing bridges that present barriers to bicyclists, or where a new bridge major bridge project
     should accommodate bicycles:
     •     Route 141 over Meramec River
     •     Route 370 over the Missouri River
     •     I-64 over the Missouri River
     •     Manchester Rd. from Des Peres Rd. to Ballas Rd. (through I-270 interchange)
     •     N. Grand Blvd. from Lindell Blvd. to south of I-64 (through I-64 interchange)
Objective: Improve the safety of existing facilities.
     Action 5.8: Conduct safety audits for existing facilities to identify design deficiencies and
     maintenance needs.
     Bicycle facilities that were installed prior to development of this Plan need to be assessed to
     determine if they require maintenance or upgrading based on their condition and according to
     updated standards and guidelines from AASHTO and MUTCD. Responsible entities should refer to
     this Plan to determine if existing facilities have any design deficiencies that should be addressed to
     improve safety and to ensure consistency with facilities that will be installed as part of the
     recommended Regional Bicycle Network. Appendix D provides more information on maintenance
     needs and strategies.
     Action 5.9: Work with appropriate state, county, and local agencies to adopt maintenance
     programs to routinely maintain and upgrade existing facilities.
     Bicycle facilities that are part of the roadway network, including bicycle lanes, shoulders, and cycle
     tracks, should be included in the regularly scheduled maintenance of the roadway network. Regular
     lane sweeping, pothole repair, and removal of obstacles in bicycle facilities should occur. Standard
     restriping and resurfacing of roadways should include on-street bicycle facilities. Appendix D
     provides more information on maintenance needs and strategies.
     Action 5.10: Identify and focus resources on spot maintenance problems on existing streets,
     corridors, and neighborhoods where bicycle crashes occur.


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                 5-25
       Bicycles are more sensitive to irregularities and road debris than cars due to their smaller and
       light-weight tires. Roadway features that cause minor discomfort to motorists, such as potholes,
       seams between roadway sections, faded or unclear roadway striping, and improper drain grates, can
       cause serious problems for cyclists. Many of these spot maintenance issues can be resolved at a
       relatively low cost, and can have a large effect on improving safety and reducing crashes. Each entity
       implementing the Plan should establish a spot maintenance/improvement program with dedicated
       resources to address discrete problems and construct low cost improvements to enhance bicycle
       safety and convenience.
Objective: Reduce the rate of bicycle crashes by 50 percent by 2021.
       Action 5.11: Identify spot locations, corridors and neighborhoods where bicycle crashes are
       occurring.
       On-the-ground assessments should be conducted in all areas where bicycle crashes are regularly
       occurring to identify necessary spot or network improvements. This Action relates to Actions 5.9.,
       5.12, and 5.13.
       Action 5.12: Focus resources on spot locations, corridors, and neighborhoods where bicycle crashes
       are occurring.
       As a component of implementation prioritization and addressing problem areas, funding and staff
       resources should be focused on areas where there are high rates of bicycle crashes. Crashes may
       result from poor roadway conditions and facility design or high volumes of bicycle and vehicle
       traffic, or both. Special spot improvements and facilities may be required in these areas.
       Action 5.13: Develop a Web site where users report crashes, bad pavement, concerns about road
       conditions, etc. Use community bike type tool in an ongoing basis.
       Great RiversGreenway, Trailnet, or the EWGCOG should host a Web site where Regional Bicycle
       Network users can interactively report conditions and crashes. Data should be compiled and
       distributed to the various entities involved in plan implementation and roadway maintenance.
       Action 5.14: Identify entities to collect data and report information
       A number of entities could fulfill the role of collecting and/or compiling data related to bicycle
       ridership (annual bicycle counts), accidents, and facility condition or crash data generated by users
       through the online tool described in Action 5.12. These entities include EWGCOG, Trailnet, and
       Great Rivers Greenway. Bicycle accident data collected by police departments should be aggregated
       and reported for the entire Plan area.
Objective: Promote more bicycling through route signing and end of trip facilities.
       Action 5.15: Install a Signed Bicycle Route System with uniform signage to create a unified and
       defined network.
       A unified system of signage and pavement markings helps bicyclists navigate the bicycle network
       and also raises awareness of the presence of bicycles among motorists. A comprehensive set of
       bicycle route wayfinding signs should be developed to connect destinations in the St. Louis region
       and indicate to bicyclists that there are particular advantages to using certain routes compared with
       alternatives. All jurisdictions and agencies implementing the Plan should install a signage system
       along bicycle routes that is consistent with the Regional Bicycle Plan and MUTCD standards.
       Appendix C contains information on the different types and hierarchy of bicycle route signage.

                                                                                              Regional Bicycle Plan
5-26                                                                                       Greater St. Louis Region
      St. Louis currently has about 77 miles of signed, on-street bicycle routes. Some of these routes have
     signage and pavement symbols that are not consistent with the 2009 MUTCD, which provides new
     guidance on wayfinding signing. As facilities recommended in the 2011 Regional Bicycle Plan are
     installed, there will be a need for a policy and program for removing old signs and installing new
     ones consistent with the MUTCD, while maintaining past sign recognition.
     In developing new policy and program guidelines, several factors should be kept in mind:
     •     Designing, fabricating, locating and installing new wayfinding in urban areas will cost between
           ten and twenty thousand dollars per mile.
     •     Existing signs provide valuable wayfinding guidance for bicyclists.
     •     Removing all the signs at once will likely create gaps in the system that will last for years as the
           bikeway network is installed over a twenty year period.
     •     Some confusion will occur if old signs are left in place on some routes while new ones are
           installed along with the installation of new bicycle facilities.
     •     There are at least three models to consider when establishing policies and programs for the
           replacement of existing signs:
     •     As facilities recommended in the 2011 Regional Bicycle Plan are installed, existing wayfinding
           signs could be removed and new ones installed. In some cases, they will be for the same routes,
           and in many cases, they will be for new routes.
     •     All existing signs could be immediately removed and new signs installed in conjunction with new
           facilities.
     •     Immediately install new signs on all on-street routes in the network that will have shared lane
           markings. This will allow for the removal of much of the existing signed system. Then, as other
           facilities are installed, the remaining existing signs could be removed.
     Adequate budget for new signs will be required to support whatever policy approach is pursued.
     Action 5.16: Require and install end-of-trip facilities.
     The availability of end-trip facilities can influence an individual’s decision as to whether or not to
     commute by bicycle. End-trip facilities such as bicycle parking, showers, and changing facilities help
     make bicycling a viable mode of transportation. Bicycle parking is a key component to making a
     bicycle network functional. Every single roadway in the region could have an excellent bicycle
     facility, but bicyclists would not use them without a safe place to secure their bicycle at their
     destination. All public facilities, (parks, community centers, libraries, city halls, schools, etc.) should
     have sufficient bicycle parking to meet demand. Incentives or requirements should be put in place
     for new commercial and multi-family residential development to provide on-site bicycle parking
     and/or storage. The Association of Bicycle and Pedestrian Professionals (APBP) Bicycle Parking
     Guidelines, 2nd Edition, should serve as a model for determining the appropriate amount of bicycle
     parking, as well as other considerations such as rack type, site layout, security, aesthetics, weather
     protection, and lighting.
     Showers and changing facilities can help make bicycling a feasible choice for getting to work by
     providing a place to freshen up after the ride. Additionally, these facilities serve fitness-minded
     employees who can exercise during lunch hours. Public agencies and private developments use


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                      5-27
       several methods to incorporate shower and changing facilities, such as through the development
       code, in coordination with gyms, or by attracting the development of all-in-one end-trip facilities
       such as Bikestation. Such facilities provide storage for bikes and gear, showers, repair services, and
       bike rentals, and are often located within employment centers and/or near major transit hubs.
       Bikestation is a certified B corporation that has facilities in Long Beach, Washington D.C., Palo Alto,
       and several other cities. Similar facilities based on the Bikestation model have appeared in other
       cities such as Chicago. The St. Louis region’s first bicycle commuter station opened in downtown St.
       Louis on April 28, 2011. The station offers bicycle parking, showers, changing facilities, and lockers.
       Through the development code, new developments or significant building renovations can be
       encouraged to install shower and changing facilities through incentives, such as trade-offs with
       parking requirements. The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) system offers
       credits for incorporating bicycle storage and changing rooms into new developments or arranging
       access to existing facilities within 200 yards of the building’s entrance. Moreover, the City of St.
       Louis and other municipalities can begin incorporate shower and changing facilities into their office
       buildings for public employees.
       Gyms and fitness centers are obvious places for cleaning up after a bicycle ride. However,
       membership costs typically cover many more services than a bicyclist simply looking for a shower
       and place to change is willing to pay for. Area gyms and other fitness facilities may be willing to work
       with the public agencies to create bicycle commuter memberships. For example, several gyms in
       downtown Seattle offer “shower only” memberships at a discounted price.




                                                                                                Regional Bicycle Plan
5-28                                                                                         Greater St. Louis Region
Chapter 6: Design and Application of Guidelines and Standards
The Citizen Advisory and Technical Advisory Committees identified improving safety by providing
consistent bicycle facilities throughout the region as a goal of the Regional Bicycle Plan. This goal is
reflected in their recommendation that all bicycle facilities be built to the latest MUTCD standards and
AASHTO Guidelines.
Goal: Improve safety for all modes of transportation through the careful design and implementation
of bicycle facilities.
Objective: Improve safety by designing all bicycle facilities to the latest AASHTO bicycle guidelines and
2009 MUTCD Standards.
     Action 6.1: Latest AASHTO bike guidelines and 2009 MUTCD are adopted by appropriate state,
     county, and local agencies.
     Action 6.2: Adopt additional guidance for installing bicycle facilities that builds on AASHTO
     guidelines and 2009 MUTCD Standards (see Appendix B for further guidance on bike lanes, shared
     lane markings, and signage).
     Action 6.3: Ensure consistent application of bicycle facility guidelines and standards through field
     checks to insure compliance to AASHTO guidelines and 2009 MUTCD Standards.
     Consistency in facility design in terms of pavement markings and signage is important for creating
     consistent interconnected bicycle network that is easy for the user to understand and navigate.
     Compliance with AASHTO guidelines and MUTCD standards will ensure uniformity in bicycle facility
     design. Each jurisdiction responsible for facility design and installation should implement a process
     that ensures all installed bicycle facilities are field-checked for consistency with these guidelines
     and standards.
     Action 6.4: Identify creative solutions to unique issues that may be outside of standard design
     guidance.
     While all bicycle facilities should be designed to meet current state and federal design guidance and
     standards, as defined by MoDOT, the AASHTO, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the
     MUTCD, there will always be situations in which adopted guidelines and standards do not
     adequately address existing right-of-way constraints or the safety needs of the bicycle network
     users. In such situations, an agency must be able to use professional engineering judgment to
     identify creative solutions that still fall within the intent of standard design guidance. Jurisdictions
     should seek out precedents from neighboring jurisdictions, and, if none are immediately available,
     they should research what has been done in similar situations in jurisdictions in other states.
     Specific local guidelines and policies, listed below, may apply to certain roadways. If the national
     standards are revised in the future, the updated standards should be followed. The following
     publications should be referenced for greater detail on the design of bicycle facilities in the St. Louis
     region. Key provisions of these guidance documents are also provided.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                       6-1
Greater St. Louis Region
National Guidelines and Standards
Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities. AASHTO, updated in 1999. 1
AASHTO is a not-for-profit, nonpartisan association representing state highway and transportation
departments. It publishes a variety of planning and design guides, including the 1999 AASHTO Guide for
the Development of Bicycle Facilities. This guide provides planning and design guidance for on- and off-
street bicycle facilities. It is not intended to set absolute standards, but rather to present sound
guidelines that will be valuable in attaining good design sensitive to the needs of both bicyclists and
other roadway users. The provisions in the Guide are consistent with and similar to normal roadway
engineering practices. 2 Signs, signals, and pavement markings for bicycle facilities should be used in
conjunction with the MUTCD.
Key provisions in the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities include:
     Bicycle planning, including types of planning processes, technical analysis tools, and integrating
      bicycle facilities with transit
     Bicycle operation and safety, including traffic principles for bicyclists and causes of bicycle crashes
     Design of on-road facilities
     Design of shared-use paths
     Bicycle parking facilities
     Maintenance and operations 3
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Published by the U. S. Department of
Transportation, Washington, DC, 2009. 4
The 2009 MUTCD is a document issued by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) of the U.S.
Department of Transportation (USDOT) to specify the standards by which traffic signs, road surface
markings, and signals are designed, installed, and used. These specifications include the shapes, colors,
fonts, sizes ,etc., used in road markings and signs. In the United States, all traffic control devices must
generally conform to these standards. The manual is used by state and local agencies and private design
and construction firms to ensure that the traffic control devices they use conform to the national
standard. While some state agencies have developed their own sets of standards, including their own
MUTCDs, they must substantially conform to the federal MUTCD, and must be approved by the FHWA.
MoDOT uses the national MUTCD and expects to adopt the 2009 edition by the end of 2011. The
National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) advises the FHWA on additions,
revisions, and changes to the MUTCD.
Key provisions of the MUTCD related to bicycling include:
     Bicycle-related warning signs

1
    Available from AASHTO at www.aashto.org/bookstore/abs.html.
2
 An update to the 1999 Guide is currently under development and is expected to be approved by the FHWA in 2011.
The updated Guide will be based on design concepts and standards found in the 1999 AASHTO Guide, with
additional detailed guidelines for the placement of bicycle lanes and bicycle lane symbols.


4
    The manual is available at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov

6-2                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                             Greater St. Louis Region
     Bicycle destination guide and route signs
     Pavement markings such as bike lane symbols and striping
     Trail signs
Significant changes in 2009 edition (from the 2003 Edition) include:
     New shared-lane (“sharrow”) pavement markings
     Bicycle lane regulatory signs no longer required
     Type 3 object markers for shared-use paths
     New bicycle destination guide and route signs
     New mode-specific guide signs for shared-use paths

State Guidelines and Standards
Primary Guidance (from MoDOT)
Engineering Design Manual and Practical Design Implementation Manual, Missouri Department of
Transportation (MoDOT)
The Engineering Design Manual states that MoDOT values the needs of all customers, including non-
motorized travelers, realizing that they need safe, connected means of transportation. MoDOT is
charged with the responsibility of using public funds wisely while providing safe choices of
transportation to the traveling public. The inclusion of bicycle facilities on all improvement projects will
be considered (see 23 USC section 217 below) and should be provided when one or more of the
following conditions exist:
     The local jurisdiction has a comprehensive bicycle policy in the area of the proposed improvement.
     There is public support through local planning organizations or local communities for the provision
      of bicycle facilities.
     Bicycle traffic generators are located near the proposed project (residential neighborhoods,
      employment centers, shopping centers, schools, parks, libraries, etc.).
     There is evidence of bicycle traffic within the proposed project limits.
     The route provides access across a natural or man-made barrier (rivers, railroads, or access-
      controlled roadways). If bicycles are allowed on either end of a bridge, access across the bridge shall
      be provided (see 23 United States Code 217e).
Other than paved shoulders, special bicycle facilities will not be provided on interstate traveled ways.
Shared-use paths within interstate right-of-way may be permitted. Shared-use paths along interstates
must be barrier separated or located outside the clear zone. 5
The decision to provide or not provide bicycle facilities on any project shall be documented. Bicycle
traffic may be accommodated in a variety of ways, depending on the location (rural/urban), the Average
Daily Traffic rate, or the speed limit. Examples of facilities include shared travel way with motorists, bike
lanes, wide curb lanes, paved shoulders and shared-use paths separated from the travel way by a
positive barrier. By law bicycles are allowed to operate on all roads except where specifically prohibited.
Probable use of most roads by bicyclists should be considered in determining construction details such

5                                  rd
    AASHTO Roadside Design Guide, 3 Edition 2006


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                      6-3
Greater St. Louis Region
as drain grates, rumble strips, traffic detection and expansion joints. Consultation with local groups of
organized bicyclists is to be encouraged in the development of projects.
Special Considerations: Bridges, viaducts, overpasses and underpasses that cross major roads, railroads,
rivers or other travel barriers present a special opportunity for accommodating bicycle travel. A greater
than usual proportion of bicycle travel is funneled onto these facilities since local roads often do not
cross these barriers.
23 USC 217 (e): On highways without full control of access where a bridge deck is being replaced or
rehabilitated, and where bicycles are permitted to operate at each end, the bridge shall be
reconstructed so that bicycles can be safely accommodated when it can be done at a reasonable cost. 6
Federal Aid Policy Guide, Sec. 652.5 states: On highways without full control of access where a bridge
deck is being replaced or rehabilitated, and where bicycles are permitted to operate at each end, the
bridge shall be reconstructed so that bicycles can be safely accommodated when it can be done at a
reasonable cost. 7
Funding
Costs for new bicycle facilities, including right-of-way, construction and maintenance may be funded by
local jurisdictions, by other non-department sources or by the department itself. Enhancement funds
cannot be used for maintenance of bicycle facilities. State funds will only be used for facilities located on
MoDOT right-of-way. Existing bicycle facilities disturbed by any MoDOT improvement will be replaced at
MoDOT’s expense. Normal right-of-way and construction costs for this restoration will be included as a
project cost for the proposed improvement. Special consideration will be given to projects funded by
local partners.
Guidance
Additional guidance regarding sidewalk design can be found in the AASHTO publication Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines
(Part 2 Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access), or the FHWA publication Selecting Roadway Design
Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles.
Technical assistance on a case-by-case basis is also available from the State Bicycle and Pedestrian
Program Coordinator.
MoDOT’s Practical Design Manual states that the agency will provide bicycle facilities on improvement
projects during planning, and that design activities are necessary when any one or more of the following
conditions exist:
     The local jurisdiction has a comprehensive bicycle policy in the area of the proposed improvement.
     There is public support through local planning organizations for the provision of bicycle facilities.
     The local jurisdiction agrees to fund the total cost of the facility (right-of-way and construction) plus
      the provision of future maintenance.

6
  http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode23/usc_sec_23_00000217----000-.html This is the federal law as
passed under SAFETEA-LU.
7
 http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/fapg/cfr0652.htm



6-4                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                             Greater St. Louis Region
      Bicycle traffic generators are located near the proposed project (residential neighborhoods,
       employment centers, shopping centers, schools, parks, libraries, etc.).
      There is evidence of bicycle traffic along the proposed project or the local community supports the
       incorporation of facilities at this time.
      The route provides access across a natural or man-made barrier ( bridges over rivers, roadways, or
       railroads) or under access controlled facilities. 8
The Practical Design Manual also states that the installation of bicycle facilities is at the sole discretion of
the director or the district engineer acting as the director’s designee. A preference is given to locate
bicycle facilities off right-of-way whenever possible, such as on a paved shoulder. The manual elaborates
further: In developed areas, bicycle accommodations differ according to ADT and speed limit. Examples
include bike lanes, wide curb lanes, paved shoulders, and a shared-use path separated from the travel
way by a barrier curb; mountable curbs are prohibited as a positive separation. In rural areas, bicycle
accommodation may include a shared traveled way on roads with low Average Daily Traffic rates or a
paved shoulder on roads with higher Average Daily Traffic rates. Because state law allows bicycles to
operate on all state highways except travel lanes of interstates or where specifically prohibited,
probable use by bicyclists is considered in determining construction details such as drain grates and
expansion joints, even on roadways where special bicycle accommodation is not provided. 9

Local Guidelines and Standards
City of St. Louis
The City of St. Louis has implemented a few road diets using the following standards:
      5-foot bike lanes
      9-foot parking lanes minimum
      10-foot center turn lane
      10- to 11-foot through lanes
Sixty-foot curb-to-curb sections will include bike lanes. In the case of 50-foot roadway sections shared
lane markings will be placed in the trough lanes. At locations where five lanes are maintained, shared
lane markings will be used centered in the outside lanes.
St. Louis County
The following Figure is a policy statement from the Department of Highways and Traffic regarding
signing and striping to accommodate bicyclists on County arterial / through roadways.




