Encouraging Active Transportation in Tucson By: Loran Shamis Mentor: Arlie Adkins, PhD. Sbe 498 Fall 2015 Table of Contents
Table 1: Furness Drive before installing protected bike lanes
Download 9.34 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Discussion
- Teaching Tucson Connectivity
- Teaching Tucson Balance
- Conclusion
- Limitations
- Recommendations
- Bibliography
|
Table 1: Furness Drive before installing protected bike lanes 
Figure 8: Protect Bike Lanes on Furness Drive DiscussionTeaching Tucson SafetyTucson is lacking a safe and comfortable environment for pedestrians and bicyclists in two ways, unset goals and nonexistent protected bike lanes. Safety can be a huge obstacle to overcome when attempting to encourage active transportation. Tucson has yet to implement a specific goal related to bicycle and pedestrian collisions. It is important to set a baseline and an achievable goal with a realistic deadline. Portland and Austin both have set forth goals for traffic related fatalities, giving them a target. Experimenting with a variety of strategies in order to achieve those goals provides vital information for each city and the rest of the nation. Tucson is also lacking protected bike lanes, which provide a perceived and a real sense of safety and comfort. Tucson has a vast network of bicycle lanes; however, riding within most of those lanes is risky as they are very narrow and not buffered or protected from motorized traffic. The Tucson bicycle crash database illustrated there are several factors contributing to the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. Since the majority of collision occurrences took place during the workweek’s rush hours, collisions are occurring most often during the presence of high traffic volume. The Tucson bicycle crash database also revealed there to be a correlation between collision instances and intersections. With the majority of collisions occurring during a car’s right turn demonstrates the junction of the two streets determines the vulnerability of cyclists and pedestrians and the likelihood of a collision. The second most frequent type of collision involves crosswalks and intersections. Since the two of these occupy the majority of the pie graph, this confirms the safety of intersections is of concern. All three cities could teach Tucson some strategies in order to create a safe environment for active commuters. Each city realized the potential effectiveness of infrastructure dedicated to active commuters in order to ensure safety resulting in more participation. By implementing protected bike lanes, collecting data and monitoring their effectiveness, these cities discovered that the protected bike lanes improve the safety of cyclists and pedestrians. If Tucson were to learn from these cities, the city would be comprised of multiple protected bike lanes; protected with pylons, street furniture, planters, ect. Portland can teach Tucson there are further steps that can be taken in order to ensure safety. At all the intersections the protected bike lanes pass through, there would be yield signals within the mixing zones; such as within right turning lanes. Those intersections would also have loop detection signals in order to ensure bikers are making full stops at red lights. Minneapolis confirms the feasibility of implementing these strategies by ensuring “road dieting” costs no more than routine road repair; since the majority of the money from the Arizona Department of Transportation is dedicated to routine road repairs, making these transformations would be easy.
Once again, these cities understand the importance of setting goals when it comes to achieving a strong community of active commuters. Minneapolis set a more direct goal of ensuring all residents are within close proximity to bike paths. Austin set an indirect goal of shifting shorter commuting trips to be executed through active transportation and targets all ages and abilities; therefore, Austin is taking steps to achieve this conversion. Minneapolis has invested greatly into constructing a seamlessly connected active transportation system for both bike and pedestrians. On a larger scale, the city created the first bike freeway in order to connect the suburbs to the city- a strategy Tucson could adopt to connect its suburban population to the urban region. Minneapolis has also identified that a street with high volumes of vehicular traffic is creating a barrier in the network for cyclists and pedestrians and implemented a separate bridge for active commuters to avoid dangerous interactions with that arterial road. Tucson could look to identify arterial streets that also create obstructions and brainstorm strategies to avoid integrating active commuters with vehicles. Lastly, Minneapolis has an extensive network of off-ground, pedestrian bridges. These bridges allow pedestrians to connect from building to building without enduring the harsh winters of Minneapolis. While Tucson does