Physical Environment Air & Water Quality Housing & Transit Search Policies & Programs

hints
Display All Policies & Programs

Bike & pedestrian master plans

Health Factors: Diet & Exercise Housing & Transit
Decision Makers: Community Development Professionals Local Government State Government
Evidence Rating: Some Evidence
Population Reach: 100% of WI's population
Impact on Disparities: No impact on disparities likely

Is this program or policy in use in your community? Tell us about it.

Description

Bicycle and pedestrian master plans establish a framework to increase walking and biking trails, and improve connectivity of non-auto paths and trails in a particular locality. Plans typically include policies and planning methods to encourage alternative modes of travel, land use plans, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure development, and address traffic and safety concerns. Bicycle and pedestrian master plans can be developed and implemented by city, county, regional, and state governments and are often implemented in stages over time (PBIC-Sample plans). 

Expected Beneficial Outcomes

Increased physical activity
Increased active transportation
Reduced injuries
Reduced vehicle miles traveled
Reduced emissions

Evidence of Effectiveness

There is some evidence that implementing bicycle and pedestrian master plans increases physical activity and active transportation by enhancing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and connectivity (Lowry 2017, Henao 2015, Pedroso 2016). Many components of bicycle and pedestrian master plans have been shown to increase physical activity such as street connectivity improvements, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, and safety and traffic control projects (Cerin 2017, Brownson 2006, Yang 2010), especially when combined with land use design projects (CG-Physical activity). However, additional evidence is needed to confirm effects of master plans.

Infrastructure improvements that support cycling, combined with informational outreach activities such as master plans, have been shown to increase cycling by modest amounts (Yang 2010). Bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure improvements such as bicycle lanes, bicycle racks, bicycle paths, walking trails, and shared bicycle programs can also promote physical activity for both confident and non-confident cyclists (Lowry 2017), especially as part of a bicycle and pedestrian master plan (Parker 2011, Pucher 2010). Bicycle and pedestrian master plans have also been associated with lower rates of injury among cyclists and pedestrians (Pedroso 2016, Kerr 2013).

Replacing automotive trips with biking and walking can reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and emissions at relatively low cost (Salon 2012, RAND-Sorenson 2008).

Costs for infrastructure improvements vary significantly by locale and type of improvement; for example, the median cost for a bicycle rack is $540, and a pedestrian wooden bridge overpass is $122,610. The median cost per mile is $89,470 for a bicycle lane, and $261,000 for a paved multi-use trail (UNC-Bushell 2013). A Netherlands-based cost-benefit analysis suggests that investments in improved bicycle infrastructure and facilities yields positive net benefits in the long-term (Fishman 2015).

Case studies of cities across the US suggest that master plans can guide investment decisions and help identify local funding sources to support implementation (Riggs 2016). Bicycle and pedestrian master plans that prioritize infrastructure improvements in neighborhoods with the least connectivity (Lowry 2017, Riggs 2016), and engage community members in the planning process may help reduce disparities in access to and use of improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure (Lubitow 2016, Lee 2017a, Noyes 2014). 

Implementation

United States

As of 2014, twenty-six states have either a bicycle and pedestrian master plan or a standalone plan for each (CDC-Step it up status 2017). Bicycle and pedestrian master plans have also been adopted by numerous cities, counties, and regions, including: Brownsville, Texas (RWJF-Brownsville 2014); Anne Arundel County, Maryland; Austin, Texas; Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Denver, Colorado; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Eugene, Oregon; Los Angeles; San Diego; New York City; and Seattle (PBIC-Sample plans). As of 2015, 31 states and Washington DC have pedestrian master plans or Complete Street policies, and at the local and regional level, 851 such policies have been adopted (CDC-Step it up status 2017). In some states, for example Utah, bicycle and pedestrian master plans include options for infrastructure improvements in urban, frontier, and rural counties where trails, lanes, or shoulders are needed for active transportation and recreation (CDC DNPAO-State highlights 2016).

