chicago bicycle crash full report final

7/29/2019 Chicago Bicycle Crash Full Report Final

1/129

BicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends

CityofChicago,2005to2010

FinalReport

SiimSt,Ph.D.

LuGan

Piyushimita(Vonu)Thakuriah,Ph.D. ProjectLead

Universityof

Illinois

at

Chicago

MelodyGeraci

PatrickKnapp

ActiveTransportationAlliance

Charlie

Short

ChicagoDepartmentofTransportation

November,2012

ThisreportwasgenerouslyfundedthroughagrantfromtheIllinoisDepartment

ofTransportation,andbytheCityofChicago.


2/129

iiBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport


3/129

iiiBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

Disclaimer The analysis and views presented in this report are the sole

responsibility of the authors.

Acknowledgements

The research team is indebted to the help given by, Lori Midden of the Illinois Department of

Transportation, Parry Frank of the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, Tracie Smith of

the Childrens Memorial Hospital, Chicago, and Chrystal Price of the American College of

Surgeons. We are grateful to William Vassilakis, formerly at the University of Illinois at Chicagoand Dr. Caitlin Cottrill, Postdoctoral Research Associate at Massachusetts Institute of

Technology National University of Singapore for their help with the project.


4/129

ivBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

TableofContents

Chapter1:KeyFindings........................................................................................................... 1Chapter2:Introduction,ReportObjectivesandOrganizationoftheReport............................ 3

2.1: Introduction........................................................................................................................ 32.2: ObjectivesoftheReport.................................................................................................... 32.3: OrganizationoftheReport................................................................................................. 4

Chapter3:BackgroundandOverviewoftheBicyclingEnvironment........................................ 53.1:

Trends

in

Bicycle

Use

..........................................................................................................

5

3.2: NationalTrendsinBicycleSafety....................................................................................... 63.3: BicycleSafetyinChicago.................................................................................................... 7

3.3.1: ChicagoBicycleSafetyTrends...................................................................................... 73.3.2: ChicagoBicycleCrashesComparedwithCrashesforOtherModes............................9

3.4: ChicagoversusSuburbanChicagoandtheRestofIllinois...............................................103.5: PeerCityComparisonofCyclingtoWorkandCrashes....................................................123.6:

Comparison

with

Other

Large

Cities

................................................................................

15

Chapter4:CharacteristicsofCyclistsInvolvedinCrashes...................................................... 184.1: BicycleUseandSafetyTrendsbyAgeandGender..........................................................184.2: EducationLevelofCyclists............................................................................................... 25

Chapter5:VehiclesandOperatorsInvolvedinBicycleCrashes............................................. 265.1: AlcoholandBicycleCrashes............................................................................................. 26

5.1.1: BloodAlcoholContentofMotorists........................................................................... 265.1.2:

Blood

Alcohol

Content

of

Cyclists

...............................................................................

27

5.1.3: HitandRunCrashes................................................................................................... 285.2: AgeandGenderofMotorists............................................................................................ 29

5.2.1: AgeofMotorists......................................................................................................... 295.2.2: GenderofMotoristsInvolvedinBicycleCrashes......................................................29


5/129

vBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

5.3: VehicleTypeandUse........................................................................................................ 305.4: DriverandVehicleManeuvers.......................................................................................... 345.5: Dooring.............................................................................................................................. 365.6: BicyclistActivity................................................................................................................. 37

5.6.1: BicyclistAction............................................................................................................ 375.6.2: BicyclistLocation....................................................................................................... 395.6.3: BicyclistHelmetUse.................................................................................................. 40

Chapter6:EnvironmentalFactorsandRoadConditions........................................................ 416.1: EnvironmentalFactorsduringCrashes............................................................................. 41

6.1.1: WeatherRelatedFactors........................................................................................... 416.1.2: LightConditions.......................................................................................................... 426.1.3: WeatherRelatedRoadSurface.................................................................................. 43

6.2: RoadwayEnvironment...................................................................................................... 436.2.1: RelationtoIntersections............................................................................................ 436.2.2: RoadDefects............................................................................................................... 476.2.3: RoadwayTypeandNumberofLanes......................................................................... 476.2.4: RoadwayClassification............................................................................................... 496.2.5: TrafficSignalControl.................................................................................................. 50

6.3: WorkZones....................................................................................................................... 53Chapter7:TemporalDistributionsofCrashes........................................................................ 54

7.1: CrashesbyQuarter............................................................................................................ 547.2: BicycleCrashesbyMonth................................................................................................. 557.3: CrashesbyDayofWeek.................................................................................................... 577.4: TimeofDay........................................................................................................................ 59

7.4.1: FatalCrashesbyTimeofDay...................................................................................... 597.4.2: InjuryCrashesbyTimeofDay.................................................................................... 607.4.3: DooringCrashes.......................................................................................................... 607.4.4: FatalandInjuryCrashesbyHour................................................................................ 61

7.5: SpecialEvents.................................................................................................................... 63


6/129

viBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

Chapter8:SpatialDistribution.............................................................................................. 658.1: OverallSpatialDistributionofCrashes............................................................................. 658.2: ChicagoCommunityAreas................................................................................................ 67

8.2.1: HighestandLowestNumberofBicycleCrashes........................................................708.2.2: PerCapitaCrashes:MappedbyCommunityAreas....................................................72

8.3: Hotspots............................................................................................................................ 738.4: MajorCrashCorridors....................................................................................................... 768.5: MajorArterialHotspots.................................................................................................... 778.6: DooringCrashes................................................................................................................ 778.7: LandUsesnearCrashLocations........................................................................................ 79

8.7.1: SchoolsandUniversities............................................................................................. 798.7.2: CentralBusinessDistrict............................................................................................. 838.7.3: ResidentialNonCentralBusinessDistrict...............................................................84

Chapter9:SummaryandLimitationsoftheStudy................................................................. 869.1: StudySummary................................................................................................................. 879.2: Limitations......................................................................................................................... 87

TechnicalAppendixA:DataandStudyArea.......................................................................... 89A.1: Data................................................................................................................................... 89A.2: StudyAreaandPeerCities................................................................................................ 90

TechnicalAppendixB:BackgroundBicyclingSafetyTrendsandLiterature........................... 93B.1: BenefitsofBicycling.......................................................................................................... 93B.2: OverallTransportationSafetyTrends............................................................................... 94

B.2.1: TrendsinBicycleSafety.............................................................................................. 94B.2.2: ChicagoAreaTrendsinBicyclingandBicycleCrashes...............................................96

B.3: RiskFactorstoBicycling:AReviewoftheSafetyLiterature.............................................96B.3.1: CrashCausationandCrashRisk.................................................................................. 97

B.3.1.1: DynamicsofBicycleCrashes............................................................................... 97B.3.1.2: RiskFactorsContributingtoCrashInvolvement................................................99B.3.1.3: ExposureBasedRiskEstimation....................................................................... 102


7/129

viiBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

B.3.2: CrashSeverityandEffects........................................................................................ 102B.3.2.1: FactorsDeterminingCrashSeverity................................................................. 103B.3.2.2: TypeofTraumaandExtentofInjury................................................................ 103

B.3.3: ComparativeStudies................................................................................................ 104B.3.4: DataandInformationSystems................................................................................. 105B.3.5: CrashCountermeasuresandEvaluation.................................................................. 106

References........................................................................................................................... 109


8/129

viiiBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

ListofTables

Table31: Bicyclecrashesbytypeofinjuryandfatalities,CityofChicago,20052010................8Table32: FatalandinjurycrashesinCityofChicago,20052010................................................9Table

33:

Fatalities

in

Illinois

and

indices

by

number

of

bicycle

commuters

and

population

...

11

Table34: Peercityfatalityindices,20052009........................................................................... 14Table35: Peercityfatalitiesbygender,2005to2010...............................................................15Table36: Bicyclingandwalkingasmodeoftransportationtoworkinmajorcities,2010.......17Table41: Gendermixofbicycling............................................................................................... 18Table42: Chicagobicyclingestimates,2007.............................................................................. 19Table43: Genderofcyclistsinjuredinbicyclecrashes..............................................................19Table

44:

Fatalities

and

injury

crashes

per

100

million

miles

of

travel

......................................

20

Table45: Bicyclingbyage,milesandminutesperday,2007*..................................................21Table46: BicyclistfatalitiesbyageandgenderinCityofChicago,20052010.........................22Table47: BicyclistsinjuredbyageandgenderinCityofChicago,20052010..........................23Table51: Bloodalcoholcontentofdriversinvolvedinfatalbicyclecrashes.............................26Table52: Apparentphysicalconditionofdriversinbicycleinjurycrashes................................27Table53: BloodAlcoholContentofbicyclistsinfatalcrashes,2005to2010............................28Table

54:

Known

age

of

driver

involved

in

fatal

crash

................................................................

29

Table55: Genderofdriversinvolvedinbicycleinjurycrashes..................................................29Table56: Vehicletypeinvolvedinbicycleinjurycrashes...........................................................30Table57: Vehicleuseduringcrash............................................................................................. 32Table58: Driveractioninfatalcrashes,CityofChicago,20052010.........................................34Table59: Driveractioninbicyclevehicleinjurycrashes............................................................35Table510: Vehiclemaneuverpriortobicycleinjurycrashes.....................................................36Table

511:

All

versus

dooring

bicycle

crashes,

by

injury

type

....................................................

