National Academies Press: OpenBook

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations (2012)

Chapter: Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit

« Previous: Chapter 7 - Pedestrian Access to Transit
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 8 - Bicycle Access to Transit." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2012. Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14614.
×
Page 76

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

66 Bicycling as a mode of transportation is increasing rapidly in the United States. A recent study of bicycling reports that bike commute mode share rose by approximately 50 percent between 2000 and 2009, and National Household Travel Survey data shows 49 percent more utilitarian cycling trips in 2009 than 2001. This increase is not occurring everywhere, however; areas that have invested in bicycling have experienced far greater increases than those that have not (35). For example, bicycle commute mode share increased more than five-fold in Portland, Oregon, between 1990 and 2009 (1.1 percent to 5.8 percent) while Charlotte, North Carolina’s, mode share remained constant at 0.2 percent, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. Paralleling national trends, this guidebook’s case studies suggest that bicycle access to rapid transit stations is an increasingly important concern for transit agencies. Moreover, transit agencies located in urban areas where cycling is rapidly increasing are more likely to be actively engaged in efforts to improve bicycle access to transit. For example, TriMet plans to provide sufficient bicycle parking for its new Portland–Milwaukee light rail line to accommodate bicycle access mode shares of 10–25 percent, depending on the station. In general, transit agencies wish to achieve two goals related to bicycle access: (1) increase total bicycle access to support transportation agency and community goals for higher bicycle ridership; and (2) establish effective means of accommodating bikes within the transit system, whether through bicycle storage facilities at the station or on-board transit vehicles. These two goals are not always compatible, as increasing bicycle access also has the potential to overwhelm transit system capacity when passengers choose to bring their bicycles on-board (Exhibit 8-1). During case studies, several transit agencies (e.g., LA Metro, BART, and TriMet) expressed a desire to develop bicycle storage solutions that appeal to more bicyclists, due to concern over the inability to accommodate the number of bicycles being brought on-board transit vehicles. Bicycle access to rapid transit stations improves transit service quality, increases mobility options, and reduces reliance on auto access. It can also enhance rapid transit ridership by: • Extending the range that patrons cover to reach rapid transit stations, particularly in locations with limited park-and-ride capacity; and • Increasing the flexibility that customers have to reach destinations at the end of a rapid transit trip. Bike sharing facilities at destination stations (Exhibit 8-2) can help passengers reach more distant destinations without having to bring a bicycle on-board a rapid transit vehicle. Bicycling makes it possible to increase ridership without a corresponding investment in automobile infrastructure or additional bus service. Most rapid transit riders are willing to walk ½ mile to a station (equivalent to about 10 minutes); they can travel more than two miles by bicycle in the same amount of time. This results in a catchment area that is 16 times that for a pedestrian trip. Moreover, improving bicycle access requires relatively little land, capital invest- ments, or operating funds, and there are almost no associated environmental impacts. C H A P T E R 8 Bicycle Access to Transit

Bicycle Access to Transit 67 Interagency Coordination As described in Chapters 2 and 6, interagency coordination is critically important to achieve improved transit access; this is also true for bicycle access as the responsibility for providing safe and comfortable bicycle routes to the station usually falls on the local jurisdiction or state DOT rather than the transit agency (which is typically responsible only for the land it owns). As a result, transit agencies may not be able to achieve many of the design principles for access routes listed below without coordination with roadway agencies. Bicycle parking at stations, conversely, typically is the primary responsibility of the transit agency. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-1. Bicycles on-board a light rail vehicle (Los Angeles). Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-2. Bike sharing facility (Denver).