Walk Friendly Communities is a national recognition program that supports and encourages efforts to enhance safer walking environments, especially those using master plans. Walk Friendly Communities have been recognized at various levels in 29 states. Seattle and New York City have been recognized at the platinum level; 15 communities have been recognized as gold, 18 as silver, 31 as bronze, and 22 as honorable mentions (WFC-State map).

Wisconsin

Wisconsin has a statewide Pedestrian Policy Plan and Madison/Dane County has a bicycling plan (PBIC-Sample plans).

Walk Friendly Communities has recognized three communities in Wisconsin. LaCrosse and Shorewood are recognized at the bronze level and Cedarburg as an honorable mention (WFC-State map).

Implementation Resources

ALBD - Active Living by Design (ALBD). Increasing physical activity and healthy eating through community design. Accessed on November 9, 2017
APHA-Transportation toolkit - American Public Health Association (APHA). APHA online toolkit: Transportation and health toolkit. Accessed on November 9, 2017
ChangeLab-Healthy plans 2012 - ChangeLab Solutions, Raimi & Associates. How to create and implement healthy general plans: A toolkit for building healthy, vibrant communities. 2012. Accessed on November 9, 2017
ChangeLab-Roadmap - ChangeLab Solutions. A roadmap for healthier general plans step by step: Who does what? Accessed on November 9, 2017
NCPPA - National Coalition for Promoting Physical Activity (NCPPA). About resources & reports. Accessed on November 9, 2017
PBIC-Sample plans - Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC). Sample plans. Accessed on November 9, 2017
PFP-Physical activity - Partnership for Prevention (PFP). Places for physical activity: Facilitating development of a community trail and promoting its use to increase physical activity among youth and adults: An action guide. Washington, DC: Partnership for Prevention (PFP); 2008. Accessed on November 9, 2017
Southworth 2005* - Southworth M. Designing the walkable city. Journal of Urban Planning and Development. 2005:131(4):246-57. Accessed on November 9, 2017
UNC-Bushell 2013 - Bushell MA, Poole BW, Zegeer CV, Rodriguez DA. Costs for pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure improvements: A resource for researchers, engineers, planners, and the general public. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Highway Safety Research Center; 2013. Accessed on November 10, 2017
US DOT-PBIC Sidewalks - US Department of Transportation (US DOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC). Sidewalks and walkways. Accessed on November 10, 2017
Utah-BPMP guide - Burbidge S. Utah bicycle & pedestrian master plan (BPMP) design guide. Project Task Force: Utah Department of Health, Utah Department of Transportation, Wasatch Front Regional Council, Utah Highway Safety Office, Utah Transit Authority, Salt Lake Valley Health Department. Accessed on November 16, 2017

Citations - Description

PBIC-Sample plans - Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC). Sample plans. Accessed on November 9, 2017