37

Table512: Bicyclistactioninfatalcrashes,20052010..............................................................37Table513: Bicyclistactionininjurycrashes............................................................................... 38Table514: Bicyclistlocationinfatalcrashes,CityofChicago,20052010.................................39Table515: Bicyclistlocationinbicycleinjurycrashes................................................................ 39


9/129

ixBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

Table516: Helmetuse,2005to2009......................................................................................... 40Table61: Weatherconditionsduringbicyclecrashes................................................................ 41Table62: Lightconditionsduringbicyclecrashes...................................................................... 42Table63: Roadsurfaceconditionsduringbicyclecrashes,2005 2010.....................................43Table64: Bicycleinjurycrashesatintersections........................................................................ 43Table65: Intersectionswiththegreatestnumberofinjurycrashes.........................................45Table66: Roaddefects............................................................................................................... 47Table67: Locationrelatedfactorsforfatalbicyclecrashes,20052010...................................47Table68: Roadwaytype.............................................................................................................. 48Table69: Numberoftravellanes............................................................................................... 49Table610: FatalandTypeAcrashesbyroadwayclassification.................................................50Table611: Allinjurycrashesbyroadwayclassification..............................................................50Table612: Trafficcontroldeviceatfatalcrashes....................................................................... 51Table613: Trafficcontroldeviceatinjurycrashes..................................................................... 51Table614: Conditionoftrafficcontroldeviceatfatalandinjurycrashes.................................52Table615: Injurycrashesinworkzones,20052010................................................................. 53Table71: BicycleinjurycrashesbycalendarquarterinChicago,20052010............................54Table81: Bicyclecrashesandmilescycledinsixcommunityareaswiththemostcrashes......68Table82: Fifteencommunityareaswiththehighestnumberofinjurycrashes........................70Table83: Fifteencommunityareaswiththelowestnumberofinjurycrashes.........................71Table84: Dooringcrashescomparedtoallinjurycrashesbymajorarterials,2010.................78TableA1: CMAPsTravelTrackerSurveymodeshareforselectedmodes................................92TableB1: Bicyclecrashliteraturecategories.............................................................................. 97TableB2: Safetycountermeasuresandstrategiesusedincitiesandstates............................108


10/129

xBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

ListofFigures

Figure31: Numberofdailybicyclecommuters,CityofChicago,2000to2010..........................5Figure32: Numberoffatalitiesbyselectedtransportationmodes,1995 2009........................7Figure33: Numberofbicycleinjurycrashesper100,000population.........................................8Figure34: Comparisonofpedestrianandbicycleinjurycrashes,2005to2010.......................10Figure35: Bicyclistsasapercentofalldailycommuters,peercities,2010.............................13Figure41: Ratioofmaletofemaleinjuryrates......................................................................... 24Figure42: Annualaverageinjurycrashrateper100,000residents..........................................24Figure51: Hitandrunbicyclecrashes,2005to2010................................................................ 28Figure52: NumberofSUVsinvolvedinbicyclecrashes............................................................31Figure71: Injurycrashesbymonthandinjurytype,2005to2010total..................................55Figure72: Fatalbicyclecrashesbymonth,20052010.............................................................56Figure73: Fatalbicyclecrashesbydayofweek,20052010......................................................57Figure

74:

Injury

crashes

by

type

of

injury

and

day

of

week

......................................................

58

Figure75: Fatalbicyclecrashesbytimeofday,20052010.......................................................59Figure76: Injurybicyclecrashesbytimeofday,20052010.....................................................60Figure77: Dooringcrashes,20102011...................................................................................... 61Figure78: FatalandTypeAinjurycrashesbyhour,2005to2010............................................62Figure79: TypeBandCinjurycrashesbyhour,2005to2010..................................................63


11/129

xiBicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

ListofMaps

Map61: Intersectionswithatleastteninjurycrashes..............................................................44Map71: BicycleinjurycrashesonthesixFourthofJulysfrom2005to2010...........................64Map81: Fatalandserious(TypeA)injurycrashesinCityofChicago,20052010.....................65Map82: TypeBandCinjurycrashesinCityofChicago,20052010.........................................66Map83: FatalitiesandTypeAinjurycrashes,20052010..........................................................67Map84: FatalitiesandTypeAcrashesfrom20052010per2010population..........................72Map85: TypeBandCcrashesfrom20052010per2010population.......................................73Map86: Allinjurycrasheshotspots........................................................................................... 74Map87: FatalandTypeAinjurycrashhotspots........................................................................ 75Map88: Majorarterialsofinjurycrashes.................................................................................. 76Map89: Nonintersectioninjurycrashes................................................................................... 77Map810: Highschoolvicinitieswithinjurycrashes................................................................... 79Map811: Primaryschoolhotspots............................................................................................. 81Map

812:

Primary

school

hotspots

in

the

far

west

side

.............................................................

83

Map813: DowntownTypeBandCinjurycrashes..................................................................... 84Map814: NorthSideTypeBandCinjurycrashes..................................................................... 84Map815: HydePark/UniversityofChicagoareaTypeBandCinjurycrashes.........................86


12/129

1BicycleCrashAnalysisandReviewofTrends,CityofChicago,2005to2010:FinalReport

Chapter1: KeyFindings

CHICAGOBICYCLECRASHSAFETYTRENDS,20052010

1. Thirtytwocyclistswerekilledincrasheswithmotorvehiclesfrom2005to2010.

2. Thenumber

of

fatal

crashes

decreased

by

28

percent

from

seven

in

2005

to

five

in

2010.

3. Almost9,000bicyclistsincurredinjurycrashesduringthesixyearperiod.

4. Thenumberofinjurycrashesincreasedfrom1,236in2005to1,566in2010.

WHEREDIDCRASHESOCCUR:SPATIALANDLOCATIONALDIMENSIONS

5. Approximately55percentoffatalandinjurycrashesoccurredatintersections.

6. Ahighnumberofcrasheshaveoccurredonornearmajordiagonalarterialstreets

includingMilwaukeeAvenue.

7. Six

of

the

77

community

areas

just

north

and

northwest

of

the

Loop

accounted

for

one

thirdoftheinjurycrashesbutmorethanonethirdofthebicyclemiles.

8. ThehighestnumberofinjurycrasheswasinWestTown(justwestoftheLoop)followed

byNearNorthSideandLoganSquare.

WHENDIDTHECRASHESOCCUR

9. Thelargestnumberofinjurycrashesoccurredfrom4:00pmto7:00pmbutfatalities

werehighestfrom8:00pmtomidnight.

10.Therewerefivefatalitiesfrom4:00pmto7:00pmbutninefatalitiesfrom8:00pmto

midnight.

11.Approximately45percentofthefatalandinjurycrashesoccurredduringthreesummer

months.

12.Thegreatmajorityofcrashesoccurredduringdaylighthoursandingoodweather.

13.Sundaysaccountedforthehighestnumberoffatalitiesbutthefewestnumberofinjury

crashes.

CHARACTERISTICSOFCYCLISTS:GENDERANDAGE

14.Maleswerethreetimesmorelikelytobeinvolvedinbicyclecrashesthanfemales

overall,and

in

most

age

groups.

15.Theratioofmaletofemalecrasheswaslowestinthe2024agegroup(1.98)but

increasedsteadilywithage.Itwas12timeshigherformalesinthe7584agegroup.

16.Thegreatestnumberofmilescycledwereloggedbycyclistsaged2534buttheyhad

muchlowercrashratesthanyoungercyclists.


13/129


EXTENTOFCYCLINGANDHOWHASITCHANGED

17.Since2000,thenumberofbicyclecommutershasincreasedby150percent.

18.Nationally0.6percentofworkerscommutedtoworkbybicyclein2010.InChicago,that

percentwas1.3percent(15,000cyclistsdaily).

19.Amongpeer

cities,

Chicago

has

more

bicycle

commuters

per

capita

than

New

York

or

LosAngeles,butfewerthanPhiladelphiaandSeattle.

COMPARINGBICYCLECRASHESWITHPEDESRIANCRASHES,20052010,

20.Whilethenumberofmotorvehiclecrasheswithpedestriansdeclinedduringthe2005

2010studyperiod,crashesinvolvingbicyclesincreased.

21.Hitandrunaccountedfor25percentofbothinjuryandfatalbicyclecrashes. Itwas

muchlowerthanpedestrianfatalandinjurycrashes,41and33percentrespectively.

CRASHCIRCUMSTANCESHELMETUSE,TYPESOFMOTORVEHICLESANDALCOHOL

22.Helmetswereknowntobeworninonlyonefatalcrash.

23.Cyclistsarereportedtohavecrossedagainstthetrafficlightin20percentofthefatal

crashesbutinonlysevenpercentoftheinjurycrashes.

24.Fourintenfatalitiesandinjurycrasheswereduetomotoristsnotyieldingrightofway.

25.Taxis(forhirevehicles)wereinvolvedinoneintwelveinjurycrashes.

26.Cyclistshadbloodalcoholcontent(BAC)overthelegallimitin22percentofthefatal

crashes.


14/129


Chapter2: Introduction,ReportObjectivesandOrganizationoftheReport

ThechapterbeginswithabriefoverviewofbicyclesafetyinChicagofrom2005to2010

followedbyadescriptionoftheprimaryreportobjectives.Thechapterconcludeswitha

summaryofthereportorganization.

2.1: Introduction

Nationwide,bicyclefatalityandinjuryrateshavebeendecliningalongwithmostotherformsof

transportation.IntheCityofChicago,motorvehiclecrasheshavesimilarlybeenonthedecline.

Yettherecenthistoryofbicycleinjurycrasheshasbeenmixedwithanoverallincreasein

bicyclecrashesfrom2005to2010. Thismaybeattributabletothelargeincreaseincycling.

Theseincreasesinbothbicyclingandinjurycrasheshavenecessitatedtheneedtodevelopa

seriesofsafetystrategiesthataddressbicyclesafety.