68 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Local jurisdictions that support bicycle transportation help create bicycle networks that provide access to transit stations. Both Portland, Oregon, and Arlington County, Virginia, adopted land use and multi-modal transportation master plans that emphasize non-motorized access to rail stations. Overall, a strong relationship between a community’s comprehensive plan and master transportation plan is needed. Bicycle access to Toronto’s GO Transit system varies by the quality of the bicycle network to each station. Stations sited with local street access and bicycle lanes on the streets approaching the station have higher bike-to-rail use. Transit agencies may also experience increases in access by bicycle where a trail connection to a station exists, such as is the case with WMATA’s Hyattsville Metrorail station (Northwest Branch Trail), MBTA’s Alewife Station (Minute Man Bicycle Trail), and Pittsburgh’s First Avenue LRT station (a riverside bicycle trail). While transit agencies may not be able to implement bicycle route improvements unilaterally, they can play an important role in ensuring that improvements occur. For example, LA Metro’s bicycle program provides a good example of how a transit agency can help to guide bicycle improvements on the local roadway system. Metro’s 2006 Bicycle Strategic Plan focuses on integrating bicycles with both rail and bus transit. The plan identifies a total of 167 bicycle–transit hubs in the region on which to focus resources. LA Metro’s plan also includes a description of audit procedures for evaluating obstacles for bicycle access with an accompanying audit table (also available electronically from Metro) and a toolbox of bicycle facility design measures that address the purpose of each facility, where to use it, and guidelines on developing it (including photos and diagrams). To support bike-to-transit access at these hubs, Metro has conducted approximately 20 station-specific bicycle access plans, but ultimately relies on individual jurisdictions to ensure that bicycle access is a priority. This strategy has been somewhat successful; for example, the City of Long Beach recently completed a Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Study to its light rail stations complementing Metro’s Bicycle Strategic Plan. Factors Affecting Bicycle Access Similar to walking, the decision to bicycle to transit stations depends on a combination of factors. These factors include, but are not limited to, safety (perceived and actual), station characteristics, network connectivity, transit agency policy, and surrounding land use. Essential characteristics for encouraging cycling to transit include secure bike parking and high-quality connections to the surrounding road network. A review of international literature shows that it is possible for bicycles to comprise up to 40 percent of transit access trips (36). However, realizing such a high percentage largely depends on factors outside transit agency control, as system-wide quality of bicycle facilities, topography, weather, and bicycle culture all play large roles in people’s willingness to bike. A recent study of 280 bicyclists and auto travelers living within 2 miles of the train and light rail station at Centennial Plaza in Mountain View, California, found six predictors for its bicycling versus driving model: trip distance, trip purpose, car availability, race, gender, and proximity to auto-friendly streets (37). In addition, climate and weather affect individual bicyclists differently. Bicycle ridership in areas with colder climates and a good bicycling network stays relatively level when the weather is colder. Days with shorter daylight hours reduce bicycle ridership. Wind and rain generally affect daily bicycle access more than temperature (38). Topography may also impact bicycle access, but high-quality facilities may offset the negative impact of hilly terrain. Even so, research indicates that provision of bicycle facilities at transit stations, in particular high-quality bicycle parking, has a significant impact on bicycle access (32).

Bicycle Access to Transit 69 Because of the strong role of these factors on bicycle access, the extent to which bicycles are a viable access mode varies considerably by system and even between stations within individual systems. For example, BART’s system-wide bicycle access mode share of 2.7 percent is over three times the mode share for NJ Transit commuter rail stations. In addition, according to BART’s 2008 passenger survey, bicycle access mode share ranges from less than 2 percent at many outlying stations to over 11 percent at the Ashby Station in Berkeley. Bicycle access to stations along the MBTA rapid transit lines in the Boston area usually have 2 to 3 percent boardings by bicyclists; one of the highest rates of bicycle access is at the end-of- the-line Alewife Station where bicyclists account for more than 5 percent of the total. Exhibit 8-3 shows the distribution of bicycle access mode shares for individual stations for selected transit agencies for which data were available. This table shows that agencies differ widely in the amount of bicycle access to transit, with over 70 percent of BART stations experiencing at least 2 percent bike access mode share compared to fewer than 10 percent of NJ Transit stations. The lower bike access mode shares in New Jersey indicate several potential issues affecting bike access. First, since the New Jersey stations surveyed are all commuter rail, the stations serve suburban areas that may require longer access journey distances and discourage cycling. Moreover, difficulty storing bicycles in Manhattan, which is a major destination of commuters, may discourage riders. In addition, the lower level of bicycle access likely reflects the poorer quality of the cycling environment in New Jersey compared to the Bay Area and Denver. This is supported by the fact that New Jersey generally has lower overall levels of bicycling for all trip purposes than do the Bay Area and Denver. As a result of the wide range in the popularity of bicycle access, some transit agencies are currently dealing with rapidly increasing bicycle access and bicycle-capacity problems on-board transit vehicles (e.g., Lane Transit District [Eugene, Oregon], BART, LA Metro), while others have fewer current concerns and place less emphasis on bicycle access. Given the general growth in bicycle use, routine consideration should be given to providing bicycle facilities that accommodate 5 percent of boardings, with bike parking sufficient to accommodate 10 percent or more of total boardings in special circumstances. Bicycle Access Improvements Many cities throughout the United States and Canada have undertaken a range of measures to improve bike–transit integration. The main groups of measures are: • Bike paths, bike lanes, and other on-street routes leading to stations; • Bike parking at rapid transit stations with varying degrees of shelter and security; Bike Access Mode Share Number of Stations BART Denver RTD NJ Transitb 0 – 2 percent 12 (28%) 18 (62%) 61 (90%) 2 – 4 percent 19 (44%) 7 (24%) 6 (9%) 4 – 6 percent 7 (16%) 3 (10%) 1 (1%) > 6 percent 5 (12%) 1 (3%) 0 (0%) Total Stationsa 43 29 68 Notes: aReflects total number of stations for which data were available. bData are for northern New Jersey commuter rail stations. Exhibit 8-3. Bicycle mode shares for selected transit agencies.

70 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations • Multi-functional bike stations that provide not only parking, but also a range of services such as bike rentals, repairs, and accessories; and • Special accommodation of bikes on-board transit vehicles through racks, hooks, designated loading doors, or other means. These areas of improvement are described in detail below. Bicycle Access Routes Safe and comfortable bike facilities on routes leading to and from transit station are critical components to increasing bicycle access to transit stations. The following ideas serve as general principles; there are numerous design guidelines available for bicycle facilities both nationally (e.g., AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide) and locally. The following general principles apply to developing an effective bicycle network in the vicinity of transit stations: • Provide appropriate bicycle facilities that follow local best practices for bicycle design (e.g., bike lanes, shared-lane markings, and trails) on routes to and from transit stations. Provide bicycle detection at all traffic signals near stations and at station entrances. The Highway Capacity Manual 2010 procedures for calculating bicycle level of service (described in detail in Appendix B) can be used to evaluate the quality of existing routes and potential improvements. • Provide bicycle wayfinding to the transit station from adjoining streets and bikeways (Exhibit 8-4). • Provide area maps in the station locating surrounding streets, popular destinations, and existing bikeways. In addition to providing bicycle facilities on routes leading to stations, agencies should also establish safe and efficient routes for bicyclists to reach the station entrance or bicycle parking from adjacent streets. To the extent possible, bicycle routes through station property should be as direct as possible and should minimize conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians, automobiles, and buses. It is also best to avoid the use of sidewalks as bicycle routes wherever possible and Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-4. Bicycle wayfinding through station parking lot (El Monte Busway Station, Los Angeles).

Bicycle Access to Transit 71 avoid requiring bicyclists to ascend and descend stairs. Where cyclists must navigate stairs, stair channels allow riders to wheel bicycles up and down stairs. While some level of conflicts between bicyclists and transit vehicles near station entrances may always occur, design options should be sought to minimize them. TriMet’s 2008 redesign of its Rose Quarter Transit Center to improve bicycle conditions and increase safety is a good example of redesigning an existing facility to better accommodate bicycles. Exhibit 8-5 depicts the new bike facility, which reduces bike–bus conflicts by allowing bicycles to travel through the center of the facility while buses serve passengers on either curb. Bicycle Parking and On-Board Accommodation On-Board Accommodation Policies for bicycle access also need to address whether bicyclists park their bicycle at the station or take their bicycles on-board transit vehicles. Agencies that permit cyclists to bring their bicycle on-board the transit vehicle can encourage bicycle access. Allowing bicycles on-board can significantly expand the reach of a transit system as riders can use their bicycle for both access and egress. However, space constraints on transit vehicles during peak periods causes many agencies to restrict bicycle access during those hours or prohibiting it altogether. If bicycles cannot be brought onto the vehicle, safe and secure parking must be provided. On-board policies can affect the need for bicycle parking at stations. For example, if bicycles are permitted during rush hours, fewer riders may want or need to park their bicycles at rail stations. Eugene’s LTD EmX BRT buses are designed for level boarding so bicyclists can walk their bikes on board. Bicyclists board through the rear door of the vehicle, and up to three bicycles can be Source: © 2011 Google Exhibit 8-5. Bicycle facility through the Rose Quarter Transit Center (Portland).

