49 •
Neighborhood cut-through traffic
•
Collisions (by injury severity and by type of collision)
Often, the studies reveal that while peak hour capacity has been maintained, rates of collisions have decreased and rates of bicycle and pedestrian volumes have increased. The following section highlights examples of data collection efforts – including road rechannelizations – that have demonstrated the positive outcomes of bicycling and walking investments while helping to build the case for future investments of this nature.
Non-motorized Data Collection Case Studies When jurisdictions or city staff proposes a new bicycle or pedestrian project, it is often met with opposition. Opposition can be from a diverse range of stakeholders, from adjacent business owners, adjacent residents, the freight community and even local politicians. There are a variety of reasons as to why community members might oppose project, however commonly it is based in perceptions of how the specific project would negatively impact the functionality of a corridor or roadway space. It is important for transportation planners and city staff to be able to demonstrate both the need for the specific project but also be able to show how similar projects have had positive results on the factors of concern. The following case studies demonstrate examples of data collection efforts that have either demonstrated positive effects of non-motorized investments on the study area, been used to help build the case and justify future investments, or both. Washington State Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project The Washington State Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project provides an example of a statewide non-motorized data collection effort. In 2008, the Washington State Department of Transportation initiated the bicycle and pedestrians counts to collect annual data about non-motorized travel across the state. The project is coordinated by Cascade Bicycle Club with volunteers conducting counts in nearly 30 cities across the state. The quantifying
data provides useful information to determine where bicycle and pedestrian travel is occurring and if infrastructure projects are contributing to increasing volumes of bicyclists and pedestrians. The data is also useful for local jurisdictions in seeking non-motorized project funding (Washington State Department of Transportation, 2011). SDOT Neighborhood Business District Access Survey The SDOT Neighborhood Business District Survey took place from September 29 to October 16, 2011 at two to four specified intersections in each neighborhood business district (NBD). A total of six neighborhoods were surveyed for the purpose of gaining a better understanding of visiting and travel behaviors in these Seattle business districts. The objectives were five-fold: 1.
Gauge the general frequency and length of stay of each neighborhood’s visitors
2.
Investigate reasons for visiting each neighborhood business district
3.
Understand how visitors travel to each business district and why they use their chosen modes of travel
4.
Identify ways the City can sustain and improve visitation to its business districts
5.
Quantify the demographic characteristics of travelers to each neighborhood business district
Among the important findings was that most residents (over 61 percent) either walk or take transit to get to their NBD. In fact, over 50 percent of residents in each neighborhood typically walk or bike to their NBD. That number declines for non-residents, but not by much: a high of 43 percent of non-residents walked or bike to the NBD and a low of 13 percent of nonresidents did the same. Also worth noting is that 23 to 31 percent of people surveyed took transit, walked, or biked because out of necessity (fastest, cheapest, no car, etc.).
& prioritizing non-motorized transportation investments