United States Bicycle Route System: Draft Corridor Plan

The Vision

To encourage the development of a coordinated system of US bicycle routes across the country.

The Task Force was charged with developing a recommended national systems-level or corridor-level plan for use in designating potential future US bicycle routes.

1956-2006 1976-2006

PHASE 1

• Collect, compile and review information on existing and proposed multi-state bicycle routes. In 2005, ACA collected the data and formalized it into a multilayer spreadsheet.

A

ZY

G

S

L

E

• Pennsylvania state designated routes

ArkansasMemphis to Fort Smith cross state route from the Dept. of Parks & Tourism

US-70, 49, 107, 64, AR-147, 50, 70, 1, 284, 306, 38, 31, 319, 60, 236, 89, 10, 176, 9, 154, 7, 155, 22

Per advocacy groups

AR-7 a western-central north-south route

US-71 western side north-south route

AR-1 eastern side north-south route

US-62 northern side east-west route

US-82 southern side east-west route

Inventory of existing and proposed national and state bike routes and trail systems.

PHASE 2

• Develop recommended corridors to comprise a logical national system, called the U.S. Bicycle Corridor Plan. Corridors demonstrate an area (+/- 50 mile radius) where a route should exist.

Corridor Criteria

• Meet the planning, design, and operational criteria in the AASHTO Guide for Development of Bicycle Facilities.

• Access destinations and regions with high tourism potential, including routes that incorporate important scenic, historic, cultural, and recreational values.

• Link major metropolitan areas to connect key attractions and transportation nodes.

• Reasonably direct in connecting cities or attractions.

Primary Considerations - Corridors should meet as many of the following as practicable:

Corridor Criteria Continued

• Make natural connections between adjoining states, Canada, and Mexico when possible.

• Have more or less even distribution, though route density will need to consider both population density and available, suitable roads.

• Include major existing and planned bike routes, including both on-road facilities and off-road shared use paths suitable for road bikes.

Secondary Consideration• Offer services and amenities such as

restaurants, accommodations, camping, bicycle shops, and convenience/grocery stores at appropriate intervals.

Inventory of routes overlaid by the proposed corridor system

Showing all possible Corridors

PHASE 3

• Produce a map of the draft U.S. Bicycle Corridor Plan.

PHASE 4

• Develop a logical system of designations for U.S. bicycle routes and assign appropriate designations to each corridor. Designations will comprise of a number, name, letter or combination system that will accommodate future expansion of the system.

PHASE 5 & 6

• Distribute the draft Corridor Plan for review by the Joint Technical Committee on Non-motorized Transportation, Subcommittee on Design, and Subcommittee on Traffic Engineering.

• Present revised draft Corridor Plan for review by the Standing Committee on Highways for endorsement as an “official corridor plan.”

AASHTO’s On-Going Role

• AASHTO is primarily interested in coordinating routes that cross state lines.

• State DOTs submit applications for each US Bike Route to the Special Committee on Route Numbering for approval and designation.

• Web site, including overview and all pending requests: http://cms.transportation.org/?siteid=68

For More Information, See Adventure Cycling Website

www.adventurecycling.org/routes/nbrn/usbikewaysystem.cfm