8
    Practical Design, Missouri Department of Transportation, Revised February 24, 2006.
9
    Ibid.

Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                        6-5
Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-1
Department of Highways and Traffic Policy Regarding Signing and Striping




6-6                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
At-Grade Bicycle Path/Roadway Crossing Guidelines
St. Louis County does not include bicycle facilities in its street and highway design criteria. The County
does provide guidelines for at-grade bicycle path/roadway crossings, recognizing that the number of
trails will continue to increase throughout the county. The guidelines provide a list of approved traffic
control devices at bicycle path/roadway crossings, which are consistent with MUTCD:
    Mid-block traffic signals, with pedestrian signal heads for path users
    Intersection traffic signals, with pedestrian signal heads for path users
    Minor street stop control at intersecting roads where there is a path/roadway crossing at the
     intersection
    Multi-way stop control at intersecting roads where there is a path/roadway crossing at the
     intersection
    Mid-block marked crosswalks at path/roadway crossings with stop control only for path users
The guidelines also provide guidance on where proposed path/roadway crossing may be located in
relation to intersections with existing control devices, as well as striping and signage to be used at
crossings.10
St. Charles County
Guidelines vary from project to project based on the context of the area that the improvement will serve.
East-West Gateway Council of Governments
The EWGCOG developed the St. Louis Regional Bicycling and Walking Transportation Plan provides
definitions and limited guidelines for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. In addition to providing
dimensional guidelines for a limited number of bicycle facilities, such as bicycle lanes and wide outside
lanes, the Plan also provides basic guidance for maintaining road surfaces, directional/informational
signage, and intersections. The Plan also touches on establishing multimodal transportation
connections, links to bicycle facilities to destinations, and connections past barriers.
General
In addition to the above, the following guidance documents should also be referenced:
    Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). U.S. Department of Justice, United
     States Access Board. Guidelines are available at http://www.access-
     board.gov/adaag/html/adaag.htm.
    Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access: Part Two – Best Practices Design Guide. Published by the
     U.S. DOT, Washington, DC, 2001.
    A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (Green Book) , AASHTO, 2004.




10
 At-Grade Bicycle Path/Roadway Crossing Guidelines, St. Louis County Department of Highways and Traffic,
Operations Division, July, 20, 2009.

Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                        6-7
Greater St. Louis Region
Additional Guidance for Bicycle Facilities
History and Current Practice
The 1999 AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities provides guidance on the design of
bicycle lanes, and has been approved by the FHWA. An update to the 1999 Guide is currently under
development and is expected to be approved by the FHWA in 2011 or 2012. The updated Guide will be
based on design concepts and standards found in the 1999 AASHTO Guide, with additional detailed
guidelines for the placement of bicycle lanes and bicycle lane symbols.

Best Practices for Locating and Installing Bicycle Lane Lines and Symbols.
The following guidelines are a supplement to the MUTCD Part 9: Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities and
the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. They are not design standards, and should
not be used as such. Application of guidance provided in this document requires the use of professional
engineering judgment when installing bicycle lanes.

Bicycle Lane Placement
Bicycle lanes should be one-way facilities and carry bicycle traffic in the same direction as adjacent
motor vehicle traffic. Two-way bicycle lanes on one side of the roadway are not recommended when
they result in bicycles riding against the flow of motor vehicle traffic. However, there may be special
situations where it is appropriate to have a two-way bicycle lane for a short distance, such as a one-way
street.
On one-way streets, bicycle lanes generally should be placed on the right side of the street. Bicycle lanes
on the left side are unfamiliar and unexpected for most motorists. This should only be considered when
a bicycle lane will substantially decrease the number of conflicts, there are a significant number of left-
turning bicyclists or the right lane is unavailable because of a special purpose lane, such as a transit lane.




6-8                                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-2
Bicycle Lane—Typical Cross Section




Appendix B contains cross-section illustrations that show bicycle lanes on a variety of roadway and
travel lane configurations.

Considerations for Bicycle Lane Line Marking Placement
The minimum width for a bicycle lane between a parking lane and a travel lane is 5 feet. The inside
bicycle lane line (parking lane line) will be located 7 to 8 feet from the face of the curb or roadway edge.
Generally, a narrower parking lane is desirable to encourage motorists to keep the vehicle as close to
the edge of the roadway as possible to maximize the available travel lane width, which will improve the
bicyclist’s level of comfort on the roadway.
The minimum width of a bicycle lane next to a curb (no parking) is 5 feet from the face of curb, but the
bike lane must also be at least 3 feet from the joint between the gutter pan and the road pavement
(4 feet preferred). In general, bicycle lanes should be no wider than 6 feet to discourage motor vehicles
from using them as a travel lane. Bicycle lane lines should not be extended through a marked crosswalk.
It is recommended that the transition for tapering centerlines and travel lanes (moving the lines
gradually to the right or the left) to create space for bicycle lanes follow standard MUTCD practices.

Considerations for Use of Dotted versus Solid Bicycle Lane Lines
Solid lines should be used at all locations where through moving motorists are to be discouraged from
entering the bicycle lane. Parking motorists may cross the solid line as necessary to park their vehicle.



Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                       6-9
Greater St. Louis Region
Dotted lines (2-foot lines with 4-foot gaps) should be used to demarcate areas where motorists are likely
or are to be encouraged to merge into or across the bicycle lane for turning movements. Dotted lines
should be used 50-200 feet in advance of intersections where motorists are permitted to turn right.
Where there is a parking restriction in advance of an intersection, including bus stops, the dotted line
should be continued through the parking restriction. The dotted line should generally discontinue at the
crosswalk or back edge of the perpendicular street sidewalk if a crosswalk is not present on the near
side of an intersection. On the far side, the dotted line should become a solid line at the back edge of
the sidewalk or the tangent point of the curb radius (whichever is larger). A dotted line through an
intersection may be desirable to provide additional guidance through intersections where bicyclists
must cross more than 4 lanes of traffic or cross uncontrolled intersections of any width.




6-10                                                                                      Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                       Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-3
Bike Lane Intersection Plan




Considerations for Bicycle Lane Symbol Placement
The bicycle lane bicycle with rider symbol with an arrow should be used to identify bicycle lanes.
Typically, the bike lane arrow and rider symbol should be located within the center of the bike lane. To
reduce wearing, bicycle lane symbols are typically not located within dotted bike lanes; however, it may
be desirable to place bicycle lane symbols within dotted lines at locations of frequent conflicts between
merging motorists and through-moving bicyclists.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                 6-11
Greater St. Louis Region
Considerations for Bicycle Lane Symbol Placement Frequency
Bicycle lane symbols should be placed at the far side of an uncontrolled intersection, at both sides of an
arterial intersection with traffic control, and at mid-block locations where block faces are more than
250 feet. Where there are marked crosswalks, the tip of the bicycle lane symbol should be placed
25 feet beyond the far side of the marked crosswalk. The frequency of placement of a bicycle lane
symbol will depend on a number of factors, including the following:
      Visibility to motorists and bicyclists (markings should be placed to take into account changes in
       topography or not be blocked by overhanging vegetation or signs when looked at from a distance).
      Generally, the markings should be located in accordance with the proposed guidelines (far side of
       intersections; then mid-block if block faces are more than 250 feet long).
      Generally the markings should not be located adjacent to each other when located mid-block. It is
       recommended that they be separated by a minimum of 20 feet.
      Markings may be adjusted from the above dimensions to stay out of the wheel track of turning
       vehicles to lengthen lifespan.

MUTCD Guidance on Bike Lane Markings and Signage
 If used, the bicycle lane symbol marking shall be placed immediately after an intersection and at
  other locations as needed.
      The bicycle lane symbol marking shall be white.
      If the bicycle lane symbol marking is used in conjunction with other word or symbol messages, it
       shall precede them.
      If the word or symbol pavement markings are used, Bicycle Lane signs shall also be used, but the
       signs need not be adjacent to every symbol to avoid overuse of the signs.
      A through bicycle lane shall not be positioned to the right of a right turn only lane.
      When the right through lane is dropped to become a right turn only lane, the bicycle lane markings
       should stop at least 100 feet before the beginning of the right turn lane.
      Through bicycle lane markings should resume to the left of the right turn only lane.
      An optional through-right turn lane next to a right-turn only lane should not be used where there is
       a through bicycle lane. If a capacity analysis indicates the need for an optional through right turn
       lane, the bicycle lane should be discontinued at the intersection approach.
      Posts or raised pavement markers should not be used to separate bicycle lanes from adjacent travel
       lanes. 11

Cost
Costs to design and install bicycle lanes will vary from $25,000 to $30,000 per mile to design and install
bicycle lanes. Costs will be on the higher end if installation requires grinding out old paint lines; they will
be on the lower end if no grinding is required.



11
     MUTCD for Streets and Highways, Traffic Control for Bicycle Facilities (Part 9), 2009 Edition.

6-12                                                                                                     Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                                      Greater St. Louis Region
Bicycle Climbing Lane Treatment Criteria
The decision to install a climbing bicycle lane should be based upon site conditions. Generally, it is
recommended that climbing lanes should be used when roadway grades exceed 4 percent for at least
300 feet. It is recommended that the bicycle lane be striped on the uphill portion. For roadways with
parking located on one side, consideration should be given to locating the parking lane on the uphill side
of the roadway unless it creates pedestrian safety issues. If a roadway grade is less than 4 percent, or if
the length of a relatively steep grade is less than 300 feet, maintaining equally spaced wide outside lanes


Considerations for Climbing Lane Transitions
could be considered in place of a climbing bicycle lane.


In general, the bicycle lane should be located on the uphill portion of the roadway. For roadways where
changes in slope create defined peaks and valleys, it is recommended that the bike lane be switched
from side to side unless engineering judgment deems it necessary to maintain a bicycle lane on a
consistent side of the roadway.
Figure 6-4
Climbing Lane




Appendix B contains additional cross-section illustrations of climbing lanes on a variety of roadway and
travel lane configurations.

Cost
Costs to design and install climbing lanes will vary from $15,000 to $20,000 per mile to design and
install. Costs will be at the high end if the installation requires grinding out old paint lines; they will be at
the lower end if no grinding is required.

Buffered Bicycle Lanes
A buffered bike lane is a bike lane that is separated from a travel lane or parking lane by a space of 3 to
6 feet. The lane is always one-way and is buffered by cross-hatched pavement marking, and if used, a


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                         6-13
Greater St. Louis Region
sign for the exclusive use of bicyclists. All other guidelines and considerations that apply to bike lanes
described above, also apply to buffered bike lanes.
Figure 6-5
Buffered Bike Lane




Appendix B contains additional cross-section illustrations of buffered bicycle lanes on a variety of
roadway and travel lane configurations.

Cost
Costs will vary depending on the type of buffering treatments used. A buffered bike lane consisting of a
4-foot buffer area but no flex bollards may cost approximately $18,000 per mile, while a buffered bike
lane that utilizes flex post bollards and two feet of diagonal striping may cost approximately $45,000
per mile.

Shared Lane Markings
The following guidelines supplement the 2009 MUTCD and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of
Bicycle Facilities. They are not design standards, and should not be used as such. Application of guidance



6-14                                                                                          Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
provided in this document requires the use of engineering judgment when installing shared lane
markings.
A Shared Lane Marking is a pavement symbol consisting of a bicycle with two chevron markings above it
that is placed in the roadway lane indicating that motorists should expect to see and share the lane with
bicycles, and indicating the legal and appropriate line of travel for a bicyclist. Unlike bicycle lanes, they
do not designate a particular part of the roadway for the exclusive use of bicyclists.
The revised 2009 Edition of the MUTCD includes new provisions for installing Shared Lane Markings. The
following is taken directly from the 2009 Edition of the MUTCD.
The Shared Lane Marking shown in Figure 6-6 may be used to:
     A. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in a shared lane with on-street parallel parking in order
        to reduce the chance of a bicyclist's impacting the open door of a parked vehicle,
     B. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and a
        bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane,
     C. Alert road users of the lateral location bicyclists are likely to occupy within the traveled way,
     D. Encourage safe passing of bicyclists by motorists, and
     E. Reduce the incidence of wrong-way bicycling
Figure 6-6
Shared Lane Marking Symbol




Source: MUTCD, 2009 edition.


Shared Lane Marking Placement
In general, Shared Lane Markings are installed on streets where there is not enough space for bicycle
lanes, or there is no desire for a bicycle lane. Where there is only space for a bicycle lane on one side of
the street, a bike lane should be installed on the uphill side with Shared Lane Markings on the downhill
side. Flat streets should either have Shared Lane Markings installed on both sides (no bicycle lane) or
have the bicycle lane installed on the side with the highest anticipated bicycle use (engineering


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                       6-15
Greater St. Louis Region
judgment required). Shared Lane Markings may be the first choice (even if there is room for a bicycle
lane) on some downhill sections.

Considerations for Shared Lane Marking Placement within a Travel Lane
The placement of shared lane markings will require engineering judgment as lane widths, quantity of
lanes, operating speeds, and presence of parking will vary from street to street. In particular, the width
of the shared travel lane, and the number of available travel lanes impact typical operating behavior of
motorists and bicyclists. Travel lanes with widths less than 13 feet will require motorists to partially or
fully change lanes to pass bicyclists. Travel lanes of 13 feet or greater generally allow motorists to pass
bicyclists with minimal or no encroachment into adjacent travel lanes (allowing 3 feet of horizontal
separation between the motorist and bicyclist).
Generally the center of shared lane markings should be located a minimum of 11 feet from the curb or
edge of roadway at locations where parking is permitted adjacent to the travel lane. Generally the
center of shared lane markings should be located a minimum of 4 feet from the curb or edge of roadway
at locations where parking is prohibited.
It may be appropriate to move the shared lane marking towards the center of the travel lane (exceeding
the MUTCD minimums) if engineering judgment determines that this placement will enhance the safety
of the bicyclist operating within the travel lane. The shared lane marking may be moved towards the
center of the lane regardless of whether it is adjacent to parking or not. In most cases it will be a
combination of two or more of the following factors which will indicate that consideration should be
given to moving the Shared Lane Marking towards the center of the travel lane:
      Travel lane is less than 12 feet in width
      Speed of traffic
      Number of travel lanes (it may be desirable to place the shared lane marking towards the center of a
       narrower outside travel lane when a center turn lane is present or when there are multiple travel
       lanes in the same direction)
      Grade of roadway and expected bicyclist speed (center lane placement often works well when going
       downhill on streets with steep grades and high bicycle speeds)
      Volume of traffic (may or may not be an issue – speed, grade, and number of lanes are more
       important)

Situations Where Travel Lanes Are Less than or Equal to 12 Feet in Width
Shared lane markings should be placed in the center of the travel lane where travel lanes are less than
12 feet to encourage bicyclists to occupy the full lane and not ride too close to parked vehicles or the
edge of the roadway. A BIKES MAY USE FULL LANE (R4-11) sign may be used to supplement the marking.
Travel lanes of this dimension are too narrow for sharing side by side with vehicles.

Situations Where Travel Lanes Are Between 12 Feet and 13 Feet in Width
Where travel lanes are 12-13 feet in width, the travel lane can appear shareable to roadway users if
bicyclists operate on the right side of the lane resulting in unsafe passing maneuvers. It may be desirable
to place the marking in the center, or close to the center of the lane to discourage these behaviors. A
BIKES MAY USE FULL LANE (R4-11) sign may be used to supplement the marking.




6-16                                                                                         Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                          Greater St. Louis Region
Situations Where Travel Lanes Are Greater than or Equal to 13 Feet in Width
Where travel lanes are 13 feet or wider, motorists will generally be able to pass bicyclists within the
same lane or will only need to slightly encroach on adjacent lanes to pass bicyclists. The Shared Lane
Marking should generally be located in the right portion of the lane (per the MUTCD minimum
requirements) with exceptions for locations adjacent to parking where it is desirable to encourage riding
further from parked vehicles. A Share the Road sign (W11-1 AND W16-1P) may be used to supplement
the marking.
*Shared lane markings should generally be used on arterial and non-arterial roadways with motor
vehicle speeds 35 mph or less. Research has shown placing the marking in the center of travel lanes
wider than 13 feet will likely result in poor compliance by bicyclists who will travel in the right portion of
the lane which may undermine the effectiveness of shared lane markings in narrower lanes.


Figure 6-7                                       Figure 6-8
Shared Lane Marking—10- to 11-foot Travel Lane   Shared Lane Marking—12-foot Travel Lane




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                      6-17
Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-9
Shared Lane Marking—13- to 15-foot Travel Lane




 Appendix B contains additional cross section illustrations that show shared lane markings on a variety of
 roadway and travel lane configurations.

 Considerations for Parking Lane Line Placement
 Where there are no parking restrictions, the Shared Lane Marking should be placed in conjunction with
 a 4 inch solid or dotted white parking lane line (2 foot line with 4 foot gaps). The dotted line should be
 used through uncontrolled intersections where there is no arterial traffic control and where there are
 parking restrictions, including bus stops. The intent is to reinforce no parking restrictions and to provide
 a continuous visual cue for the bicyclist to track along. The parking lane line will be located 7 to 8 feet
 from the face of the curb or roadway edge. Generally, a narrower parking lane is desirable to encourage
 motorists to keep the vehicle as close to the edge of the roadway as possible to maximize the available
 travel lane width, which will improve the bicyclist’s level of comfort on the roadway.

 Considerations for Symbol Placement Frequency
 Shared Lane Markings should be placed at the far side of an uncontrolled intersection, at both sides of
 an arterial intersection with traffic control, and at mid-block locations where block faces are more than
 250 feet.
 When placing mid-block Shared Lane markings, they should be placed in such a manner that the first
 Shared Lane marking a bicyclist or motorist would come upon would be the Shared Lane marking in their
 direction of travel. The Shared Lane markings should be offset from each other 20 feet from the tip of
 the leading (top) chevron to tip of leading (top) chevron.



 6-18                                                                                         Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
Where there are mid-block marked crosswalks, the tip of the chevron should be placed 25 feet beyond
the far side of the marked crosswalk.

Considerations for Shared Lane Marking Placement – Non-Arterial Streets
Shared Lane Marking installation on non-arterial streets (streets without a centerline) should generally
follow the guidelines mentioned above. However, no parking lane lines should be installed. Utilizing the
marking on non-arterial streets may require that the Shared Lane Markings be offset at intersections to
prevent the symbols from overlapping. The tips of the leading (top) chevrons should be separated by at
least 10 feet.

Cost
Costs to design and install shared lane markings will vary from $15,000 to $20,000 per mile to design
and install. Costs will be at the high end if the installation requires grinding out old paint lines; they will
be at the lower end if no grinding is required.

Cycle Tracks
A cycle track is a portion of a right-of-way contiguous with the traveled way, which has been designated
by pavement markings and, if used, signs, for the exclusive use of bicyclists. Cycle tracks are typically
one-way (not always), may or may not be at a higher elevation than the adjacent roadway, and are
separated from the motor vehicle lane by a barrier or buffer such as a curb, cross-hatched pavement
marking, planting strip or parked cars.
Cycle tracks create the following operational and design challenges which should be considered:
    Motor vehicles entering the arterial roadway from a side street that is stop controlled, must cross
     through bicycle traffic to view arterial roadway traffic around the parked cars. This may cause motor
     vehicles to block the cycle track as they edge forward to see around parked vehicles.
    Drivers of motor vehicles crossing or turning from the road with cycle tracks may not be able to see
     bicyclists in the cycle tracks if they are blocked by parked vehicles.
    To make a left turn, bicyclists must merge into the travel lanes from behind a line of parked cars
     (assuming the parking is being used), creating a situation with poor sight lines between motorists
     and bicyclists. If parking is fully-utilized, this may not even be possible except at signalized
     intersections where bicyclists are given an exclusive phase to make a left turn.
    Motor vehicle passengers are not accustomed to looking for bicyclists when they open doors and exit
     on the right side of the vehicle. Consequently, several feet of shy distance (lateral space) is needed
     between the parked motor vehicles and the cycle track.
    If the facility is a two-way bicycle track way, bicyclists may ride in the opposite direction of adjacent
     motor vehicle traffic, making them vulnerable to motor vehicle drivers who only look to their left
     when turning right from a side street.
    In most cases, cycle tracks should not be placed between parked cars and the curb, unless the above
     issues can be addressed.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                        6-19
Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-10
One-Way Cycle Track




6-20                     Regional Bicycle Plan
                      Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-11
Two-Way Cycle Track




Cost
Costs for cycle tracks may vary considerably depending on whether drainage work or new signal heads
are required. The cost of a one-way cycle track on both sides of the street is approximately $670,000
per mile.

