cris, gps, and blos data collection tools for effective bicycle and pedestrian planning

CRIS, GPS, and BLOS: Data Collection Tools for Effective Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning

Lydia Kelly, Cecilio Martinez, Stephanie Velasquez

Lydia Kelly Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Planner Phone: (210) 230-6911 Email: [email protected]

Stephanie Velasquez Regional Transportation Planner Phone: (210) 230-6908 Email: [email protected]

Cecilio Martinez Senior GIS & Web Analyst Phone: (210) 230-6905 Email: [email protected]

Presented by

825 South Saint Mary’s St. | San Antonio, Texas 78205 | Phone: 201-227-8651 | Fax:210-227-9321

www.sametroplan.org

Lydia Kelly Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Planner Phone: (210) 230-6911 Email: [email protected]

Introduction and MPO Plans and Programs

Agenda

§  What is an MPO and how it relates to active transportation

§  Programs and Studies

§  Data: Where it comes from; how it is used

§  Incorporating the Safety Program

§  Questions

Metropolitan Planning Organization

Greater Bexar County Council of Cities

Northeast Partnership

Metropolitan Transit

Transportation Policy Board Senator Jeff Wentworth Texas Legislator Representative Joe Farias Texas Legislator Mayor Chris Riley, Leon Valley Greater Bexar County Council of Cities Commissioner Kevin Wolff Bexar County Commissioner Sergio Rodriguez Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson (Chair) Bexar County Renne Green, Director Public Works Bexar County Councilman Carlton Soules San Antonio Councilman Cris Medina San Antonio Council Ray Lopez San Antonio Councilman Rey Saldaña San Antonio Majed Al Ghafry, Dir. Public Works San Antonio Mike Frisbie, Dir., CIMS Department San Antonio Councilman William Weeper, Selma Northeast Partnership Manuel Peláez, Board Member VIA Transit Mary Briseño, Board Member VIA Transit Mario Medina, District Engineer SA District,TxDOT Clay Smith, Planning Engineer SA District,TxDOT Dean Danos, Executive Director AACOG

MPO Programs and Plan

Unified Planning Work Program: Budget and Planning Studies -‐ 2 years

Metropolitan Transportation Plan: Future goals, strategies and transportation projects for 25 years

Transportation Improvement Program: Funded transportation projects within 4 years

Components of the Plans & Programs

Active Transportation Programs

Walkable Community Program Walkable Community Workshops Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Classes for children and adults Bike rodeos/related activities Defensive Driving Class Support

Walk & Roll Program Walk & Roll Rally Supports National Bike to Work Month Encourages businesses to support active transportation Encourages residents to “try” active transportation

Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Advisory Committees Monthly meetings 3 Bike Night meetings a year Agency Staff and Citizen Representation

What is wrong with this picture?

Elements desired for a Community

The Benefits a Walkable Community

Transportation Benefits– reduced traffic congestion, improved safety, calms traffic, preserves road infrastructure.

Economic Benefits – increased retail sales (restaurants, lodging establishments, retail stores), job creation, and enhancement of nearby property values.

Environmental Benefits – improved air quality and energy conservation.

Social Benefits -‐ quality-‐of-‐life benefits from living in communities with more open space and greenways and that provide more opportunities for walking or cycling.

Health and Fitness Benefits– it is well recognized that Americans would benefit in many ways from a more active lifestyle. Bike lanes, sidewalks and trails promote healthy choices.

Related Studies

Bicycle & Pedestrian Data Collection Project Phase I and Phase

II

San Antonio Regional

Bicycling Travel Patterns Survey

Pedestrian Safety Action

Plan

Mobility 2035 Plan Scenario Planning

Scoring for Surface Transportation Projects

Metro Mobility recognize active transportation projects

Safety Program

Cecilio Martinez Senior GIS & Web Analyst Phone: (210) 230-6905 Email: [email protected]

Study Network and Data Elements

The San Antonio – Bexar County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Planning area

History

History 1975

City of San Antonio’s Bicycle Master Plan

1975 San Antonio only had three bicycle corridors, which consisted of McAllister Park, a route connecting St. Mary's University, Trinity University, San Antonio College and Brackenridge Park, and a bike trail along the San Antonio River in the historic mission area.

History

Bicycle Mobility Task Force

Full-time bicycle coordinators

Identify bicycling funding

1995

UPWP 94-2 San Antonio-Bexar County Bicycle Mobility Plan.

