Do All Roadway Users Want the Same Things?
AbstractThis 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.Â 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. Â 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. Â In an open-ended question about street improvements to enhance perceived traffic safety, all respondent groups requested the same top five improvements.Â 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).Â 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.Â 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.Â 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.Â Overall, the findings support the continued implementation of complete streets principles and policies.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley in its series Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings with number qt1zn7w26v.
Date of creation: 15 Sep 2013
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 109 McLaughlin Hall, Mail Code 1720, Berkeley, CA 94720-1720
Web page: http://www.escholarship.org/repec/its/
More information through EDIRC
Architecture; Engineering; bicycle lanes; complete streets; traffic safety;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2013-06-30 (All new papers)
- NEP-TRE-2013-06-30 (Transport Economics)
- NEP-URE-2013-06-30 (Urban & Real Estate Economics)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Sanders, Rebecca Lauren, 2013. "Examining the Cycle: How Perceived and Actual Bicycling Risk Influence Cycling Frequency, Roadway Design Preferences, and Support for Cycling Among Bay Area Residents," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt6ct7x8hp, University of California Transportation Center.
- Sanders, Rebecca L, 2013. "Examining the Cycle: How Perceived and Actual Bicycling Risk Influence Cylcing Frequency, Roadway Design Preferences, and Support for Cycling Among Bay Area Residents," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt1tf5v738, University of California Transportation Center.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lisa Schiff).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.