72 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations accommodated per vehicle. Eugene has very high levels of bicycle ridership, and in many periods demand to bring bicycles on-board exceeds capacity. Most agencies allow bicycles on-board rapid transit vehicles, and all of the rail agencies interviewed as part of the research allow bicycles on-board during non-peak periods. On-board accommodation during peak periods varies by agency and is largely dependent on overall demand. Where agencies allow bicycles on-board transit vehicles, vehicles should be designed to efficiently store bikes without blocking doors or creating a nuisance for other passengers. Several design options for accommodating bikes are available, such as exterior bicycle racks on buses (Exhibit 8-6), and bicycle hooks and bicycle holding areas inside rapid transit vehicles (Exhibit 8-7). On many systems with high bicycle access mode shares, there is a desire to encourage more riders to park their bicycles at stations rather than bring them on-board vehicles. To achieve this goal, bicyclists must perceive parking at rail stations to be safe, which requires that the parking be located appropriately and of an acceptable type (e.g., lockers in addition to racks). To deal with increasing numbers of bicycles on its system, LA Metro promotes both bicycle parking to encourage patrons to leave bicycles at stations when possible, and the use of folding bikes for those passengers that do bring their bikes on-board. Metro is in the early stages of a program that will partner with a local company that promotes green technology, to promote folding bikes and potentially subsidize folding bikes for transit passengers. Note that there may be equity impacts associated with prohibiting bicyclists from taking bikes on-board vehicles. A survey of over 2,000 bicyclists conducted by LA Metro showed that low- income bicyclists were more likely to bike to transit, and that many of those who bike to transit require use of their bikes on both ends of their transit trip, requiring them to bring their bicycles on-board transit vehicles (39). Bicycle Racks Bicycle racks are the most common method of bicycle parking. Most agencies stated that bicycle racks are relatively cheap and can be installed as needed to meet demand, except where space constraints prohibit additional racks. However, bicycle racks may be less secure than other forms of bicycle storage, making some bicyclists hesitant to use them. The following are general Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-6. Exterior bicycle rack on BRT vehicle (Los Angeles).

Bicycle Access to Transit 73 principles for providing bicycle racks at transit stations (the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals’ Bicycle Parking guidelines provides detailed guidance on bicycle parking): • Provide adequate bicycle racks to meet demand, wherever space permits. • Locate bicycle parking in secure, well-lit locations along bicyclists’ “desire lines” from major bikeways to the station entrance(s). If it is not possible to site bicycle parking within view of station personnel (if present), parking should be located in areas with high pedestrian flows or where other informal surveillance is possible. However, racks or lockers should not impede pedestrian flows. • Locate bicycle parking where weather protection exists (such as a roof or awning), where possible (Exhibit 8-8). • Consider providing covered parking in other locations. • Locate bicycle parking so that bicyclists do not have to dismount and walk to access it. This means that bike routes should continue as close as possible to the station entrance. Signs requiring bicyclists to dismount generally have limited effectiveness. • Locate bicycle parking in proximity to station entrances wherever possible. • Design parking garages to avoid major conflicts with bicycle traffic at structure entrances and exits. Where bicycle routes must cross garage entrances or exits, provide additional traffic control or calming devices to alert motorists to the bicycle crossings. (a) Bicycle Hook (Portland) (b) On-board Storage Area (Metrolink) Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-7. Interior bicycle storage examples.