Paved Shoulders
Paved shoulders provide space on the outside of travel lanes for bicycle and pedestrian use. Paved
shoulders should be a minimum of 4 feet without the curb; 5-foot minimum with a curb. Additional
shoulder width is desirable on roadways with high motor vehicle traffic volumes, high vehicular speeds,
or a high percentage of trucks, buses, and recreational vehicles. It is important to note that at
intersections, additional symbols, signage, arrows, or short sections of bike lanes may be needed to
provide direction to bicyclists and reduce potential conflicts between bicyclists and turning cars.
Agencies can evaluate narrowing travel lanes within AASHTO Green Book guidelines to allow pavement
to be reallocated to the paved shoulder. On some roadways without curbs, paved shoulders can provide



Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                6-21
Greater St. Louis Region
important bicycle connections. Paved shoulders also improve safety for motor vehicles and prevent
pavement damage at the edge of the travel lanes.
There are two types of bikeable shoulders identified, with the difference being whether parking is
allowed on the shoulder. In rural areas, no parking is allowed and shoulders should be provided as
discussed above. In some areas within the City of St. Louis and other parts of the planning area
shoulders may function as a parking lane. In areas where there are low occupancy rates of parking, the
shoulder can function as bikeable space the majority of the time. In these instances, there is no need to
provide an additional dedicated bicycle facility, and bicyclists should proceed with caution when
overtaking parked vehicles. It should be noted that this situation should be regularly re-evaluated. If
on-street parking occupancy rates increase, shared lane markings may be added to provide
location-specific guidance to bicyclists and motorists.

Cost
The cost of paved shoulders will vary depending on whether the paved shoulder area already exists or
additional pavement is required to provide the shoulder. Costs associated with enhancing an existing
paved shoulder may include adding signage indicating a bicycle route and restriping. If the shoulder is to
be added to the roadway, the cost is approximately $2.3 million per mile, assuming earthwork, base
course, pavement, landscaping, traffic maintenance, utility adjustments, and striping.
Figure 6-12
Paved Shoulder




Appendix B contains additional cross-section illustrations of other situations in which paved shoulders
may be considered.




6-22                                                                                       Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                        Greater St. Louis Region
Shared Bus/Bike Lanes
When bus/bike-only lanes are developed, it is desirable for the lanes to be wide enough (15-foot
minimum) for buses and bicyclists to pass each other comfortably in the lane. Shared bus/bike lanes that
are part of a bikeway system should include shared lane markings.

Signed Route/Shared Roadway
Shared roadways are roadways without any designated bicycle facilities, which may or may not be
signed as a bicycle route. Many non-arterial roadways with low traffic volumes and low speeds are
already good places for bicyclists to ride. Roadway striping and markings are not necessary to make
these streets comfortable for most bicyclists to use. Many arterial roadways are also currently shared
roadways as bicyclists have the right to use all roads (unless, specifically prohibited such as on a
controlled access freeway), but appropriate facilities described above should be incorporated into
arterial roadways to make them more comfortable for bicyclists and motorists. Appropriate bicycle
signage is required when transitioning from a roadway with a designated bicycle facility to one without
any designated bicycle facility (and vice-versa).
 In addition to bicycle route signs, Share the Road signs can be used on shared roadways to remind
motorists to share the road with bicyclists. These signs can increase awareness of bicyclists, especially in
areas where bicyclists may not be expected or where many drivers are not local. A new fluorescent
yellow/green color has been approved in the MUTCD and can be used on these signs. Signs should be
used judiciously, as too many signs can cause visual clutter and lead to non-compliance. Note that the
Share the Road sign is a warning and should not be used for directional signing of a bicycle route. More
guidance on signage is provided in Appendix C.

Shared-use Paths
Shared-use Paths are an important component of a bikeway system. These facilities can provide a high-
quality bicycling experience because they are separated from motor vehicle traffic and often provide an
opportunity for extended landscaping and preservation of green corridors. Shared-use paths are usually
paved and widths range from 10 to 14 feet. Trail widths of 14 feet and even 16 feet are appropriate in
high-use urban situations or where:
    There is significant use by in-line skaters, adult tricycles, or other users that need more operating
     width.
    The path is used by larger maintenance vehicles.
    On steep grades to provide additional passing area.
    Through curves to provide more operating space.
In very rare circumstances, a reduced width of 8 feet may be used where the following conditions
prevail:
    Bicycle traffic is expected to be low, even on peak days or during peak hours.
    Pedestrian use of the facility is not expected to be more than occasional.
    Horizontal or vertical alignments provide safe and frequent passing opportunities.
    The path will not be regularly subjected to maintenance vehicle loading conditions that would cause
     pavement edge damage.



Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                        6-23
Greater St. Louis Region
Considerations for pathways parallel to roadways
Ideally, shared-use paths are provided on both sides of the roadway and bicyclists use the paths as one-
way facilities (traveling in the same direction as adjacent motor vehicle traffic). Due to right-of-way and
budget constraints, though, they are often provided only on one side of the roadway. Shared-use paths
should be designed to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists. They can function well if the
following key design features are achieved:
      A minimum 5-foot buffer between the outside travel lane and edge of pathway can be built (a
       42-inch vertical barrier is also acceptable).
      Conflicts with intersecting roadways and driveways (which may or may not be signalized) should be
       minimized.
      Paths work particularly well where they are parallel to expressways and railroad rights-of-way
       because they are limited access in nature. However, paths parallel to divided highways must be
       designed carefully, especially near crossings of high speed ramps.
      Visibility of cyclists at all crossings.
      Street trees are recommended where possible (30 to 60 feet on center).
      Crossings of free flow highway access ramps should be avoided or minimized and made sufficiently
       safe.
      Conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists are minimized by having adequate width, clear space at
       the side of the path, and sight distance at locations where pedestrians cross or enter the facility.
      Berms and/or vegetation can be used to separate paths from adjacent areas; however, it is not
       desirable to place the pathway in a narrow corridor between two barriers (such as fences, bollards,
       or a knee-wall) for long distances. This prevents path users from leaving the path in the event of an
       emergency, and creates an uncomfortable experience for the user.

Considerations for trails and greenways
Design considerations for pathways are also applicable to trails and greenways. Additional design
considerations for trails and greenways include the clear zone of trees, signs and other objects near
trails. Information on clear zone requirements from the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities is included below.
      A minimum 2-foot wide graded area with a maximum 1:6 slope should be maintained adjacent to
       both sides of the path; however, 3 feet or more is desirable to provide clearance from trees, poles,
       walls, fences, guardrails or other lateral obstructions.
      Where the path is adjacent to canals, ditches or slopes steeper than 1:3, a wider separation should
       be considered. A minimum 5-foot separation from the edge of the path pavement to the top of the
       slope is desirable. Depending on the height of embankment and condition at the bottom, a physical
       barrier, such as dense shrubbery, railing or chain link fence, may need to be provided. 12




12
  Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, 1999.

6-24                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                              Greater St. Louis Region
Side paths
Side paths are shared-use paths located adjacent to roadways. They are often located only on one side
of a road, and are intended to provide two-way bicycle and pedestrian travel. Sometimes this type of
facility is the only option in a narrow roadway corridor. Side paths can function well if the following key
design features can be achieved:
    Sufficient width is available to build a facility with at least a five-foot buffer between the outside
     travel lane and edge of pathway (a 42-inch vertical barrier is also acceptable).
    The path can be located in an area where conflicts with crossing roadways (which may or may not
     be signalized) can be minimized. Paths work particularly well where they are parallel to expressways
     and railroad rights-of-way because they have limited access by nature. However, paths parallel to
     expressways must be designed carefully—grade separation is preferred at freeway interchanges.
    Crossings of free flow ramps can be avoided, minimized, or made sufficiently safe.
Figure 6-13
Side Path




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                         6-25
Greater St. Louis Region
Transitions between Different Bicycle Facility Types
While a goal for the Plan is to provide consistent bicycle facilities among jurisdictions throughout the
region, it is often necessary to use different bicycle facilities to provide bicycle access within the same
roadway corridor due to existing roadway conditions, surrounding land uses, available right-of-way, and
other characteristics. Where this condition occurs, it is important to provide transitions between
different facilities. These transitions can be made safer and more understandable for bicyclists and
motorists with appropriate and consistent treatments such as spot directional signs, warning signs,
pavement markings, curb cuts, etc. Transitions should be provided as a part of the bicycle facility design
process.
One of the most typical transitions between bicycle facilities will be between shared travel lanes and
bicycle lanes. At locations where bike lanes terminate to become shared lanes it may be desirable to
provide a transition to a marked shared lane for a brief distance, even if it is not desirable to mark a
continuous shared lane for the remainder of the roadway. The placement of the shared lane marking
should conform to guidance provided above. It is recommended that a SHARE THE ROAD sign (W11-1
and W16-1P) be used for shared lane situations where the lane is wider than 13 feet and BIKES MAY USE
FULL LANE (R4-11) signs be used for narrower lane widths. The taper terminating the bike lane should
also conform to the MUTCD (Figure 3B-14, 2009 MUTCD).




6-26                                                                                        Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                         Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-14
Transition from Bike Lane to Shared Lane Marking




Bicycle Facility Intersection Treatments
The AASHTO Guide and the MUTCD provide a comprehensive discussion of intersection design for on
road bicycle facilities and off-road trail crossings of roadways. This section provides additional guidance
for intersection treatments to supplement the AASHTO Guide and the MUTCD. These treatments
include contrasting color pavement, bike boxes, and transitions between bike lanes and shared lanes.

Contrasting Green Color Pavement
The use of contrasting green color is used primarily to highlight areas with a potential for bicycle-vehicle
conflicts, such as intersections or merge areas where turning vehicles must cross a through bike lane.
Generally, color has been applied to sections of bike lanes that previously had been delineated by
dotted white lines. Examples of the use of color are shown in Figures 6-15 and 6-16.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                    6-27
Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-15
Green Bike Lane Through Intersection




6-28                                      Regional Bicycle Plan
                                       Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-16
Green Bike at Intersection Approach




MUTCD Status: The use of contrasting color is presently not in the MUTCD, but was given Interim
Approval status by FHWA on April 15, 2011. The use of contrasting green color has been shown through
experimentation to increase awareness of bicyclist but has thus far not been shown to reduce crash
rates in conflict areas. The Interim Approval status requires a jurisdiction to submit a written request to
FHWA for its use until such a time as it is included into the MUTCD; an experiment is not required.

Bike Boxes
A bike box is generally a right angle extension to a bike lane at the head of the intersection (see
Figure 6-17). Bike boxes require an advanced stop bar for motor vehicles and second stop bar for
bicyclists. The box allows bicyclists to get to the head of the traffic queue on a red traffic signal
indication, and then proceed first when the traffic signal changes to green. Such a movement is
beneficial to bicyclists and eliminates conflicts when, for example, there are many right-turning motor
vehicles next to a right side bike lane. Being in the box, and thus at the front of the traffic queue, also
tends to make bicyclists more visible to motorists. The bike box may also be appropriate in situations
where there is a high volume of left turn movements by bicycles. In some cases, bike boxes have been
combined with the use of contrasting colored pavement to reinforce the intended use of the box.


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                     6-29
Greater St. Louis Region
MUTCD Status: The use of bike boxes is presently not in the MUTCD. It is currently experimental device with
multiple experiments occurring around the United States. Advanced stop lines are an approved MUTCD
device. It is recommended an experiment request be submitted to FHWA prior to use of a bike box.
Figure 6-17
Bike Box




Bike Detection
Actuated traffic signals should detect bicycles. If a traffic signal does not detect a bicycle, a bicyclist will
be unable to call a green light. If a motor vehicle does not arrive to actuate the signal, the cyclist who
chooses to proceed through the intersection can do so only by treating the red light as a STOP sign. The
most common type of detector is the inductive loop. Loops are wires installed in a specific configuration


Inductive loop configurations
beneath the pavement surface that can detect the presence of a conductive metal object.


Significant research has been conducted to determine the best loop configurations to detect bicycles.
Loop layouts have been developed and tested both in bicycle lanes and shared lanes. The quadruple
loop detector illustrated in Figure 6-18 can detect a metal-frame or metal-rim bicycle at any location

6-30                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                             Greater St. Louis Region
above the loop. It may be necessary to install bicycle specific loop detectors on roadways with bicycle
lanes if the motor vehicle loop does not extend into the bicycle lane sufficiently. An example is shown in
Figure 6-18.
Figure 6-18
Bike Detection




A quadruple loop detector with a diagonal configuration as illustrated in Figure 6-18 can be used when
bicyclists share the lane with motor vehicles.
The most important aspects of detection are the sensitivity setting of the detector amplifier and the
location on the loop where the cycle crosses the loop. The use of sensitivity settings depends on local
factors like the depth of the inductive loop, size of the adjacent lanes and the percentage of truck traffic
in the adjacent lanes.
At locations with bike lanes, it is possible to minimize delay to bicyclists and provide green extension
time by installing one loop about 100 feet from the stop bar, with a second loop located at the stop bar.
The location of the upstream detector should be far enough from the intersection to allow for the
bicycle stopping distance. Another key consideration in the location of the upstream detector is to avoid
being triggered by right turn vehicles. The detector located upstream of the stop bar can have a
standard loop configuration. When a bicycle is detected at the upstream loop, appropriate extension
time is provided to hold the green to allow the bicycle to reach the loop at the stop bar. When the
detection is made at the stop bar, extension time is provided to allow the bicycle to move far enough

Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                    6-31
Greater St. Louis Region
into the intersection to safely clear before the end of the yellow interval. If the detection occurs when
the light is red, the minimum timing feature programmed in the signal controller provides the required
minimum green time to cross the intersection.
At locations without bike lanes, the bicycle detector pavement marking should be installed over the spot
that a bicycle must stand in order to activate the signal. This pavement marking can be supplemented by
a R10-22 sign to reinforce the message to the bicyclist.

Additional Considerations for Roadway Crossings and Bicycle Facilities
Roadway crossings are critical to the safety and convenience of a bicycle network. Many arterial streets
are challenging to cross, particularly during peak travel periods. In order to make it possible for bicyclists
to travel throughout the St. Louis region, there must be safe places to cross major streets. The section
below describes the types of treatments that are recommended to help bicyclists cross these major
roadways. Selection of the appropriate roadway crossing treatment depends on a number of factors:
      Roadway width/number of lanes
      Motor vehicle traffic volumes
      Motor vehicle speed
      Sight-distance
      On-street parking
      Presence of traffic signals at the intersection or at nearby intersections.
An appropriate combination of physical improvements should be recommended for each crossing
location in a bicycle network. These crossing improvements include traffic signals, geometric
improvements, signs, and markings. Specific types of recommended improvements are described below.

Signalized Intersections
Signalized intersections allow bicyclists to cross arterial streets without needing to select a gap in
moving traffic. Traffic signals make it easier to cross the street, though it is important to make
improvements to reduce conflicts between bicyclists and turning vehicles. All new signals must meet
MUTCD warrants.

Mid-block Crosswalk Signals
Mid-block crosswalk signals allow pedestrians and bicyclists to stop traffic to cross arterial streets. Most
mid-block crosswalk signals in the bicycle network will be for trail crossings. Pushbuttons should be"
hot" (respond immediately), be placed in convenient locations for bicyclists, and abide by other ADA
standards. Other passive methods for signal activation may also be considered. All new signals must
meet MUTCD warrants.

Curb Extensions
Curb extensions shorten bicyclist and pedestrian crossing distance (exposure time) and increase the
visibility of non-motorized users at roadway crossings. By narrowing the curb-to-curb width of a
roadway, curb extensions may also help reduce motor vehicle speeds and improve bicyclist and
pedestrian safety. Curb extensions are appropriate only for locations that have full time, on-street
parking.

Curb Radius Reduction
Wide curb radii allow motorists to make high-speed turning movements. Reducing the curb radii at the
corners of an intersection helps to slow turning vehicles, improves sight distance between bicyclists and
motorists, and shortens the crossing distance for bicyclists and pedestrians. The choice of a curb radius

6-32                                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
is dependent on the design vehicle and speed; and whether the street is a local residential street, a
neighborhood collector, or a major arterial. The appropriate radius for each corner of an intersection
should be designed independently based on the specific needs of the appropriate design vehicle.

Median Islands
Median islands (or crossing islands) allow bicyclists and pedestrians to cross one direction of motor
vehicle traffic at a time. Arterial roadway intersections that have low demand for left-turn movements
can be potential candidates for adding median islands. Median islands can be constructed on these
roadways by using the available center turn lane area, or by removing parking from one side of the
street and shifting the travel lanes. Median islands are likely to be a medium- or long-term improvement
on roadways where significant channelization changes are needed to provide enough space for the
median island.

Overpasses and Underpasses
Overpasses and underpasses separate bicycle and pedestrian traffic from vehicular traffic, allowing
bicyclists and pedestrians to cross freeways, busy streets and railroad tracks without potential conflicts.
They can also be used to cross ravines, canals, and streams. However, for crossing streets or railroad
tracks, they should be used with great caution as they are expensive to construct. In addition,
underpasses are prone to security concerns due to limited visibility, and the inconvenience of out-of-
direction travel is high (up to 1,000 feet or more), because of the need to provide accessible ramps, and
many bicyclists and pedestrians will not walk this extra distance and will instead cross at-grade. To be
effective, there should be a self-enforcing feature that requires the bicyclists or pedestrian to use the
bridge, such as topography, or fencing. Consequently, overpasses and underpasses should be reserved
for locations where there is a high demand for bicycle and pedestrian crossings and there are no other
more attractive options. Adequate width (for users to pass each other comfortably), lighting, and
surveillance should also be provided to increase security of these crossings.

High-visibility Pedestrian/Bicycle Crossing Warning Signs
High-visibility bicycle and pedestrian warning signs are recommended at trail crossings. These signs can
increase driver awareness of bicyclists and pedestrians, especially at mid-block locations where bicyclists
and pedestrians may not be expected. These signs will be most effective when combined with other
treatments, such as marked crosswalks, curb extensions, median islands, etc. Signs should be used
judiciously—too many signs can cause visual clutter and lead to non-compliance.

Sight-distance Improvements
Sight-distance obstructions can increase the risk of bicyclists being struck by vehicles at roadway
crossings. Locations may have on-street parking, landscaping, light poles, bus stop shelters, and other
features obstructing the line of sight between drivers and bicyclists. While these features can make a
street more attractive and serve other valuable functions, they should be placed in locations that do not
obscure drivers’ views of bicyclists.
Restricting parking within a certain distance of an intersection—typically 30 feet—helps to maintain
sight distance. Such a restriction should be put in place in all jurisdictions within the Plan area, if it is not
already. Enforcement of this law should be targeted on arterial roadways with bicycle lanes and at
intersections where signed bicycle routes cross arterial roadways. At certain locations, it may be
appropriate to restrict parking further to achieve the desired improvement in sight distance.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                         6-33
Greater St. Louis Region
Bicycle Parking Guidelines

Model Bicycle Parking Guidelines
The Association Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) Bicycle Parking Guidelines, 2nd Edition covers
virtually everything related to bicycle parking, including recommended racks, site layout, security,
aesthetics, weather protection, lighting maintenance etc. It even provides model legislation for
determining required parking for new developments.
The APBP guidelines are applicable in both urban and suburban contexts. The only significant difference
will be scale. The number of bicycle parking racks needed at a particular location may be less in
suburban and semi-rural areas. This difference in demand will immediately be captured if parking
requirements are based on density and distance (addressed in APBP Guidelines). Lower densities and
longer distances from population centers will generally result in lower demand for bicycle parking.

