Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBikeway Master Plan DocumentationCollege Station's city council is onsidering a proposed bikeway sys- ~m. . This system would link three arkS, an arboretum, and a proposed ommercial center. Project MPO :ader for the Bryan-College Station rea, Danise Hauser, suggests this plan falls short, because "this proposed :>ikeway system is not presently in the MPO · Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), and funds have not be illocated." She points out that "with 1>ublic support, Project MPO bas tre- inendous potential in Bryan-College . Station." ·· ... ... ... Success will be mea5ures differ- ently. For example, in the Bryan/ College Station area Danise and co~­ pany, have had meeting with David Neshyba, TxDOT's District Bicycle Coordinator. Finally, beyond how the MPO should work (in theory), they Learned about the dynamics of their MPO. She says, "most MPOs, includ- ing ours, are not used to active roles in the decision-making process. No:w TxDOT and ISTEA maridates are pushing them to taice an authori~ative role. Our MPO members are gomg to be slow to do so and will rely heavily on TiDOT and City staff for some time to come." * * *· · CollegeStationplannerEdHard (dUring the June Workshop) said he had found solutions to some· of the problems in the area and since has been able to finish their Bicycle Plan. He is .looking for Project MPO leader Danise Hauser to participate in a fo- cus group on this plan and to muster bicyclists' help in evaluating planned routes (this should culminate in a Col- lege Station Bicycle Map). Soon Danise will look to rally bicyclists and local politicians in support of bicycle . facility improvements. Let her know if you can be counted" on. . ... ... •· The Bryan-College StationProject MPO Team enjoyed · active involve- ment in planning for bicycle facilities this summer by serving on the focus group for College Station's Bikeway Master Plan. Ed Hard, Transporta- tion Planner for College Station, and · M"'arla Fendley, Planning Intern, drafted the comprehensivemasterplan after graduating from the. TBC spon- sored planning workshop in June. Representatives from a wide range of the community responded to the chal- lenge to evaluate and propose changes to the plan, including the Bryan Plan- ning Department, TxDOT, Texas A&M University; the Texas Trans- portation Institute, the CS Parks Department, the local school districts, and A&M's Cycling Team. Danise Hauser and A&M Cycling Team president, Rey Trevino, emphasized. · the need for an educational compo- nent in the city's commitment to promote bicycling. Impressed with the group's con- tribution, Bryan's Senior Planner, Ron Quarles, expressed interest in consul- tation with a similar focus group as Bryan fonnulates its bicycle master plan. · In another exciting development, Ecf Hard will unveil for city officials in September a visionary $1 million-dol- lar bicycle loop, unnamed at press time, for TxDOT's Transportation Enhancement Program. It's critical that the cycling com- munity shows enthusiastic support for bicycle facilities such as these. Rous- ing cheers from the cycling masses will help ensure these colorful draw- ing~ don't become shelved plans. For. front-row seats at the presentations of the Bikeway Master Plan and the Mil- lion-dollar loop, contact Danise. Many-miles-traveled awards go ·to Jim Distin, -DeWayne Morris, Kelly-·Schmitt and Jonathan Coopersmith for recent volunteer ef- forts. _· .. Fmally, both cities are consider- ing the joint-production of a full-color bicycle route map similar to TBC's maps for Austin and Dallas. · ~~-~ Bryan-College Station bicyclists were mobilized recently by TBC 's local Project MPO and packed into the Octo- ber 28th College Station City Council meeting. With neon yellow pins, "I like Bikes-Texas Bicycle Coalition," nearly 60 folks and a petition of 3,000 more came to support the new College Station Bicycle Plan. They generated newspaper and TV coverage, they cut a last-minute deal with potential opposi- tion, and now they have a Bicycle Plan to guide Transportation Improvements well into the future. Rumor has it that the College Stations city manager is think- ing about joiningTBC. Congratulations, on such successes! They will also hold their first Bike to Work day in May. ~~~ The City of College Station, Texas Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future. P.O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue • College Station, TX 77842 • (979) 764-3500 www .ci.college-sta tion. tx. us MEMORANDUM TO: College Station City Council -·-, THROUGH: Kelly Templin, Development Services Directo&. THROUGH: Tom Brymer, City Manager FROM: Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner /q-- DATE: December 12, 2002 RE: Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan -Final Report I am very excited to finally deliver this final report for the Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan project. As you know, City Council adopted this plan on October 10, 2002. It will be very exciting to see this plan implemented in the future. If you have any questions or comments about this plan, please let me know. Since adopting the plan, I have applied for the City of College Station to be designated as a 11Bicycle Friendly Community11 by the League of American Bicyclists. This program rates communities based on how accommodating they are to bicyclists. I will be sure to let you know whether we meet the strict criteria for this designation. If we do not meet the criteria, we will be able to identify the areas that we need to work on. If you would like more information on this program, you can visit www.bicyclefriendlycommunity.org. Home of Texas A&M University League of Anierioan Bicyclists Bicycle Friendly Community The League of American Bicyclists Bicycle Friendly Communities Campaign LEAGUE OF AMERICAN BICYCLISTS 16 12 K St.. NW. Suite 800 W<Jshington. DC 2006-2850 WEBSITE www.bik.eleague.org EMAIL IJ1keleague11~·bikt:lea9ue.org PHONE 202.822.1333 FAX 202.822.1334 Thank you for your interest in becoming a designated Bicycle Friendly Community. Please complete Part I. Visit www.bicyclefriendlycommunity.org or call 202-822-1333 for more information and resources. APPLICATION PART I CONTACT INFO Name of Community Mayor or top elected official in municipality MA'-(' of'. ~t--l Contact Name Position Employer Address Address line 2 City State Zip Phone Fax Email Website i12A-J SPOf2..-\,b.Tior-l PLAt--l t-JE-~ vt 1'""( G F-eou...-e. <e e.-<;.m 11. o ,...j \ \ o \ 11:::.>CAS' AVEN vE ~~kE@ et. CoL~E-S"TA11or--l · 11<.L W N 'IV . C\ . CoLu;tE, -9rktl ot--1 -"'ilC • u > COMMUNITY PROFILE 1. Population 2. Square mileage of municipality Total area Water area Land area 3. Population density 4. Climate Average temperature for January Average temperature for April Average temperature for July Average temperature for October Average precipitation for January Average precipitation for April Average precipitation for July Average precipitation for October 5. Median income 6. Age distribution 3 under 20 3 age 20-64 3 age 65-84 3 age 85+ 7. Race a. 3 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) b. 3 Not Hispanic o r Latino c. 3 One race d . 3 White e. 3 Black or African American f. 3 American Indian and Alaska Native g. 3 Asian h. 3 Native Haw aiian and Other Pacific Islander i. 3 Some other race j. 3 Two or more races 8. If you have Journey-to-Work census data on bicycling to work, what percentage of people in your community bike to work? 4o ·-=l- I. pt-Z....'' so.t> 07 -,.-----l o c..c... c. 07 _--".. ___ 10 ~ ."?..-070 ---~-/C ----'-0_._4 __ 3 \o .o 3 ~C>. 0 3 q ~.' 3 6 0 .{ 3 ~.4 3 o.3 3 ~."3 3 o . \ 3 4.S" 3 1. e>i 3 _4.......:........3=--_3 Directions (Questions 9-14): Please circle the choice that reflects the best answer for your community. 