History 1997

Community’s Bicycle Route Planning Workshop Proposed Bikeways

History 2005

Adoption of the Bicycle Master Plan April 28, 2004 Consideration of a resolution to execute a Bicycle Master Plan for the City of San Antonio and Bexar County region as called for in the Unified Development Code (Development Services)

Approved by San Antonio City Council on April 21, 2005

Approved by Bexar County Commissioners Court by resolution on July 12, 2005

Current

Bicycle Network

Total Percentage of the Bicycle Network

28. 6%

28.6% of Corridors Used From MPO Bicycle Mobility Plan (1994)

and Community-Based Bicycle Planning Study (1997)

+/- 5% margin of error


56. 8%

28.2% of Corridors Used From 2001 Bicycle Route Suitability Study



62%

5.2% of Corridors Used From 2004 Existing and Funded Bicycle

Facilities and Accommodations



72.9%

10.9% of Corridors Used From 2005 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Update Public Involvement



77. 2%

4.3% of Corridors Used From 2005 Proposed Southside Initiative

and some City of San Antonio Prop 3 Hike and Bike Trails

4.3%



100%

22.8% of Corridors Used From 2005 The City of San Antonio’s

Major Thoroughfare Plan


How do we evaluate this network?

What is Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS)?

What is Bicycle Suitability and Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS)?

Bicycle level of service (BLOS) attempts to place a rating on the experience of bicycling on the transportation networks of collector, arterial, service and local roads. The rating ranges from A to F, good to bad respectively along the lines of the automobile level of service (LOS) model.

a1ln(Vol15/L) + a2SPt(1+10.38HV)2 + a3(1/PC5)2 - a4(We)2 + C

where: Vol15 = directional traffic (15 minutes time period) L = total number of through lanes SPt = effective speed limit (see below) SPt = 1.12ln(SPP -20) + 0.81 SPP = Posted speed limit HV = percentage of heavy vehicles PC5 = FHWA’s five point surface condition rating We = Average effective width of outside through lane

Width of bike lane/paved shoulder Width of outside lane Traffic volume Traffic Speed % Trucks Presence of on-street parking Pavement Condition

Key Inputs for Bicycle Conditions Evaluation

Basis for 2001 San Antonio study Basis for 2005 San Antonio update Part of the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual

BLOS

Key Inputs for Bicycle Conditions Evaluation

Orthophoto Imagery

Digital orthophoto is a computer-generated image of an aerial photograph or aerial digitial image in which displacements caused by camera orientation and terrain have been corrected and the image has been projected to a standardized map projection. In other words, digital orthophotos are special photos because they have been processed to be spatially accurate.

The MPO has access to imagery at 4 inch pixel resolution

Why Aerial Photography or Orthophoto Imagery?

The resolution number represents the distance covered by one pixel in the image. Therefore, a 4 inch image is an image where 1 pixel is equal to 4 inches.

Aerial Photography

Our imagery is updated every year from our partnership with City of San Antonio, Bexar County Appraisal District and Bexar Metro 9-1-1. Which are part of the

Strategic Geospatial Coordination Committee or SGCC

What can you collect using the Aerial Photography? 1. Number of Lanes = 2 3. Configuration = undivided 6. Total width of outside lane & shoulder = 18ft 7. Width of outside striped lane = 5ft 8. Width of Parking = 0 9. Percent of segment with occupied parking = 0 10. Width of Sidewalk = 6ft

Quickly Identify Geometrics

Segment Split

Right-Of Way

RATING PAVEMENT CONDITION 5.0 (Very Good) Only new or nearly new pavements are likely to be smooth enough and free of cracks

and patches to qualify for this category.

4.0 (Good) Pavement, although not as smooth as described above, gives a first class ride and exhibits signs of surface deterioration.

3.0 (Fair) Riding qualities are noticeably inferior to those above; may be barely tolerable for high-speed traffic. Defects may include rutting, map cracking, and extensive patching.

2.0 (Poor) Pavements have deteriorated to such an extent that they affect the speed of free-flow traffic. Flexible pavement has distress over 50 percent or more of the surface. Rigid pavement distress includes joint spalling, patching, etc.

1.0 (Very Poor) Pavements that are in an extremely deteriorated condition. Distress occurs over 75 percent or more of the surface.