Between2005and2010,atotalof1,021personswerekilledintheCityofChicagoinallcrashes

involvingmotor

vehicles,

including

drivers,

other

motor

vehicle

occupants,

pedestrians

and

bicyclists.Totaltransportationfatalitiesdeclined32percentinthecityduringthisperiod,with

191personskilledin2005comparedto128in2010.Thetotalnumberofpersonsinjuredinall

crashesinthecitydeclinedfrom25,831in2005to19,865in2010(adecreaseofabout23

percent).Thesedecreasesinthecityreflectnationaltrends.

Bycontrast,duringthesameperiod,32bicyclistswerekilledintheCityofChicago.Bicycle

fatalitiesduringthisperiodexhibitimprovementoverthesesixyears,withsevenfatalitiesin

eachofthefirsttwoyearsofthesixyearperiodandfivefatalitiesineachofthelastthree

years.Thelowestnumberoffatalitieswasin2007withthree.Thenumberofinjuredbicyclists,

however,hasincreasedfrom1,236in2005to1,566in2010,withahighof1,782in2007.

Twoadditionalstatistics,however,showslightlymoreconsistencyinthemodesttrendof

increasingbicycleinjurycrashes.First,bicyclecrashes,asapercentofallcrashes,have

increasedfromlessthansevenpercenttonearlytenpercent. Second,thenumberofbicycle

crashespercapitahasincreasedfromapproximately47in2005to62in2010. Regardlessof

themetric,thereisevidencethatbicyclecrasheshaveincreasedduringthestudyperiod. Still,

bicycling(asmeasuredbythenumberbicyclecommuters)hasgrownmorerapidlythanany

measureofthenumberofcrashes.

2.2: ObjectivesoftheReport

ThepurposeofthisreportistoreviewtrendsinbicyclesafetyintheCityofChicago,andto

identifywaystoimprovebicyclesafety.Theoverallgoalofthereportistoprovideasystematic

assessmentofthewho,whatandhowofsafetyriskstobicycliststosupportsafety

countermeasuresandlongtermbicycleplanningactivities.Thereporthastwoobjectives.

Objective1:ToanalyzebicyclecrashesintheCityofChicago.Ouroverallobjectiveistomake

acomprehensivepresentationofbicyclecrashtrendsinChicagooverthe20052010period.


15/129


First,wehavepresentedanoverviewofthebicyclingusageandsafetytrendsinthecityand

comparedthesetonationaltrendsandtothoseinpeercities.Wehaveconsideredfatalities

andinjuriesincurred.Wehaveexaminedthecharacteristicsofcyclistsinvolvedincrashesand

thatofthevehiclesandvehicleoperators.Environmentalfactors(weatherandlightconditions)

andthecharacteristicsoftheroadwaywherecrasheshaveoccurredwerethenexaminedas

wellas

road

surface

conditions.

We

then

analyzed

seasonal

and

time

of

day

pattern

of

crashes,

includingcrashpatternsrelatingtospecialevents.Wealsoexaminedthespatialdistributionof

crashesbycommunityarea,corridors,locationtypeandidentifyhotspotswherecrasheshave

occurred.

Weusedtwotypesofdatafortheanalysis:(A)safetydataoncrashes,injuriesandtraumafrom

theIllinoisDepartmentofTransportation(IDOT),NationalHighwayTrafficSafety

Administration(NHTSA)andtheAmericanCollegeofSurgeons,and(B)traveltrenddatato

identifypatternsinbicycleusefromtheU.S.CensusBureau,NationalHouseholdTravelSurvey

(NHTS)andtheChicagoMetropolitanAgencyforPlanning(CMAP).Moreinformationregarding

thedatausedisgiveninTechnicalAppendixA.

Objective2:Torecommendacollectionofstrategiestoimprovebicyclesafetythat

incorporatesoursummaryandthecrashdataanalysis.Thesearedesignedtoassistin

developingfuturecoursesofactionregardingwaysinwhichbicyclesafetycanbeimprovedin

theCityofChicago.

Tomakethereportselfcontainedasastudyofbicyclecrashes,wehaveundertakenareview

ofthepublishedliterature,aswellasofpolicyandplanningdocumentspublishedbythe

FederalHighwayAdministrationandstateandmetropolitanplanningorganizationsto

understandthetypesofactivitiesthatarebeingundertakentoimprovebicyclesafety.

2.3: OrganizationoftheReport

Thereportis

organizedasfollows:

Chapters3through8

presentthefindings

onbicyclesafety

trends.Chapter9

presentsasummary

ofthestudyandits

limitations.The

report

hastwotechnical

appendices:Appendix

Adescribesthedata

usedandAppendixB

presentsadditional

backgroundmaterialandaliteraturereview.


16/129


Chapter3: BackgroundandOverviewoftheBicyclingEnvironment

Thischapterbeginstheanalysisofcrashdata. ItexaminesthegrowthinChicagoandcompares

ittonationaldataandinformationfromothercities.

3.1:

Trendsin

Bicycle

Use

Nationallytherehasrecentlybeenanappreciableincreaseinbicycling. Closetoonepercentof

alltripsreportedforalltrippurposes(includingwork,shopping,socialtrips)werebybike

(NationalHouseholdTravelSurvey(NHTS),2009)andthetotalnumberofbicycletrips

increasedfrom1.7billionannualtripsin2001tofourbillionreportedtripsin2009(NHTS,

2009).TheCensusBureaujourneytowork(commuting)datashowsthatbicyclingtoworkhas

increasedfrom0.4percentin2000to0.53percentin2010(U.S.CensusBureau,2010).

BicyclinghasincreasedatahigherrateinChicagothannationally.Usingthesamecensusdata,

thenumberofdailybicyclecommutersinChicagohasriseninthismillenniumfromjustunder

6,000to

over

15,000

(Figure

31).

This

increase

of

approximately

9,000

additional

bike

Figure31: Numberofdailybicyclecommuters,CityofChicago,2000to2010

Source:ACS,2000to2010


17/129


commuterswereachievedduringaperiodinwhichtherewasadecline,thoughmodest,inthe

numberofcommutersresidinginthecity. Therefore,theriseinbicyclingmodesharewas

proportionatelyslightlyhigher,increasingfrom0.5percentto1.3percentofcommuters,2000

to2010.

This

puts

Chicago

well

above

the

national

level

in

terms

of

commuting

trips

and

higher

thanmanyothermetropolitanareas.

3.2: NationalTrendsinBicycleSafety

Whilebicyclinghasgrowninpopularity,thenumberofbicyclefatalitiesnationallyexhibitsa

slightdownwardtrendwitha

substantialdeclineduring

ourstudyperiod.From2005

to2009,thenationalnumber

of

bicycle

fatalities

declined

from786to630(Figure32).

Thisisadecreaseof20

percent.However,safety

gainsforallmotorvehicle

crashfatalitieswere

considerablyhigher,witha

declineinfatalitiesamong

motorvehicledriversof24

percentandamong

passengersof31percent. Thisdifferencemaybeattributablethe13percentdeclinein

highwaypassenger

miles

(http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics)

from2005to2009,aperiodduringwhichbicycleusehasshowntheoppositetrend,i.e.,has

grownrapidly. Alsoimportantisthedeclineamongpedestrianfatalities,16percent,though

thedeclineisnotasgreatasforthemodes(driverandmotorvehiclepassenger)citedabove.It

maybenotedthatthenationalpopulationincreasedduringthe20052009periodby18million

people,makingthedeclineinfatalitiesevenmoreimpressive.

Althoughtherearemanyimportantdifferenceswithrespecttothesociodemographicsofusers

andoverallusepatterns,perhapsthemostdirectcomparisoniswithmotorcyclefatalities.

Bothbicycleandmotorcycleusehasincreasedduringthestudyperiodandbothtypicallyhave

justtwo

wheels.

During

2005

to

2009,

motorcycle

fatalities

decreased

by

2.5

percent

but

actuallyincreasedby16percentinthreeyears(20052008)beforethesharponeyeardrop

from2008to2009. Duringthelongerperiod,since1995,however,therehasbeenadramatic

100percentincreaseinthenumberofmotorcyclefatalities.Bycontrast,bicyclistfatalities

recordedanapproximately25percentdeclinebetween1995and2009.


18/129


Figure32: Numberoffatalitiesbyselectedtransportationmodes,1995 2009

Source:FARS,19952009, http://wwwfars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx

3.3: BicycleSafetyinChicago

Nationally,the

number

of

bicycle

fatalitieshasdeclinedconsiderably.

Butsincethegrowthofcyclingin

Chicagohasexceededthenational

trend,itisnecessarytoexamine

Chicagocrasheswiththisinmind.

BelowweexamineChicagobicycle

crashesandcomparethemtoother

modes.

3.3.1: ChicagoBicycleSafetyTrends

Duringthestudyperiod,bicycle

fatalitiesinChicagohavedeclinedbut

duetotheirsmallnumberitisdifficult

topointdefinitivelytoasolidtrend. In

thefirsttwoyearsofthestudyperiod,


19/129


2005and2006,thereweresevenfatalities(Table31)ineachyearversusfivefatalitiesineach

ofthelastthreeyears(2008and2010). Thesenumbersindicateadecreaseof28percent,with

thelowestnumberofthreefatalitiesin2007.

Table31: Bicyclecrashesbytypeofinjuryandfatalities,CityofChicago,20052010

Type

2005

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

TotalFatalities 7 7 3 5 5 5 32

A* 127 186 178 159 162 149 961

B** 734 645 895 719 648 851 4492

C*** 375 554 709 628 576 566 3408

Totalinjuries 1236 1385 1782 1506 1386 1566 8861

* TypeAInjuries:anyinjuryotherthanfatalinjurywhichpreventstheinjuredpersonfromwalking,driving,ornormally

continuing the activities he/she was capable of performing before the injury occurred. Includes severe lacerations,

brokenlimbs,skullorchestinjuries,andabdominalinjuries.

** TypeBInjuries:Any injury,otherthanfatalor incapacitating injury,which isevidenttoobserversatthesceneofthe

crash.

Includes

bump

on

the

head,

abrasions,

bruises,

minor

lacerations.

*** Type C Injuries: Any injury reported orclaimedwhich isneither of theabove. Includesmomentary unconsciousness,

claimsofinjuriesnotevident,limping,complaintofpain,nausea,hysteria.

Source:IDOTMotorVehicleCrashData

Thedataonbicyclecrashinjuriesarelesssymbolicofacleartrend.Althoughthenumbershave

increasedoverallfrom2005to2010,injurycrasheswerefewerin2010thanthepeakyearof

2007.Shownonapercapitabasis,Figure33indicatesthehighestinjurycrashlevelwasin

2007,thesameyearwiththelowestnumberoffatalities. Generally,since2007,therehasbeen

adecrease,thoughthelowestoverallnumberofinjurycrasheswasin2005.

Figure

3

3:

Number

of

bicycle

injury

crashes

per

100,000

population

Source:computedfromIDOTMotorVehicleCrashDataand


20/129


AmericanCommunitySurvey(ACS)populationdata

3.3.2: ChicagoBicycleCrashesComparedwithCrashesforOtherModes

Therehasbeenarelativelysteadydeclineinfatalandinjurycrashesinvolvingalltransportation

modesinthecity.From2005to2010,bothbicycleandmotorvehiclefatalcrashesdeclinedby

approximately28

percent

(Table

32).

The

use

of

both

modes

may

have

increased;

however

bicycleusagehascertainlyincreasedmore.

Perhapsduetothesharpriseinbicycleuse,thenumberofinjurycrasheshasincreasedfrom

2005to2010(27percent)whileinjurycrashesinvolvingallmodeshavedeclined(14percent).

Still,thenumberofbicycleinjurycrashesrosedramaticallyinthefirsttwoyearsonlytodrop

almostthesameamountthenexttwoyears(to2009). Thiswasfollowedbyanotherincrease

in2010. Giventhesedata,itisdifficulttoconclusivelyarguethereisalongterm,ongoing

phenomenon,especiallysincethereappearstobenochangeinthenumberofinjurycrashes

from2006to2009(1,385versus1,386).Overall,however,theprevailingtrendpointstoan

increaseintheannualnumberofbicyclecrashes.

Table32: FatalandinjurycrashesinCityofChicago,20052010

Mode 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 TOTAL*

Fatal

Crashes

Bicycle 7 7 3 5 5 5 32

Pedestrian 65 48 49 55 34 30 281

All 179 176 164 156 141 127 943

%Bicycle 4% 4% 2% 3% 4% 4% 3%

Injury

Crashes

Bicycle 1236 1385 1782 1506 1386 1566 8861

Pedestrian 3406 3781 3686 3484 3130 2914 20,401

All

18,505

18,516 17,541 15,599 15,645

15,881 101,687

%Bicycle 6.7% 7.5% 10.2% 9.7% 8.9% 9.9% 8.7%

*Crashesinvolvingpropertydamagearenotincluded


Figure34showscyclingandpedestrianinjurycrashesoverthestudyperiod.Incontrastto

bicycleinjurycrasheswhichhaveincreasedoverallfrom2005to2010,pedestrianinjury

crashesdeclined(from3,406in2005to2,914in2010).Perhapsthisispartlyduetothelarge

increaseinbicyclingintheregion. Iftheuseofabicycleintheworktripisanindicationofa

moreuniversaluseofbicycles,thenitisnotsurprisingthat,withasurgeinuse,thereisnotan

obviousdecline

in

injury

crashes.

At

some

point,

however,

we

might

expect

along

term

decrease.Manymodesoftransportationexperienceincreasesincrasheswhentheyfirst

becomepopularandthendeclineastheybecomemoreuniversallyused.Motorvehicle

fatalitiesintheU.S.havebeendecliningfornearlyfortyyears(sincetheearly1970s)despite

thegrowthinpopulationandlevelsofvehicleuse.


21/129


22/129


23/129


3.5: PeerCityComparisonofCyclingtoWorkandCrashes

Peercities

are

those

places

that

most

resemble

Chicago

in

size

and

character.

While

no

two

placesarealikeinallcriteria,thereareasmallnumberofplacesthatarebroadlysimilarto

Chicago. Fourcriteriaweredevelopedfortheidentificationofpeercities:(1)over500,000in

population;(2)populationdensityofover5,000residentspersquaremile;(3)atleast75

squaremiles;and(4)atleast17percentproportionofcommutersthatusenonautomodes.

ThesecriteriaarepatternedaftertheNewYorkPedestrianSafetyStudy,whichusesthreeof

thefourcriteria[notnumber(3) NewYorkCityDepartmentofTransportation,2010].

AdditionaldetailsontheselectionofpeercitiesaregiveninTechnicalAppendixA.

Sincethescientificcommunitydoesnothave

guidelinesfor

the

definition

of

apeer

city,

we

also

includeinthisreportthetwelvelargestcitiesin

theU.S.andsomeothernoteworthyplacesfor

comparison. Increasingtothesetwelvecities

permitstheinclusionofanothermidwesterncity

Indianapolis whilekeepingtheanalysistoa

manageablenumber.Still,thepeercities

representthemostmeaningfulcomparisonsof

statisticssuchasmodeshare.

Weexamine

U.S.

Census

bicycling

to

work

data

becauseitistheonlylargesample,annualdata

thatshowlevelsofbicyclingincitiesacrossthe

nation.Wealsocomparedbicyclesafetystatistics

ofChicagotothesepeercities.

Incomparisontoourtwomostimmediatepeer

cities,LosAngelesandNewYork,Chicagoin2010

hadnearlyasmanybikecommuters(15,096)as

LosAngeles(16,101),amuchlargercity. ThepopulationofLosAngelesexceedsthatofChicago

byapproximatelyonemillionpeople.NewYorkCityhasnearlythreetimesChicagos

populationbut

has

less

than

twice

the

number

of

bicycle

commuters

(27,917).

Figure35showsthatthemodeshareforbicyclistsisnoticeablyhigherinChicagothaninNew

YorkandLosAngeles,butlowerthaninPhiladelphiaandSeattle. Thissuggeststhatincreasesin

modesharesince2000areimportantbutthereisstillthepotentialforhigherlevelsofbicycling

inthefuture. NotealsothatthegeographicallyclosestpeercitytoChicagoisMilwaukee,which

hasamodeshareapproximatelyhalfthatofChicago.


24/129


25/129


Table34: Peercityfatalityindices,20052009(Fiveyearsoffatalitiesdividedbytheaveragenumberofdailybikecommuters)

City Fatalities Commuters1 Index2

NewYork

97 22,420 4.33

LosAngeles 35 13,764 2.54

Chicago 293 12,706 2.28

Philadelphia 16 8921 1.79

Seattle 8 8981 0.89

Baltimore 3 1428 2.10

Milwaukee 1 1803 0.55 1Averagenumber20052009

2Totalfatalitiesdividedbythousandsofcommuters3

FARSreports

slightly

higher

numbers

than

IDOT

Source:20052009AmericanCommunitySurvey5YearEstimatesand

FARS:FatalAccidentReportingSystem,ftp://ftp.nhtsa.dot.gov/fars/

WhatismostremarkableaboutthepeercitiesistheextenttowhichNewYorkdominatesthe

numberoffatalities. Itaccountsforhalfofthebicyclefatalities,eventhoughithasjustunder

onethirdofthebicyclecommuters(seealsoTable36).

Also,ChicagosfatalitynumberislowerthanthatofLosAngeles,eventhoughthetwocities

haveaboutthesamenumberofbicyclecommuters.

Moreover,thegendermixisverydifferent.Onlyfour

percentof

the

Los

Angeles

fatalities

are

female,

versus

15

percentforChicagoand12percentamongthepeercities.

Table35alsodepictsthechangeinthenumberoffatalities

onanannualbasis. Itisapparentthattherearelargeyear

toyearfluctuations;thusanassessmentofonlyannualdata

wouldlikelynotbeparticularlyinformative. Wetherefore

examinedthefirsttwoyears(2005and2006)versusthelast

twoyears(2008and2009).The2010FARSdatawerenot

availableatthetimeofthisanalysis.

Allofthecitieshadlowernumbersinthelasttwoyears

versusthefirsttwoyears,exceptSeattle(partlyduetosmall

numbers). Chicagosfatalitiesdroppedfrom14to12,Los

Angelesfrom15to12. Collectively,thenumberoffatalities

inthesevencitiesdroppedby12percent. Sincebicyclingis

mostprevalentinlargecities(otherthancollegetowns),the

dropinfatalitiesrestatesthenationalimprovementin


26/129


bicyclefatalities.However,weseehowtheadditionofoneyearofdatachangesthetrend. In

2010thereweremoremaleandfemalefatalitiesthanin2009andalsoalargejumpinmale

fatalitiesinLosAngeles.Theoverallincreaserosefrom28to42fatalities,evenwiththeslight

declineinChicagofromsixtofive(weuseIDOTdatathroughoutmuchofthisreportthatshows

nochangeinChicagofrom2009to2010).

Table35: Peercityfatalitiesbygender,2005to2010

Source: FARS:FatalAccidentReportingSystem,ftp://ftp.nhtsa.dot.gov/fars/

3.6: ComparisonwithOtherLargeCities

AmorethoroughassessmentoftherelativepositionofChicagoincludesalargercollectionof

citiesandcharacteristics. Table36showsthatwhenthebasisforcomparisonisexpandedto

thetwelvelargestcities,Chicagosrankjumpstosecondplace,sinceSeattledropsfromthelist

ofpeercitiesandofthe12largestcitiesonlyPhiladelphiahasasharehigherthanChicago.

