This paper presents findings from a recent study on roadway design preferences among pedestrians, drivers, bicyclists, and public transit users along a major urban corridor in the East San Francisco Bay Area.  Sponsored by the California DOT, the research focused on exploring design preferences that could increase perceived traffic safety, walkability, bikability, and economic vitality along urban arterials.  

Results from an intercept survey showed that all user groups desire similar roadway design features along the test corridor, which carries 25,000-30,000 motorists bi-directionally and has comprehensive sidewalk coverage, but no bicycle facilities.  In an open-ended question about street improvements to enhance perceived traffic safety, all respondent groups requested the same top five improvements.  Bicycle lanes were ranked first by pedestrians, drivers, and bicyclists (fifth by public transit respondents), and improved pedestrian crossings were ranked second by pedestrians, drivers, and public transit users (third by bicyclists).  The other top five suggestions were the same for all groups, though ordered slightly differently: slowing traffic/improving driver behavior, increasing street lighting, and increasing traffic signals/stop signs. Similar preference alignment was found regarding street improvements to encourage more visits to the corridor. 

These findings suggest that design features generally thought to benefit one road user group, such as bicycle lanes for bicyclists, may also benefit other users.  Moreover, these results provide evidence that roadway planning can take advantage of synergistic opportunities to benefit multiple user groups by implementing a few key design interventions.  Overall, the findings support the continued implementation of complete streets principles and policies.

Pedestrians, bicyclists, drivers, and public transit users all desire similar roadway design features, at least according to findings from a recent intercept survey of 537 people along a major urban corridor in the San Francisco Bay Area. This research was sponsored by the California Department of Transportation to understand traveler preferences for street design that could increase perceived traffic safety, walkability, and bikability along urban arterials, as well as encourage economic vitality through increased patronage of local businesses.

In an open-ended question about street improvements to enhance perceived traffic safety, all respondent groups requested the same top five improvements. Bicycle lanes were ranked first by pedestrians, drivers, and bicyclists (fifth by public transit respondents), and improved pedestrian crossings were ranked second by pedestrians, drivers, and public transit users (third by bicyclists). The remaining top five elements, while the same for all groups, were ordered slightly differently among them: slowing traffic/improving driver behavior, installing more traffic lights, and increasing the amount of street lighting. Similar preference alignment was found in response to a question about street improvements to encourage more visits to the corridor.

These findings suggest that design features generally thought to benefit one user group, such as bicycle lanes, may have unmeasured benefits for other user groups. Moreover, they offer evidence that focusing solely on specific user groups in the design process may miss opportunities to benefit multiple user groups through prioritizing a few design ideas. Overall, the

findings support the continued implementation of Caltrans’ Complete Streets policy.

Safe Routes to Transit (SR2T) was initiated in 2004 with the adoption of the San Francisco Bay Area’s Regional Measure 2 which established a $1 increase in Bay Area bridge tolls. The intended purpose of this funding was to support various transportation projects within the region in order to reduce congestion along the seven state-owned toll bridge corridors. Consistent with this purpose, the SR2T Program was awarded $20 million to fund enhancements to increase walking and cycling to regional transit stations.

SR2T funds were used for the following improvements, among others: ssecure bicycle storage at transit stations; safety enhancements for pedestrian and bicycle station access to transit stations/stops; removal of pedestrian/bicycle barriers near transit stations; and system-wide transit enhancements to accommodate bicyclists or pedestrians.

MTC collaborated with Fehr & Peers and the UC Berkeley Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) to oversee the assessment of the SR2T program on mode share, perceived traffic safety, traffic behaviors and perceived air quality. Additional data was collected to obtain economic feedback on spending behavior as related to mode choice. Transit stations were chosen based on key variables associated with travel behavior and mode choice, such as population density, employment density, and the percentage of households living beneath the poverty line. The transit stations included in the before and after study were the Balboa Park, Bay Fair, Civic Center, Glen Park, Lafayette, and Pittsburg BART stations, as well as the Palo Alto Transit station. Fremont and Rockridge BART stations were the control sites.

This paper elaborates on findings from an evaluation of the San Francisco Bay Area’s Safe Routes to Transit (SR2T) program, which funded enhancements to increase walking and cycling to regional transit stations. To understand how the program influenced travel choices, behavior, and perceptions of safety and local air quality, researchers surveyed transit users and observed driver, pedestrian, and bicyclist behavior in the periods before and after the enhancements were made at multiple transit stations.

Data from the treatment and control stations suggest that the streetscape and roadway improvements made through the SR2T program positively influenced the propensity to walk, bicycle, and take the bus to transit stations as reported through surveys. In particular, results show that walking and bicycling increased by 3% among treatment sites compared with control sites. Bicycling also increased at control sites, indicating a general societal shift. Further, driving decreased 2.5% at treatment sites. Perceived air quality, in general, improved in the post-period. When asked about perceived traffic risk, bicyclists more than pedestrians reported feeling safer on the road, with 10% of the bicyclists, on average, feeling safer after the improvements. There were also economic benefits from this project—pedestrians and bicyclists were overrepresented in those who stopped en route to transit for food and drink.

The evidence suggests that the SR2T program positively impacted the decision to walk and bicycle to access transit. It is recommended that the program be expanded to additional sites in the future.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions