  This study evaluated the performance of pedestrian-bicycle crossing
alternatives at Continuous Flow Intersections (CFI). Further, a comparison was
also performed of CFI crossing types against a standard intersection designed
to provide an equivalent volume-to-capacity ratio. Three CFI crossing
alternatives were tested, namely Traditional, Offset, and Midblock crossings.
In total, 12 alternative scenarios were generated by incorporating two bicycle
path types and two right-turn control types. These scenarios were analyzed
through microsimulation on the basis of stopped delay and number of stops.
  Simulation results revealed that the Offset crossing alternative incurred the
least stopped delay for all user classes, including motorized traffic. The
Traditional crossing generated the least number of stops for most route types.
The Midblock crossing can be considered as a supplement to either the Offset or
Traditional crossing depending on the specific origin-destination patterns at
the intersection. The exclusive bicycle path performed better than the
shared-use path in most cases. When compared with an equivalent standard
intersection, aggregated results showed significant improvement for all CFI
crossing types with respect to stopped delay, but the standard intersection had
an equal or fewer number of stops for most routes investigated. Regarding the
effect on vehicular movement, the lowest volume-to-capacity ratio of the main
intersection was incurred by the Offset crossing. Future research includes
incorporating pedestrian-bicycle safety, comfort, and the relative effects of
these crossing alternatives on additional vehicular performance measures.