9. How many households are within 1/.i mile of a retail or business area? (All) (Most) (CS'O;.i) (Few) l 0. How many neighborhoods have significant grass, flowers, and trees? (All) ~ (Some) (Few) 11 . How many neighborhoods have significant amenities such as parks, water fountains, benches, and public art? (All) ~ (Some) (Few) 12. How many neighborhoods in your community would you consider a good place to raise children? @ (Most) (Some) 13. Do you have a Bicycle Master Plan? ~(No) (Few) 14. Do you have a written bicycle accommodation policy? (Yes) ('.§) Directions (Questions 15-18): Please answer the following questions on a separate sheet of paper. All answers should be typed and numbered accordingly. 15. What was your community's most significant investment for bicycling in the past year? 81~1l'1 "1AS~ Pl/tN t/Po/f'rE;..JN6W Of¥-~1/?A7HSL_ PrNl> 16. List current community activities that encourage/promote bicycling. Nf5W LAl'\E'~ 171 }(£. ~ w /) (<¥-Dft1 17. Bicycle Coordinator & Government Staff a. List your official bicycle/pedestrian coordinator or bicycle issues contact person on government staff. f4!W fZo~,1 ~NSf'f)ff-V-'477-o/J Pl..;'t#~ b. What department is the bicycle coordinator located in? (JIE.VE.u:;f>l"t,~ ~tc6-~ c . How many hours are spent per year in this capacity? ~02--2'Jb +f"t-t~S , d. List all other governme nt staff or c ontrac tors whose primary duties are devoted to bicyc li ng issues. 16-XA-S ~ t/flJ/V~iTPJ 1-f/t~ 81/C-e U;o/;!J.?1t.J~~. 18. Do you have a Bic yc le Advisory Committee, Ped/Bike Council or other venue for citizen input? a. List the name of the Chair a nd their contact information. /JO . Thank you for providing preliminary information. Please mail the completed application to: League of American Bicyclists 1612 K Street, NW #800 Washington DC 20006 After careful review of your general community profile, the League will inform you if you have met the basic criteria to begin Part II of the application process. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE COLLEGE STATION BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN AS AN AMENDMENT TO THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND ADOPTING B~ANCE THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED BY RESOLUTI # A SET OUT BELOW; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; DECLARING A ; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DA TE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS: PART I: PART2: PART2: PART 3: That the "College Station Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan", as shown in Exhibit "A" be adopted as ordinance for all purposes. That the College Station Thoroughfare Plan as shown in Exhibit "B", previously adopted by resolution, be adopted now by ordinance for all purposes. That if any provisions of any section of this ordinance shall be held to be void or unconstitutional, such holding shall in no way effect the validity of the remaining provisions or sections of this ordinance, which shall remain in full force and effect. That any person, firm, or corporation violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable by a fine of not less than Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00) nor more than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000 .00). Each day such violation shall continue or be permitted to continue, shall be deemed a separate offense. Said Ordinance, being a penal ordinance, becomes effective ten (I 0) days after its date of passage by the City Council, as provided by Section 3 5 of the Charter of the City of College Station. PASSED, ADOPTED and APPROVED this tenth day of October, 2002. APPROVED: RON SIL VIA, Mayor ATTEST: Connie Hooks, City Secretary APPROVED: City Attorney O/groupllegal/ordinance/amendmenlform.doc .. ORDINANCE NO. ~~~~~~~~~ Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" The City of College Station Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan, is hereby adopted as set out hereafter to read as follows: u\c: \windows\temp\mx/ibdir\bpmp ordinance_ I. doc 8129102 06 /2i /2002 THl 13:04 FAX 979 ~50 5~5 ~ tlC~ tconom1c vev ~orp Goal: Develop high speed rail1 centered in the Bryan + College Station area, that can be hailed as a prototype for other areas of Texas and the nation. Such a facility would have repair and research facilities located in Bryan+ College Station area. Routes would go to Houston, San Antonio1 Dallas- Fort Worth, and back to Bryan + College Station1 plus to Austin along the "Presidential Highway" between the Bush and Johnson Libraries and would enhance relations between the Austin and Bryan + College Station communities. Strategy: High-speed passenger rail routes should extend from Bryan and College Station to Austin along the Presidential Corridor; then major routes, emphasizing maximum use of established rail/highway rights-of-way and minimum use of eminent domain and condemnation of private properly. Goal: Improve multi-modal transportation access to workplaces, shopping areas, entertainment centers and schools and implement incentives to increase bicycle pedestrian and transit use. Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Stra.tegy: Strategy: Install transit shelters at major traffic generators. Study the problem of access in and around Texas A&M University by performing a feasibility study to determine if there are other more efficient alternatives to automobile access. These alternatives would utilize the latest technological advances in Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), such as automatically guided and operated transit vehicles (people movers). Study the feasibility of providing park-and-ride lots located on the periphery of the Bryan+ College Station urbanized area adjacent to SH-6 and FM-2818. Undertake a pedestrian study which identifies the needs of the walking public, centers of pedestrian activity, and presence of or absence of pedestrian-related infrastructure. -Improve access for citizens with disabilities. Compile and implement public involvement strategies to achieve a consensus on proposed thoroughfare improvement alternatives. Educate the public regarding transportation issues. 24 Post·i~ Fax Note 7671 To K-e From Co. Phone # Fax 11 Fax• ~ UV.l./ VV-t 06 127 12002 THl 13 :04 FAX 979 260 5252 ecs ~conom1c uev corp Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Educate the public on rights and responsibilities of roadway users. Develop public support for transportation mobility options. Study the impact of providing financial incentives to students in order to get them to shift from autos to bicycles when traveling to and from Texas A&M. Develop List of Pedestrian Improvements (LPI) which establishes prioritized pedestrian walkway improvements for future construction. This LPI will also address Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance. Installation of continuous sidewalks as well as pedestrian crosswalks and pedestrian activated signals on South Texas Avenue at quarter-mile intervals. Link neighborhoods east of the bypass with bikeways/walkways even before the planned roadways are constructed. · Install sidewalks along both sides of minor and major arteries and on one side of collectors marked crosswalks at intersections. Develop List of Bicycle Improvements (LB!) which establishes prioritized bikeway impwvements for fu ture construction. Convert the 2-way bicycle lane on George Bush Drive to two 1-way bicycle lanes. Install bike racks on transit buses. Install 14'-16' wide curb lanes with share.the-road signs and pavement symbols at intervals. Install bicycle-activated signals. Require bicycle parking where car parking is required at a ratio of 1 :5 . Reduce posted speeds to 20 mph on local roadways and 25 mph on collectors. Identify areas that are characterized by high pedestrian activity and evaluate the feasibility of providing pedestrian zones. A pedestrian zone is an area where pedestrians are provided with quality facilities and protected from interference from impeding vehicular traffic. Goal: Ensure access to airports, intermodal trar:isportation facilities, major freight distribution routes, recreational areas, monuments, and historical sites. 