Quick-Build Prioritization Process

While each quick-build bike facility project is important for different reasons, a variety of factors (including funding, time required for public process and implementation, and seasonal construction restrictions) prevent all projects from being implemented at once. Therefore, the we have drafted a three-step selection strategy to determine the order in which quick-build facilities will be implemented. Once finalized, this process will guide our work for years to come, while giving us the flexibility to account for opportunities that may arise in the future (e.g. construction or other road work).

Quick-Build Prioritization Video

The video below provides a basic overview our proposed Quick-Build Prioritization Process, watch the video to learn more and scroll down for more information about the proposal and how to give feedback.

Prioritization Process Example

This draft of the prioritization process was initially shared in mid-September, 2020. Community members were invited to share feedback on the draft through October 10, 2020. The final version of the prioritization process will be released as a part of the Bicycle Plan update.

The following information is for illustrative purposes only, so that you may better understand the draft process. The final list of projects will be determined after we finish the public process for the 2020 Bicycle Plan update, including collecting feedback on the Bicycle Network Vision.

In order to illustrate how this process would work, we identified 14 corridors from the existing Bicycle Network Vision as candidates for quick-build separated bicycle facilities. All of these streets are:

• Identified for greater separation in the Network Vision - Off-street paths and lower-volume/lower-speed corridors are not generally implemented with quick-build materials. 
• Controlled by the City, not another agency - We can only make changes to streets we own. 
• Not slated for reconstruction in the near future - The Cycling Safety Ordinance requires the City to install separated bike facilities that are included in the Network Vision when the street is reconstructed as a part of the City’s Five-Year Plan for Sidewalk and Street Reconstruction. We want to make the most of our resources, so we would not implement quick-build projects on the streets that will be addressed in the near future as a part of the Five-Year Plan. 
• Locations quick-build implementation has been deemed feasible - Some streets are not good candidates for quick-build projects because implementing safe separated bike facilities would require more extensive construction. 

Step 1 - Rank Projects

We conducted a data-driven analysis based on factors that relate to the goals of the Cambridge Bicycle Plan, including mode shift, safety, and equity. We also considered public input and ease of implementation. The analysis factors are:

• Connectivity - Does this corridor help improve the connectivity of the network? 
• Key Route to Schools - Is this corridor a key route to elementary, middle, and high schools in Cambridge? 
• Key Route to Major Destinations - Does this corridor help make connections to one or more major destinations? 
• Safety - Are there safety issues identified through a crash rate analysis? 
• Comfort Rating - Is this a corridor that would benefit most from the change?  
• Equity - Is this corridor in a Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area? 
• Community Input - Is this a priority for the community? 
• Simplicity of Design - How quickly can a project be implemented (i.e., does not require significant roadway or signal changes)? 

Based on analysis of these factors, we ranked 14 sample projects:

Step 2 – Group projects into phases

We merged neighborhood boundaries to create five “project areas”. Generally speaking, these merged areas consolidate major corridors that span across multiple neighborhoods.

We categorized the ranked projects by project area (Step 2a), then selected the top-ranked project from each area for Phase 1 of implementation (Step 2b). This ensures equal prioritization across project areas and neighborhoods. The same process was used for the second-ranked project from each area for Phase 2, and so on.

Step 2a – Group projects by area

The numbers indicate the rank established in Step 1.

Step 2b – Create phases by selecting the top projects from each area

The list below indicates the phase that each project would fall into. We would complete phase one before moving onto phase two.

Step 3

Each year, we will consider other factors (some of which are currently unknown) that may impact phasing. Examples of these other factors include leveraging transit opportunities, future roadway construction projects, etc.

As we prepare to move from one phase to the next, we will re-conduct the prioritization process to determine if any of the rankings change.