IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt6md6b2z4.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Advancing Active Transportation Project Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Fitch-Polse, Dillon T.
  • Mohiuddin, Hossain
  • Willett, Dan
  • Nelson, Trisalyn
  • Favetti, Matthew
  • Watkins, Kari

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the effectiveness of active transportation projects in increasing active transportation in California. It also serves to validate the current methods of the California Active Transportation Benefit-Cost Tool. Using count and infrastructure data from the cities of Santa Barbara and Santa Cruz, California, with updated models from the California Active Transportation Benefit-Cost Tool, the authors estimated project level changes in active transportation using two methods. The first method uses a direct demand modeled before and after bicycling and pedestrian volumes. The second method is an expected increase in bicycling and pedestrian volumes based on the project parameters and their effect sizes from the academic literature. Results show that, in general, both estimates are closely aligned. However, the results also indicate that for some projects, particularly those projects with greater change in walking and bicycling, the California Active Transportation Benefit-Cost Tool can diverge from the before-after estimate substantially at the project-level. Several suggestions for future research and improvements to the tool are made. View the NCST Project Webpage

Suggested Citation

  • Fitch-Polse, Dillon T. & Mohiuddin, Hossain & Willett, Dan & Nelson, Trisalyn & Favetti, Matthew & Watkins, Kari, 2025. "Advancing Active Transportation Project Evaluation," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt6md6b2z4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt6md6b2z4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/6md6b2z4.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social and Behavioral Sciences; Before and after studies; Benefit cost analysis; Bicycle counts; Bicycling; Nonmotorized transportation; Pedestrian counts; Transportation planning; Travel demand; Walking;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt6md6b2z4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.