25 ~UU .. /UU'i "I i 06 /27 /2002 THl 13 :04 FAX 979 ~60 5 ~5 ~ H e ~ t conom1 c v ev ~orp Strategy: Establish bus routes where visitors can conveniently visit major historical points. Revise transit routing to serve EasteJVJood Airport. Install bicycle and luggage lockers at airport. Goal: Promote a networl< of designated roadway and separated bicycle facilities to safely and effectively accommodate the travel and recreational desires of casual bicyclists. This network will complement the existing and future roadway system, in which every roadway (unless specifically prohibited) accommodates experienced bicyclists. Strategy: Install, improve, and maintain sidewalks and designated bicycle facil ities, especially in and around schools, bus stops, and LBI commercial areas and workplaces throughout the urban area in accordance with LPL Strategy: Ensure that all new developments provide sidewalks and bicycle accommodations with direct connections to residential, commercial, and recreat ional areas and to transit stops. , Strategy: De si gn and retrofit appropriate roadways not legally prohibiting bicyclists or pedestrians to accommodate these users safely in order to achieve a balanced multi-modal transportation system . OBJECTIVE: SAFETY Reduce accidents involving all transportation modes. Goal: Promote cooperation and sharing of the roadway among all users. Strategy: Assist in the implementation of educational traffic safety programs that have been created by other agencies. 26 Li!:.! V V V / vv~ 06/27 /2002 THU 13 :05 FAX 979 260 5252 HCS ~conom1c uev ~orp ~ V V":t/ VV"i: • E11vironme11l Goal: Develop a continuous greenbelt in the floodplain from the upper reaches of Carters Creek (north of the Brazos Center) to the confluence of the Navasota river. Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Develop a city nature park in Bryan along the upper reaches of Carters Creek with facilities for observing flora and fauna. Develop a city nature park in College Station along the mid-reaches of Carters Creek with facilities for obser..ting flora and fauna. Develop a county nature park along the lower reaches of Carters Creek with facilities for day use and campsites for both individuals and groups. Develop a county nature park on Carters Creek at the Navasota river. Design and build low-maintenance natural pathways along Carters Creek connecting the developed parks to provide a continuous trail from the Brazos Center to the Navasota river confluence. Goal: Create a Brazos river parks system which would give access to natural areas and preserve our historic links to the Brazos river. Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Strategy: Develop a county park on the Brazos river for day and overnight use with overlooks, potable water, and public facilities with easy access to the Presidential Highway. Develop a county park on the Brazos river at the Batts Ferry Crossing with facilities for day use. Develop a county park on the Brazos river at the Koppe Bridge site with facilities for day use. Design low-maintenance natural pathways along the Brazos river connecting the parks by a continuous trail. Goal: Provide citizens with an opportunity to view wildlife in a wetlands habitat formed in appropriate portions of the floodplain. 34 i I t l I· l Memo To: From: CC: Date: Re: / Bicycle Planning Team Judy Dowis Mark Smith 07/31/01 College Station #3 Company Name Here I finally went over to campus and copied this article. I thought we should have it if we were going to keep quoting it to everybody! Also, I have the State Data Center 'M'.lrking on the bicycle mode splits from the 1990 Census. It is on summary tape file and we will probably have to pay for the information. The State Data Center's building was condemned (can you believe it), and they are in the process of moving, so it will take a couple of \Neeks. •Page 1 Promoting Bicycle Commuting: Understanding the Customer This paper provides a demographic profile of the bicycle commuter and explores government and community efforts to successfully market bicycle commuting to American workers. An integrated approach is recommended for communities interested in encouraging people to select the bicycle as a transportation alternative. The data used in constructing a profile of the typical bicycle commuter comes from the 1980 and 1990 Public Use Microdata Sample Files (PUMS) compiled by the U.S. Census Bure~u. These m~crodata files are a valuable resource for producing detalled tabulations of demographic characteristics for bicycle commuters and other similar subpopulations. by fames Wt/Iiams and fan Larson A mericans love their cars. But the car culture of the 1950s that promised freedom and wide open spaces has led in the 1990s to dependence and gridlock. Ac- cording to the U.S. Census, the number of people driving to work alone increased dramatically between 1980 and 1990. During that period the U.S. labor force grew by 19 million jobs, but 22 million more people began driving to work alone. In the decade between 1980 and 1990, the proportion of American workers driv- ing to_ work alone increased from 64 per- cent to 73 percent. In the late 1970s and into the 1980s, the federal government unsuccessfully sought to alleviate urban congestion through a costly series of promotions and programs heavily geared toward park and ride transportation. Bicycling as an alternate mode of transportation played virtually no part in these efforts. That changed with two pieces of federal leg- islation: the 1990 Clean Air Act and, more significantly, the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (!STEA). The Clean Air Act sets stricter standards for air quality and require~ regions to develop methods to reach com- pliance, including bicycling as a trans- portation alternative. The greatest boost to bicycle commuting comes from this policy requirement and $155 billion in funding available to states and commu- nities to develop transportation facilities and plans, including integrating pro- grams and facilities for bicycling. Betz, Dustrude and Walker describe Americans' increasing attraction to bi- cycling as an alternate form of transport. This trend has been accelerated by con- cerns about the environment, improved health benefits and cheaper transport costs. Several surveys show more Ameri- cans are bicycling. While estimates of 'I'RANsPORTATION QUARTERLY, Vol 50, No. 3, Summer 1996 (67-78) 0 1996 Eno Transportation Foundation, Inc., Lansdowne, Vrrginia 67 l I ! 1 I •·' t; i I i i ~ , TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY adult cyclists range from 48 million to 70 million, a 1991 Harris poll showed 46 percent of Americans aged 18 and older had ridden a bicycle in the last year. Goldsmith explains however, that n~arly all bicycling is considered recreatio~nal. He adds that murmurings in support of expanding opportunities for bike com- muting do not necessarily translate into individuals choosing to use bicycles to· get to work. U.S. Census data for 1990 reveal that just under a half a million workers, or about four-tenths of one per- cent of the U. S. labor force rely on a bicycle as their primary means of trans- portation to work. Despite the low percentage of bicycle commuters, the potential for bicycles to become an effective alternate mode of transport is great. According to the 1989 Nationwide Personal Transportation Sur- vey, many work trips are short enough to use a bicycle. The study found that 27 percent of travel trips are one mile or less; 40 percent are two miles or less; and 49 percent are three miles or less. Certainly, barriers to bicycle com- muting still remain. Researchers at the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center reviewed trans- portation surveys and developed a list of the most commonly offered reasons for not bicycling to work. Among them: • Length of trip and travel time Absence of safe places to ride Lack of secure bike