1. UF BIKE LANE ANALYSIS DECEMBER 2, 2013 KELSIE HOECHERL, MARIA MISSENA, & SOPHIA SAPORTAS

2. Policy 1.1.7: The University shall cooperate and coordinate with the City of Gainesville, Alachua County, FDOT and the MTPO to identify and implement means to improve bicycle facilities within the context area. IMPROVING BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION ON THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA CAMPUS

3. Background Information UF Campus 2,000-acre campus 900 buildings Approximately 5,000 cyclists daily Research on pedestrian and bicycle behavior indicates: willing to walk 1,000 to 1,500 feet between destinations (5-10 minutes) will bicycle up to three miles Constraints to development Crashes by mode

4. Cycling Deterrents Security during allocated times Not enough information about regulations while riding a bike Limited connectivity Risks of crashing into pedestrians and cars Policy 2.2.11: Corrective measures shall be identified and implemented in areas that experience bicycle and pedestrian conflicts.

5. GOAL: Use GIS to analyze the existing bike lanes on the University of Florida’s campus and target the areas where cyclists do not feel comfortable sharing lanes with pedestrians or automobile traffic.

6. SHARING LANES UF cyclists surveyed said that 250 ft was the maximum distance that they felt comfortable riding next to a vehicle or pedestrian.

7. Proposal Plan 1.Target paths that cyclist feel uncomfortable riding along with pedestrians and vehicles 2.Identify heavy flow areas of cyclist on campus 3.Analyze intersections of these paths with heavy flow areas as gaps for bike lanes 4.Target zones that need improvement so that cyclist feel more comfortable; therefore, people get encouraged to ride their bikes to campus more often.

8. Data Defined Shared Use Paths: Paths shared between bikes and pedestrians as well as paths shared between bikes and vehicles. Bike Racks Inventory: Availability of racks on campus. Analyzed by usage UF Buildings: Buildings will be used as a reference for the areas that need improvement

9. Methodology Select by Attributes (Length) Share-Used- Paths greater than 250ft Select by Attributes (Description) Heavy Usage Bike Racks Clip intersection of buffers Select by Attributes Select by location (intersection of two layers) Highly affected Buildings/Zones Gaps greater than 250 ft UF Buildings layer Buffer by 200 ft Buffer by 150 ft

10. STEPS OF ANALYSIS

11. SELECTION: SHAREDUSE PATHS LAYER By attributes, we extracted paths with a length greater than 250ft.

12. SELECTION: BIKE RACK INVENTORY 2010 By attributes, we selected hose bike racks that were deemed “heavy usage” from NOTES06

13. BUFFERING THE SELECTED “HEAVY USAGE” BIKE RACKS WERE BUFFERED BY 150FT. AS DETERMINED BY RESEARCH ON WALKING DISTANCES.

14. BUFFERING SHARED USE PATH SELECTION BY 200 FT.

15. CLIPPING CREATED CLIP THAT SHOWS INTERSECTION BETWEEN THE SHARED USE PATH BUFFER AND THE BIKE RACK

16. SELECTION SELECTED BY LOCATION THE BUILDINGS THAT INTERCEPT THE CLIP

17. RESULTS

18. Conclusion There is a definite need to develop a safer way for cyclists to navigate around UF’s campus without pedestrian or traffic interference in heavy usage areas targeted: J. Wayne Reitz Union Chemical Engineering Building Chemistry Laboratory Residence Halls: o Hume Hall o Kenne Flint Hall o Angela Mallory Hall o Mary Reid Hall o Nancy Yulee Hall o Beaty Commons

19. SOURCES HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/MP0515/TRANSPO%2 0D&A.PDF HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/MP0515/TRANSPO%2 0D&A.PDF HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/MP0515/TRANSPORT ATION%20ELEMENT%202005.PDF HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/MP0515/TRANSPORT ATION%20ELEMENT%202005.PDF HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/ HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/ HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/MP0515/2_URBAN%2 0DESIGN%20D&A.PDF HTTP://WWW.FACILITIES.UFL.EDU/P LANNING/CMP/MP0515/2_URBAN%2 0DESIGN%20D&A.PDF All screenshots are original work of the authors created through either ArcGIS or GoogleEarth and therefore their property. Only to be used with explicit consent.

20. QUESTIONS?