Whenwefurtherbroadenthescope

ofcomparison,placeslikePortland,

SanFrancisco,Minneapolisand

Washington,D.C.appearwithhigher

bicyclemodeshares. Asstated

earlier,someofthesehighlevelshave

beenachievedwithrelativelysmall

citylandareas.

InTable36,wehavealsoincluded

theshareforwalkingtowork. Places

suchasBoston,Washington,D.C.and

NewYorkarecitieswherewalkingto

workiscommon. WhileChicagocannotcomparewiththeseplacesintermsofpedestrian

modeshare,the6.5percentisstillmorethantwicethenationalshareof2.8percent.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Percent

M F M F M F M F M F M F M F F

NewYorkCity 16 4 15 2 24 2 20 2 11 1 15 3 101 14 12%

LosAngeles 5 0 9 1 8 0 7 0 4 1 12 0 45 2 4%

Chicago 6 1 7 0 2 1 5 1 4 2 5 0 29 5 15%

Philadelphia 2 0 4 0 4 1 2 1 2 0 2 2 16 4 20%

Seattle 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 6 3 33%

Baltimore

1

0

1

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0

4

0

0%Milwaukee 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0%

Total 30 5 38 4 40 4 36 4 23 5 36 6 203 28 12%


27/129


28/129


Table36: Bicyclingandwalkingasmodeoftransportationtoworkinmajorcities,2010

Source:U.S.CensusBureau,ACS,2010

Commuters By

bicycle

Percent

bike

Walk Percent

walk

Ratio

biketo

walk

Bike

percent

male

US 136,941,010 731,286 0.53% 3,797,048 2.77% 0.19 73.6%

Illinois 5,792,659 33,427 0.58% 178,901 3.09% 0.19 71.4%

Peercities

NewYork* 3,615,588 27,917 0.77% 364,273 10.08% 0.08 79.1%

LosAngeles* 1,706,116 16,101 0.94% 61,154 3.58% 0.26 78.4%

Chicago* 1,168,318 15,096 1.29% 76,372 6.54% 0.20 72.3%

Philadelphia* 583,734 10,503 1.80% 48,318 8.28% 0.22 58.4%

Seattle

339,160

12,306 3.63% 29,070 8.57%

0.42

70.1%Baltimore 256,622 1,788 0.70% 16,532 6.44% 0.11 81.5%

Milwaukee 249,594 1,723 0.69% 11,736 4.70% 0.15 77.8%

Twelvelargestcities*,notfoundaboveinpeercities

Houston 961,240 4,393 0.46% 20,641 2.15% 0.21 81.3%

Phoenix 620,072 3,576 0.58% 11,025 1.78% 0.32 90.2%

SanDiego 620,939 6,390 1.03% 18,178 2.93% 0.35 69.1%

Dallas 543,348 820 0.15% 9,895 1.82% 0.08 92.3%

SanAntonio 591,725 1,159 0.20% 13,686 2.31% 0.08 77.0%

SanJose

426,136

2,708 0.64% 6,768 1.59%

0.40

83.6%

Jacksonville 375,579 843 0.22% 6,700 1.78% 0.13 79.2%

Indianapolis 366,017 1,935 0.53% 7,035 1.92% 0.28 83.2%

Othernoteworthycities

SanFrancisco 437,814 15,208 3.47% 41,362 9.45% 0.37 67.3%

Washington,D.C. 296,717 9,288 3.13% 34,895 11.76% 0.27 67.9%

Boston 309,620 4,369 1.41% 49,007 15.83% 0.09 61.2%

Portland, OR 286,228 17,035 5.95% 15,078 5.27% 1.13 64.9%

Columbus,OH 370,337 2,498 0.67% 11,205 3.03% 0.22 67.1%

Sacramento 188,974 4,725 2.50% 5,507 2.91% 0.86 75.5%

Detroit 196,706 651 0.33% 4,905 2.49% 0.13 100%

Austin,TX 412,291 4,242 1.03% 12,184 2.96% 0.35 77.9%

Minneapolis 200,853 6,969 3.47% 13,458 6.70% 0.52 75.5%

Miami 164,340 1,550 0.94% 6,166 3.75% 0.25 79.9%


29/129


Chapter4: CharacteristicsofCyclistsInvolvedinCrashes

In

this

chapter,

we

examine

bicycling

patterns

in

the

City

of

Chicago

by

gender,

age

and

educationallevels.Wealsoexaminethedetailsofcrashstatisticsbythesesociodemographic

groupings.

4.1: BicycleUseandSafetyTrendsbyAgeandGender

Moststudiesshowthatthemajorityofcyclistsaremale,withtheexceptionthatwomenare

morelikelymaketripstoschoolbybicycle(Garrard,etal2008;Krizek,etal2005). Usinga

varietyofsourcesandcircumstances,weestimatethatmalestypicallyaccountfortwothirdsto

threequartersofthecyclists(Table41). UsingtheCMAPTravelTrackersurveydata,wefind

thatinChicago,malesareparticularlypredominantinrecreationalandentertainmenttrips,

accountingfor

78

percent

of

these

trips.

Females

account

for

roughly

one

third

of

the

trips

in

theCMAPTravelTrackerSurvey,and27percentofthecyclistsinaCDOTdowntowncount.

Table41: Gendermixofbicycling

Variable Male Female Total

Chicago No. Percent No. Percent

BicycletripsperdayCMAPsurvey 66% 34%

CMAProutineshoppingtrips 59% 41%

CMAPrecreationandentertainmenttrips 78% 22%

20052009ACSjourneytowork 9303 72% 3620 28%

CDOTDowntown

Bike

Count

13/9/2011*

73%

27% 9722

Chicagofatalities2005to2010 27 84% 5 16% 32

BeyondChicago

Fatalitiesinpeercities20052009 167 88.4% 22 11.6% 189

Nationalfatalities2008 93 87.0% 623 13.0% 716

Nationalfatalities2009 81 85.2% 549 14.8% 630

*http://www.chicagobikes.org/pdf/NBPDcount_stats.pdf

SourceforChicagodata:CMAPTravelTrackerSurvey,20078

Sourceforstatewidedata:IDOTCrashData,20052010

Sourcefor

National

data:

Fatality

Analysis

Reporting

System

(FARS)

Thelargestgenderdifferencesareinfatalitiesstatistics.Nationally,femalesaccountedfor

approximatelyoneofeverysevenfatalities,or13.0and14.8percentin2008and2009

respectively. ThisissimilartothesixyeardataforChicago,wherethefemaleportionof

crasheswas16percent.Forcomparison,onlyninepercentofbicyclistswhodiedasaresultof


30/129


crashesinNewYorkCityfrom1996through2003werefemale(NYCDOT),thoughmorerecent

datashowthat thisstatistichasrisento12percentinthelastsixyears.LosAngelesresultin

thissamedatacategoryisfourpercent(Table35).

Somedifferencesmaybeattributabletogreaterexposureandhigherspeedsformales(Table

4

2).

Females

account

for

just

under

one

third

of

the

miles

traveled

(Note:

The

CMAP

Travel

Trackersurveyprovidesveryusefulinformationforthisstudy;however,thedataprocessed

andreportedarenotintendedtobeprecise,inpartduetothesmallsamplesizeandoverall

objectivesoftheCMAPsurvey).

Table42: Chicagobicyclingestimates,2007

Daily

miles*

Daily

minutes*

Average

minutes/

trip

Average

miles/

trip

Speed

MPH

Female 98,200 800,000 22.1 2.70 7.3

Male 221,600 1,660,000 23.1 3.08 8.0

Total

319,800 2,460,000

Ratio 2.3 2.1 1.05 1.14 1.10

*Theminutesand milesareestimatescomputedby theauthors fromCMAPsurveydataandarenot

intendedtobeprecisecomputationsanddonothaveadefinedmarginoferror

Source: ComputedbytheauthorsfromCMAPTravelTrackerdata,2007

Whilemalesaccountforapproximatelytwiceasmuchcycling,theyincurthreetimesmore

injuries(Table43). Thethreetooneratiolargelyholdstruethroughoutthesixyearstudy

period. Onlydatafortheyear2008fallsbelowthisratio.

Table43: Genderofcyclistsinjuredinbicyclecrashes

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Percent Percent

known

Male 777 1046 1347 1093 1064 1163 6490 72.86% 75.38%

Female 243 334 429 405 328 381 2120 23.80% 24.62%

Unknown 226 17 14 9 4 27 297 3.33%

Total 1246 1397 1790 1507 1396 1571 8907 100% 100%

Source: IDOTMotorVehicleCrashData

Tofurther

understand

the

relationship

between

male

and

female

cycling,

we

examined

the

crashratespermilescycled.Table44showsthatfemaleslivinginChicagocycle36million

milesannually,andtogetherwithmaleslogover110millionmilesannually.Usingthestandard

usedintransportationliteratureonmotorizedfatalities,weestimatethattherateforfemales

is2.8fatalitiesforevery100millionbicyclemilestraveled(BMT).Formales,theratiostandsat

approximatelytwotimeshigherat5.5.Therateforallcyclistsis4.6fatalitiesper100million

BMT.Mostofthebicyclemileagedatausedinthesecalculationswerebasedonhousehold


31/129


travelsurveyscompiledlargelyin2007whentherewereonlyatotalofthreefatalities. Using

thisasthebase,thefatalityratesforthatyearwasonly2.6permillionsBMT.