Pavement Condition

Figure 7: Pavement Condition Ratings & Images

PCR 5.0 - Excellent New or nearly new pavements. Free of cracks, patches, or rutting.

PCR 4.0 - Good to Excellent Pavements exhibiting few, if any, visible signs of surface deterioration.

PCR 3.3 - Good Evidence of initial deterioration including hairline cracks and minor rutting.

PCR 2.4 - Fair to Poor Visible defects including moderate cracking, distortion, and rutting. Some patching may now be present.

PCR 1.2 - Poor Extremely deteriorated pavements. Defects include severe cracking, distortion, and rutting. Very extensive patching.

PCR 0.8 - Very Poor Pavement is completely deteriorated. No structural integrity.No salvage value.

Source http://www.state.me.us/mdot/systems_management/pvmnt-conditions.php

A visual example of the Pavement conditions descriptions

Traffic Count

City of San Antonio Bexar County

Texas Department of Transportation

Field Collection is most accurate

2003

Bicycle Maps (Free) 2005 2009

~1,000 miles of roadway studied ~34 miles of bicycle facilities existed ~10,000 copies

11% 10%

15%

37%

24%

3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dy N

etw

ork

Segm

ents

A B C D E F

Level of Service Grades

Bicycle Level of Service Distribution

2001 Bicycle Study with 2003 Bicycle Map

~1,400 miles of roadway studied ~66 miles of bicycle facilities existed ~45,000 copies

2005 Bicycle Study with Bicycle Map

~1,664 miles of roadway studied ~136 miles of bicycle facilities ~30,000 copies

2009 Bicycle Study with Bicycle Map

Year Bicycle Network (Miles)

Bicycle Facilities

(Miles)

Number of Copies

2003 1,000 34 10,000

2005 1,400 66 45,000

2009 1,664 136 30,000

Bicycle Study Summary

Progressive Studies

Bicycle & Pedestrian Data Collection Project Phase I and Phase II

San Antonio Regional Bicycling Travel Patterns Survey


1.  Existing/Programmed Paved Shoulders or Bike Lanes

2.  Bicycle LOS Threshold Met

3.  Roadway Restripe Candidate

4.  Road Diet Candidate

5.  Add Paved Shoulders

6.  Detailed Corridor Study Needed


1.   Existing/Programmed Paved Shoulders or Bike Lanes






Shoulders 4ft or Greater



2.   Bicycle LOS Threshold Met





Bicycle LOS “B” for all collector and local streets, as well as arterials within one mile of the existing/planned Linear Creekway system Bicycle LOS “C” for all other arterial street




3.   Roadway Restripe Candidate




CoSA: 10 ft. (11 ft. if along a VIA route or a road with significant horizontal curvature) TxDOT: 11 ft. Bexar Co.: 12 ft





4.   Road Diet Candidate



Motor Vehicle LOS “C”






5.   Add Paved Shoulders


Right-Of Way and Cross Section







6.   Detailed Corridor Study Needed


To gather data from residents to better understand bike travel in the region, including:

Estimated number of residents who bike The reasons people bike Where people bike The frequency that people bike Barriers to biking Perceptions of current conditions for biking in the region The types of biking improvements that are needed


Profile of Bicyclists and Non-Bicyclists


The GPS survey was administered to 208 bicyclists ◦ 152 randomly selected bicyclists ◦ 56 active bicyclists who were members of cycling clubs, etc.

The GPS device was carried by bicyclists for one week The GPS device recorded the routes used, speed, and other information that will help us better understand bike travel in the region

Progress

1975 2011

iMap and Bicycle Information

Stephanie Velasquez Regional Transportation Planner Phone: (210) 230-6908 Email: [email protected]

MPO’s Safety Program

§  Efforts began in 2006 §  Best Practices

§  Available crash data

§  2009 began to work with TxDOT – safety data

§  Request from partner agencies for information about traffic and safety crash information for more informed decision making

§  2010 release of the MPO’s Regional Safety Study using 2008 Crash Record Information System data

History

§  Exceptional growth over the next 20 years, expecting 600,000 new residents.

§  Introducing CRIS and safety data to our region.

§  Budget constraints limit the ability for the needed transportation improvements making safety even more of a pressing issue.

§  Efforts to reduce the frequency and severity of crashes has long been underway, this study offers a more coordinated effort across local jurisdictions.