not have harsh winters, the summer heat can often times be a barrier to entry for pedestrians and cyclists; therefore, Tucson could mimic Minneapolis innovative spirits in creating a built environment that allows active commuters to adapt to the high temperatures of summer. Austin has outlined two objectives to encourage short trips to be achieved by active commuting. Those objectives are to create an all ages and abilities bicycle network and to remove barriers in the bicycle network. The city is investing in infrastructure promoting safety to achieve these objectives. Investing in a bicycle network that is comprised of urban trails and protected bike lanes will encourage usage and make anyone feel comfortable traveling by bike or by foot. By learning from Austin, Tucson could map the bicycle system it wishes to implement and build a network of safe infrastructure. Lastly, Portland has successfully created a connected active transportation system by ensuring fluid navigation. The network features signs and wayfinding strategies (such as sharrows) in order to direct cyclists and pedestrians more easily. This could be used in Tucson on routes that entail crossing busy streets, or routes along busy streets, to redirect the cyclist or pedestrian to a calmer and safer path. The small block sizes of Portland are also advantageous for active commuters. With shorter block lengths, there becomes greater accessibility due to the frequently encountered crossing corridors. Although, this could potentially require revisions of Tucson’s zoning plans, it could be a very effective way to encourage active commuting. Since this structural component of Tucson is less likely to rapidly occur Tucson could simply implement more frequent and safe signal crossings. One of the characteristics the low stress bike paths of Tucson were lacking was the proper infrastructure for safe crossings; applying more signal crossings could eliminate that barrier. Tucson could utilize the map of low stress bike paths as a foundation to create a more connected active transportation system. By making these more comforting Tucson could add protected bike lanes on streets with low speed limits. The city could also implement overlay district zoning that encourages mixed-use development. By integrating commercial and residential along safe bike and pedestrian routes, active commuters will be closer to necessities and be more likely to choose an alternative mode of transportation. Teaching Tucson BalancePassing priority over to active commuters or striving for a more balanced transportation system are an excellent strategies in order to encourage more residents in Tucson to switch their transportation preference. By implementing some of the strategies Portland, Minneapolis and Austin have adopted, commuting by bike or by foot throughout Tucson can be made simple, effortless and more convenient. Sometimes, giving active commuters top priority is out of scope; therefore, many of these examples dedicate some level of priority to cyclist and pedestrians, which is better than none. Portland and Minneapolis have both dedicated to investing $10 million annually towards active transportation efforts, compared to Tucson’s $60 million investment in active transportation efforts over a span of 20 years. The monetary investment Tucson dedicates to active commuters amounts to $3 million annually, or 30 percent of what Portland and Minneapolis are dedicating. The square mileage of these cities compared to Tucson confirms the insignificant monetary investment Tucson dedicates to pedestrian and bicycle projects. $3 million is dedicated to the entire area of Pima County, a total of 9,189 square miles, while the annual investment of $10 million is allocated among the 57 square miles of Minneapolis (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010) and another $10 million allocated among 463 square miles of the area mandated by the Oregon Metro Council (2035 Regional Transportation Plan, 2011). Therefore, the monetary investment of the region of Portland and Minneapolis has the potential to achieve much more and impact a larger portion of the population. In order to address this, Tucson could dedicate an annual portion of the budget to achieve a significant amount of projects. Portland and Minneapolis have both demonstrated strategies in order to balance the physical movement of all mode of transportation. The two cities attempt to balance the street by discouraging motorized travel through streets utilized by bicyclists and pedestrians. Portland decreased posted speed limit, making traveling through bike boulevards inefficient for cars as well as safer for active commuters. Minneapolis reversed stop signs requiring cars to stop more frequently and subsequently discouraging drive through traffic and encouraging bicycle travel. Tucson could easily employ these simple strategies along streets having the potential to attract active commuters, such as residential streets.