Bicycle and Transit Integration
Recommended guidelines for bicycle parking at transit stations.
Metro, like many transit agencies across the country, provides bicycle parking at transit stations. Bicycle
parking is attractive for several reasons, including the following:
      Promotes transit ridership
      Is relatively cheap to install
      Can be installed on an as-needed basis when demand increases (assuming there is space)
      Can accommodate several bicycles (passengers) in a relatively small footprint
      Saves the cost of constructing expensive parking garages.
Simply providing a few racks and lockers at transit stops, however, is not enough to realize the full
potential for accessing transit by bicycle. It requires a thoughtful and purposeful approach that
addresses user concerns about security and will attract the maximum number of bicyclists.
The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) has a comprehensive publication on
bicycle parking titled APBP Bicycle Parking Guidelines, 2nd Edition that should be adopted by Metro for
use at all transit stations. The manual covers virtually everything related to bicycle parking including
recommended rack types, site location and layout, security, aesthetics, weather protection, lighting,
maintenance etc .
The City of St. Louis and other cities should coordinate with Metro to incorporate into station area
planning the parking recommendations for transit stations from the APBP Bicycle Parking Guidelines.
They call for the following:
      Long-term Bicycle Parking Requirement: Spaces for 5 percent of projected morning peak period daily
       ridership. Long-term parking racks provides a high level of security and are typically in cages and
       bicycle rooms as well as lockers located in-doors and out-doors.
      Short-term Bicycle Parking Requirement: Spaces for 1.5 percent of morning peak period daily
       ridership. 13 Short-term parking usually consists of simple bicycle racks that are convenient and
       utilitarian but do not provide a high level of security.




13
     APBP Bicycle Parking Guidelines (3-3)

6-34                                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
When installing bicycle parking at stations, it is desirable to include some excess capacity to
accommodate future bicyclists. Some people may decide against riding simply because they feel that
there is insufficient available bicycle parking.
Bicycle parking needs should also be considered at heavily used bus stations using the same formula.
Separate studies may be required to determine parking needs on a station specific basis.
Not all stations will require this amount (see above) in the short run. If fewer spaces are provided, they
should be regularly monitored with more spaces provided as demand increases. In all cases, ground
space should be set aside to meet these parking requirements in the future.
The APBP Bicycle Parking Guidelines provides very good guidance for installing and managing bicycle
lockers. They also point out some of their shortfalls—they can be used for nefarious activities (storage),
they may be rented but seldom used, there often is a waiting list for those wanting to rent a locker,
renters are generally restricted to one location (unless they rent lockers at multiple stations), and they
can be a challenge to administer.
Another approach that is gaining widespread acceptance is to install high capacity bike parking facilities.
While there are different designs, they are essentially free-standing, unattended, see-through buildings
that require a key card or similar device to enter. Once inside, personal locks secure bikes to traditional
racks (see Figure 6-19). This approach has several advantages:
    Transit passes (monthly or yearly) can be used to access the buildings thus avoiding the need to
     issue individual keys.
    The transparency of the buildings allows for easy surveillance.
    Anyone with a transit pass can use any facility—they are not limited to renting a single locker at just
     one facility.
    There are generally fewer moving parts, which makes them easier to maintain.
Metro could either manage the high capacity bike parking facilities or contract with a vendor. An
additional fee could be added to the cost of the monthly/yearly/daily passes to cover some of the
operating costs. However, the amount of this fee should be balanced against the potential to deter
cyclists from riding to transit stations. For example, the City of Portland has been experiencing relatively
low bike parking utilization rates and the fee amount was determined to be a contributing factor.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                    6-35
Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 6-19
                              14
Example of a Lock-Up Facility




Recommended Criteria for Implementing Bicycle Facility Improvements at
and to Transit Stations
Metro should consider installing appropriate bicycle parking at new stations and in conjunction with
major retrofitting of existing stations. Space for future bicycle parking should be included in station
designs from the onset of a project, regardless of how many bicycle parking spots are installed.
Metro should also prioritize existing stations to determine which stations should be targeted for
enhanced bicycle parking. This should be done in conjunction with local jurisdictions so that Bikeway
System improvements providing bicycle access to the stations can be completed at the same time. To
accomplish this, Metro and the local jurisdiction will need to agree on mutually acceptable criteria for
setting priorities. A good way to start is by counting the number of bicycles currently parking at each
station (count bicycles at racks and elsewhere at the stations). However, this information should be used
with care since it may be misleading in situations where there are no facilities leading to the stations
from adjacent neighborhoods (i.e. lack of bicycles does not always mean lack of demand). Another good
approach is to develop a prioritization map for the city or region that uses a variety of factors to
determine where there will likely be demand for bicycle facilities (see City of St. Louis prioritization map
in Chapter 9).
This still leaves the need to prioritize stations that should be targeted for access and parking
improvements. Metro and local jurisdictions are encouraged to adopt the following criteria:
      Density: Higher density neighborhoods generally have higher numbers of people that live within
       bicycling distance of a transit station.
      Ridership: Stations with the highest morning peak period daily ridership have more people who will
       potentially bicycle.
      Distance from centers: Stations closest to a downtown or neighborhood commercial area are likely
       to attract more bicycling while stations further out will tend to serve a different, more automobile-
       oriented clientele.


14
     LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

6-36                                                                                          Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                           Greater St. Louis Region
    Proximity to Bicycle Facilities: Stations close to multi-use trails and future on-road bicycle facilities
     will likely experience higher levels of passengers accessing the station by bicycle.
    Other Transit Connections: The level of connectivity to other transit services (other trains, buses) at
     the station indicates the station’s ability to serve a wide-ranging area.
    Origin vs. Destination: Some stations are at the origin of a journey while others are at the
     destination or end of a journey. Stations that serve both functions are often good candidates for
     capturing bicycle trips.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                       6-37
Greater St. Louis Region
Chapter 7: Education, Enforcement, and Encouragement
Introduction
A successful bicycle network is one that incorporates the five “E’s”: Engineering, Education,
Enforcement, Encouragement, and Evaluation. Engineering and construction of the bicycle network are
critical aspects that have been addressed in other chapters in this Regional Bicycle Plan, but it is equally
important to discuss how the Plan will be complemented by programs designed to raise awareness,
encourage use, and enforce Missouri law. Evaluation of the Plan, including project implementation and
programs is important for tracking progress and insuring that Plan goals, objectives, and actions are
being met. This Plan uses performance measures to evaluate progress in implementing the Plan. The
performance measures can be found in Chapter 10.
Throughout the St. Louis region, several existing programs involve components of education,
enforcement and encouragement. A comprehensive approach is needed to coalesce various programs,
actions, and initiatives within a regional framework.
The selection of actions identified are a combination of existing programs found in the region as well as
best practices from around the United States. Many of the actions identified in Chapter 7 can be easily
accomplished simply because they are already underway by several agencies and organizations. The
success to initiate all of the actions identified is dependent on funding and staff time available. This
Chapter can serve as a useful tool for public agencies, bicycle advocates, and interested citizens.
Throughout this chapter, education, enforcement, and encouragement actions are identified and
sometimes paired with others to accomplish multiple objectives.

Education
From motorists to bus and delivery truck drivers to bicyclists and pedestrians on the sidewalk or
crosswalk, all users of a public roadway must understand how to safely travel and interact with the
various transportation modes. The regulations that govern all users, including bicyclists, can be taught
through various education programs, training classes, and marketing and awareness campaigns.

Enforcement
The Missouri Revised Statute 307.188 establishes bicycles as having the same rights and duties of a
motor vehicle. The Statute requires bicyclists to signal when making turns (MRS 307.192) and to ride as
near to the right as is safe when moving slower than the speed of flowing traffic or the posted speed,
except when making a left turn or when it is necessary to avoid a hazardous condition, or when riding on
a one-way street (MRS 307.190). Bicycles are prohibited from riding on sidewalks within a business
district (MRS 300.347). The Statute requires motorists to maintain a safe distance when passing a bicycle
and establishes penalties for violation of this provision (MRS 304.678), prohibits the obstruction of
bicycle lanes by a parked car, and limits motorists to driving within a designated bicycle lane only for the
purposes of a lawful maneuver to cross the lane or to provide for safe travel (MRS 300.330). In either
case, the motorist must yield to any bicycle in the lane. Appendix L contains the full Missouri Revised
Statute pertaining to bicycle users, as well as A Law Officer’s Guide to Bicycle Safety, which was
developed by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances. The Guide provides a
discussion on why enforcement is important, why bicycle crashes happen, how to enforce bicycle laws,
and how to investigate crashes.



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                   7-1
Reducing bicycle-related crashes hinges upon addressing the behavioral causes. Educating both
motorists and bicyclists about state and local laws should be the primary method for encouraging
appropriate behavior. Enforcement that targets certain behaviors of each road user group is also
important for establishing correct behaviors.
Motorist behaviors that should be targeted include turning left and right in front of bicyclists, passing
too close to bicyclists, parking in bicycle lanes, opening doors of parked vehicles in front of bicyclists,
rolling through stop signs or disobeying traffic signals, and harassment or assault of bicyclists.
Bicyclist behaviors that should be targeted include ignoring traffic control (particularly traffic signals),
riding the wrong way on a street, riding without lights at night, riding recklessly near pedestrians on
sidewalks, and riding without a helmet (where applicable).
Coordination among local and state law enforcement agencies, transportation agencies and bicycle
advocacy organizations to enforce laws and reduce bicycle-related crashes is critically important. Proper
reporting and monitoring of bicycle crashes and ultimately reducing the number of crashes through
better bicycle facilities and/or awareness and enforcement of state law is a top priority of this Plan.

Encouragement
The St. Louis region is fortunate to have one of the top bicycling advocacy organizations in the nation.
Founded in 1988, Trailnet has partnered with many organizations and government agencies to promote
healthy and active living and raise awareness of bicycling issues and encouraging more residents to get out
and ride a bike. Their efforts include organizing bicycle promotion and education events, and working with
communities, businesses, and institutions to develop and implement policies and programs that facilitate
and encourage bicycling and walking. In addition, the region is home to many organizations that host
bicycle events geared toward youths and young adults to college students and commuters. The popular
Gateway Cup Bicycle Race series, hosted every Labor Day weekend, the Tour de Grove in the City of
St. Louis, and the Tour of Missouri are all positive events that raise excitement for bicycling.
By providing recognition, incentives, or simply basic services to make it easier to bike to a destination,
the Regional Bicycle Plan can help bicycling be viewed as a more convenient transportation choice.
Increased bicycle use through orientation rides for incoming college freshmen, casual fun rides along the
region’s greenways and trails, and bicycle safety rodeos for school-age children are programs are
already lead in the region in this effort.
Taking advantage of the wealth of existing programs and expertise from organizations that have
successfully implemented projects around the St. Louis region and building new programs geared
toward encouragement, enforcement, and education will support the primary goal of this Plan, which is
to increase the number of bicyclists in the region while reducing the crash rate.
Goal: Improve safety for all modes of transportation through the implementation of educational and
enforcement programs.

Objective: Improve safety and reduce the number of crashes involving bicyclists by expanding,
developing and implementing education and enforcement programs through partnerships with
community organizations.
      Action 7.1: Expand and support existing and new bicycling education programs for bicyclists and
      motorists through partnerships with community organizations and appropriate law enforcement
      agencies. This action includes programs taught by certified instructors through the League of
      American Bicyclists.


7-2                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                             Greater St. Louis Region
     As the bicycle facility network is built and more people are encouraged to bicycle, new and
     expanded programs will be needed to educate bicyclists and motorists about how to coexist safely
     in the roadway environment. Advocacy organizations like Trailnet and MoBikeFed, which have done
     a great job with educating bicyclists and motorists alike, should expand these initiatives and seek to
     partner with other organizations and agencies such as the EWGCOG and local police departments.
     The Bike St. Louis Project, which is a partnership between the City of St. Louis and Great Rivers
     Greenway, includes educational materials for adults and school-age youth on safe bicycling. This
     program could be expanded or combined with other programs in the region.
     Action 7.2: Expand safe routes to school programs, including curriculum and safety education
     programs, to encourage children to walk and bicycle to school at the elementary, middle, and high
     school levels.
     Local governments, school districts, public health organizations, parent associations, and local
     walking and bicycling advocacy groups should continue to work within the Missouri Safe Routes to
     School network managed by MoDOT to build upon existing programs and partnerships, and explore
     new strategies for encouraging children to walk and bicycle to school.
     Trailnet currently manages the Safe Routes to School program, providing workshops on the topic
     and working directly with local schools to establish programs.
     Action 7.3: Work with MoDOT to develop, update, and include educational materials regarding
     motor vehicles and bicyclists.
     MoDOT provides road and route information for bicyclists using its facilities and has built a
     statewide network of partnerships to move bicycle and pedestrian issues forward. It has
     representatives from its various divisions and districts sit on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
     Committee. Through these existing partnerships, MoDOT should continue and expand its efforts to
     educate motorists and bicyclists through its Web site, print, digital, and social media and the
     publication and dissemination of materials such as state bicycle maps and road maps. Local
     jurisdictions and the general public should be made aware of the materials available through
     MoDOT so they can take advantage of the publications.
     Action 7.4: Add stronger language to the Missouri Driver Guide related to motorist-cyclist
     behavior and incorporate bicycle friendly training into driver’s education.
     While the Missouri Driver Guide provides guidance on sharing the road with bicyclists, including
     appropriate behavior when bicyclists are present on the roadway, it currently does not provide
     much guidance about the different types of bicycle facilities. The Guide also does not cite State
     Statute 304.678 (2), which defines the penalties associated with not maintaining the proper distance
     when passing a bicyclist. Local agencies should continue to work with the State of Missouri to
     update and improve the Driver Guide.
     Action 7.5: Identify agencies (champions) and not-for-profit groups that will collaborate on
     developing educational, promotional, and marketing materials for bicyclists, motorists, and
     transportation, education, and enforcement agencies.
     Bicycle education and outreach through classes and promotional materials is provided by a number
     of organizations and agencies in the State and region, including Trailnet, Missouri Bicycle and
     Pedestrian Federation, MoDOT, Great Rivers Greenway, and local jurisdictions. One of Trailnet’s
     newer initiatives is the TravelGreen program, which promotes commuter bicycling and increases


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                 7-3
      awareness of bicycling safety in the St. Louis region. To promote bicycle commuting among
      employees at area businesses, Trailnet works with businesses to address the workplace
      environment, as well as individual and social support needs to promote bicycle commuting among
      employees.
      Close coordination among organizations and agencies involved in bicycle education and promotion
      may allow each to play to their strengths, such as providing volunteers, funding, technical capacity,
      or staffing, etc., while promoting consistent and effective messaging.
      Action 7.6: Encourage local police agencies to participate in outreach activities such as bicycle
      rodeos and school assemblies.
      Because police officers are seen as authority figures and respected by children, their involvement in
      programs and activities that promote safe cycling can help foster responsible riding for a lifetime
      while reducing the likelihood of injury. Local police agencies can get involved by being present at
      community bicycling events, developing bicycle and pedestrian safety messages for morning
      announcements, and being present on the street near schools during the morning and afternoon
      when kids are coming and leaving school. One example of how police are already involved in bicycle
      education programs comes from the St. Louis County Parks Department: park rangers conduct
      bicycle safety courses for children at many county parks.
      Trailnet offers bike rodeo events that include bike safety checks, local hospitals’ bike helmet
      programs (providing helmets and helmet fittings at low costs), bike safety presentations, practice
      courses, and a safety quiz.
      Action 7.7: Increase enforcement of motorists and bicyclists behavior to reduce bicycle- and motor-
      vehicle-related crashes. Follow up by compiling and reviewing statistics on where and why
      citations are issued to assess their consistency and focus.
      Bicycle enforcement starts with good data on where and why citations are issued. It is logical for
      MoDOT to compile crash data on a regional and state basis, since the Missouri Highway Patrol
      collects this data from local agencies. One challenge it faces is making sure that officers in all
      jurisdictions know the rules of the road for bicyclists along with motorists’ and bicyclist’s behaviors
      that lead to crashes (discussed below). The State Patrol of the State Highway Safety office could
      provide this training. A Law Officer’s Guide to Bicycle Safety was developed by the National
      Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances and offers guidance on why and how to enforce
      traffic laws that apply to bicyclists. The guide can be found in Appendix L.
      Bicyclist safety is a shared responsibility between all roadway users. To be effective, enforcement
      programs should focus on awareness and education, rather than punishment. Enforcement
      priorities should be established through a collaborative process involving local police departments,
      implementing agencies, Trailnet, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, MoBikeFed, and
      potentially other stakeholders. For this Regional Bicycle Plan, it is important that all jurisdictions
      support the enforcement program and are consistent in addressing enforcement priorities.
      Another important aspect of a successful enforcement program is to recognize the nature of the
      problem. If the majority of users practice unsafe behavior, there may be a problem with the physical
      design of the roadway or bicycle facility and it would be ineffective to station an officer at the site
      and issue citations. When the vast majority of users are breaking the law, it may be necessary to
      change the physical environment first. Enforcement should take a balanced approach to improving
      behaviors of both bicyclists and motorists.


7-4                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
     Motorist behaviors that should be targeted include the following:

     •     Turning left and right in front of bicyclists
     •     Passing too close to bicyclists
     •     Parking in bicycle lanes
     •     Opening doors of parked vehicles in front of bicyclists
     •     Rolling through stop signs or disobeying traffic signals
     •     Harassment or assault of bicyclists

     Bicyclist behaviors that should be targeted include:

     •     Ignoring traffic control (particularly traffic signals)
     •     Riding the wrong way on a street
     •     Riding without lights at night
     •     Riding recklessly near pedestrians on sidewalks
     •     Riding without a helmet (where applicable)

           Progressive Ticketing from Safe Routes to Schools
           Progressive ticketing is a method for introducing ticketing through a three-staged process.
           Issuing tickets is the strongest strategy of an enforcement program, and it is usually
           reserved for changing unsafe behaviors that other strategies failed to change or that pose a
           real threat to the safety of students.
           There are three main steps of an effective progressive ticketing program:
           1. Educating
           Establish community awareness of the problem. The public needs to understand that drivers
           are speeding around schools and the consequences of this speeding for children’s safety.
           Raising awareness about the problem will change some behaviors and create public support
           for the enforcement efforts to follow.
           2. Warning
           Announce what action will be taken and why. Give the public time to change behaviors
           before ticketing starts. Fliers, signs, newspaper stories, and official warnings from officers
           can all serve as reminders.
           3. Ticketing
           Finally, after the warning time expires, hold a press conference announcing when and where
           the police operations will occur. If offenders continue their unsafe behaviors, officers issue
           tickets.

     Cities throughout the country often require offenders (both drivers and bicyclists) to take a course
     on specific laws that pertain to pedestrian and vehicular safety. It is beneficial for students to learn
     from people directly involved with enforcement process. Instructors of the course can include
     emergency trauma and medical staff, police offers, transportation advocates, and even judges. In
     some communities, the citation is removed after the offender takes the course. It would be
     advantageous to create a publicly accessible, region-wide policy that explains when offenders have
     the option or are required to enroll in the course.