§  Priority for the MPO and Partner Agencies §  Requests from City of San Antonio Public Works

§  San Antonio Police Department §  Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Advisory Committees

Purpose of the 2010 Safety Study

v  Introduction v  Transportation Safety in

the Planning Process v  Regional Safety

Committee v  Methodology v  Legislative Information v  Next Steps

v  Regional Crash Assessment v  Impaired Driving v  Distracted Driving v  Road Rage/Aggressive Driving v  Cell Phone Use v  Speeding v  Bicycle Crashes v  Pedestrian Crashes v  Motorcycle Crashes

v  Analysis

v  Technical Appendix

2010 Safety Study Overview

v  Regional Crash Assessment

v  Impaired Driving

v  Distracted Driving

v  Road Rage/Aggressive Driving

v  Cell Phone Use

v  Speeding

v  Bicycle Crashes

v  Pedestrian Crashes

v  Motorcycle Crashes

On average, one bicyclist is involved in a crash with a vehicle every other day in our region.

Did you know? v  The first automobile crash involving a cyclist in the United States occurred

in New York City in 1896, when a motor vehicle collided with a bicyclist. (www.cycling.org)

v  Cyclists were the highest paid athletes in the U.S. until Babe Ruth joined the Yankees.(www.cycling.org)

v  Helmet use has been estimated to reduce head injury risk by 85 percent.

v  Twenty-onestates and the District of Columbia have helmet laws applying to young bicyclists; none ofthese laws applies to all riders. (www.helmets.org)


Analyzed accurate quantitative and qualitative data.

v  Crash Records Information System

v  Transportation Survey

v  GIS


Methodology

Crash Unit Person

Photo courtesy San Antonio Express-News Photo courtesy San Antonio Express-News

Phot

o co

urte

sy S

an A

nton

io E

xpre

ss-N

ews

Crash Number

Crash Records Information System (CRIS)

§  Create a Regional Safety Program

§  Develop an online public friendly format

§  Current three years

§  Develop an online application that allows public agencies to directly access data §  “iMap”

Safety Study Overview – Next Steps

§  City of San Antonio Bond Project Selection for 2012

§  STP-MM Funding for Future MPO Projects

§  Walkable Community Workshops

§  Bicycle Master Plan

§  Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

§  San Antonio Police Deployment of Resources

§  Education and Awareness Campaigns

§  Support Data for Grant Applications

§  Northside Independent School District

How is the Safety Data Used?

§  More formalization of safety efforts, analysis and data collection

§  Information is updated online §  More in-depth information of analysis areas §  Additional contributing factors analyzed §  Includes year 2010 thus far §  8 contributing factors represent 76% crashes

MPO Safety 2012

§  Transportation Safety Committee §  Texas Department of Transportation

§  San Antonio Police Department

§  City of San Antonio

§  Silver Eagle Distributors

§  Bexar County Sheriff’s office

§  Bexar County GIS Department

§  Mother’s Against Drunk Driving

§  Federal Highway Administration

Who helps us make decisions?

§  Bike Master Plan

§  Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

§  STP-MM projects

§  City of San Antonio Bond Program

§  Walkable Community Workshops

Safety: an Important Component in Transportation Planning

Bike Master Plan

Pedestrian Safety Action Plan

No Entity Roadway Name Number of Crashes

Crash Rate per VMT

57 TxDOT IH 410 Pedestrian Accommodations 0 0.00

59 TxDOT Loop 13 Pedestrian Facilities 15 1.39

60 TxDOT Loop 13 Pedestrian Facilities 3 0.68

67 TxDOT US 87 Bicycle Accommodations 3 0.72

STP-MM projects

The formula for calculating the crash rate for a roadway segment is presented below. The “Rate” ( R ) is expressed in crashes per Million Vehicle Miles Traveled (MVMT),

which is standard to the Traffic Engineering profession.

Where: A = Average number of crashes along the study roadway per year L = Length of roadway segment in miles V = Average Daily Traffic Volume along the roadway

City of San Antonio Bond Program

Walkable Community Workshops

Bike Night

iMap update with safety related data

§  Safety Program Continued Development §  Regional Safety Trends

§  Performance Measures

§  Counter Measures

Next Steps

Questions Lydia Kelly, Cecilio Martinez, Stephanie Velasquez

cris, gps, and blos data collection tools for effective bicycle and pedestrian planning

Technology