Citations - Evidence

Brownson 2006* - Brownson RC, Haire-Joshu D, Luke DA. Shaping the context of health: A review of environmental and policy approaches in the prevention of chronic diseases. Annual Review of Public Health. 2006;27:341–70. Accessed on November 9, 2017
Cerin 2017 - Cerin E, Nathan A, van Cauwenberg J, Barnett DW, Barnett A. The neighbourhood physical environment and active travel in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2017;14(1):15. Accessed on November 16, 2017
CG-Physical activity - The Guide to Community Preventive Services (The Community Guide). Physical activity. Accessed on November 9, 2017
Fishman 2015* - Fishman E, Schepers P, Kamhuis CBM. Dutch cycling: Quantifying the health and related economic benefits. American Journal of Public Health. 2015;105(8):e13-e15. Accessed on November 9, 2017
Henao 2015* - Henao A, Piatkowski D, Luckey KS, et al. Sustainable transportation infrastructure investments and mode share changes: A 20-year background of Boulder, Colorado. Transport Policy. 2015;37:64-71. Accessed on November 16, 2017
Kerr 2013 - Kerr ZY, Rodriguez DA, Evenson KR, Aytur SA. Pedestrian and bicycle plans and the incidence of crash-related injuries. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2013;50:1252–8. Accessed on November 9, 2017
Lee 2017a* - Lee RJ, Sener IN, Jones SN. Understanding the role of equity in active transportation planning in the United States. Transport Reviews. 2017;37(2):211-226. Accessed on November 16, 2017
Lowry 2017* - Lowry M, Loh TH. Quantifying bicycle network connectivity. Preventive Medicine. 2017;95(Suppl):S134-S140. Accessed on November 16, 2017
Lubitow 2016* - Lubitow A, Zinschlag B, Rochester N. Plans for pavement or for people? The politics of bike lanes on the “Paseo Boricua” in Chicago, Illinois. Urban Studies. 2016;53(12):2637-2653. Accessed on November 16, 2017
Noyes 2014* - Noyes P, Fung L, Lee KK, Grimshaw VE, Karpati A, DiGrande L. Cycling in the city: An in-depth examination of bicycle lane use in a low-income urban neighborhood. Journal of Physical Activity & Health. 2014;11(1):1-9. Accessed on November 18, 2017
Parker 2011* - Parker KM, Gustat J, Rice JC. Installation of bicycle lanes and increased ridership in an urban, mixed-income setting in New Orleans, Louisiana. Journal of Physical Activity & Health. 2011;8(Suppl 1):S98-S102. Accessed on November 9, 2017
Pedroso 2016* - Pedroso FE, Angriman F, Bellows AL, Taylor K. Bicycle use and cyclist safety following Boston’s bicycle infrastructure expansion, 2009-2012. American Journal of Public Health. 2016;106(12):2171-2177. Accessed on November 16, 2017
Pucher 2010* - Pucher J, Dill J, Handy S. Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: an international review. Preventive Medicine. 2010;50(Suppl 1):S106-25. Accessed on November 9, 2017
RAND-Sorenson 2008 - Sorenson P, Wachs M, Min EY, et al. Moving Los Angeles: Short-term policy options for improving transportation. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation; 2008: Monograph Report 748. Accessed on November 9, 2017
Riggs 2016* - Riggs W, McDade E. Moving from planning to action: Exploring best practice policy in the finance of local bicycling and pedestrian improvements. Case Studies on Transport Policy. 2016;4(3): 248-257. Accessed on November 18, 2017
Salon 2012* - Salon D, Boarnet MG, Handy S, Spears S, Tal G. How do local actions affect VMT? A critical review of the empirical evidence. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2012;17(7):495–508. Accessed on November 10, 2017
UNC-Bushell 2013 - Bushell MA, Poole BW, Zegeer CV, Rodriguez DA. Costs for pedestrian and bicyclist infrastructure improvements: A resource for researchers, engineers, planners, and the general public. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Highway Safety Research Center; 2013. Accessed on November 10, 2017
Yang 2010 - Yang L, Sahlqvist S, McMinn A, Griffin SJ, Ogilvie D. Interventions to promote cycling: Systematic review. BMJ. 2010;341:c5293. Accessed on November 9, 2017

Citations - Implementation

CDC DNPAO-State highlights 2016 - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity (DNPAO). DNPAO State Program Physical Activity Highlights: Montana’s Building Active Community Initiative Action Institutes & Utah’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Planning. 2016. Accessed on November 16, 2017
CDC-Step it up status 2017 - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Status report for Step It Up! The surgeon general's call to action to promote walking and walkable communities. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2017. Accessed on November 16, 2017
PBIC-Sample plans - Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC). Sample plans. Accessed on November 9, 2017
RWJF-Brownsville 2014 - Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). Brownsville, TX: 2014 Culture of Health Prize Winner. 2014. Accessed on November 16, 2017
WFC-State map - Walk Friendly Communities (WFC), Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center. Walk friendly communities state map. Accessed on November 9, 2017

Page Last Updated

November 16, 2017

* Journal subscription may be required for access.