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                    7-5
Objective: Educate staff in planning, design, maintenance, construction and enforcement.
      Action 7.8: Implement semiannual training programs on AASHTO guidelines and MUTCD
      standards for educating planners, engineers, maintenance staff, the public, and others
      organizations.
      The Federal Highway Administration, the University of North Carolina’s Highway Safety Research
      Center, and other organizations offer training programs on the standards and guidelines in the
      AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities and the 2009 MUTCD. In addition, the
      Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals provides workshops on Complete Streets that
      help developers look at streets holistically in order to provide the community with ideas and
      concepts that can be used to implement guidelines and standards. While there are no courses on
      national maintenance guidelines, working with maintenance crews on activities like bike lane
      sweeping schedules is important for bicycle safety.
      Action 7.9: Identify creative, low-cost ways to deliver education programs for planners and
      engineers (webinars and courses offered through APBP, PBIC, APA, Great Rivers Greenway,
      Trailnet, EWGCOG, MoDOT, etc). Programs should provide continuing education credits to
      encourage participation.
      The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professional and the Bicycle Pedestrian Information
      Center currently offer periodic webinars on various topics related to bicycle planning, engineering,
      education and enforcement. Great Rivers Greenway has been the local sponsor, and MoDOT hosts
      the webinar at its Transportation Management Center. Flyers promoting the webinars, along with
      information on continuing education credits, are widely disseminated to transportation agencies
      along with information on continuing education credits that are offered through these courses.
      Action 7.10: Identify a training program champion to administer, publicize, and seek funding for
      training. The training champion should coordinate with the EWGCOG to incorporate training into
      the long-range transportation plan.
      Great Rivers Greenway and/or Trailnet should identify a program champion to oversee
      implementing the Plan, including the coordination of training workshops. The workshops should
      cover all the priorities highlighted throughout this Plan—bicycle planning, facility design,
      maintenance, education, enforcement, safe routes to school, and Complete Streets.
      Action 7.11: Establish a communication system to promote education opportunities to
      municipalities, agency staff, crews, and law enforcement; establish funding mechanism to
      maintain the system.
      The EWGCOG, MoDOT, Trailnet, and the Great Rivers Greenway should disseminate information
      through their networks and to transportation agencies on educational opportunities offered through
      national organizations and agencies.
      Action 7.12: Improve the consistency of enforcing traffic laws for motorists and bicyclists through
      training workshops for law enforcement officers and review of current laws and behaviors by
      motorists and bicyclists that lead to bicycle crashes.
      Bicycle transportation safety laws are a part of every patrol officer’s training. However, if on-road
      bicycle use is not yet common, it is not surprising that some officers are not as familiar with laws
      that pertain to bicycles as those related to vehicles, which they no doubt refer to regularly.
      Unfortunately, what likely happens in these cases is that unsafe behavior by bicyclists and motorists

7-6                                                                                          Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                          Greater St. Louis Region
     goes uncorrected. It is the responsibility of all cities and counties in the region to emphasize the
     need for bicycle safety law enforcement. To do so, regular trainings on traffic safety laws as they
     pertain to bicyclists and motorists should be offered to law enforcement officials. As bicycling in the
     region increases, it will be important for all patrol officers to be prepared for potential conflicts and
     incorrect behavior. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has several resources that
     can be integrated into regular training materials to keep the message fresh and engaging for
     officers.
     Given the numerous jurisdictions within the St. Louis region, it is important that all law enforcement
     personnel have a common understanding of current laws pertaining to bicycling. Individual police
     departments or some other entity should offer educational training to officers about bicyclist rights
     and responsibilities as well as aggressive motor vehicle behavior toward bicyclists. For example, the
     Maryland Office of Highway Safety organizes safety training events for officers to raise awareness
     about rights, rules, and appropriate responses to incidents involving conflicts between motor
     vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. The Federal Highway Administration offers a DVD that is an
     excellent training tool. A Law Officer’s Guide to Bicycle Safety, which was developed by the National
     Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances (Appendix L), is another useful resource that
     offers guidance on why and how to enforce traffic laws that apply to bicyclists.
     Action 7.13: Offer specialized training. Examples: Offer educational sessions (including Complete
     Streets) at meetings with the American Public Works Association, Police Department, City
     Manager, and Mayor.
     Educating decision makers and other high level officials on the latest approaches to roadway design
     and accommodation of bicycles helps to establish a common level of understanding and facilitate
     discussions on crucial policy decisions affecting the Plan’s implementation. While it can be difficult
     to entice high level officials to attend 1- or 2-day workshops (see Action 7.8), they can often be
     encouraged to attend short, 1- or 2-hour presentations on facility design and other topics related to
     bicycling.
Goal: Expand the public’s view that bicycles are a viable /acceptable mode of transportation through
encouragement programs.
Education and encouragement programs help to build acceptance that bicycles belong as legitimate
users of the roadway, thus improving bicycle safety and people’s willingness to bike.
Objective: Establish ongoing regional encouragement programs.
     Action 7.14: Facilitate and/or support existing and new bicycling promotion events (including
     multi-jurisdictional events) through partnerships with community organizations, municipalities,
     and schools.
     Initiatives and programs that promote bicycling are provided by a number of organizations and
     agencies in the region, including Trailnet, Great Rivers Greenway, MoBikeFed, and many
     municipalities. Closer coordination among these organizations and agencies may achieve greater
     impact by allowing each to play to their strengths, such as volunteering, funding, technical capacity,
     and staffing.
     A number of promotion strategies have either been used by the organizations mentioned above or
     should be considered in the overall effort to encourage bicycling. These strategies include working
     with public and private employers to offer their employees incentives to bicycle to work and to


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                    7-7
      provide end-trip facilities, implementing a region-wide social marketing campaign, holding bike
      events such as expos and community rides, widely distributing regularly updated bikeway system
      maps and information, and establishing Safe Routes to School programs.
      Trailnet promotes National Bike Month with its “Drive Your Bike Challenge,” which encourages
      people to use their bicycle instead of their car for errands and short trips. Trailnet, in partnership
      with a number of other organizations and businesses, also promotes National Bike to Work Day by
      providing refueling stations where riders can stop and socialize while enjoying complimentary
      breakfast and coffee. In addition, Trailnet organizes a number of rides throughout the year. Its
      Bicycle Fun Club Rides typically occur on low-traffic, scenic rural roads, and many rides are tied to
      food and local festivals, and focus on socializing and eating after the ride. The series is now one of
      the most active bicycle event programs of its type in the nation, drawing up to 10,000 recreational
      bicyclists annually. Trailnet also partners with other organizations and agencies to organize
      community rides centered on encouraging and enabling people of all ages and abilities to get
      outside and get active. The focus is on fun, safety, appreciation of our communities, and spreading
      the love of bicycling.
      The City of Portland’s SmartTrips program offers all residents the opportunity to order information
      and resource materials and participate in hands-on programs to assist them in making the choice to
      walk, bike, ride transit, and carpool. A key component of this program is the Portland By Cycle kit,
      which includes a packet of maps and information about bicycling in the city. Portland also offers
      Women on Bikes rides and clinics, which are aimed at getting new and inexperienced riders on their
      bikes for recreation and transportation.
      The following are examples of bicycle promotion events in the region organized by Great Rivers
      Greenway, including National Bike to Work Day, Open Streets, and Bike to Busch .




7-8                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region   7-9
       Action 7.15: Encourage people to bike to community events by providing bicycle parking.
       Providing sufficient bicycle parking, and where possible, locating the parking so that it provides extra
       convenience to those arriving on bicycle can be an effective encouragement strategy. Many of the
       major regional events throughout the St. Louis region, such as Fair St. Louis, Taste of St. Louis, and
       the Earth Day Festival, to name a few, now offer bicycle parking. Many community or neighborhood
       fairs and events offer bicycle parking but lack the funds to advertize the availability of bicycle parking.
        The Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals’ Bicycle Parking Guidelines, 2nd Edition,
       offers recommendations on everything from bike parking policies to site planning and rack types,
       and includes a section on event bicycle parking. For event parking, the Guidelines provide a
       discussion of three types of parking: valet, attended (self-park), and unattended, and
       recommendations for suitable types of racks. Local agencies should integrate the Association’s
       guidelines into their policies, regulations and programs. A copy of the guidelines may be obtained
       from http://www.apbp.org.
       Action 7.16: Challenge cities to do one bike event per year. For example, a city could create a
       series of “Bicycle Sunday” events where 1 to 5 miles of roadway are closed to motorists and only
       open only to bicyclists and walkers.
       Partnerships between government agencies, not-for-profit advocacy organizations, and bicycle gear
       manufacturers and retailers could be leveraged to organize, staff, and fund such events. Examples of
       bicycle events may include an annual bike expo, possibly in conjunction with a community ride/race
       and periodic bike maintenance and repair workshops. Several cities across the country have
       established Bicycle Saturdays( or Sundays). In the City of St. Louis, a series of Open Streets festivities
       are held during the year and feature car-free street events that draw thousands of residents. A
       similar event in the City of Ferguson is very popular. In Seattle, the Department of Parks and
       Recreation and the Cascade Bicycle Club cosponsor Bicycle Sunday, during which Lake Washington
       Boulevard, a scenic roadway along the shore of Lake Washington, is closed off to motorists 3 or
       4 days per month (May through September). For more information visit
       www.seattle.gov/transportation/bikesatsun.htm. Other cities within the Plan area should initiate
       similar programs.
       Action 7.17: Revise, develop, provide, and maintain regional and local bicycle network maps.
       As new bikeways are added to the network over the next 20 years, regular updates will be needed
       to a Regional Bicycling Guide Map to reflect changes in the bicycle network and to ensure that
       bicyclists are aware of new routing options.
        Several agencies have produced maps in the region. Bike St. Louis, a project between the City of
       St. Louis and Great Rivers Greenway, has produced a paper map for the initial network and will
       revise it every 2 years as the network expands. The map includes additional educational information
       on effective cycling and network route types, including bike lanes and shared lane markings. In
       addition, Ridefinders, as part of Madison County Transit in the Metro East, produces a regional
       bicycle map for the bistate region.
       The maps are distributed in paper form and posted online as a downloadable or printable
       document. Through partnership with Trailnet, the next step is to develop a web-based bicycle route-
       finding program (see the following action). The entity or entities ultimately involved in producing
       and maintaining the Plan map will need to work closely with other organizations to distribute it. The
       map should be a coordinated effort utilizing one set of information so that it is consistent and


7-10                                                                                              Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                               Greater St. Louis Region
     becomes familiar to users as “the map” for the region. . The map should also containother
     information of interest to bicyclists should , including information on effective cycling, updates and
     information relating to bicycle network improvements, as well as local bike facility information from
     Bike/Walk plans.
     Action 7.18: Develop an interactive, Internet-based bicycle route way-finding program (may be
     possible to use or partner with other companies developing web-based wayfinding tools.)
     An online bicycle route wayfinding program should be developed as a coordinated effort between
     EWGCOG, Trailnet, and Great Rivers Greenway, with support from partner governments and
     organizations, to help bicyclists determine preferred routes to destinations throughout the region.
     Such a program would allow bicyclists to enter their origin and destination and generate an optimal
     route to follow, give their experience level, time limits, preferred type of bicycle facility (bike lane or
     trail only), or other factors. It is likely that online tools already in existence, such as Google Maps or
     Community Walk, could be used and modified as needed to create a customized wayfinding program.
     Action 7.19: Pursue League of American Bicyclists (LAB) Bicycle Friendly Community Award
     (business, city, county, and state levels).
     The League of American Bicyclist’s Bicycle Friendly Community Program provides incentives, hands-
     on assistance and award recognition for communities that actively support bicycling. A Bicycle
     Friendly Community welcomes cyclists by providing safe accommodation for cycling and
     encouraging people to bike for transportation and recreation. Over 150 communities throughout
     the nation have become Bicycle Friendly Communities, including the City of St. Louis, Columbia, MO,
     Springfield, MO, Louisville, Denver, Knoxville, and many more.
     The Bicycle Friendly Business designation has been achieved by several businesses in the region, and
     should be encouraged in the business community for not only bicycle-related businesses, but to a
     wide range of businesses through chambers of commerce.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                     7-11
Chapter 8: Supporting Policies
For the Regional Bicycle Plan to be successful, bicycling must be valued by the various government
agencies and not-for-profit organizations responsible for implementation and instituted into their
planning, policies, missions, and corporate cultures. To make changes to policies, plans, and processes
that guide the decision makers at the local, regional, and state levels, staff members must coordinate
among departments. Instituting bicycle policies and ensuring successful implementation of those
policies also requires external relationships and partnerships with other agencies and not-for-profit
organizations. Cities and regions that are successful in implementing regional bicycle networks work
together to solve problems and tackle issues that extend beyond their own boundaries.
In addition to collaboration across departments and organizations, there must be significant citizen
oversight and understanding of decisions made to implement the Plan. For example, many state DOTs
have bicycle and pedestrian advisory committees that provide bicyclists with an important voice in state
transportation decisions. Instituting bicycle policies is important not only at the state level, but also at
the local and regional levels.
Commitment of public officials in all levels of government is necessary to make this happen. The Regional
Bicycle Plan should serve as a reference point from which public officials, their agencies, and departmental
staff can initiate public policy and programs aimed at implementing and supporting the Plan.
Goal: Increase the commitment of public officials to support and/or initiate public policy for bicycling
in all levels of government—state, local, and regional.
Objective: Increase intergovernmental cooperation on bicycle policy and projects.
Creating a regional network of bicycle facilities requires cooperation and coordination among various
city and county departments and other public agencies in the region. Considering bicycle plans at all
levels of decision making encourages interdepartmental and interagency collaboration. Moreover, many
federal-aid funding opportunities require cooperation among local and regional entities in developing
and implementing regional goals. Partnering among agencies and organizations can allow funding
resources to be used more efficiently, and so numerous jurisdictions in the St. Louis region must be
plugged into the Plan’s implementation process.
Furthermore, public agencies often have their hands tied when it comes to advocating bicycling, which is
why the involvement of advocacy groups is important. The St. Louis region and the State of Missouri are
fortunate to have several well-established and active organizations advocating for bicycling. These
groups can help raise awareness of bicycle issues and affect attitudes toward bicycling among elected
officials and staff. Advocacy groups are able to notify their political representatives of goals for bicycling
and serve on boards and committees to help advance bicycling goals throughout the region.
As the various components of the Plan are implemented, partnerships and collaboration across the
region will be required from public agencies, bicycle advocacy groups, and citizens. Only by working
together can we make the St. Louis region a better place to live.
     Action 8.1: Identify and designate a regional entity to enhance, promote, and oversee
     cross-municipality and cross-county collaboration to ensure continued planning.
     Implementation of this Plan will require significant coordination between the various transportation
     agencies at the State, County and local level from around the region. An organization with a regional
     reach, like EWGCOG or Great Rivers Greenway, can play a critical role in promoting bicycle planning


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                   8-1
      and overseeing collaboration between jurisdictions. One of these organizations could also host the
      Citizen Committee (Action 8.2) or serve as the Bicycle Program Coordinator (see Chapter 9).
      Action 8.2: Designate (or create if needed) a citizen committee within the selected agency to
      support intergovernmental cooperation to implement the Plan and review plans for major projects
      as needed.
      A citizen oversight committee could provide initial review of major roadway projects to ensure that
      Plan recommendations are being considered and incorporated. Such a committee could also track
      and measure implementation of the plan, and could be responsible for issuing an annual report card
      that summarizes achievements and milestones. The Citizen Advisory Committee convened for
      planning purposes could continue as an oversight committee.
      Action 8.3: Identify key personnel and contacts in appropriate state, county, and local
      governments.
      To maintain momentum and work closely with the bicycle and pedestrian program, it is important to
      get the right people in the right positions at each level of government that has an interest in Plan
      implementation. These champions of the Plan will help the Bicycle Program Coordinator (See Action
      8.13) ensure that no opportunities for creating the Regional Bicycle Network are missed in the Plan.
      A mailing list of key contact people in the area transportation agencies should be developed and
      maintained by the Bicycle Program Coordinator, and/or Great Rivers Greenway.
      Action 8.4: Identify process or steps for appropriate transportation agencies to take to modify
      standard plans for on-street facilities. Include all appropriate agencies to ensure uniformity of
      design practices.
      Transportation agencies have standard plans and specification manuals that are used to design and
      retrofit roadways. These plans should systematically be updated to include the latest AASHTO
      guidelines, MUTCD standards, and best practices as they relate to bicycle planning and design.
      Providing training workshops once or twice a year (Action 7.8) on the latest AASHTO guidelines,
      MUTCD standards, and best practices in bicycle facility design may be one method for assisting local
      agencies in identifying necessary updates to their standard specifications. Developing a checklist
      that can be used by local agencies to audit their specifications and identify needed changes based
      on the latest standards and guidelines may be another method for encouraging uniformity in design
      practices.
      Action 8.5: Review local plans to identify planned facilities that do not connect to other
      jurisdictions; once identified, collaborate to change plans to create an interconnected system.
      Bringing all planned facilities in line with the Plan’s recommendations will ensure the development
      of a contiguous, interconnected regional bicycle network, and efficient use of resources. Review of
      local plans should be completed by local jurisdictions, particularly if these jurisdictions have a bicycle
      coordinator. Alternatively, the EWGCOG may be a natural fit for leading this effort, particularly if this
      agency ends up being the umbrella organization for the Plan. Given their involvement with working
      on bike/walk initiatives for many local jurisdictions in the region, Trailnet could also play a role in
      reviewing local plans and identifying where they do not align with the Regional Bicycle Plan.




8-2                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                             Greater St. Louis Region
     Action 8.6: Identify process to make sure bicycle facility projects and elements of projects are
     implemented as planned.
     Having a system in place that ensures Plan recommendations are being incorporated at the project
     planning and development phase is critical to implementation. Such as system may be as simple as
     making sure the project manager addresses whether or not Plan recommendations are being
     incorporated into the project or holding a project kickoff meeting at the outset of every street-
     related capital project. Representatives from all departments should be invited to comment on their
     department’s needs and preferences. If there is no Bicycle Program Coordinator, then someone
     should be designated to ensure that the proposed project implements bicycle facilities identified in
     the Regional Bicycle Plan, if applicable.
     Provided a Complete Streets policy is in place, another effective method for ensuring Plan
     implementation during street project planning and design is to develop a checklist that can be used
     by state, county, and local staff to identify which elements are needed in the street project to meet
     Complete Street objectives. Appendix L includes an example checklist
     Action 8.7: Adopt Complete Streets ordinances or similar policies at local, regional, and state levels.
     Instituting a Complete Streets policy ensures that transportation planners and engineers
     consistently design the entire roadway with all users in mind—including bicyclists, public
     transportation vehicles and riders, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities.
     The National Complete Streets Coalition 1 has identified 10 elements of a comprehensive Complete
     Streets policy:
     1. Includes a vision for how and why the community wants to complete its streets.
     2. Specifies that “all users” includes pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit passengers of all ages and
        abilities, as well as trucks, buses, and automobiles.
     3. Encourages street connectivity and aims to create a comprehensive, integrated, connected
        network for all modes.
     4. Is adoptable by all agencies to cover all roads.
     5. Applies to both new and retrofit projects, including design, planning, maintenance, and
        operations, for the entire right-of-way.
     6. Makes any exceptions specific and sets a clear procedure that requires high-level approval of
        exceptions.
     7. Directs the use of the latest and best design criteria and guidelines while recognizing the need
        for flexibility in balancing user needs.
     8. Directs that Complete Streets solutions will complement the context of the community.
     9. Establishes performance standards with measurable outcomes.
     10. Includes specific next steps for implementation of the policy.2

1
 The National Complete Streets Coalition is and advocacy organization that mobilizes a diverse base of interest
groups and supporters to lobby for the adoption of Complete Streets policies and ordinances at every level of
government.

Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                          8-3
      Action 8.8: Collaborate to preserve and develop rail corridors for multi-purpose trails.
      Rail corridors, whether in use or abandoned, may provide opportunities for rails-to-trails or rails-
      and-trails projects that provide regional connections and recreational opportunities. Such projects
      often require significant amounts of collaboration between government and the entity or entities
      that control and/or use the rail corridor. Great Rivers Greenway works with local, county, and state
      officials to monitor potential opportunities as they become available for connections to the regional
      greenway and trail system.
Objective: Establish funding sources for implementation and ongoing maintenance.
      Action 8.9: Review and revise prioritization criteria by state, regional, county, and local
      transportation agencies to ensure that good bicycle projects (those that encourage use and
      improve safety) receive priority ranking for existing funds.
      While prioritization criteria may vary across jurisdictions and agencies, the prioritization criteria
      used to develop the Regional Bicycle Plan’s recommendations should be used as a starting point.
      Chapter 9 outlines the methodology used for prioritizing the bicycle network defined in this Plan.
      Local jurisdictions should be encouraged to prioritize projects based on their existing capital
      improvement programs.
      The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) developed by the EWGCOG provides the financial
      and implementation schedule for projects receiving federal transportation funding in the St. Louis
      metropolitan area. Projects identified in the TIP are prioritized from the region’s 20-year Long Range
      Transportation Plan (Legacy 2035). TIP funding priorities are based upon six focus areas identified in
      the Legacy 2035 plan:
      •   Preservation of existing infrastructure. Maintaining the current road, bridge, transit, and
          intermodal assets in good condition.
      •   Safety and security in travel. Decreasing the risk of personal injury and property damage on, in,
          and around transportation facilities.
      •   Congestion Management. Ensuring that congestion on the region’s roadways does not reach
          levels that compromise productivity and quality of life.
      •   Access to opportunity. Addressing the complex mobility needs of persons living in low-income
          communities, the elderly, and persons with disabilities.
      •   Sustainable development. Coordinating land use, transportation, economic development,
          environmental quality, energy conservation, and community aesthetics.