parking and showers at work Fear of crime While transportation literature ex- plores stated reasons for decisions against biking to work, less attention has been devoted to the characteristics of those who do commute to work regularly using a bicycle. Understanding those factors may help craft appropriate re- sponses to the perceived needs of bicy- clists and develop effective approaches 68 to attracting new bicycle commuters. As Edmondson observes, "Like skilled mar- keters, planners must craft strategies rooted in consumer information ... " Methodology The data used in constructing a pro- file of the cycling commuter comes from the 1990 Public Use Microdata Sample Files (PUMS) prepared by the Bureau of the Census. Unlike summary data, where the unit of analysis is a geographic area, microdata files contain records for a sample of housing units and the indi- viduals who live in those housing units. The 1 percent version of the PUMS gives the user records for about 2.5 million individuals. These microdata files allow researchers to produce detailed tabula- tions of characteristics for specialized sub-populations. The Census asks a sample of about 16 percent of all households questions about employment, income, education and many other items. After identifying those persons who are employed at all, the census form asks, "How did this per- son usually get to work last week?" If more than one method was used, the respondent must select the mode of transport used for most of the distance. The respondent could select from items such as car, truck or van, bus or trolley, subway or elevated, railroad, ferry, taxi- cab, motorcycle, bicycle, walked, worked at home, or other method. In this study, persons who identified "bicycle" as the predominant mode of transportation were compared to those commuting to work by other means. Those who worked at home were ex- cluded from the analysis. Results Nine demographic variables were selec ofbic age,• incor geogi of bi pare• iden1 twee J are t die ti tow bicy< cent sine• 75% mut• and This the 1 seqi.: shm mut Mali mal1 ratic Sou 1ters. As ledmar- :rategies l ... " ig a pro- 1es from Sample .lreau of y data, >graphic :ords for he indi- 1g units. .1S gives million es allow tabula- cialized >f about 1estions ucation ntifying d at all, his per- :ek?" If :ed, the J.ode of lstance. n items trolley, ry, taxi- worked entified node of o those means. ere ex- :s were ·r .. .; " PROMOTING BICYCLE COMMUTING: UNDERSTANDING THE CUSTOMER selected to examine the characteristics age. For persons under 25, the ratio of of bicycle commuters, including: gender, men to women is about 3.5 to l; but for age, ethnicity, work status, occupation, persons 45 to 54, it is almost 6 to 1. income, education, marital status and Men are far more likely to be bicycle com- geographic location. The characteristics routers up into their 40s and 50s. Fe- of bicycle commuters were then com-male riders are more likely to be under pared to those of other commuters to age 35. In fact, 75% of female bicycle identify similarities and differences be-commuters are between the ages of 15 tween the two groups. and 34. Age and Gender -Gender and age Since bike commuting is closely tied are the two most powerful factors in pre-to age, the increase in births during the dieting whether a person will commute late 1970s and 1980s should produce a to work by bicycle. Nearly 80% of all modest increase in the number of per- bicycle commuters are male. This per-sons using this form of transport. centage has actually increased slightly Marital Status -Figure 2 shows that since 1980, when the percentage was compared to other commuters, bicycle 75%. The total number of bicycle com-commuters tend to be single. This is con- muters declined slightly between 1980 sistent with the age patterns shown and 1990, from 471,000 to 461,000. above, since the younger one is, the less This is probably due to the deflating of likely one is to be married. However, the the baby boom in the 1960s and the con-tendency for bicycle commuters to be sequent aging of the population. As we unmarried persists even when age is con- show in Figure 1, the propensity to com-trolled. For each age group, the rate of mute to work by bike declines with age. commuting by bicycle is highest for those Male bicycle commuters outnumber fe-who have never married, and second males in all age categories. However, the highest for those who are divorced and ratio of men to women increases with separated. The widowed have the low- Figure 1 Bicycle commuters per 1000 total commuters by age 15 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 and over Source: 1990 Census, PUMS file, 1 % sample 69 . . •' '' 1 -.. . ---':-... -. ' -.. ·-. ---· -. --•': . ·- I I ·. ' .· .· ;: :l; .. ·~ t::.<:, ... : 'i· .. )' ' ' I r ' -\• '\" : .l-i t • " : '-1-•:., . ' : , t t • 'I l f ' I~ t ' ' ~ • ~ l .. . -·~·!! ~~::~·~1 -~ ..... ~;·:·f ~i·t': ~ .. E-.~~ ~l.:~ t-. ~~~~~,!_:_~-_ .. ;; .. ;;1~} ct~, " •I :. i; ., " i I ;! lj : t; 'I' :).! •fi l .,\. f ~·! 'i} ,. : ~11 ,. ~ '! ;j f ; J I' I. ' " : ~ ~~ t: . ii t !; ; f; Ii' ' I ~ !1 : ,, I ·~ "! " ~ ' t• '! ~ ,. d : ii ' :i!J . 'n '· '"t · ;:!f · ' ;·• ! : l ! : : 1 I ' ! ~ 4 ' " ' •· f. t ~ .! I ,I I " ; \ TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY est commuting rates in every age cat- egory. Rac e and Ethnicity -Riding a bi- cycle to work is not distributed propor- tionately among all racial and ethnic cat- egories, as we can see in Figure 3 . The census allows respondants to select the racial/ ethnic category with which they most closely identify. In this table we have combined a number of detailed cen-- sus codes into very broad racial/ ethnic groupings. Blacks are the least likely to commute by bicycle, followed by Whites, Asians, American Indians, and Hispan- ics in that order. Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians are more likely to be found in Mountain and Western states, where bicycle commuting is highest. Since many members of the Hispanic and Asian populations have recently immi- grated to the United States, they may be influenced by the extensive use of bi- cycles for transport found in Latin and Asian countries. Employment -In addition to age, gender, marital status and ethnicity, fac- tors related to employment are impor- tant determinants of bicycle commuting. To begin with, the distance from work- place to residence must be short enough to allow reasonable commuting time. While the PUMS Census file does not provide direct data on distance to work, it does report travel time. Bicycle com- muters report a shorter travel time than other workers. On average, bike com- muters arrived at work about 16 min- utes after they left home, compared to 22 minutes for persons using other means. A second employment factor is whether the person works at a job full- or part-time for the entire year. Less than half (44%) of bicycle commuters are full- time workers all year. In contrast, 63% of those using other means of transport work full-time. To analyze the relationship between bicycle commuting and type of employ- ment, several hundred census occupa- tional codes were combined into seven broad categories. The bicycle commut- ing rate for each category was calculated by dividing the number of bike commut- Figure 2 Bicycle commuters per 1000 total commuters by marital status Married Separated or Divorced Source: 1990 Census, PUMS file, 1 % sample 70 F ers by and m sonnel comm· in Figl worke: with S• per 10 est for tive Sl To int teristi1 ries rr. sonne mogra comm persoi makir tion, states out th plain milita Tl farm, thou1 broad So um mting. work- nough : time. es not >work, e com- te than e com- 6 min- lled to : other :tor is )b full- ss than tre full- >t, 63% ms port 1etween :mploy- >ccu pa- ) seven munut- culated >mmut- PROMOTING BICYCLE COMMUTING: UNDERSTANDING THE CUSTOMER ers by the number of total commuters male. Since all are also outdoor occu- and multiplying by 1000. Military per-pations, individuals