Table44: Fatalitiesandinjurycrashesper100millionmilesoftravel

(fatalities

and

injuries

represent

the

annual

average

over

the

six

year

study

period,

milesbikedareconservative,approximateestimates)

Annualmiles Fatalities/

100millionmiles

Injurycrashes/

100millionmiles

Female 36,000,000 2.8 1000

Male 81,000,000 5.5 1400

RatioM/F 2.25 2.0 1.4

Source: IDOTMotorVehicleCrashDataandCMAPTravelTrackerdata,2007

Thesenumbersarehigherthanfornationalmotorvehiclefatalities,thathavedecreasedin

recentyears

to

1.14

per

100

million

miles

traveled.

In

making

this

comparison

two

points

need

tobeacknowledged.First,thebikemilesareestimatedfromCMAPhouseholdsurveydatathat

includesdataonbicyclingbutwasnotweightedstrictlywithbicyclinginmind.Second,bicycles

andmotorvehiclestravelonverydifferentroadways,especiallyinaCityofChicagoversus

nationalcomparison. Manyofthemotorvehiclemilesareloggedoninterstatehighways,

impracticalformostcitytrips. Still,thestatisticsprovideacrudecomparisonoftherelative

safetyoftworatherdifferentmodesoftravel.ThefemalepermilefatalityrateinChicagois

approximatelytherateformotorvehiclesabout35yearsago,regardlessofgender.Themale

rateof6.7fatalitiespermillionmilestraveledwastrueforhighwayfatalitiesabout60years

ago. Inthe1930s,therateofmotorvehiclefatalitiesper100millionmilesoftravelwasover

ten.

Regardingdemographics,bicyclingseemstoincreaseinpopularityuptoage34andthen

decreases.Thelargestnumberoftripsismadebycyclists25to34yearsofage,butthedatain

Table4.5needtobeevaluatedwiththecaveatthattheyarebasedonarelativelysmallsample.

InparticularsincetheCMAPTravelTrackerdatainTable45aredividedintoeightage

categories,someoftheagegroupsmayreflectdata,inparticular,thatarebasedonasmall

samplesize. Nevertheless,thereisevidencethatcyclingmilesandminutesalsoincreasewith

ageuntilage34,atwhichpointitbeginstodecline. The5564agegroupfitsthepatternfor

numberoftripsanddistance,buttheiraveragesinthelasttwocolumnsdonotfitanyobvious

pattern.Withoutthis5564agegroupitappearstheaveragetripdistance(milesandminutes)

increaseswith

age

(last

two

columns).

Sincegenderandagearebothrelatedtobicycleuse,itwouldbeinformativetoexamineboth

genderandagetogether.Webeginbyexaminingfatalitynumbersandtheninjurydatarates.


32/129


Table45: Bicyclingbyage,milesandminutesperday,2007(Eightagecategoriesyieldatablewithunevensamplesizessothat

thedatainthistableshouldnotbeinterpretedprecisely)

Age Trips Distance Minutes Average

distance

Average

minutes


33/129


Table46: BicyclistfatalitiesbyageandgenderinCityofChicago,20052010

Age(years) Male Female Total

Total

killed

Population Fatality

rate*

Total

Killed

Population Fatality

rate

Total

killed

Population Fatality

rate


34/129


35/129


Figure42illustratestherelationshipbetweenmaleandfemalecyclistinjurycrashratesbyage

shownaboveintabularform.Thereisgenerallyaconsistentpatternwithmalesexperiencing

higherratesandnumbersforeachagegroup.Thereare,however,twoagecategoriesthat

seemoutofstep:1014and4554years. Inthesetwoagegroups,maleshavehigherrates

thanthepatternimpliedbytheshapeofthelineforfemalecyclists,anddonotconformto

steadilyincreasing

and

decreasing

rates

found

for

females.

Lastly,

both

lines

peak

at

20

24

yearsofage.

Figure41: Ratioofmaletofemaleinjuryrates(Rateisinjuryperpopulationintheagecohort,thereisnodatapointfor85+

sincetherewerenoinjuriesforfemales)

Source:PreparedbytheauthorsfromIDOTMotorVehicleCrashData

Figure42: Annualaverageinjurycrashrateper100,000residents


36/129


37/129


Chapter5: VehiclesandOperatorsInvolvedinBicycleCrashes

Inthis

chapter

we

examine

the

condition

of

vehicles,

drivers

and

bicyclists

at

the

time

of

the

crashaswellashitandrunstatistics.

5.1: AlcoholandBicycleCrashes

HighBACofdriversinvolvedintrafficfatalitieshasbeenalongstandingproblem.Nationally,

thepercentageofmotorvehicledriversexceedingthepermittedBAClevelof0.08has

remainedsteadyforoveradecade(http://www.fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Trends/TrendsAlcohol.aspx)

atapproximately32percentandaccountedforover10,000fatalitiesin2009.

5.1.1: BloodAlcoholContentofMotorists

Ofthe

32

bicycle

fatalities

in

our

study

period,

only

six

motorists

received

afield

sobriety

test,

andonerefusedtobetested. Ofthesesix,fourhadnoalcoholintheirsystemandtwohad

positiveresults,butwithinthelegallimit(Table51,usingFARSasadatasource).Thesetwo

positivelevelswere0.1and0.7,thelatterbeingclosetothelegallimit.

Table51: Bloodalcoholcontentofdriversinvolvedinfatalbicyclecrashes

BAClevelfordrivers

(g/dL)

Frequency

BAC=0 4

0.001


38/129


39/129


Table53: BloodAlcoholContentofbicyclistsinfatalcrashes,2005to2010

BACtestresult(g/dL) Frequency

0.00 19

0.01

1

0.02 1

0.06 2

0.11 1

0.14 1

0.18 1

0.25 1

Total 27

14.8percentDUIamongtotaltestedbicyclists

Source:FARS

5.1.3: HitandRunCrashes

Hitandruncrashescontinuetobeavexingproblemforbicyclecrashes(Figure51).They

accountforapproximatelyaquarterofallfatalitiesandbicycleinjurycrashes.Whilethese

proportionsmayseemhigh,theyarelowerthaninthecaseofpedestriancrashes.From2005

to2009,33percentofthepedestrianinjurycrashesand41percentofthepedestrianfatalities

werehitandrun.

Figure51: Hitandrunbicyclecrashes,2005to2010



40/129


41/129


42/129


Other 39 40 51 40 35 39 244 2.91% 3.02%

Unknown/NA 40 51 64 59 56 37 307 3.66%

Total 1219 1283 1611 1374 1325 1577 8389 100.00% 100.00%


Thetotal

number

of

injury

crashes

has

fluctuatedfromyeartoyear,butafewofthe

vehicletypesshowevidenceofatrendover

thestudyperiod. Duringthelastfouryear

period,thenumberofsingleunittrucks

involvedinbicyclecrasheshassteadily

declined.Theydecreasedfrom26in2007to

onlyninein2010.

Increaseshavebeenregisteredbypickup

trucks. Thoughtheincreasesarenotsteady,

therise

in

their

involvement

has

been

from

30

in2005to54in2010. Themostnoticeable

increase,however,hasbeenwithSUVs. Figure

52showstherisefrom87in2005to165in

2010. Notonlyhastherebeenanincrease

everyyear(modestinsomeyears)butthere

hasbeenalmostadoublinginthenumber

duringthestudyperiod.

Figure52:

Number

of

SUVs

involved

in

bicycle

crashes


43/129



Table57examinestheroleofmotorvehiclesmorecloselybynotingthetypeofuseduringthe

injurycrash. Asanticipatedfromtheprevioustable,personaluseisthemostcommonvehicle

use. Thisisfollowedbytaxis(togetherwithotherforhirevehicles).Thisgroupaccountsfor

onein12bicyclecrasheswithinjuries. CTAbuses,commercialvehiclesandpoliceallaccount

formorethanonepercentofthecrashes.

Manyof

the

individual

uses

shown

in

Table

57trend

with

the

total

number

of

bicycle

injury

crashes,makingitdifficulttoidentifytheirindividualtrends. Policevehicles,however,showa

steadydeclinesince2007. Thenumbershavedeclinedfrom20in2007to12in2010,twoyears

thathadahighnumberofinjurycrashes,1611and1577respectively,showinglittleoverall

decreaseincrashes.

Table57: Vehicleuseduringcrash

Typeofuse 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Percent Percent

known

Notinuse 50 38 54 51 53 50 296 3.53% 4.21%

Personal

810

846 1084 885 855 1024 5504

65.61%

78.36%Taxi/forhire 80 91 110 114 90 107 592 7.06% 8.43%

Citybus 19 15 23 11 13 31 112 1.34% 1.59%

Commercialsingleunit 7 14 20 11 16 15 104 1.24% 1.48%

Police 12 13 20 17 14 12 88 1.05% 1.25%

Construction/maintenance 8 4 6 9 1 9 37 0.44% 0.53%


44/129


Othertransit 4 3 4 7 6 9 33 0.39% 0.47%

Masstransit 8 6 7 8 0 3 32 0.38% 0.46%

Stateowned 2 2 0 2 3 3 12 0.14% 0.17%

Schoolbus 1 0 2 1 1 3 8 0.10% 0.11%

Towtruck

1

2 1 0 2 1 7

0.08%

0.10%Camper/RV 1 3 0 0 0 1 5 0.06% 0.07%

Fire 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 0.05% 0.06%

Drivereducation 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 0.04% 0.04%

Ambulance 1 0 2 0 0 0 3 0.04% 0.04%

Housetrailer 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0.02% 0.03%

Other 27 33 39 35 33 36 203 2.42% 2.89%

Unknown/NA 187 211 235 223 236 273 1365 16.27%

Total 1219 1283 1611 1374 1325 1577 8389 100.00% 100.00%

Source:IDOT

Motor

Vehicle

Crash

Data


45/129


5.4: DriverandVehicleManeuvers

In24ofthe32fatalities,theactiontakenbythemotorvehicledriverisknown.Inhalfofthese

cases,the

driver

is

reported

to

have

contributed

to

the

fatality

by

either

failing

to

yield,

driving

toofastorengaginginanimproperlanechange(Table58). Inonethirdofthecases,there

wasnoidentifiedactionandinanotherfourcasestheactionwasclassifiedasother.