      •   Efficient movement of goods. Improving the movement of freight within and through the region
          by rail, water, air, and surface transportation modes.
      While transportation projects that include bicycle facilities may be favored by these funding
      priorities, the Regional Bicycle Plan recommendations—particularly those recommendations that
      involve major roadway, intersection, or bridge improvements—should be directly incorporated into
      the TIP.


2
 National Complete Streets Coalition, www.completestreets.org/changing-policy/policy-elements/, accessed
February 15, 2011.

8-4                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
     Action 8.10: Review and revise application forms and scoring criteria used by state, regional, and
     local transportation agencies to ensure that good bicycle projects (those that encourage use and
     improve safety) receive priority ranking for existing funds.
     The EWGCOG is the entity that grants and distributes federal funding for many of the local
     transportation projects and programs in the St. Louis region. Most of the EWGCOG’s application
     forms and scoring criteria already take bikes into consideration. These forms and criteria should be
     reviewed periodically to see if good bicycle projects and programs are actually being funded, and, if
     not, that the forms and scoring criteria should be reviewed for possible changes. Furthermore,
     MoDOT, which has its own selection processes for projects proposed to the EWGCOG should modify
     those processes to insure that bicycle facilities that encourage use and improve safety receive
     priority ranking.
     Action 8.11: Install bicycle facilities as part of normal public and private projects, development,
     and programs (also known as “routine accommodation”).
     As routine road projects such as resurfacing and striping are executed, bicycle facilities should be
     incorporated according to the Plan’s recommendations, where feasible. Bicycle facilities should also
     be required or incentivized as part of the development review process when new road overlays or
     sections are required for new development.
     Action 8.12: Identify local, county, or state dedicated funding sources for implementation of on-
     street bicycle facilities. For example, a certain percentage of capital improvements could be set
     aside for bicycle facilities, or regional agencies could offer grant programs for improved bicycle
     facilities.
     Dedicated funding sources are needed to fund on-street bicycle facilities that otherwise would not
     be funded through routine accommodation or Complete Streets. They are also needed to complete
     bicycle facilities on streets that are not likely to be resurfaced in the near future but are important
     links in the bicycle network that must be addressed immediately. Often, new road projects that
     include bicycle facilities are eligible for Federal Surface Transportation Program, Enhancement, and
     Congestion, Mitigation and Air Quality funding, which is provided through the EWGCOG.
     Action 8.13: Encourage local municipalities to fund a bicycle/pedestrian program coordinator, or,
     at a minimum, dedicate responsibility for bicycle/pedestrian facility planning, implementation,
     and programming to an existing position.
     The Bicycle Program Coordinator will play a critical role in implementing the Plan in local
     jurisdictions. The coordinator would ensure that bicycle and pedestrian issues and Plan
     recommendations are considered during transportation project scoping and design. They also help
     to maintain momentum for Plan implementation at the local level by serving as a liaison among
     organizations, governmental agencies, and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (see
     Action 8.2). A coordinator could also keep a close eye on funding and partnership opportunities that
     may otherwise fall through the cracks, and play an important role in coordinating multi-agency
     applications (See Action 8.15). Lastly, a Bicycle Program Coordinator could play an important role in
     collecting information and reporting it to the entity responsible for compiling data and tracking
     performance measures.




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                   8-5
      Action 8.14: Create public/private partnerships to develop bicycle facilities such as on-road
      facilities, bicycle parking, or other support facilities.
      There may be opportunities to leverage new developments and redevelopments to provide bicycle
      facilities if such facilities are not required outright by local development regulations. For example, a
      project may include developing end-of-trip facilities such as bicycle storage and showers as part of a
      new development located within major transportation hubs in the region. Local planning agencies
      should be proactive in identifying opportunities early in the development review process so that
      cost-sharing or other funding mechanisms can be worked out without delaying the project.
      Action 8.15: Encourage multi-agency applications for funding projects.
      Emphasizing multi-jurisdictional and inter-agency cooperation in grant applications puts such
      applications in a favorable position because many granting agencies include multi-agency
      involvement as a criterion for receiving grant funds.
      Action 8.16: Encourage municipalities or a group of municipalities or units of government to enact
      impact fees for new developments or redevelopments and require the installation of bicycle
      facilities.
      Most cities assess transportation impact fees for all new development as a means to mitigate traffic
      impacts associated with that development. One idea is to require contribution to a fund that can be
      used to make bicycle infrastructure improvements on area roadways, in addition to traffic
      improvements.




8-6                                                                                            Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                            Greater St. Louis Region
Chapter 9: Implementation
Introduction
This chapter describes practical and feasible strategies for implementing the Regional Bicycle Plan over
the next 20 years. Included are early implementation opportunities and targets for installing new bicycle
facilities in the near-, medium-, and long-term.

Strategies for Bicycle Network Implementation
There are a variety of strategies for creating new bicycle facilities. Based on traffic conditions, facility
type, and availability of right-of-way, the strategy for constructing the facility will change. Three
recommended strategies are discussed in the following subsections.

New Construction and Reconstruction of Roadways
As part of routine accommodation (Chapter 8, Action 8.11), where new construction or reconstruction is
anticipated, bicycle facilities should always be considered at the inception of the project and
incorporated from project scoping through each design phase. Bicycle facilities, as found in this Plan,
would be installed as part of all public and private roadway projects. For example, Clayton Road, from
west of Clarkson Road to Baxter Road in St. Louis County, has long been a key bicycle corridor. Inclusion
of bicycle accommodations was considered in the planning as well as design and construction phases,
and minimal costs and right-of-way were needed to make the accommodations while providing an
exceptional facility. All resurfacing, repaving, and improvement projects should be evaluated to
determine whether it is possible to provide the bicycle facility recommendations included in this Plan.
Because roadways are built in phases, this method also requires that an interim facility be provided until
all segments of the roadway are completed. This applies to both roads built with public funds, such as
those identified in the EWGCOG’s Transportation Improvement Program, and new roads built with
private funds in new developments or redevelopments. Any deviation from designing and constructing
bicycle facilities on streets identified on the Regional Bicycle Network should be justified with a design
exception memorandum, with input from the appropriate bicycle advisory committee, and only if
alternative facilities can be provided.

Retrofitting Existing Roadways
In many cases, roadways are not candidates for new construction, and roadways may be retrofitted to
include bicycle facilities. Retrofitting existing roadways allocates a portion of existing roadway pavement
to bicyclists. In many cases there are shoulders or excessively wide curb lanes that allow for the easy
installation of bicycle lanes or shared lane markings. In other cases, existing roadway space can be
reallocated. For example, in the case of Skinker Boulevard, in the City of St. Louis, connections to the
Forest Park Trail system is critical to neighborhoods to the west. The wide outside lanes/parking lanes
would benefit from adding shared lane markings to accommodate the facility on-road necessary to
make key connections to access points for the park. In other cases, where shoulders exist, such as Route
100 in west St. Louis County, bicycle markings or buffered bicycle lanes can be added to the existing
shoulders to provide the facility recommended in the Plan. Since the shoulders receive minimal use from
motor vehicles, the longevity of the markings will be significant. While these examples require no
marking removals, retrofitting roadways through the removal and replacement of pavement markings,
prior to resurfacing, may also be chosen for providing bicycle facilities




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                          9-1
Greater St. Louis Region
The reallocation of existing roadway space can be achieved by reducing the number of through vehicle
lanes (road diet), narrowing the lanes (lane diet), or by reallocating parking. A road diet is a type of
roadway conversion project where travel lanes are removed from a roadway, and the space is used for
other travel modes, including bicycle facilities. Potential road diet candidates are evaluated based on
traffic volume and flow, turning volume, frequently stopping and slow-moving vehicles such as buses or
trucks, and roadway function. Given the right combination of these factors, a motorized vehicle travel
lane can be removed and a bicycle facility installed in its place. Lane diets are where lane striping is
removed and lanes are restriped to be narrower. Candidates for lane diets are based on traffic speed
and volume as well as the traffic type and roadway function.
Extensive engineering and analysis is required to make roadway design decisions. The transportation
agencies in the greater St. Louis region have varying needs for minimum lane widths. For example, 9 feet
is the most narrow travel lane the City of St. Louis will permit in certain locations, MoDOT has a
minimum lane width of 11 feet, and St. Louis County has a minimum lane width of 12 feet. Additionally,
Metro needs at least 11 feet for its bus corridors. Another component in determining whether a
roadway is a restripe candidate is the amount of pavement that will remain for the bicycle facility.
AASHTO’s Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities says 5 feet is the preferred minimum bicycle
lane width, but on high-speed roadways, a wider bicycle facility is preferred and recommended. For
example, on a roadway that has a speed of 50 miles per hour, a 5-foot bicycle lane may not be sufficient.
Examples of successful road diets in the greater St. Louis region include Holly Hills Boulevard where a
four-lane boulevard with on-street parking was reduced to a single lane in each direction, and bicycle
lanes were added, and South Grand from Arsenal Street to Utah Place, where a four-lane roadway with
on-street parking was reduced to two wide through lanes, a center lane, and on-street parking. In
addition, South Broadway from Cherokee Street to the River Des Peres, in the City of St. Louis, was
converted from a four-lane section to a three-lane section with a mix of shared lane markings or bicycle
lanes, based on curb-to-curb width during a resurfacing project.

Traffic Calming
Traffic calming may be considered as a way to improve the bicycling environment by reducing motorized
vehicles speeds. FHWA in partnership with the Institute of Transportation Engineers identifies a variety
of traffic-calming devices such as speed humps, traffic circles, chicanes, semi-diverters, curb extensions,
roundabouts, bulb-outs, center islands, and median barriers. 1 Traffic-calming devices are also used in
bicycle boulevards to reduce vehicular speeds and prioritize the bicyclist. While certain traffic-calming
devices such as curb extensions can be used on arterial and collector streets, lower-volume streets may
allow for a greater range of traffic calming applications. Traffic-calming devices such as chicanes, traffic
circles, diagonal diverters, and neck downs can be installed in combination with signage to create bicycle
boulevards, which are typically developed on local streets. Refer to Chapter 5 for information about
bicycle boulevards.

Prioritization Methodology
The Regional Bicycle Master Plan covers two counties, the City of St. Louis and over 100 municipalities
within its planning area. The prioritization methodology used for this Plan is based on establishing key
connections to destinations throughout the plan area and is intended to assist the various public
agencies involved in Plan implementation to focus their efforts on projects that provide the greatest
amount of connectivity. Using this methodology, this Plan identifies near- (2010–2017), medium-
(2018–2023), and long-term (2014–2032) priorities over the next 20 years. Priority is placed on

1
    Traffic Calming Library. Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org/traffic/), accessed March 31, 2011.

9-2                                                                                                   Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                                   Greater St. Louis Region
proposed facilities that offer a higher degree of connectivity to multiple destinations. A number of
destinations were identified and ranked in terms of importance by the TAC and Citizen Advisory
Committee. The following priorities are destinations of regional importance and high travel demand:
•    Transit Stations and Transfer Centers
     o     MetroLink Stations
     o     Multi-modal centers (for example, a joint bus/train depot)
     o     Bus Transfer Centers (for example, Gravois in South City, North Broadway, planned bus transfer
           centers such as North County)
     o     MetroBus Express Route park and ride locations (such as, Eureka Park and Ride and Reavis
           Barracks at I-55)
•    Employment Centers
     o     Employment densities weighted to reflect the number of employees (for example, a center with
           1,000 employees receives greater weight than a center with 200 employees). EWGCOG’s
           Transportation Area Zones (TAZs) were used to identify center employment density throughout
           the plan area to attain employment numbers for key employment centers.
•    Town Centers
     o     Designated town centers

•    Colleges and Universities
     o     Nonprofit, public, and for-profit schools recognized by the State of Missouri and included in the
           St. Louis County Geographic Information System (GIS) (school must have at least 300 enrolled
           students)
•    Regional Parks
     o     Federal Park Lands
     o     State Parks
     o     County or City Parks greater than 33 acres
•    On-street facilities that connect to Great Rivers Greenway’s Trails (includes the Katy Trail)
     o     Existing and future trails planned by Great Rivers Greenway
Two approaches were used to create the prioritization maps in GIS. For features such as parks and
employment centers that are polygonal in nature and cover large areas, a 3-mile buffer was applied to
indicate the geographic area most likely to capture bicycling trips. A buffer was not applied to
greenways and trails, but on-street facilities that connect to these features were given more weight. For
point features and features for which the geographic extent varies widely or is not well-defined such as
transit stops, town centers, and colleges/universities, a kernel-density tool was used, which calculates
the density of these features within self-defined neighborhoods around the features. Figure 9-1 includes
transit infrastructure such as major transit centers and clusters of stops. The map also indicates park-
and-ride locations that include west St. Louis County and St. Charles County. Figure 9-2 shows significant
employment centers, Figure 9-3 shows town centers, Figure9-4 shows colleges and universities, and
Figure 9-5 shows regional parks throughout the plan area. The weighted sum of each destination was


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                     9-3
Greater St. Louis Region
calculated and combined to create a composite prioritization map upon which the bicycle network was
overlaid. By overlaying the bicycle network map over the combined prioritization map, areas of
numerous destinations become apparent over areas that have fewer destinations.




9-4                                                                                   Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                   Greater St. Louis Region
 Areas with overlapping priorities have the highest potential demand. For example, a town center that
has a major transit stop, a university, and a park will score the highest. Conversely, a small- to medium-
sized employment center with no transit or university will score lower. Note that there will be
opportunity-oriented routes that may present themselves during implementation. The opportunities
may allow the shift of a route segment from a long-term improvement to a near-term improvement.
   Figure 9-1: Transit Infrastructure (Kernel Density)   Figure 9-2: Employment Centers (1-mile buffer)




    Figure 9-3: Town Centers (Kernel Density)            Figure 9-4: Colleges and Universities




    Figure 9-5: Parks and Recreation




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                     9-5
Greater St. Louis Region
Below is the composite prioritization map divided into three sections: the City of St. Louis, St. Louis
County, and St. Charles County. The maps provide a tool for transportation agencies to identify priority
areas along the bicycle network. The maps are designed to create near-, medium-, and long-term
priorities within each jurisdiction, and should not be compared. For example, a near-term priority in
St. Louis should not be compared to a near-term priority in St. Charles County.
Figure 9-6: City of St Louis Facility Prioritization




  Prioritization: Low                                                      High




9-6                                                                                        Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                        Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 9-7: St. Louis County Facility Prioritization




  Prioritization: Low                                  High




Regional Bicycle Plan                                         9-7
Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 9-8: St. Charles County Facility Prioritization




      Prioritization: Low                                High




9-8                                                                Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                Greater St. Louis Region
Below are near-, medium-, and long-term implementation goals for the Plan. For example, it is
recommended that 34 miles of bicycle lanes be installed between 2012 and 2017. The prioritization
maps (above) should be used as a guide to determine where the bicycle lanes should be installed if there
is a choice of where to focus funds. When there in an opportunity to install a bicycle facility as part of
another project, it should be constructed regardless of whether it is rated as a low, medium, or high

Near-Term Implementation (2012–2017)
From 2012 through 2017, the Plan recommends the installation of 200 miles of new on-street bicycle
facilities throughout the region. New bicycle facilities include: 34 miles of bicycle lanes, 8 miles of bicycle
tracks/buffered bicycle lanes, 80 miles of shared lane markings, and 34 miles that will need further study.
Some of the numbers will vary slightly, depending on the number and location of repaving projects that
provide opportunities for implementation of bicycle facilities. Several off-road trail projects by Great
Rivers Greenway and its partners will be completed as part of the River Ring. Partnerships with local
organizations for bicycle safety education, enforcement, encouragement, and parking will continue or
will be developed in the near-term. New wayfinding signs will be installed in conjunction with new
facilities and can be installed areawide under a more aggressive sign removal and bicycle facility
network definition wayfinding program. Online mapping software and mobile phone applications will
continue to become more common and many citizens will have access to maps from their mobile
devices as well the ability to report conditions, needed repairs, or interesting sites and amenities along
the Regional Bicycle Network.

Medium-Term Implementation (2018–2023)
From 2018 to 2023, the Plan anticipates the installation of 138 miles of new on-street bicycle facilities
throughout the region. New bicycle facilities include: 14 miles of bicycle lanes, 7 miles of bicycle
tracks/buffered bicycle lanes, 25 miles of shared lane markings, and 35 miles that will need further study.
As part of medium-term implementation, resources should be directed toward the more complicated
intersection improvements not addressed in near-term implementation. Additional off-road trails will be
constructed by Great Rivers Greenway to further expand the connectivity throughout the greater
St. Louis region.

Long-Term Implementation (2024–2032)
In the closing stage that completes the 20-year implementation timeframe for the Plan, the intersection
improvements and the remaining on-street bicycle facilities should be completed. From 2024 through
2032, the Plan anticipates the installation of 532 miles of new on-street bicycle facilities. New bicycle
facilities include: 71miles of bicycle lanes, 30 miles of bicycle tracks/buffered bicycle lanes, 71 miles of
shared lane markings, and 80 miles that will need further study. Major construction projects to provide
bicycle and pedestrian bridges and bicycle facilities in constrained roadway corridors are likely to be
designed during this long-term timeframe. Additionally, the Plan should be revisited and updated every
5 years to acknowledge progress that has been made and to reflect new priorities.




Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                       9-9
Greater St. Louis Region
Regional Bicycle Facility Network—Prioritized Projects
       1. Early Implementation Opportunities (2011/2012)


Early Implementation Opportunities
                                                     Recommended
   Entity          Street        Project Limits         Facility            Client Action
City of St.    Broadway       Cherokee to South     Add bike lanes       Implemented with
Louis                         City Limit            through a road       chip-and-seal
                                                    diet from 4 to       project; Project
                                                    3 lanes from         refinements are
                                                    Cherokee to          planned to
                                                    Bates; South of      improved safety and
                                                    Bates Road diet      traffic flow.
                                                    to provide 3-lane
                                                    section and
                                                    shared lane
                                                    markings

Ladue          Clayton Road   E/O Lindbergh to      Road diet from       To be left at 4 lanes
                              McKnight              4 to 3 lanes, and
                                                    add Bike Lanes

Frontenac      Clayton Road   Bopp Road to E/O      Revise existing      Approved for
                              Lindbergh             3-lane               Spring 2011
                                                    configuration to     resurfacing
                                                    2 lanes with
                                                    bike/pedestrian
                                                    shoulders

Town and       Clayton Road   Route 141 to Bopp     Revise existing      Leave at 3-lane
Country                                             3-lane               section; planned
                                                    configuration to     shared use path will
                                                    2 lanes with         be added on the
                                                    shoulders            north side of
                                                                         Clayton Road

St. Louis      Clayton Road   Weineker to Skinker   Marked shared        To be studied
County                                              lane/bike lane       further by STLCO

City of St.    Skinker        Clayton to Page       Shared lane
Louis          Boulevard                            markings to
                                                    Delmar and bike
                                                    lanes to Page

St. Louis      Delmar         Price to Delcrest     shared lanes at I-   To be studied
County         Boulevard                            170                  further by STLCO


9-10                                                                              Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                               Greater St. Louis Region
MoDOT              Woodson         Natural Bridge to St.   Lane diet and       Approved and in
                   Road            Charles Rock Road       add bike lanes      construction

St. Luis           Howdershell     Charbonair to Brown     Wide outside        To be studied for
County             Road                                    lane and shared     separate facility
                                                           lane markings

St. Louis          Florissant      Regina to I-270         Shared lane         To be studied for
County             Road                                    markings            separated facility



St. Louis          Bellefontaine   Parker to I-270         Shared lane         Wide outside lanes
County             Road                                    markings and
                                                           wide outside
                                                           lanes

St. Louis          New Ballwin     Kiefer Creek to         Climbing lanes      Wide outside lanes
County             Road            Manchester              and bike lanes      to big bend only

St. Louis          Big Bend        I-44 to Kirkwood        Wide outside        To be studied for
County             Road            Road                    lanes               separated facility

St. Louis          Big Bend        Meramec Station to      Bike lanes          To be studied for
County                             E/O Dougherty Ferry                         separated facility
St. Louis          St. Louis       Grand Glaize Becket     Bike lane           Wide outside lane
County                             Memorial

St. Louis          Marshall        I-270 to Grand Glaze    Shared lane         Not approved for
County             Road                                    marking             network

St. Louis          Sulphur         Big Bend to             Climbing            Not approved for
County             Springs Road    Manchester              lane/shared lane    network
                                                           marking

MoDOT              Manchester      Mason to I-270          Buffered bike
                   Road                                    lane

St. Louis          Mason Road      Manchester to           Share the Road      Shared use path by
County                             Clayton                 signage             others
St. Louis          Weidman         Clayton road to         Climbing lane       To be studied
County             Road            Manchester              and share the       further by STLCO
                                                           road signing

MoDOT              Ballas Road     Conway to               Paved shoulder
                                   Manchester              from Manchester
                                                           to Clayton and
                                                           wide outside lane
                                                           from Clayton to
                                                           Conway


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                               9-11
Greater St. Louis Region
St. Charles   Duello Road      I-64 to Creek             Bike lane            Wide outside lane
County

St. Charles   Parr Road        Route A to Route P        Paved shoulder       Not in plan
County

St. Charles   Guthrie Road     Route P to Bushy          Paved shoulder       Not in plan
County                         Brook

MoDOT         Veterans         Rte. 370 to Cave          Paved shoulder       Completed
              Memorial         Springs and Zumbehl
              Boulevard        to Route 94

MoDOT         Ladue Road       Woods Mill to Ballas      Paved shoulder       Paved shoulder and
                                                         and shared lane      shared the road
                                                         marking at           constructed
                                                         interchange

St. Louis     Warson Road      Olive to Page             Wide outside         To be studied
County                                                   lane                 further by STLCO

St. Charles   Motherhead       Westwood to               Bike lane            Wide outside lane
County        Road             Route N

MoDOT         Rte. N           St. Charles St. to        Paved shoulder       Approved
                               Meadowlake

St. Charles   Birdie Hills     Knaust to Mexico          Bike Lane            Wide outside lane
County

MoDOT         Rte. DD          Caledonis to              Paved Shoulder       Completed
                               Sommers

St. Charles   Sommers          Rte. DD to Rte. N         Bike Lane            Wide outside lane
County        Road

St. Louis     Clayton road     Strecker to Clarkson      Bike Lane            Wide outside lane
County                                                                        completed

St. Louis     Woodson          Olive to Liberty          Olive to Pennell     To be studied
County        Road                                       bike lane, Pennell   further by STLCO
                                                         to Liberty wide
                                                         outside lane

St. Louis     Lucas and        New Halls Ferry to        Paved shoulder       To be studied
County        Hunt Road        Hord                                           further by STLCO


Who Will Implement the Plan?
Numerous agencies and organizations will have a role to play in implementing the Plan. Historically,
there has not been any one agency or organization that has spearheaded regionwide bicycle planning. It
will be important to establish a home for the Plan where implementation can be coordinated and


9-12                                                                                    Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                     Greater St. Louis Region
tracked. Below is a discussion of the various agencies and organizations that have been involved in
developing the Plan, their missions, and their potential role in implementing the Plan.

Great Rivers Greenway District (the District)
The District has traditionally been a regional greenway and trails agency, funding (among other things)
both the planning and development of the regional trails system. The District has worked with the Cities
of St. Louis, Clayton, Maplewood, and Kirkwood to develop on-street bicycle facilities as part of the Bike
St. Louis program. While the District could use some of its limited resources to fund on-street bicycle
improvements, it does not own or otherwise have any direct authority over any of the roadways. In
other words, the District is not in a strong position to require other transportation agencies to
implement on-street bicycle facilities. The District does have limited internal capacity to fund staff,
expertise to initiate education/promotion programs, and possibly assist in funding some on-street
projects. The District can be a partner in (but not fully responsible for) building the entire bicycle
network across the greater St. Louis region.
Potential Plan implementation roles for the District may include continuing its coordination of the
Citizen Advisory Committee, monitoring progress on Plan implementation, funding
education/promotion programs, funding bicycle planning and design workshops for public agencies,
coordinating annual bicycle counts, and updating the Plan every 5 years in partnership with EWGCOG.

East West Gateway Council of Governments
EWGCOG’s mission is to bring jurisdictions together to solve regional issues such as transportation and
to distribute federal transportation funding. EWGCOG engages in long-range planning and distributes
federal transportation funding throughout the region. EWGCOG developed the Legacy 2030 plan and
the St. Louis Regional Bicycling and Walking Plan for the seven-county region (including the City of
St. Louis and St. Louis and St. Charles counties) in 2005, which outlined regional bicycle and walking
policy. It also sponsors and staffs the St. Louis Region Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
EWGCOG oversees project selection for regional Surface Transportation Program funds and works with
MoDOT to distribute and monitor funds.
Potential Plan implementation roles for EWGCOG include serving as the umbrella agency for developing
an annual work program for Plan implementation in conjunction with partner agencies, for example,
MoDOT, Great Rivers Greenway, St. Louis and St. Charles counties, and the City of St. Louis. Through the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, EWGCOG could also provide ongoing oversight for Plan
implementation. Lastly, EWGCOG can require that all road projects they review and fund are complete
streets, which include bicycle facilities recommended in the Plan.

Missouri Department of Transportation, St. Louis (City and County) and St. Charles County
MoDOT, the City of St. Louis Board of Public Service and Street Departments, and the Department of
Highways staff of St. Louis and St. Charles counties are focused on building, operating, and maintaining
the separate parts of the roadway network that they oversee. Each of these agencies has staff and crews
to manage and maintain their infrastructure and access to local, state, and federal transportation
dollars. MoDOT also sponsors and staffs the statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
Potential Plan implementation roles for these agencies include adopting the Plan and Complete/Livable
Streets policies, and implementing the annual Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as established
through partnership with EWGCOG and other agencies. MoDOT may also offer FHWA-sponsored
courses in planning, designing, and engineering bicycle facilities both internally and to staff at other
transportation agencies.


Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                  9-13
Greater St. Louis Region
Trailnet
Trailnet is primarily an advocacy group focused on the promotion of active living. With a focus on the
entire greater St. Louis region, Trailnet has a history of working with local municipalities to develop
bicycle/walk plans and obtaining grants to develop and administer education and encouragement
programs such as Safe Routes to School—the development of the Healthy, Active, and Vibrant
Community Toolkit.
Trailnet, would also be a logical choice for monitoring and tracking Plan implementation given that it
represents all types of bicyclists, has staff resources, and could provide an advocate or user view of the
plan provided that there is appropriate funding for this task. As part of its monitoring efforts, Trailnet
could collaborate with GRG to issue an annual report card that summarizes all the work products
completed for the year, along with a big-picture review of where things are in relation to the 20-year
time-frame for completing various elements of the Plan. The list of work products completed should be
compared to the work program submitted the year before as a way to build institutional accountability.
Trailnet could also provide educational programs throughout the region (for example, Safe Routes to
School or coordinating the certification of Effective Cycling Instructors).




9-14                                                                                        Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                         Greater St. Louis Region
Figure 9-7
Participating Organizations




Other Agencies Critical to the Success of the Plan

Police & Fire
The police and fire departments of the various jurisdictions within the region have a significant role to
play in supporting Plan implementation, particularly the safety education and enforcement components
of the Plan. Police departments will also be involved with crash reporting and adding appropriate detail
to determine the cause of crashes involving bicycles. Fire department representatives should be part of
policy discussions having to do with roadway design and accommodation.

Bi-State Development Agency (Metro)
The Bi-State Development Agency (BSDA), which became known as Metro in 2003, is probably best
known for the transit system it operates; however, it is an agency with a much broader mission and
reach. The BSDA was created to serve the region on both sides of the Mississippi—to have a regional
outlook not tied to any one municipality, county, or state. As such, it was given broad powers that
enable it to cross local, county, and state boundaries to enhance the development of the region. A key
component of creating a comprehensive, well-connected multimodal transportation system is to
consider the connection among various modes of transportation, including bicycling and mass-transit.
Metro’s role in implementing the Regional Bicycle Plan is ensuring that bicycles are well-accommodated
on its public transportation vehicles and at its facilities. As existing Metro facilities become better
connected to the bicycle network, and as the mass transit network continues to expand, Metro will be
responsible for continuing to provide and enhance bicycle accessibility to its transit system in Missouri
and Illinois. Providing sufficient, secure bicycle parking and storage at its MetroLink stations and
Metrobus transfer facilities, and continuing to accommodate bicycles on its public transportation
vehicles are two critical pieces of developing a multimodal transportation system. Metro’s Transit-



Regional Bicycle Plan                                                                                 9-15
Greater St. Louis Region
Oriented Development initiatives around its MetroLink stations will also contribute to development
patterns that are supportive of bicycling and transit.

Health Departments and Hospital Systems
Health departments and the extensive hospital system in the City of St. Louis as well as St. Louis and
St. Charles counties provide leadership and services to prevent illness and injury, promote healthy
lifestyles, and protect against health hazards. The City of St. Louis Department of Health, St. Charles
County Department of Health and the Environment, and St. Louis County Department of Health can use
their existing networks and public outreach channels to encourage people to bike as a component of a
healthy lifestyle and to educate the public about safe bicycling. Additionally, health departments and
hospitals can be great partners for organizing and funding community bicycling events and health fairs
featuring bicycling information. Health departments and hospitals may even have access to, or be
partners on grant applications for, funding that could be used to produce educational materials, print
bicycle maps, or fund other efforts identified in this Plan.

Staffing
This Plan envisions an accelerated pace for bicycle facility implementation throughout the City of
St. Louis and St. Louis and St. Charles counties. It will be necessary to provide appropriate staffing in
order to administer programs, design projects, monitor progress, conduct public outreach, and perform
other tasks related to implementation of the Plan. Expertise and commitment will be required at each
implementing agency in order to implement this Plan within the timeframe identified. One full-time staff
member is recommended at the District, one full-time staff member at Trailnet, and a part-time staff
member each at EWGCOG, MoDOT, and St. Louis and St. Charles Counties. This staffing level is
consistent with staffing levels in other cities that have successfully implemented their bicycle facility
plans in a relatively short time frame.




9-16                                                                                      Regional Bicycle Plan
                                                                                       Greater St. Louis Region
Chapter 10: Performance Measures and Accountability
Introduction
Performance measures are helpful in evaluating the progress being made toward achieving the goals
and objectives of the Regional Bicycle Plan. The Plan establishes two types of performance measures:

•    Long-term Performance Measures: The performance measures used to monitor and evaluate
     progress towards the Plan’s mission to increase the number of people using bicycles while reducing
     the number of crashes involving bicycles.
•    Strategic Performance Measures: The performance measures related to the Plan goals and
     objectives, and their associated actions, are strategic—they will be used to evaluate the amount of
     progress that has been made toward fulfilling specific actions.

Whether long-term or strategic, the best performance measures are those that are quantifiable, and
yet, do not require onerous data collection.

     Action 10.1: Establish long-term performance measures.

     Long-term performance measures will help to evaluate the degree to which the Plan is resulting in
     increased bicycle use and improved bicycle safety.

Long-term Performance Measure 1: The number of bicyclists observed at counting locations
throughout the planning area.

This measure supports the Plan Mission and should be based upon biannual bicycle counts at specific
locations. Fifty to sixty count locations should be identified and divided into two groups, one focusing on
major urban centers, and the other on the region’s major trails typically used by commuters, arterial
roadways with existing or planned bicycle lanes or shared lane markings that serve as key links in the
Regional Bicycle Network, and other preferred routes that have been observed. Bridges and major
intersections with existing or planned bicycle facilities are ideal count locations to track over time. For
the past 3 years, Great Rivers Greenway has conducted off-road trail counts, which could be expanded
to include on-road counts. Bicycle counts could be organized by EWGCOG’s Bicycle and Pedestrian
Program, the Bicycle Program Coordinator (if such a position is established), or one of the not-for-profit
organizations, such as Trailnet, that could be involved in monitoring the Plan.

Counts should be taken around the same time of year, on the same day of the week, at the same time of
day (for example between 6:00 and 9:00 a.m.), and under similar weather conditions. Counts should be
conducted on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, and should avoid Mondays and Fridays, when
counts are often skewed by holidays and long weekends. Conducting counts in conjunction with other
events, such as Bike to Work Day, is a strategy that can attract support in terms of count volunteers and
sponsors offering giveaways to commuters and other riders, but should not be a substitute for
conducting other counts as described above. Taking bicycle counts during such promotional events has
the added benefit of capturing those people who may only be occasional riders or those who would be
more likely to ride if there were a larger number of bicyclists using on-street facilities, and therefore
represents potential ridership. Counts may also include observations of important bicycling behavior,
such as wearing helmets, riding on the correct side of the street, obeying traffic controls, and using
lights at night.


Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                               10-1
Additional bicycle counts may be obtained by requiring bicyclists to be included in current manual traffic
counts conducted by local transportation agencies. This data would not represent all bicycle activity
throughout the region, but would begin to provide some basic data on the use of bicycles facilities.
Additionally, system-wide, volunteer-based bicycle counts should be supplemented by more frequent
counts using automatic counting devices, such as pneumatic tubes, video, and infrared detection, on
specific routes where more data may be needed. More information on automatic counters is provided in
Appendix F. The National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project provides more guidance on
dates, times, locations, and methods for consistent counts.

In addition to regular counts, before- and after-counts should be taken to measure increases in bicycle
use related to a specific bicycle lane, shared-lane marking, or trail project. After-counts should be taken
at the same time of year and day as the before-count was taken. Automatic counting devices such as
pneumatic tubes are typically used for before- and after-counts.

Long-term Performance Measure 2: The number of police-reported on-road bicycle crashes compared
to the total number of bicyclists observed during the on-road bicycle counts collected every other
year.

This measure supports the Plan Mission and compares bicycle crash trends (as reported by police
records) in terms of bicycle exposure—that is, the number of people using the on-street network.
Exposure would be approximated using the bicycle counts collected every other year. Note that police-
reported crashes do not represent all bicycle collisions; many go unreported, particularly less severe
crashes and those that occur in parking lots.

As mentioned above, this Plan’s mission is to increase the number of bicyclists using the bicycle network
while at the same time reducing the annual crash rate. The crash rate is a ratio of reported crashes to
bicycle trips. The chart below shows an indexed bicycle crash rate (trend line) juxtaposed with bicycle
traffic over four bridges in Portland, Oregon. As the chart shows, Portland has experienced a decreasing
bicycle crash rate while bicycle trips have increased steeply over a 17-year period.




                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
10-2                                                                                      Greater St. Louis Region
A process should be set up for jurisdictions within the Plan area to report their crash data. The process
may involve identifying the types of information that is collected and establishing a central repository to
which crash data is sent and compiled, such as the EWGCOG’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Program, or, if
established, the Bicycle Program Coordinator. In addition, providing guidance to law enforcement
officers on how to properly report crashes involving bicycles may help to improve the data that is
collected. A Law Officer’s Guide to Bicycle Safety, which was developed by the National Committee on
Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances, provides useful information on understanding and reporting
bicycle crashes.

     Action 10.2: Establish strategic performance measures.

     Strategic performance measures calculate the amount of progress that has been made toward
     specific performance targets. The majority of strategic performance measures for this Plan are
     quantifiable metrics that are tracked over specified periods of time during Plan implementation,
     while other measures may be discrete actions that will only occur once during Plan implementation,
     such as integrating bicycle-friendly training into driver’s education.

     Action 10.3: Establish baseline data and data collection methods that can be used to measure
     success of the Plan.

     Establishing baseline data and monitoring established performance measures will require data to be
     collected on a periodic basis—either annually or every other year. Data collection will entail
     coordinating with transportation agencies, police departments, and other relevant organizations
     that generate data related to the performance measures. Data collection may be the responsibility
     of one agency or organization, or several. Logical organizations to take on the responsibility of data



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                10-3
       collection include Great Rivers Greenway, Trailnet, and the EWGCOG, given their regional reach and
       staffing resources.
       Action 10.4: Establish mechanisms for ongoing community input and accountability.
       Implementation of the Plan will be a dynamic process with priorities changing over time as factors
       such as community input and funding availability are taken into consideration. Community input
       should continue to be sought after the Plan is finalized and throughout its implementation phase.
       The ideas and experiences of bicyclists and other roadway users, such as their experience with
       installed facilities, spot maintenance issues, behaviors of roadway users, and other improvements
       they would like to see implemented, should be used to shape the Plan continually. Community input
       may be elicited using several mechanisms, including setting up a telephone hotline or Web-based
       comment forum, having open houses annually or every other year in different neighborhoods within
       the Plan area, and offering online tools such as interactive mapping tools and surveys.

Performance Measures
The Plan development process, which involved extensive outreach to the public, stakeholders and
decision-makers, resulted in the identification of 58 specific actions that were deemed as critical for
successful implementation of the Plan, and the policies and programs that support the Plan. In
accordance with Actions 10.1 and 10.2, performance measures have been established for 52 of these
(four Actions did not lend themselves well to a quantifiable measure) in addition to the two long-term
performance measures corresponding to the Plan’s mission. Because of the large number of Actions
and the realities of the staffing and resources necessary to collect data for each corresponding
performance measure, the measures have been grouped into high, medium, and low priority, which are
described in the tables below.




                                                                                           Regional Bicycle Plan
10-4                                                                                    Greater St. Louis Region
Long-term Performance Measures
The following long-term performance measures are high priority measures, but have been grouped separately from the other high priority
measures they will be used to monitor and evaluate progress towards the Plan’s mission of increasing bicycle use and reducing the number of
crashes involving bicycles.

Table 10-1: Long-term Performance Measures

Performance              Corresponding Action   Baseline                  Performance Target        Data             Entity             Entity
Measure                  and Page Number        Measurement                                         Collection       Collecting         Receiving
                                                                                                    Frequency        Data*              Data*

Number of bicyclists     Plan Mission           To be counted in 2012     Double the number of      Every 2 years,   Great Rivers       EWGCOG,
observed at counting                            on-street                 riders by 2018,           plus automatic   Greenway,          MoDOT
locations                (Page __)                                        quadruple by 2031         counters (       Trailnet,
                                                                                                    ongoing)         Volunteers
                                                                                                                     (EWGCOG,
                                                                                                                     MoDOT)

Crash Rate: the number   Plan Mission           To be calculated by end   Reduce the bicycle        Every year       MoDOT, City        EWGCOG,
of police-reported on-                          of 2012                   crash rate by half by                      of St. . Louis,    MoDOT
road bicycle crashes     (Page __)                                        2018, and by half again   (focus on        St. Louis and
compared to the total                                                     by 2031                   reported         and St. Charles
number of bicyclists                                                                                crashes, and     Counties; local
observed during the                                                                                 research         jurisdictions
on-road bicycle counts                                                                              hospital         (EWGCOG,
collected every other                                                                               reports and      MoDOT)
year                                                                                                other data –
                                                                                                    hospital and
                                                                                                    other data if
                                                                                                    there is time
                                                                                                    and funding is
                                                                                                    available)




                                                                                                                                       Regional Bicycle Plan
10-5                                                                                                                                Greater St. Louis Region
Strategic Performance Measures – High Priority (Top 10)
The following are high priority performance measures that should be established in the short-term. Many of the actions corresponding to these
performance measures should be implemented immediately, while others are longer term measures that are critical for evaluating the progress
of Plan implementation.