would not be as con- sonnel have the highest rate of bicycle cerned about having a place to shower commuting at 9 .7 per 1,000 as shown and change clothes before starting to in Figure 4 . Farm, forestry and fishing work. workers ranked second at 7.5 per 1,000 The relatively high rate for service with service workers close behind at 7 .3 workers must be interpreted differently. per 1000. Bike commuting rates are low-Included in this group are personal ser- est for workers in the sales/ administra-vice workers, food service, and house- tive support category at 2 .7 per 1,000. hold workers, as well as protective and To interpret these results, the charac-health service workers. Service workers teristics of the different employee catego-are often part-time and have lower pay ries must be considered. Military per-rates. In addition, they are typically sonnel are primarily young males, a de-younger than other workers. Although mographically favorable group for bike women ou tnumber men in the service commuting. Moreover, many military category, the effect of these other factors personnel live on or very near bases, is strong enough to produce a higher fre- making for a short commute. In addi-quency of commuting by bike. tion, many military bases are located in Sales and administrative support states that enjoy good weather through-workers are least likely to use a bicycle out the year. These factors all help ex-to get to work. Women outnumber men plain the higher commuting rate for the by 2 to 1 among these workers, a factor military. which doubtless accounts for much of The same considerations exist for the lower participation. Moreover, these farm, forestry and fishing workers. Al-workers may be m ore concerned about though the age range is somewhat personal appearance on the job, which broader, the category is overwhelmingly may mitigate against u se of a bicycle if Figure 3 Bicycle commuters per 1000 total commuters by race/ ethnicity American Indian White Asian/Pacific Islander Hispanic Source: 1990 Census, PUMSfile, 1% sample { :;:• 1.· : . ~; ~ j. j. ii ]· i i I. I ' ! i -~ ' ~ .r " I ~: a !. . ~1 :; :1 .. ~~ ,; TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY no shower facilities are available. Income and Education -Given what we have learned about the employment characteristics of bicycle commuters, it is not surprising to find that as a group, bicycle commuters earn less money than the rest of society. Since most bicycle commuters only work par.t-time, it is more instructive to look only at full-time workers. Table 1 contains data on in- come levels by age for full-time workers with different transportation preferences. The average income for all bicycle com- muters is $23,842 compared to $28,876 for all commuters. As expected, there is a link between age, income and bicycle commuting habits. In the 15 to 24 age group, the mean income for bicycle com- muters is $12,229 compared to $15,314 for all commuters. This pattern also holds true for the 25 to 34 and 35 to 44 age groups. In older age groups, how- ever, a different picture emerges. The mean income for bicycle commuters in the age groups 45 to 54 and 55 and over is actually higher than that of their co- horts who choose other modes. Bicycle commuters in the 45 to 54 age group have a mean income of $35,580, com- pared to a mean income of $34,624 for all commuters in this age group. In the 55 and over group, those who ride bi- cycles to work also have a higher mean income . The higher mean income for older bi- cycle commuters suggests a different motive for riding to work. If money is not a factor in the decision, personal health or environmental benefits may be other possible motivators. The greater flexibil- ity and independence often associated with higher paying jobs may also pro- vide older commuters with more trans- portation choices. Somewhat consistent with the above analysis is the finding that bicycle com- muting occurs in its greatest numbers at both ends of the educational spec- trum. As shown in Figure 5, individuals with less than four years of high school are most likely to use a bicycle to get to work, showing a rate of 6.2 per 1,000. College graduates follow in their decision to ride a bicycle to work with a rate of Figure 4 Bicycle commuters per 1000 total commuters by occupational category Military service Operatives, laborers Skilled crafts Farm, forestry, fishing Sales, administrative support Professional, technical, managerial 0 2 4 6 8 10 Source: 1990 Census, PUMS file, 1 % sample 72 p Ag< 15-2 25-3 35-4 45-4 55 a Tota Note: E Source: 4.5 pe diplon equall: with r 1,000 greate ingmc men ta with 1 mayh not af Souro groupj com-·'f. 24 for ? In the :-:: de bi-:t · mean ·:~ 'other exibil- ciated o pro- trans- above ~com­ mbers spec- iduals school get to 1,000. !Cision rate of PROMOTING BICYCLE COMMUTING: UNDERSTANDING THE CUSTOMER Table 1 Mean Income of Commuters By Age and Mode of Transportation Age Bicycle Commuters Other Commuters All Commuters 15-24 $12,229 25-34 $22,097 35-44 $28,307 45-44 $35,580 55 and over $35,768 Total $23,842 Note: Based on full-time, all year workers Source: 1990 Census, PUMS file, 1 % sample 4.5 per 1000. Those with a high school diploma and those with some college are equally likely to ride a bicycle to work, with respective rates of 2.9 and 2 .7 per 1,000. College graduates may have greater flexibility in choosing a commut- ing mode and select bicycling for environ- mental and/ or health reasons while those with less than a high school education may have limited choices and simply can not afford a car. Some workers with less $15,332 $15,314 $25,184 $25,173 $32,327 $32,318 34,622 $34,624 $32,516 32,520 $28,891 $28,876 than a high school education aged 16-18 may not have driver's licenses. Geographic Location -As might be expected, geography plays a prominent role in determining who commutes by bicycle. Figure 6 presents bicycle com- muter rates for the nine geographic divi- sions identified by the Bureau of the Census. The far west states of the Pa- cific have the greatest number of bicycle commuters at 9.6 per 1,000, followed Figure 5 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Bicycle commuters per 1000 by level of education Q-l<::~~~~~~-.-~~~~..-~~~~.-~-' High School Grads College grads <High School 1-3 yrs College Source: 1990 Census, PUMS file, 1 % sample j i I ! i " ' ;1 111 . ;I ::1 ,, :11 ,, 1; ,. !I j, ' ! ' I ! ! I ·I 'I . ' ~-' j [ ! ' ! ~ 1. ; ·l'i I~ '. di :.,·~ 11 i ! · .i.; ·I· I,'· " i1' l j • Lj·. J : 1·1· I . 'I· I. : ! ;! 1 I i .( I i I. TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY closely by the Mountain division with 8. 7 per 1000. The region with the lowest rate of bicycle commuting is the East South Central, which includes of "deep south" states. In these states, less than one out of 1,000 commuters uses a bicycle to get to work. Although weather and popula- tion composition play a significant role in regional patterns of bicycle use, cul- tural factors may be at work in the re- luctance of southern residents to use this form of transport. Riding a bicycle may not fit into southern conceptions of ap- propriate behavior for adults, particu- larly males. In addition to states, the PUMS data files provide data for Metropolitan Sta- tistical Areas (MSAs). In Table 2 we show the top ten MSAs in terms of commut- ing to work by bicycle. Four of these ar- eas are in California which also has the most metropolitan areas (13) with 1 per- cent or more of commuters riding bi- cycles to work. Within California, the Chico-Paradise Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) ranks highest with 49.7 bi- cycle commuters per 1,000, followed closely by the Santa Barbara MSA with 41.2. It should be noted that many of the communities with larger bicycle com- muter populations also are college towns with a generally younger population. In fact, every MSA .on the top ten list con- tains a major university. Promoting bicycle commuting What can communities do to promote greater bicycle use? What is it that makes people choose a bicycle to com- mute to work? What more can be done to convince others to do the same? A picture of the hard-core bicycle commuter emerges from the demo- graphic data. The bike commuter typi- cally is male. If young, his wages are lower than non-bicycle commuters his age. If older, his wages are typically higher. The education of the average bike commuter varies from either no high school diploma to having a college de- gree. He lives in a college town where the weather is mild year round, probably in Figure 6 Bicycle commuters per 1000 total commuters by geographic division New England Mid Atlantic East North Central West North Central South Atlantic East South Central West South Central Mountain 0 Source: 1990 Census, PUMS fil.e, 1 % sample 74 2 4 6 B 10 the Wes Pre' to bicyc cilities, cerns. 