The safety concern in Tucson is mainly concentrated in the intersections of arterial streets. Portland, Minneapolis and Austin are all investing in infrastructure to create a safer built environment for bicyclists and pedestrians. These three cities have observed great improvements in safety and therefore ridership since the application of street designs that dedicate a bounded area of the street to cyclists. Building protected bike lanes along arterial roads and clearly designating areas for cyclists in intersections is extremely significant at improving active transportation participation. Improving those two elements of the street can encourage more people to bike or walk as a means of commuting. Lack of connectivity in Tucson’s active transportation system is also discouraging participation in active transportation. Tucson has a fairly extensive network of painted-shoulder bike lanes. While this is a valid attempt at increasing connectivity throughout Tucson, these bike lanes lack a safe riding and walking environment. Several of the streets in Tucson that are recognized as “low stress bike paths” can be unjustified as safe by certain characteristics of the street that may be deterring riders. Portland has created a connected pedestrian and cycling network through the use of maximum block lengths. By ensuring block sizes are about 200 feet by 200 feet and built with high-density mixed-use development, pedestrians and cyclists have more opportunities to cross streets and access daily necessities. Minneapolis has the largest network of indoor pedestrian bridges; connecting several of the cities high-rise buildings. These bridges save pedestrians of inconvenience of enduring the harsh winter weather. Tucson could learn from this innovative strategy when attempting to deal with the extreme heat of summer. Lastly, Austin is addressing the gaps in its bicycle network and investing in infrastructure as needed. Tucson could implement this strategy to efficiently create a more connected active transportation system. The operation of Tucson’s active transportation system is triumphed by the priority the city gives to automobiles. Most of the budge for the Pima County Department of Transportation is dedicated to street widening projects rather than improving the active transportation infrastructure. Also much of the planning energy is exhausted by executing projects dedicated to ensuring the fluidity automobile travel. Portland, Minneapolis and Austin all are working to create a more balanced and fair transportation system through planning and investments. The monetary investments dedicated to active transportation in Portland and Minneapolis marginalizes Tucson’s monetary investment. Austin shows great efforts in continuously attempting to improve the functionality through balance of its active transportation system. Tucson could adopt some of the values of these cities while balancing its transportation system to accommodate all modes of transportation. By analyzing Tucson’s current status of its active transportation system, faults in the system were identified and pinpointed as issues in need of addressing. Portland, Minneapolis and Austin are all examples of cities that are innovatively experimenting to overcome some issues of which Tucson is confronted. Through analysis and case studies, it was discovered that all of these obstructions- safety, lack of connectivity and an unbalanced transportation system- all operate in sync. Therefore, it is important to ensure all three of these components are corrected and are harmonious in order to improve Tucson’s engagement in bicycling and walking as means of transportation. Tucson could potentially learn and adopt the strategies these cities have implemented in order to create a safer, connected and balanced transportation system for active commuters.
"2014 Austin Bicycle Master Plan." (2014). Austintexas.gov. Austin Department of Transportation. 2035 Regional Transportation Plan. (2011, December 13). Retrieved November 24, 2015, from http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/rtp_exec_summary_final.pdf 2040 Tucson Regional Transportation Plan. (2010). Retrieved November 24, 2015, from http://www.pagregion.com/documents/rtp/rtp2040/RTP-2040-Update-2012-06-29.pdf "ADOT Completes Study on Economic Impact of Bicycling in Arizona." (2013). Arizona Department of Transportation. Active Transportation. (2015, October 26). Retrieved November 5, 2015. "Adult Obesity Facts." (2015). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Anderson, M. (2014). In Austin, Posts and Paint Bring a New Bike Bridge From Good to Great. StreetblogUSA.org. "Arizona." (2013). State Obesity Data, Rates and Trends: The State of Obesity. Trust for America's Health and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. "Car Ownership in U.S. Cities Map." (2013). Governing. "Community Profile: Pima County, Arizona." (2013). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Carlson, S.A., Fulton, J.E., Pratt, M., Yang, Z., and Adams, K.E. (2015). "Inadequate Physical Activity and Health Care Expenditures in the United States." Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 57.4 (2015): 315-23. Cdc.gov. Clarke, A., Dewey A., Flusche, D., Nesper, B., Simcox, A., Wempe, M., Wynands, N. (2012). A bicycle friendly America guide. American Bicyclists. Retrieved October 15, 2012, from http://www.bikeleague.org/members/pdfs/AB-mar-apr2012-forweb.pdf Daniels T. 2014. The environmental planning handbook for sustainable communities and regions. Second Edition. Planners Press, APA. Washington, D.C. Frank, L. D., Greenwald, M.J., Winkelman, S., Chapman, J., and Kavage, S. (2009). Carbonless footprints: Ppromoting health and climate stabilization through active transportation. Preventive Medicine 50. Forbes, C. (2015). Tucson bicycle crash database. Bikecoll.info. "Great American infrastructure: Minneapolis, MN, Minneapolis skyway system." (2012). Infrastructure USA. Hallal, P. C., Andersen, L.B., Bull, F.C, Guthold, R., Haskell, W., and Ekelund, U. (2012). Global physical activity levels: Surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. The Lancet 380.9838: 247-57. Krizek, K., Barnes, G. and Thompson, K. (2009). Analyzing the effects of bicycle facilities on commute mode share over time. Journal of Urban Planning and Development. McConville, M. E., Rodrigues, D,, Clifton, K., Cho, G., Fleischhacker, S. (2011). Disaggregate land uses and walking. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 40.1: 25–32. McKisson, Michael. "Love Cyclovia but Hate Traffic? Here Are Some Low-stress Routes in Tucson | Bicycle Tucson." Bicycle Tucson. Bicycletucson.com, 29 Mar. 2011. Web. 11 Nov. 2015. Mckisson, M. (2014). RTA Board slashes funding for regional bicycle/pedestrian projects. Bicycle Tucson. Mekuria, Maaza C., Peter G. Furth, and Hilary Nixon. "Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity." (n.d.): n. pag. Sjsu.edu. Mineta Transportation Institute, May 2012. Web. 11 Nov. 2015. Minneapolis Bicycle Master Plan. (2011). Minneapolis, MN: City of Minneapolis, 2001. Minneapolismn.gov. Access Minneapolis. Minneapolis (city) QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau. (2010). Retrieved November 24, 2015, from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/27/2743000.html Monsere, C., Dill, J. McNeil, N., Clifton, K., Foster, N., Goddard, T., Berkow, M., Gilpin, J., Voros, K., Van Hengel, D., and Parks, J.. (2014). Lessons from the green lanes: Evaluating protected bike lanes in the U.S. National Institute for Transportation and Communities U.S. Department of Transportation. "More roads to recovery."(1959). New England Journal of Medicine 260.18: 939. Pima.gov. Pima County, 2014. Web. 18 Sept. 2015. Nieswiadomy R. (2007). Qualitative Research Designs 5th edition. PAG regional plan for bicycling. (2009). Tucson, AZ: Pima Association of Governments, 2000. Pagnet.org. Schmitt, A. (2015). More money won’t fix U.S. infrastructure if we don’t change how it’s spent. Streetsblog USA. Smith, L. (2007). The true cost of owning a car. Investopedia. Tangerine and Tangerine. (2013), "The Loop: Economic, environmental, community and health impact study." Economic, Environmental, Community, and Health Impact Study. Pima.gov. "The City of Portland, Oregon." Traffic Calming Studies and Reports RSS. Portland Bureau of Transportation. Urban Planning 101 – Block Size. (2015, March 30). Retrieved November 22, 2015, from http://postgreenhomes.com/urban-planning-101-block-size/#comments Walljasper, J. (2011). Minneapolis shows how to make a great bike city. Shareable. United States Census Bureau. (2013). American FactFinder. Retrieved from: census.gov Directory: arizona -> bitstream -> 10150 10150 -> Amphitheater High School’s Outdoor Classroom: a study in the Application of Design 10150 -> Scientific and Scholarly Classifications are not “Naïve”: a comment to Begthol (2003) 10150 -> Scope and methodology issues arizona -> Date: February 11-12, 2017 Location: 7301 E. Brown Rd, Mesa, az 85207 School Director: Dr. Wendy Truvillion; 770-364-3643 or 602-764-6016 arizona -> 702 Reform Negative swsdi 2015 Solvency arizona -> From: Public Policy Polling® To: Interested Parties Subject Download 9.34 Mb. Share with your friends:
|