Table58: Driveractioninfatalcrashes,CityofChicago,20052010

Driveraction Frequency Percentknown

None 8 33%

Failedtoyield 10 42%

Toofastforconditions 1 4%

Improperpassing 1 4%

Other

4 17%

Unknown 8

Total 32 100%


Failuretoyieldrightofwaywasalsoa

majorfactorinapproximately40

percentoftheinjurycrashes(Table5

9),similartothetrendshownforfatal

crashesshownintheprevioustable.

Improperactionsassociatedwithlane

change,backing,passing,parkingand

turningarealsocontributors,but

collectivelyaccountforapproximately

onlyfivepercentoftheinjurycrashes.

Injustoverathirdofthecrashes,the

driverwasnotinvolvedinamaneuver

listedinTable59. Inessence,the

drivermaneuversinbothfataland

injurycrashes

are

rather

similar.

The

differencemaybeattributedtothemuchlargerdatabaseofinjurycrashesthatpermitsmore

detailregardingothermaneuvers.


46/129


Table59: Driveractioninbicyclevehicleinjurycrashes

Driveraction 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Percent Percent

known

None 360 390 477 368 358 431 2384 26.75% 35.29%

Failedtoyield 357 385 551 452 463 525 2733 30.67% 40.46%

Disregardedcontrol

devices

21 38 34 26 25 14 158 1.77% 2.34%

Toofastforconditions 9 14 19 16 13 11 82 0.92% 1.21%

Improperturn 15 23 24 35 27 33 157 1.76% 2.32%

Wrongway/side 3 8 8 4 2 6 31 0.35% 0.46%

Followedtooclosely 12 11 15 10 16 13 77 0.86% 1.14%

Improperlane

change

12

10

15 16 15 14 82 0.92%

1.21%

Improperbacking 13 16 15 10 9 8 71 0.80% 1.05%

Improperpassing 7 10 10 10 6 9 52 0.58% 0.77%

Improperparking 3 2 2 2 0 4 13 0.15% 0.19%

Licenserestrictions 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0.02% 0.03%

Stoppedschoolbus 0 2 2 1 1 2 8 0.09% 0.12%

Emergencyvehicleon

call

0 1 1 1 4 0 7 0.08% 0.10%

Evadingpolicevehicle 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0.02% 0.03%

Other

136

155

165 165 137 138 896 10.05%

13.26%Unknown 296 331 454 397 315 363 2156 24.19%

Total 1245 1397 1794 1513 1391 1571 8911 100.00% 100.00%


Themotionordirectionofthevehicleisgivenin

Table510.Theprevioustable(Table59)

describedtheactionofthedriver. Accordingto

availabledata,themotorvehiclewasmoving

straightaheadinnearlyallcases. Bothturning

vehiclesand

entering

traffic

from

parking

each

accountedforlessthanonepercentofdriver

actions.


47/129


Table510: Vehiclemaneuverpriortobicycleinjurycrashes

Vehiclemaneuver 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Percent Percent

known

Straightahead

735

803 1014 825 791 918 5086

56.81% 98.81%

Passing/overtaking 1 1 2 0 0 2 6 0.07% 0.12%

Turningleft 1 1 0 0 0 1 3 0.03% 0.06%

Turningright 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0.02% 0.04%

Turningonred 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0.01% 0.02%

Uturn 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0.02% 0.04%

Startingintraffic 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.01% 0.02%

Slow/stopleftturn 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0.02% 0.04%

Slow/stoprightturn 6 5 2 2 0 1 16 0.18% 0.31%

Slow/stop

load/unload

0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0.01% 0.02%

Slow/stopintraffic 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.01% 0.02%

Drivingwrongway 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0.01% 0.02%

Changinglanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.01% 0.02%

Entertrafficfrom

parking

2 4 10 2 3 3 24 0.27% 0.47%

Unknown/NA 501 587 774 689 602 652 3805 42.50%

Total 1249 1402 1805 1521 1398 1577 8952 100% 100%

Source:IDOT

Motor

Vehicle

Crash

Data

5.5: Dooring

Whenabicyclistrunsintoamotorvehicle

doorthatisopenedunexpectedly,itis

knownasacaseofdooring. Weusethe

IDOTdataondooringstartingwith2010;

thereforethesummariesreportedbeloware

forarelativelyshortperiodoftime.Itshows,

however,

that

dooring

is

associated

with

disproportionatelymoreTypeBinjuries

(Table511). AddingTypesAandBtogether

showsthehighdegreeofsevereinjuries

commonwithdooring(TypeCinjuriesare

theleastserious).


48/129


(Thephotographsarethrougharearviewmirror).

Table511: Allversusdooringbicyclecrashes,byinjurytype

Injurytype Allnondooringcrashes Dooringcrashes

TypeA

11%

8%

TypeB 51% 61%

TypeC 38% 31%

Source:IDOTMotorVehicleCrashData20052010andIDOTDooringData20102011

5.6: BicyclistActivity

Inthissectionweexploretheactionsof

bicyclistsandwherethecrashoccurred.

Itconcludesbyexaminingthe

propensitytowearahelmet.

5.6.1: BicyclistAction

Wefirstconsiderfatalcrashesfollowed

byinjurycrashes.Over45percentof

the32fatalitiesoccurredwhile

bicyclistsweremovingintraffic. Inover

onethird(11)ofthefatalitiesthecyclist

wasmovingwiththeflowoftraffic

(Table512)andinonlytwocaseswasthecyclistmovingagainsttheflow.Signalized

intersectionsrepresentasignificantproblemarea.Atsignalizedintersectionswherefatalities

occurred,cyclists

crossed

against

the

signal

in

six

of

the

cases,

or

20

percent

of

the

time.

Lastly,

leftturnswerethecontributingfactorinthreeof32fatalities.

Table512: Bicyclistactioninfatalcrashes,20052010

Bicyclistaction Fatalities Percent Percent

known

Turningleft 3 9.4% 10.3%

Enterfromdrive/alley 1 3.1% 3.5%

Crossingwithsignal 2 6.3% 6.9%

Crossingagainstsignal 6 18.8% 20.7%

Walking/Ridingwithtraffic 11 34.4% 37.9%

Walking/Ridingagainst

traffic

2 6.3% 6.9%

Playinginroadway 1 3.1% 3.5%

Otheraction 3 9.4% 10.3%

Unknown/NA 3 9.4%

Total 32 100% 100%


49/129



Likefatalcrashes,asimilarlyhighpercentageofinjurycrashes(50percent)alsooccurredwhile

thecyclistwasmovingintraffic(Table513percentknown).Again,asimilarlyhighproportion

ofthese

in

traffic

injuries

occurred

when

moving

against

traffic,

approximately

20

percent.

Thelackofexposuredatamakeitimpossibletoknowifthisisdisproportionatetoactualtraffic.

Also,crossingatsignalizedintersectionsisthesecondhighestcontributortobicyclecrashes,

accountingfor20percentofthecrashes. Inslightlymorethanonethirdofthesecrashes,the

cyclistwascrossingagainstthesignal.

Table513: Bicyclistactionininjurycrashes

Bicyclistaction

Injury

type

Total

Percent

Percent

knownA B C

Turningleft 25 107 86 218 2.45% 2.94%

Turningright 15 46 40 101 1.13% 1.36%

Enterfromdrive/alley 33 209 147 389 4.37% 5.25%

Noaction 26 119 112 257 2.89% 3.47%

Crossingwithsignal 91 505 372 968 10.87% 13.05%

Crossingagainstsignal 69 275 185 529 5.94% 7.13%

Entering/Leaving/Crossingschoolbus

(within

50ft)

0 0 1 1 0.01% 0.01%

Entering/Leaving/Crossingparkedvehicle 1 13 9 23 0.26% 0.31%

Entering/Leaving/Crossingnotat

intersection

13 52 38 103 1.16% 1.39%

Walking/Ridingwithtraffic 288 1624 1084 2996 33.64% 40.40%

Walking/Ridingagainsttraffic 94 374 296 764 8.58% 10.30%

Walking/Ridingto/fromdisabledvehicle 0 6 2 8 0.09% 0.11%

Waitingforschoolbus 0 2 3 5 0.06% 0.07%

Playing/workingonvehicle 0 1 1 2 0.02% 0.03%

Playinginroadway 7 25 29 61 0.68% 0.82%

Standingin

roadway

0 5 10 15

0.17%

0.20%

Workinginroadway 0 1 4 5 0.06% 0.07%

Otheraction 87 483 382 952 10.69% 12.84%

Intoxicated 2 10 8 20 0.22% 0.27%

Unknown/NA 176 658 658 1492 16.75%

Total 927 4515 3465 8907 100% 100%



50/129


51/129


5.6.3: BicyclistHelmetUse

Oneoftheprovenmeansofminimizing

seriousinjuriesfrombicyclecrashesis

helmetuse. Amongthe29fatalities

recordedbetween

2005

and

2009,

only

one

cyclistisknowntohaveusedahelmet

(Table516).Importantly,thereportingfor

theremaining28crasheswasnotconclusive

astowhetherahelmetwaswornornot

(recordedoncrashreportsasnone

used/notapplicable).Forthisreason,

conclusionsregardingthetruerateof

helmetuseinthesecrashes,ortheimpact

oncrashseveritycannotbedrawnfrom

thesedata.