1 standin muters ers. Go incorpo tive fac bike to and ind issues • The foll tors an sei:ve a concen Dis tablish• trips tc . cycling nities b ties by] exam pl carry re ing bic: distanc clists l onto b Bike-01 numbe ing fac many or,'· cle com--;r'?? ~e towns :~:,­ tion. In -;:. list con- promote I it that to com- be done ne? : bicycle ~ demo- .ter typi- ages are iters his typically rage bike no high liege de- rhere the >bably in :sion PROMOTING BICYCLE COMMUTING: UNDERSTANDING THE CUSTOMER the West, and less likely in the South. Previous research identifies barriers to bicycle commuting such as lack of fa- cilities, distance, traffic and crime con- cerns. The remaining issue is an under- standing of how potential bicycle com- muters become regular bicycle commut- ers. Goldsmith has developed a model incorporating the personal and subjec- tive factors which affect the decision to bike to work. Community, government and industry efforts which speak to these issues are more likely to enjoy success . The following is a breakdown of key fac- tors and further responses which may sei:ve as models in addressing public concerns and perceptions. Distance -It has already been es- tablished that a large percentage of daily trips to work are within reasonable bi- cycling distance. However, some commu- nities have further expanded opportuni- ties by providing bicycle-transit links. For example, in San Diego, California, buses carry rear-mounted bicycle racks allow- ing bicycle commuters to travel greater distances. Since the late 1970's, bicy- clists have been allowed to take bikes onto buses in Westchester, New York. Bike-on-rail programs are available in a number ofU .S. cities as are bicycle park- ing facilities. In San Francisco, bicycle parking has been available since the early 1970s . More recently the city's Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) service has installed 600 lockers. Nearly 500 are in use; 352 of those are rented at a cost of $15 for a 3-month period or $30 for a year. BART also has installed nearly 1,400 bicycle racks at suburban and urban rail stations. Values & Attitudes -Influencing val- ues and altering attitudes may present . the greatest challenge to attracting greater n u mbers of bicycle commuters. Visibility and integration are key com- ponents of these strategies. Because !STEA requires states and metropolitan areas to develop long-range bicycling plans, the visibility of bicycle commut- ing will be improved. Equally helpful are requirements that states appoint bicycle program coordinators. Coordinators can help communities create consistent ap- proaches to heighten public awareness through education and publicity pro- grams. Eight of the top 10 cities for bi- cycling have bicycle coordinator posi- tions. Public involvement also increases program visibility. In Eugene, Oregon, the Bicycle Advisory Committee works with city officials to promote bicycling and increase facilities. Family Responsibilities -As we Table 2 Top Ten Metropolitan Areas For Bicycle Commuters Metropolitan Statistical Areas Chico-Paradise, CA Santa Barbara, CA Gainesville, FL Eugene-Springfield, OR Bryan-College Station, TX Madison, WI Boulder-Longmont, CO Champaign-Urbana, IL Sacramento, CA Santa Cruz, CA Source: 1990 Census, PUMS file, 1 % sample Bicycle Commuters per 1000 49 .7 41.2 35.2 32.9 37.2 29.5 24.5 21.6 19.6 19.1 75 ! I I; 1 · I·: I i ;I !1 Ii !' I II iii ·:1 T ii : :I !I: 1, 11 I !I I' ii "' 'I ii Ii I' I I ! I I I I i ' I I I I ! I f ! I ~ i ' 1' ; : n ~. j· ·~ jj } ~ :} Ji ]ll I. ii; ~j! ~;. ~1: i1; i,' ~I. ii; .1 ·!I ~j; 'I' '.t' ~i !!1 j'· 11: ,It ij, 1, iF 11 !i ll I :I ~ i l ! ;: l ,, j ~i ' 1! ! l i I I I j! ! I j ~! ' 11 l i ll i i1 l i! l ii ~I i l· i: ! ! !/ 1, 1 i l! j l ' l! j ! l• i 11 'I l ' !1 I ~1 ; ~i l ~i i t ' l' ·' ,. 1: ! . :!1 ~ i! I 'l l ! ,.I 1 , I: j! : I • 1 TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY have seen, most bicycle commuters are not married. Community and govern- ment officials charged with long-term planning should consider the needs of two-worker families. Possible alternatives include high-density, mixed-use devel- opment. These compact centers would offer day care services, shopping oppor- tunities and easy access to the work- place. · Work Requireme nts -The need to arrive at work neatly groomed and in professional attire and neatly groomed has promptea a number of responses at the local and national level. In 1991 Los Angeles passed a law requiring bicycle parking, showers and clothing lockers in new work sites. Within targeted pollu- tion areas, the Clean Air act requires em- ployers with more than 100 workers to develop plans to reduce work-related trips by automobile. Access & Routing -The need to pro- vide greater access and to develop inte- grated route systems has been docu- mented. Researchers have cited the need for maps and b rochures to direct bicycle commuters to the best routes. In North Carolina, the state Department of Trans- portation produces more than 10,000 maps of routes and bicycle facilities an- nually. Recently, the state also com pleted computer-generated route and access maps for Durham and Winston-Salem. The city of San Diego maintains a sepa- rate phone line that provides informa- tion on bicycling. Free maps indicate city bicycle routes, bus stops where bikes can be loaded and unloaded, locations of bi- cycle lockers and parking at park and ride lots and bike-on-bus routes. Traffic Safety -Concerns that bi- cycle commuting is not safe must be ad- dressed, particularly to expand bike com- muting by women. Bicycle training pro- grams can increase safe behavior as shown in a study of bicyclist character- istics by Cynecki, Perry and Frangos. The researchers observed bicyclist be- 76 havior regarding use of helmets, atten- tion to traffic rules and use of bike lanes. With the promotion and participation of a bike to work week in Phoenix, helmet use increased, traffic rule compliance rose and bicyclists followed lane desig- nations more closely. Subsequently, the city hosted ten to twelve bicycle rodeos in various city parks and schools. The rodeos offered free bicycle inspections and tune-ups and safety training from police offers on the bicycle detail. Law enforcement is a necessary com- ponent of bicycle safety. Central busi- ness districts, grade schools, parks and universities should be targeted. A num- ber of communities have launched po- lice on bicycle programs that serve as community relations vehicles as well as traditional enforcement operations. Weather -Weather may not neces- sarily deter bicycle commuting. In Min- nesota, where winter temperatures may prevail five to six months of the year, ten percent of adults ride a bicycle to work at least once a year. The state has long promoted bicycle commuting and plans to spend $10 million annually during the 1990s to support bikeway development, safety and education programs. Storage/Shower Facilities -ISTEA and the Clean Air Act boost bicycle com- muting by requiring communities and large businesses to address the needs of bicycle commuters. In Palo Alto, Califor- nia, Xerox