Table 10-2: High Priority Performance Measures
Performance Measure              Correspon Baseline                 Performance            Data Collection        Entity Collecting          Entity
                                 ding Action Measurement            Target                 Frequency              Data*                      Receiving
                                 and Page                                                                                                    Data*
                                 Number

Establish a citizen committee (or   Action 8.2    N/A               In 2011                N/A—One-time           EWGCOG                     EWGCOG
build upon EWGCOG’s Bicycle         (Page __)                                              effort
and Pedestrian Advisory
Committee) to support
intergovernmental cooperation
and review plan implementation

Fund a regional Bicycle/            Action 8.13   N/A               By 2012                N/A—One-time           Great Rivers               Great Rivers
Pedestrian Program Coordinator                                                             effort                 Greenway                   Greenway
                                    (Page __)



Miles of Bicycle Facility Network   Action 5.3    Number of miles   Provide 450 miles of   Annually               MoDOT, St. Louis and       EWGCOG,
completed                                         of existing       recommended                                   St. Charles Counties;      Great Rivers
                                    (Page __)     facilities in     facilities by 2021,                           local jurisdictions        Greenway
                                                  Network           900 miles by 2031

Number of identified spot high      Actions       Bicycle crash     Address top 5 high-    Update list annually   MoDOT, St. Louis and       EWGCOG,
crash rate locations rectified      5.11and       report for the    crash locations each                          St. Charles Counties;      Great Rivers
                                    5.12          last 6 years      year                                          local jurisdictions        Greenway

                                    (Page __)

Number of state, county, and        Action 6.1    To be counted     100 percent by 2016    Annually               MoDOT, St. Louis and       EWGCOG,
local agencies that have formally                 by end of 2012    (likely to happen                             St. Charles Counties;      Great Rivers
adopted 2009 MUTCD and latest                                       when MoDOT

                                                                                                                                             Regional Bicycle Plan
10-6                                                                                                                                      Greater St. Louis Region
Performance Measure                   Correspon     Baseline            Performance           Data Collection        Entity Collecting       Entity
                                      ding Action   Measurement         Target                Frequency              Data*                   Receiving
                                      and Page                                                                                               Data*
                                      Number

AASHTO bicycle guidelines             (Page __)                         officially adopts                            local jurisdictions     Greenway
                                                                        2009 MUTCD
                                                                        guidelines—many
                                                                        agencies follow
                                                                        MUTCD informally)

Number of miles of installed          Action 6.3    To be surveyed      450 miles of          Every 3 years          MoDOT, St. Louis and    EWGCOG,
bicycle facilities (all area plans)                 by end of 2014      recommended           (in conjunction with   St. Charles Counties;   Great Rivers
complying with AASHTO                 (Page __)                         facilities by 2021,   Action 5.15)           local jurisdictions     Greenway
guidelines and 2009 MUTCD                                               900 miles by 2031
standards

Number of special focus trainings     Action 7.13   N/A                 4 per year            Annually               EWGCOG/ MoDOT           Trailnet
(audience will vary per topic)                                                                                       and Great Rivers
                                      (Page __)                                                                      Greenway

Achieve Bicycle-Friendly              Action 7.19   City of St. Louis   Average of one        Annually               All jurisdictions       Trailnet
Community recognition at city,                                          community
county, and state levels              (Page __)                         recognized per year

Percentage of jurisdictions that      Action 8.7    City of Ferguson,   4 jurisdictions per   Annually               EWGCOG                  EWGCOG
have adopted Complete Streets                       City of St. Louis   year
ordinances or similar policies        (Page __)

Miles of on-street bicycle            Action 8.11   N/A                 5 miles per year      Annually               EWGCOG                  EWGCOG
facilities installed as a result of                                     working to 30 miles
routine accommodation                 (Page __)                         per year by 2016




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                                    10-7
Strategic Performance Measures – Medium Priority (16 Measures)
The following performance measures are of medium priority and should be implemented to the extent allowed by available staff, time and
budget.

Table 10-3: Medium Priority Performance Measures
Performance Measure             Correspon Baseline                  Performance              Data              Entity Collecting         Entity Receiving
                                ding Action Measureme               Target                   Collection        Data                      Data
                                            nt                                               Frequency

Number of state, county, and local     Action 5.1   To be           Average of 10 per        Annually          MoDOT, St. Louis and      EWGCOG, Great
jurisdictions that have integrated                  counted by      year; 100 percent                          and St. Charles           Rivers Greenway
appropriate Plan elements into         (Page __)    end of 2012      percent by 2021                           Counties; local
their own planning documents                                                                                   jurisdictions integrate
                                                                                                               appropriate elements
                                                                                                               into their own plans


Number of identified and resolved      Action 5.6   Barriers        Average of 10 barriers   Every 2 years     MoDOT, St. Louis and      EWGCOG, Great
barriers affecting accessibility and                identified in   per year resolved                          St. Charles Counties;     Rivers Greenway
safety on roadways                     (Page __)    Plan11          (focus on roadways                         local jurisdictions
                                                                    with safety issues)


Number of new or rehabilitated         Action 5.7   Survey          100 percent of bridge    As projects are   MoDOT, St. Louis and      EWGCOG, Great
bridge projects that have included                  bridges in      rehabilitation and       completed         St. Charles Counties;     Rivers Greenway
appropriate bicycle facilities—        (Page __)    network by      new bridge projects                        local jurisdictions
focus on bridges that are part of                   end of 2012     have appropriate
network                                                             bicycle facilities


Number of state, county, and local     Action 5.9   To be           Average of 10 per        Annually          MoDOT, St. Louis and      EWGCOG, Great
agencies that have adopted bicycle                  counted by      year; 100 percent by                       St. Charles Counties;     Rivers Greenway
facility maintenance programs          (Page __)    end of 2012     2021                                       local jurisdictions




                                                                                                                                              Regional Bicycle Plan
10-8                                                                                                                                       Greater St. Louis Region
Performance Measure                   Correspon     Baseline          Performance               Data            Entity Collecting       Entity Receiving
                                      ding Action   Measureme         Target                    Collection      Data                    Data
                                                    nt                                          Frequency

Number of miles of on-street          Action 5.15   To be             Install 450 miles of      Every 3 years   MoDOT, St. Louis and    EWGCOG, Great
facilities with uniform signage                     surveyed by       recommended                               St. Charles Counties;   Rivers Greenway
                                      (Page __)     end of 2014       facilities by 2021,                       local jurisdictions
                                                                      900 miles by 2031


Number of public facilities and       Action 5.16   Existing public   Install bicycle parking   Ongoing         St. Louis and           EWGCOG, Great
developments providing end-of-                      facilities and    facilities at 50                          St. Charles Counties;   Rivers Greenway
trip bicycle facilities               (Page __)     developments      locations each year                       local jurisdictions;
                                                    with bicycle                                                Metro and Trailnet
                                                    parking
                                                    identified by
                                                    end of 2014


Number of training workshops          Action 7.1    To be             5 to 10 workshops         Annually        Trailnet or Missouri    League of American
offered by certified League Cycling                 counted in        per year, initially;                      Bicycle & Pedestrian    Bicyclists, Missouri
Instructors                           (Page __)     2011              work up to 15                             Federation              Bicycle and
                                                                                                                                        Pedestrian
                                                                                                                                        Federation, Trailnet


Number of schools with active Safe    Action 7.2    Baseline          5 new schools per         Annually        MoDOT, Trailnet         EWGCOG, Great
Routes to School programs                           assessment        year                                                              Rivers Greenway
                                      (Page __)     in 2012


Number of educational materials       Action 7.5    Existing          Develop and               Annually        Great Rivers            Trailnet, Great Rivers
(brochures) developed among                         materials         distribute one new                        Greenway, Trailnet      Greenway
partner organizations                 (Page __)     cataloged         (or revised)                              or EWGCOG, MoDOT
                                                                      educational material
                                                                      per year




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                                   10-9
Performance Measure                   Correspon     Baseline          Performance            Data         Entity Collecting       Entity Receiving
                                      ding Action   Measureme         Target                 Collection   Data                    Data
                                                    nt                                       Frequency

Number of bike rodeos, school         Action 7.6    To be             One per year           Annually     Great Rivers            Trailnet
assemblies, or other bicycle safety                 counted in                                            Greenway or Trailnet
outreach activities where local       (Page __)     2013                                                  with support from
police officers play an active role                                                                       EWGCOG

Number of training workshops on       Actions 7.8   N/A               At least 1 workshop    Annually     EWGCOG, MoDOT,          EWGCOG
AASHTO and MUTCD guidelines                                           per year                            Great Rivers
and Complete Streets—for local        and 7.9                                                             Greenway, Trailnet
planners, engineers, and decision     (Page __)
makers

Create and revise bikeway system      Action 7.17   Provide initial   Revise maps every      Annually     St. Louis and           Great Rivers
maps (online and printed)                           route map in      2 years                             St. Charles Counties;   Greenway
                                      (Page __)     2012 of                                               local jurisdictions;
                                                    network and       (update printed                     Great Rivers
                                                    network           maps every 2 to 3                   Greenway
                                                    routes with       years; update online
                                                    facilities        maps yearly)

Regional entity identified to         Action 8.1    N/A               In 2011                N/A          EWGCOG and Great        EWGCOG and Great
enhance and promote                                                                                       Rivers Greenway         Rivers Greenway
collaborative planning                (Page __)


Identify key personnel and            Action 8.3    N/A               100 percent of         Annually     All agencies            EWGCOG and Great
contacts at each governmental                                         agencies by 2013                                            Rivers Greenway
agency                                (Page __)




                                                                                                                                       Regional Bicycle Plan
10-10                                                                                                                               Greater St. Louis Region
Performance Measure                      Correspon     Baseline     Performance              Data            Entity Collecting       Entity Receiving
                                         ding Action   Measureme    Target                   Collection      Data                    Data
                                                       nt                                    Frequency

Identify (and implement)                 Action 8.12   N/A          By 2014                  N/A—One-time    EWGCOG, Great           EWGCOG, Great
regionally based, dedicated                                                                  event           Rivers Greenway         Rivers Greenway
funding sources for on-street            (Page __)
bicycle facilities


Jurisdictions that include bicycle       Action 8.16   To be        Five new jurisdictions   Every 3 years   St. Louis and           EWGCOG
facilities as part of their impact fee                 counted by   per year                                 St. Charles Counties;
                                         (Page __)     2016                                                  local jurisdictions




Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                               10-11
Strategic Performance Measures – Low Priority (26 Measures)
The following performance measures are of lower priority. It is likely that some of these measures will not be implemented for several years, but
they should be considered if staffing levels and budgets grow.

Table 10-4: Lower Priority Performance Measures

Performance Measure                    Corresponding Baseline         Performance         Data             Entity Collecting         Entity Receiving
(and corresponding Action              Action        Measurement      Target              Collection       Data                      Data
Numbers)                                                                                  Frequency

Number of transportation agencies      Action 5.2   Survey entities   100 percent by      Annually—        MoDOT, St. Louis and      Great Rivers
that have further prioritized RBP                                     2021                begin in 2014    St. Charles Counties;     Greenway
priority recommendations               (Page __)                                                           local jurisdictions
(jurisdictions internally prioritize
facilities from the Plan)

Number of state, county, and local     Action 5.4   Barriers          Average of 10 per   Biennially       MoDOT, St. Louis and      Great Rivers
planning documents that mention                     identified in     year; 100 percent                    St. Charles Counties;     Greenway
identified barriers to bicycling       (Page __)    Plan              by 2021                              local jurisdictions
                                                                                                           include barriers from
                                                                                                           Plan in their
                                                                                                           documents

Number of state, county, and local     Action 5.5   Barriers          Average of 10 per   Biennially       MoDOT, St. Louis and      Great Rivers
planning documents that address                     identified in     year; 100 percent                    St. Charles Counties;     Greenway
how barriers will be addressed and     (Page __)    Plan              by 2021                              local jurisdictions
prioritized                                                                                                include barriers from
                                                                                                           Plan in their
                                                                                                           documents




                                                                                                                                      Regional Bicycle Plan
10-12                                                                                                                              Greater St. Louis Region
Performance Measure                       Corresponding Baseline             Performance            Data               Entity Collecting       Entity Receiving
(and corresponding Action                 Action        Measurement          Target                 Collection         Data                    Data
Numbers)                                                                                            Frequency

Number of miles of existing on            Action 5.8    77 miles of          17 percent of          17 percent of      MoDOT, St. Louis and    EWGCOG, Great
street bicycle facilities and number                    existing             system audited         system audited     St. Charles Counties;   Rivers Greenway
of intersections safety audited           (Page __)     facilities; revise   annually (entire                          local jurisdictions
                                                                                                    annually (entire
                                                        annually as new      system audited         system audited
                                                        facilities are       every 6 years)         every 6 years)
                                                        completed

Percentage of spot maintenance            Action 5.10   Collected on an      100 percent within     Ongoing            MoDOT, St. Louis and    EWGCOG, Great
problems identified and rectified                       ongoing basis        2 years of being                          St. Charles Counties;   Rivers Greenway
                                          (Page __)     from bicyclists      identified                                local jurisdictions
                                                        (need way to
                                                        report
                                                        problems)

Web site for bicycle events,              Action 5.13   N/A                  By end of 2012         Ongoing            Great Rivers            Great Rivers
educational materials, public                                                                                          Greenway or Trailnet    Greenway or Trailnet
meetings, etc., developed and             (Page __)
maintained

Adopt additional guidance for             Action 6.2    Additional           5 jurisdictions per    Biannually         MoDOT, St, Louis and    EWGCOG, Great
installing bicycle facilities (as found                 guidance in          year                                      St. Charles Counties;   Rivers Greenway
in this Plan) that builds on AASHTO       (Page __)     Chapter 5 and                                                  local jurisdictions
guidelines and 2009 MUTCD                               Appendix ___
Standards



Number of special facilities              Action 6.4    Identify             Complete one to        Ongoing            MoDOT, St. Louis and    Great Rivers
deployed to address unique issues                       locations on an      three unique                              St. Charles Counties;   Greenway
outside standard design guidance          (Page __)     ongoing basis        facilities in region                      local jurisdictions
                                                                             per year, as needed
                                                                             (effectiveness must
                                                                             be measured and
                                                                             reported)



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                                      10-13
Performance Measure                    Corresponding Baseline           Performance          Data            Entity Collecting        Entity Receiving
(and corresponding Action              Action        Measurement        Target               Collection      Data                     Data
Numbers)                                                                                     Frequency

Number of new League Cycling           Action 7.1    To be counted      1 per year           Annually        Great Rivers             MoBikeFed, Trailnet
Instructors certified and actively                   in 2012                                                 Greenway, Trailnet
involved in providing trainings        (Page __)                                                             or Missouri Bicycle
                                                                                                             and Pedestrian
                                                                                                             Federation

Number of motor vehicle-bicycle        Action 7.3    Existing           Revise or create     Every 3 years   MoDOT, Department        EWGCOG, Great
educational materials revised or                     materials          new materials                        of Revenue               Rivers Greenway
developed through information          (Page __)                        once every 3 years
kiosks, licensing offices, etc.

Questions about sharing the road       Action 7.3    Existing           Review and revise    Every 3 years   Missouri Department      MoDOT, EWGCOG
with bicyclists integrated into                                         as needed every                      of Revenue, Missouri
written driver’s exam                  (Page __)                        3 years                              Bicycle and
                                                                                                             Pedestrian
                                                                                                             Federation

Bicycle friendly training integrated   Action 7.4    N/A                Develop materials    N/A             Missouri Department      EWGCOG, Great
into driver’s education and mass                                        and training of                      of Revenue               Rivers Greenway
transit operator training programs     (Page __)                        Metro drivers by
                                                                        2013 and
                                                                        incorporate by
                                                                        2015

Number of law enforcement              Action 7.7    To be counted      5 law enforcement    Annually        Police Departments       MoDOT, EWGCOG,
agencies that issue citations issued                 by 2015 (may       agencies per year                                             Great Rivers
for unsafe bicyclist or motorist       (Page __)     require training   issue and Track                                               Greenway
behavior, as defined in the Plan                     to get this        citations per
                                                     going)             recommendation
                                                                        in this Plan

Identify a Training Program            Action 7.10   N/A                By 2012              N/A             EWGCOG, Trailnet,        Great Rivers
Coordinator                                                                                                  Great Rivers             Greenway
                                       (Page __)                                                             Greenway, MoDOT



                                                                                                                                       Regional Bicycle Plan
10-14                                                                                                                               Greater St. Louis Region
Performance Measure                    Corresponding Baseline            Performance          Data             Entity Collecting      Entity Receiving
(and corresponding Action              Action        Measurement         Target               Collection       Data                   Data
Numbers)                                                                                      Frequency

Establish an e-mail list or listserv   Action 7.11    N/A                By 2012              N/A              Great Rivers           Great Rivers
that can be used to disseminate                                                                                Greenway or Trailnet   Greenway
information about training             (Page __)                                                               with support from
opportunities                                                                                                  EWGCOG

Number of training workshops           Action 7.12    N/A                1 workshop every     Annually         Police Association,    EWGCOG
offered to enforcement officers                                          2 years                               MoDOT
                                       (Page __)

Number of bicycle promotion            Actions 7.14   To be identified   15 per year          Track annually   Local Jurisdictions,   Great Rivers
events (rides, rodeos, events that                    and listed in                                            Great Rivers           Greenway or Trailnet
gets folks out on bikes)               and 7.16       2014                                                     Greenway or Trailnet
                                       (Page __)

Number of community events that        Action 7.15    N/A                4 new events per     Track annually   Local Jurisdictions,   Great Rivers
provide bicycle parking                                                  year                                  Trailnet               Greenway or Trailnet
                                       (Page __)

Develop Internet-based wayfinding      Action 7.18    N/A                By 2014, revise as   N/A              Great Rivers           Great Rivers
tool                                                                     needed                                Greenway, Trailnet,    Greenway
                                       (Page __)                                                               or EWGCOG

Establish a model process for          Action 8.4     N/A                Create by 2014       N/A              EWGCOG develop         EWGCOG
modifying street standards (goal is                                                                            model for other
to create better streets for           (Page __)                                                               entities to adopt
bicycling)

Review local plans to identify         Action 8.5     Complete           Completed            N/A              EWGCOG                 EWGCOG
planned facilities that do not                        inventory by       inventory
connect to other jurisdictions; once   (Page __)      2015
identified, collaborate to change
plans to create an interconnected
system and implementation
success



Regional Bicycle Plan
Greater St. Louis Region                                                                                                                             10-15
Performance Measure                             Corresponding Baseline                         Performance                Data                    Entity Collecting             Entity Receiving
(and corresponding Action                       Action        Measurement                      Target                     Collection              Data                          Data
Numbers)                                                                                                                  Frequency

Establish a process or method, such             Action 8.6             N/A                     In 2014                    In 2014,                EWGCOG                        EWGCOG
as a standardized checklist, for                                                                                          confirm process
evaluating bicycle facility elements            (Page __)                                                                 has been
                                                                                                                          established

EWGCOG revises their application                Action 8.10            N/A                     N/A                        One-time event          EWGCOG as granting            EWGCOG
forms/scoring criteria                                                                                                                            agency
                                                (Page __)



Create public/private partnerships              Action 8.14            N/A                     Average of 2 per           N/A                     Various (EWGCOG)              EWGCOG
to develop bicycle facilities such as                                                          year
bike lanes                                      (Page __)

Number of multi-agency funding                  Action 8.15            N/A                     10 per year                Annually                EWGCOG                        EWGCOG
applications
                                                (Page __)

Number of performance measures                  Action 10.3            N/A                     100 percent by             Annually                Great Rivers                  Great Rivers
(listed here) for which baseline data                                                          2016                                               Greenway or Trailnet          Greenway or Trailnet
and collection method has been                  (Page __)                                                                                         with support from             with support from
established                                                                                                                                       EWGCOG                        EWGCOG

Number of opportunities for public              Action 10.4            N/A                     Ongoing through            Annually                EWGCOG                        EWGCOG
to provide input on the Plan                                                                   reporting Web site
                                                (Page __)                                      (Action 5.13),
                                                                                               e-mail or
                                                                                               telephone hotline;
                                                                                               1 public event per
                                                                                               year
* The organizations or agencies identified in the “Entity Collecting Data” and “Entity Receiving Data” column are recommendations only. Recommendations are based on the organizations’ missions,
existing roles, staffing resources, and volunteer resources. Recommendations do not include assigning duties to a Bicycle Program Coordinator because it is not certain that such a position will be
created, as the Plan recommends, or which entity would host the position. Establishing a Bicycle Program Coordinator position would be advantageous given the number of agencies and
organizations involved in Plan implementation, and the number of performance measures that have been identified. A major responsibility of the Bicycle Program Coordinator would be to monitor
Plan implementation using the performance measures below. This person would actively engage relevant agencies to obtain the data necessary to track the progress of implementation.



                                                                                                                                                                                 Regional Bicycle Plan
10-16                                                                                                                                                                         Greater St. Louis Region

								
To top