Facility Type	Ridership Change (Facility Number)	Sources	Notes
Class I: Bicycle Paths	Mean = 86% (see notes)	Matute et al. (2016)	This was the only study we found reporting route usage changes after bicycle path installation that distinguished between bicyclists and pedestrians; however, the results for just Class I facilities are not clear because the study combined counts for two bicycle paths with counts for two bicycle boulevards and six cycle tracks.
	Median = 48%
Class II: Bicycle Lanes	Mean = 119% (n = 37)	Goodno et al. (2013); Gudz, Fang, & Handy (2016); Matute et al. (2016); Sallaberry (2000)	Mean of reported percentage changes in route usage.
	Median = 73% (n = 34)	Matute et al. (2016)	Median of reported percentage changes in route usage.
	Range = see notes	City of Toronto (2001); Goodno et al. (2013); Gudz, Fang, & Handy (2016); Matute et al. (2016); Sallaberry (2000)	Facility-specific ridership changes (versus mean and median percentage changes) were only reported for three of the facilities in the studies we reviewed.
Class IV: Cycle Tracks	Mean = 119% (n = 10)	Goodno et al. (2013); McClain & Peterson (2016); Monsere et al. (2014)	The mean, median, and range are of reported percentage changes in route usage. This excludes the ridership change data for the six Class IV facilities studied in Matute et al. (2016) because those counts were only presented as combined with counts for two bicycle paths and two bicycle boulevards.
	Median = 67% (n = 10)
	Range = 21% – >500% (n = 10)