and Hewlett-Packard provide covered parking and/ or bike lockers for employees. Palo Alto also requires that new major commercial and public build- ings install showers and changing areas. The cost of providing such amenities can alleviate the need for more expensive fa- cilities for cars. Employer & Peer Support -Federal law is pushing employers to develop pro- grams to promote bicycle commuting. For example, in Phoenix, a community- wide promotes using other transport m odes at least once a week. Schools held p ~ poster • peted tc particip munity and bik Alto an< ingto er employ• bicycle, reimbu: cycle b1 bicycle gent dr ible WO burs err. Examp Oft "bike f1 sin ha~ comml bikewa striped lector ~ cent ci1 people a 1991 estima sin-Ma cycle e Bic Madise city's t The cit as well time t house< partm l. I 2. I var .anes. ·e. ion of elm et iance iesig- y, the odeos ;. The ::tions : from rcom- busi- :s and num- !d po- rve as veil as s . rieces- 1 Min- :s may ar, ten >work LS long . plans ingthe >ment, I STEA e com- !S and .!eds of ~alifor­ >rovide :ers for !S that ·build- .areas. ies can sive fa- "ederal ')p pro- ,mting. mnity- nsport ils held PROMOTING BICYCLE COMMUTING: UNDERSTANDING THE CUSTOMER poster contests, public agencies com- peted to win the title of most employees participating in the program'. and c~m-· munity members hosted a bike festival and bike to work week. The City of Palo Alto and the Alza Corporation are work- ing to encourage bicycle commuting. Alza employees are paid $1 for each day they bicycle, walk or carpool to work. The city reimburses seven cents per mile for bi- cycle business travel. Other support for bicycle commuting includes less strin- gent dress codes in the workplace, flex- ible work hours and parking fee reim- bursement. Example: Madison, Wisconsin Often touted a.s one of the nation's "bike friendly cities," Madison, Wiscon- sin has done much to promote bicycle commuting. More than 100 miles of bikeway system, consisting of off-road, striped bike lanes and bikeways on col- lector streets, criss-crosses the city. Re- cent city surveys indicate nearly SD,000 people ride bicycles on a daily basis. And a 1991 university survey determined an estimated 13,000 University of Wiscon- sin-Madison students and staff ride bi- cycle each day. Bicycles are part of the landscape in Madison and an everyday part of the city's transportation planning process. The city employs a full-time coordinator as well as two full-time staff and a half- time traffic engineer. The program is housed in the city's Transportation De- partment, offering an integrated ap- proach to planning projects. The city dedicates an estimated $250,000 annu- ally to independent bikeway projects. Substantially greater sums are spent on projects integrating bicycles and other transportation, according to city officials. A number of policies, laws and pro- grams also are in place to promote bi- cycle commuting. The city has a written bike plan and a city zoning ordinance requiring new development to include bicycle parking. The city publishes maps of bicycle routes and facilities and oper- ates an education programs focused on youth. The programs is intended to teach bicycle safety as well as promoted bicy- cling as a life-long activity. Conclusion This Madison, Wisconsin example demonstrates that an integrated ap- proach is needed increase the number of bicycle commuters. Efforts to remove per- ceived and real barriers to bicycle com- muting must be supported. Communities must promote and alert potential bicycle commuters to improvements. But even after barriers are removed and promo- tional efforts are in full swing, more work will be required. The task of changing val- ues and attitudes demands that commu- nities and transportation professionals think like marketers: they must under- stand their customers and provide goods and services that will provide the level of satisfaction customers require if they are to make the switch from potential bicycle commuters to regular bicycle commuters. Endnotes l. Brad Edmondson, "Alone in the Car," American Demographics, June, 1994, pp. 44-52. 2. Michael Replogle, Bicycles and Public Transportn.tion: New Links tc Suburban Transit Markets, Pennsyl- vania: Rodale Press, 1983, pp. 24-25. 77 I I I ~ 1 / 1 '-j S'-~ I .; f: t 1: . I ' ·~ I I ·:r ! I ! i : I I ~ ! i . I ,i 1 •. ii, :'!11 :'.ii 1i: '· I " ·I ·'1. I; ~! ! " I '.~ .i j ., \ ,. ,, tl; ,, i ~i ~ j;' : .. •i ~ !I :.: i! . ·; l· TRANSPORTATION QUARTERLY 3. J . Betz, J . Dustrude and J . Walker, "Intelligent Bicycle Routing in the United States," Transportation Research Record, no. 1405, 1983, pp. 21-27. 4. Stewart A. Goldsmith, "Case Study No. 1: Reasons Why Bicycling and Walking Are and Are Not Being Used More Extensively As Travel Modes," U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration National Bicycling and Walking Study, Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1992, p. 14. 5. U. S. Department of Transportation, Mouing America: New Directions, New Opportunities, Washington D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, p. 23. 6. University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, "Pavement Pounders and Pedal Pumpers," Highway Safety Directions, 4, no. 1, 1992, pp. 2-7. 7. Edmondson, p. 53. 8. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population and Housing, 1990 (United States): Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) Files, l percent sample, (machine-readable data files]. Washington: The Bureau [producer and distributor] 1993. 9. Goldsmith, pp. 6-9, 66 . 10. Michael A. Replogle and Harriet Parcells, "Case Study No. 9: Linking Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities with Transit," U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, National Bicycling and Walking Study, Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1992, pp. 28-30. 11.Ryan Snyder, "Bicycles in Ecological Cities," Earthword: The Journal of Environmental and Social Re- sponsibility, Issue 4, 1992, pp. 6-7. 12.Replogle and Parcells, p. 39; Betz, Dustrude and Walker, pp. 21-27. 13.M. J . Cynecki, G. Perry and G. Frangos, "A Study of Bicyclist Characteristics in Phoenix, Arizona," Transportation Research Record, 1405, 1983, pp. 28-34. 14. U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, National Bicycling and Walking Study: Transportation Choices for a Changing America, Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1992, p. 57. 15.National Bicycling and Walking Study, p . 89. 16.Replogle, 1983, pp. 24-25. 17.R. Alcott and M. M. Decindis, "Clean Air Force Campaign 1989-1990: Programs, Attitudes and Com- mute Behavior Changes," Transportation Research Record, 1321, 1991, pp. 34-44. fames Williams is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Anthropology at the University ofWTsconsin-Bau Claire. His teaching and research interests include demography, social stratih'cation, mortality and applied sociology. As a long-time cyclist, his research on the bicycle commuter was prompted by a desire to learn more about others who use this means of traveling to work. fan Larson is an Assistant Professor of Journalism at the University of 'Wisconsin-Bau Claire. She writes frequently about demographic trends for American Demographics Magazine. 