Table516: Helmetuse,2005to2009

Helmetuse Number Percent

known

NoneUsed/NotApplicable 26 97%

Used 1 4%

Unknown 2

Total 29 100%

Source:FARSftp://ftp.nhtsa.dot.gov/fars/

However,nationaltraumadataindicatethatthepercentageofincidentsinwhichhelmetsare

usedhasrangedfrom22to24percent(basedonapproximately50,000traumaincidents

between2007and2010).


52/129


Chapter6: EnvironmentalFactorsandRoadConditions

Inthischapterweexaminetherelationshipofbicyclecrashestoenvironmentalfactorssuchas

weatherandlightconditions.Thisisfollowedbyadiscussionofroadconditions.

6.1:

EnvironmentalFactors

during

Crashes

Previousresearchsuggeststhatbicycle/motorvehiclecrashesareassociatedwithpoorlylit

streets,streetswithoutmediansandhighspeedlimits. Weexploresomeofthesepointsinthis

section.

6.1.1: WeatherRelatedFactors

Perhapssurprisingly,inclement

weatherdoesnotseemtobea

majorcontributortobicycle

crashes.Thismaybeduetothefact

thatcyclinglevelsarelowduringinclementweather;however,we

havenoexposuredata(miles

traveledininclementweather)to

assesshowweathermay

disproportionatelycontributeto

crashes.

Thegreatmajorityofinjuryand

fatalcrashesoccurredinclearweather(Table61).Rainwaspresentinlessthantenpercentof

crashes,suggesting

that

bicycling

predominantly

occurs

during

good

weather.

Table61: Weatherconditionsduringbicyclecrashes

Weather Fatal

crashes

Injurycrashtype Injury

total

Percent Percent

knownA B C

Clear 29 807 3932 2939 7678 86.65% 88.70%

Rain 2 93 320 252 665 7.50% 7.68%

Snow 11 22 23 56 0.63% 0.65%

Fog/smoke/haze 20 91 69 180 2.03% 2.08%

Sleet/hail

4 8 12 24 0.27%

0.28%Severecrosswind 1 3 3 7 0.08% 0.08%

Other 1 6 30 10 46 0.52% 0.53%

Unknown 19 86 100 205 2.31%

Total 32 961 4492 3408 8861 100.00% 100.00%



53/129


6.1.2: LightConditions

Inadditiontoclearweather,the

majorityofbicyclecrashesoccurred

duringdaylight

hours,

in

nearly

three

offourcrashes(Table62). Mostof

theremainingcrashesoccurred

duringhoursofdarkness,butin

locationswheretheroadwayis

lighted.Thisisthecasein18percent

ofinjurycrashesandmorethanone

thirdoffatalcrashes.InChapter7,

thedisproportionatenumberoffatal

crashesin

the

evening

hours

is

exploredfurther.

Table62: Lightconditionsduringbicyclecrashes

LightConditions

Injury

crashes

Fatal

crashesInjurycrashtype Total Injury

percent

Percent

knownA B C

Daylight 635 3269 2479 6383 72.03% 73.02% 17

Dawn 18 54 45 117 1.32% 1.34%

Dusk 35 168 126 329 3.71% 3.76% 2

Darkness 53 154 137 344 3.88% 3.94% 2

Darkness,lightedroad 209 794 566 1569 17.71% 17.95% 11

Unknown 11 53 55 119 1.34% 0

Total

961 4492 3408 8861 100.00%

100.00% 32



54/129


6.1.3: WeatherRelatedRoadSurface

Expectedly,thedataonroadsurfacescanbeinferredfromthefindingsrelatingtotheweather

data(Table63).Nearly90percentofcrashesoccurredwhentheroadsurfacewasdryandten

percentwhen

it

was

wet.

Again,

as

expected,

snow

or

slush

was

rarely

the

contributing

factor.

Table63: Roadsurfaceconditionsduringbicyclecrashes,2005 2010

Roadsurface Fatal Injurycrashtype Injury

total

Injury

percent

Percent

knownA B C

Dry 29 802 3875 2878 7555 85.26% 89.16%

Wet 2 114 415 322 851 9.60% 10.04%

Snoworslush 5 18 22 45 0.51% 0.53%

Ice 1 2 6 9 0.10% 0.11%

Sand,mud,

dirt

1 3 2 6 0.07% 0.07%

Other 1 7 0 8 0.09% 0.09%

Unknown 1 37 172 178 387 4.37%

Total 32 961 4492 3408 8861 100.00% 100.00%


6.2: RoadwayEnvironment

6.2.1: RelationtoIntersections

Intersectionsrepresentagreaterhazard

tobicyclistscomparedtootherroadway

sections.Table64showsthatoverhalf

ofbothfatalandinjurycrashesoccurred

atintersections.Thedatareflectthe

natureoftheChicagostreetsystem,

withmanydiagonalstreetscreating

complexintersections.

Table64:

Bicycle

injury

crashes

at

intersections

Intersection

related

Fatalcrashes Injurycrashtype Total Percent

Number Percent A B C

Yes 18 56.3% 541 2436 1836 4813 54.3%

No 14 43.8% 420 2056 1572 4048 45.7%

Total 32 100% 961 4492 3408 8861 100%



55/129


Intersectionsrepresentapotentialhazardforalltraffic,andparticularlytobicyclesand

pedestrians.Map61showsintersectionsthatrecordedatleasttencrashes. Thevastmajority

oftheseintersectionsarelocatednorthwestofdowntownChicago. Onlyoneintersectionis

locatedsouthoftheLoopandoutsidethegreaterdowntownarea,atArcherandWestern.

Map61: Intersectionswithatleastteninjurycrashes


Thesizeofanintersection(geographicscope)isnotfixedandvariesbyintersectiondesignand

complexity. We,however,usethesamesizedefinitionforallintersections.Specifically,ifa

crashoccurswithin125feetofthecenterpointoftheintersection,itiscountedasan

intersectioncrash.

Table65showsthatnoneofthe12intersectionswiththehighestnumberofcrashesare

locatedintheimmediatedowntownarea. TheintersectionatChicagoandHalstedisthesite

closestto

the

Loop.

Thetwointersectionswiththehighestnumbersofcrashesarelarge,complexintersections

wherethreemajorarterialroadwaysconverge. Thehighestnumberofintersectioncrashes

occursattheintersectionofDamen,FullertonandElstonAvenues,followedcloselybythe

intersectionofChicago,MilwaukeeandOgdenAvenues. Manyofthehighcrashintersections

areassociatedwithdiagonalstreets,includingMilwaukee,ClybournandLincoln.Thelargest

numberofcrashesatanondiagonalintersectionisatChicagoandHalsted.


56/129


Table65: Intersectionswiththegreatestnumberofinjurycrashes

Crash

count

N/Sstreet E/Wstreet Diagonalstreet/Avenue Communityarea

20 DamenAve FullertonAve ElstonAve LoganSquare

19

n/a

ChicagoAve

Milwaukee

Ave&

Ogden

AveWest

Town

17 HalstedSt ChicagoAve n/a WestTown

16 LakeShoreDr MontroseAve n/a Uptown

16 CaliforniaAve n/a MilwaukeeAve LoganSquare

15 HalstedSt FullertonAve LincolnAve LincolnPark

15 DamenAve NorthAve MilwaukeeAve WestTown

14 DamenAve DiverseyAve ClybournAve NorthCenter/Lincoln

Park

14 n/a FullertonAve MilwaukeeAve LoganSquare

14

AshlandAve

Cortland

St

n/a

Logan

Square

14 HalstedSt ArmitageAve n/a LincolnPark

14 DamenAve n/a WickerParkAve WestTown

14 ClarkSt n/a RidgeAve Edgewater


Map62showsthe

locationsofthehighcrash

intersectionsmoreclearly.It

isevident

that

the

diagonal

arterialsaccountforthe

vastmajorityofcrashes.

ThisincludesMilwaukee,

Elston,Clybourn,Lincoln

andClark. Theseareall

importantarterialsradiating

fromdowntownChicago.

Halstedisthemajor

exception,followedby

NorthAvenue.

Amongtheintersectionsclosesttodowntownareat(1)HalstedandMadisonand(2)Roosevelt

andState. Theyarenot,however,inthelistofthe12highestcrashintersections.


57/129


Map62Intersectionswithlargenumberofinjurycrashes



58/129


6.2.2: RoadDefects

Theroadcircumstancesseemnottobeanimportantelementinbicyclecrashes.Nodefects

werereportedin97percentofthecrashes(Table66).SomeofthedefectslistedinTable66

areinevitableovertheshorttermbeforemaintenancecrewscanact,suchasdebrisonthe

road.

Table66: Roaddefects

Roaddefects Fatal Injurycrashtype Injury

total

Injury

percent

Percent

knownA B C

Nodefects 30 864 4000 2770 7634 86.15% 97.08%

Constructionzone 0 10 46 28 84 0.95% 1.07%

Maintenancezone 0 0 2 2 4 0.05% 0.05%

Utilityworkzone 0 0 0 3 3 0.03% 0.04%

Workzoneunknown 0 2 3 2 7 0.08% 0.09%

Shoulders

0

0 0 1 1 0.01%

0.01%Rut,holes 1 2 11 9 22 0.25% 0.28%

Wornsurface 0 3 11 10 24 0.27% 0.31%

Debrisonroadway 0 6 19 38 63 0.71% 0.80%

Other 0 3 13 6 22 0.25% 0.28%

Unknown 1 71 387 539 997 11.25%

Total 32 961 4492 3408 8861 100.00% 100.00%


6.2.3: RoadwayTypeandNumberofLanes

Mostfatal

bicycle

crashes

occur

on

two

way

streets.

Over

80

percent

are

on

such

streets

(Table

67). Onewaystreetsaccountforoneineightfatalities. Thelackofexposuredatapreventsus

chicago bicycle crash full report final

Documents