74 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Secure Bike Parking There are a variety of options for bike storage that provide more security than bike racks. Exhibit 8-9 summarizes the primary methods of secure bike storage. Bicycle lockers rented through individual subscriptions are the most common method of providing secure bicycle parking, and are in use at many transit agencies (Exhibit 8-10). Lockers are typically rented either annually or semi-annually for a small fee (typically less than $100 per year). Transit agencies may manage the subscriptions and maintenance themselves, or partner with other organizations (e.g., a local bicycle advocacy organization, a regional MPO) to manage larger parking operations. While subscription lockers are relatively easy to install and manage, the experience at many transit agencies has been mixed: locker subscriptions tend to sell out quickly but utilization is very low on a daily basis. This suggests that the low price of a subscription encourages occasional bicycle commuters to rent a locker even if they use it infrequently. As a result, many agencies are exploring more effective options for providing secure bike parking. For example, BART is moving toward hourly payment for bicycle lockers through electronic cards to improve utilization. Similarly, LA Metro recently piloted an unmanned bicycle storage module with electronic entry at the Covina Metrolink station. The facility cost approximately $100,000 to install. Metro is currently monitoring use to determine whether such facilities make sense in other locations as well. Attended bicycle parking (Exhibit 8-11) has also proven popular among patrons, but the costs of operating attended bike parking often limit its use within a system to only a few locations. Typically, attended bike parking is combined with other services, such as bicycle repair or rentals, to generate some revenue to pay for operations. Bike Sharing Bicycle sharing programs are expanding rapidly around the country, many of which are focusing on expanding the reach of transit. Boston and Washington, D.C., for example, have both recently implemented wide-spread bike sharing programs. Bike share stations are placed near MBTA and WMATA stations allowing riders to ride between home and work and the nearest transit station. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-8. Bicycle racks located beneath overpass (MacArthur BART Station, Oakland).

Bicycle Access to Transit 75 Exhibit 8-9. Summary of secure bike storage options. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-10. Rental bicycle lockers (Oakland). Bike Stations Bike Lockers: Subscription Bike Lockers: Shared System Cage Self-Service Bike Description Provides valet attended parking. Other services (lockers, changing rooms, showers, bicycle repair, etc.) optional. Metal or plastic crates for storing bicycles. Self- serve. Metal or plastic crates for storing bicycles. Self-serve. Bicycle racks behind a locked door. Free-standing cages, or fenced-in room. Method of Access Electronic key access, must purchase membership. Subscribers assigned a specific locker. Electronic key accesses network of lockers on first- come, first-served Electronic or other entry through door for subscribers. Typical Fees Monthly/annual subscription. Deposit and monthly/annual fee. Fees charged basis. electronically by use (several cents per hour). Monthly/annual subscription. Benefits High level of service and security. Users guaranteed a spot. More secure than racks. Higher utilization than subscription lockers. Users pay only for what they use More secure than racks. Lower operating costs than attended parking. More secure than open racks High potential utilization. Cons High capital and operating costs. Additional agency- owned infrastructure. Potential for patrons to store items other than bicycles. Waitlists for subscriptions common. Potential for patrons to store items other than bicycles. Electronic payment system increases operating costs. Additional agency- owned infrastructure. Lower security and service to patrons than attended parking. Low utilization.

76 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Large bike sharing stations are located outside South Station in Boston and Union Station in Washington, D.C. Bike sharing is attractive especially to commuters and visitors who can often reach destinations more quickly than by connecting to another transit service. Providing for bike share access to transit has many of the same considerations of other types of bicycle access, including the quality of the surrounding bike network. However, effective bike sharing has the potential to reduce the need for dedicated bike parking. Agencies should work closely with bike share providers on the placement of bike share stations and on choosing which stations may offer the greatest benefit. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Exhibit 8-11. Attended bicycle parking (Berkeley, CA).

Next: Chapter 9 - Transit Access »
Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 153: Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations is intended to aid in the planning, developing, and improving of access to high capacity commuter rail, heavy rail, light rail, bus rapid transit, and ferry stations. The report includes guidelines for arranging and integrating various station design elements.

The print version of TCRP Report 153 is accompanied by a CD-ROM that includes a station access planning spreadsheet tool that allows trade-off analyses among the various access modes--automobile, transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit-oriented development--for different station types. The appendices to TCRP Report 153 are also available on the CD-ROM.

The items contained in the CD-ROM are also available for download below.

In 2009 TRB released TCRP Web-Only Document 44: Literature Review for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations, which describes the results of the literature review associated with the project that developed TCRP Report 153.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!