78 ( T a ll ti c 11 i1 a r p ii 0 T c The City of College Station, Texas Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future. P.O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas A venue • College Station, TX 77842 • (979) 764-3500 www.ci.college-station.tx.us Patti Jett, 764-3768 Public Communications & Marketing Assistant December 6, 2001 For Immediate Release Citizen Input Needed For the Bikeway-Pedestrian Master Plan Team The City of College Station will hold two Bikeway-Pedestrian Master Plan focus group meetings on Monday, December 10, 2001. The meetings will be held in room 127 of the College Station Conference Center, located at 1300 George Bush Drive. These public meetings will be held from 2:00 p.m. -4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. -8:00 p.m. Residents are encouraged to attend either of the two meetings with City staff to discuss bikeway routes, safety and educational issues. Using the initial findings from the focus group meetings, the City of College Station will conduct an internet survey at http://devservices.ci.college-station.tx .us/planning/ regarding bicycle and pedestrian issues. After the survey results are collected and analyzed, a second round of public meetings will be scheduled. Based on survey and meeting results, a revised Bikeway-Pedestrian Master Plan will be presented to the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council for adoption. For more information on our Bikeway-Pedestrian Master Plan process, contact Ken Fogle, College Station's Transportation Planner, at 764-3570. Citizens can also e-mail comments to kfogle@ci.college-station.tx.us. ### Home of Texas A&M University I. College Main Street A. A super highway for bicycle commuters and pedestrians 1. A primary point of entry to T AMU. 2. Several hundred trips by bicycle per day, making it unique and deserving special attention. L WV study. B. A street with serious problems 1. pot-holes 2. Un-even road surface, loose gravel 3. No curb or gutter, no sidewalks, soft shoulders 4. Poor lighting 5. Too narrow for type and volume of traffic, will only get worse with development in area. 6. Frequently traveled by large shuttle busses, intoxicated and speeding motorists II. Ways to Finance Repairs A. Federal T-21 funding, next deadline June 2003, some $300 million for bicycle projects, etc. for Texas alone. Matching funds usually 20%. B. HB 2204, Matthew Brown Act 1. Provides federal funding from Hazard Elimination Funds to create a Safe Routes to Schools program in TxDot a. Funding for improvements within a two mile radius of a school 1. Installation of new crosswalks and bike lanes 2. Construction of multi-use trails 3. Construction and replacement of sidewalks 4. Implementation of traffic calming programs in neighborhoods around schools 5. Construction of wide outside lanes to be used as bike routes III. Steps To Be Taken To Acquire Funding A. Need to send qualified representatives to September 19th meeting in Austin B. Need to strongly consider hiring of or contracting with experienced grant writers C. Need to consider hiring a full time staff member to over-see and direct the application process D. Need a firm commitment by the mayor and city council to proceed with the application process, and not let this opportunity slip away from the citizens of Bryan IV. Motion Request and Closing Remarks A. Staff will attend the September 19th meeting in Austin and request that applications for funding under HB 2204 be accepted for improvements within a two mile radius of a public university. .. B. If (A) is accomplished, staff will vigorously apply for funding for curbs, gutters, bicycle lanes, improved road surface, and improved lighting for College Main under HB 2204. C. Staff will vigorously pursue funding for improvements to College Main and other city streets through both HB2204 and T-21. D. City staff will present both a written and oral report to council every two months on progress with the above provisions, as street improvement is an important issue for the mayor, council, and the citizens of Bryan. The City of College Station·, Texas Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future P.O. Box 9960 TO: Bikeway Master Plan Team FROM: Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner DATE: September 10, 2001 RE: August 6, 2001 Meeting Minutes Attendees: Jane Kee , City Planner Ken Fogle, Transportation Planner Nanette Manhart, Senior Planner 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, TX 77842 (979) 764-3570 Memorandum Dale Picha, City Traffic Engineer Judy Downs, Greenways Program Manger Edwin Hard, TTI Ron Ragland , former City Manager and active cyclist, charged the planning team with the task to develop a bike facilities map for the City of College Station in the late 1980's. In addition, John Black, City Traffic Engineer, began marking bike routes with signs. In the early 1990's, federal funds became available for bikeway projects through ISTEA. To be eligible for the grants, the applicant municipality had to have a bikeway master plan in place. At this time, the first bikeway master plan was developed. One of the key components of this planning process was getting input from developers, engineers, and the local bicycle coalition. The City was divided into different sections and the participants were grouped into focus groups to represent each section. The focus group decided where bikeways should be located in each section. In addition to the bikeway plan, the bicycle ordinance and technical guidelines were developed. Edwin made the point that our guidelines and specification should always relate to the standards as recommended by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). If there are bikeways that are marked, but not up to these standards, they should be removed or upgraded to reduce liability. Also, the standards should be consistent citywide. The Public Works Department has funds set aside to stripe roadways in the City with 3M thermoplastic. There are several thoroughfares in the City that has bike lanes planned. Before striping these facilities with bike lanes, it is important to look at the impact that bike lanes have on the street. These include on street parking, two way left turn lanes, volumes, etc. Home of Texas A&M University 4l!!9X Downs -[tra11~ana-greenwaysJ 1::marawa1~ -=iu•:ie:t1.1•1 ~ oi Luw u 11~avl r:-•n"<>- From: To: Date: Subject: "Gerry Hawkes" <ghawkes@sover.net> <trailsandgreenways@yahoogroups.com> 9/10/01 4:59AM [trail~and-greenways] Boardwalk Surfacing & Low Impact Paths The following email from Rick Manning was forwarded to us at Bike Track (see www.biketrack.com). We make a heavy duty modular path system that can be installed with minimal environmental impact (see http://www.biketrack.com/ecotrack_path_reduces_environmental_impact.htm ) and provides an excellent surface for walking, bicycling and wheelchairs. We also make a heavy duty surfacing tile for refurbishing and improving wooden boardwalk surfaces (see http://www.biketrack.com/antislip.htm). While the path and refurbishing tile have an aggressive traction and drainage pattern, the in-line skaters whom we have talked to found the surface considerably superior to skating over the planking of a wooden boardwalk. If you would like additional information, you may email lnfo@biketrack.com. Gerry Hawkes Bike Track, Inc. Woodstock, Vermont ghawkes@biketrack.com ----Original Message----- From: trailsandgreenways@yahoogroups.com [mailto:trailsandgreenways@yahoogroups.com} Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 8:16 AM To: trailsandgreenways@yahoogroups.com Subject: [trail~and-greenways] Digest Number 315 Message: 5 Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 07:52:15-0400 From: Riek Manning <manning01@l-speed.com> Subject: Boardwalk Surfacing We have two areas along proposed trails in Ithaca, New York where we are considering constructing boardwalk through swamp forest/wetland areas. I have heard reference made to rubber or plastic matting that could be placed on a boardwalk to comfortably accommodate in-line skaters, but never seen photos or product information. Any suggestions and input on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you Rick Rick Manning, RLA Coordinator, Cayuga Waterfront Trail Initiative -. " Jud Downs -t!alls-ar1c:J-g~eenwa s Re_: srgnmg ~0~1a1_ 1 rans .. From: To: Date: Subject: <ChinookSvc@aol.com> <trailsandgreenways@yahoogroups.com>, <Turnbull@greenbelt.com> 9/8/01 1 :28PM [trails-and-greenways] Re: Signing Social Trails Some interesting thoughts and comments from this post ..... . Does anyone have experience with trailhead signage for social trails? Our City owns 80+ acres of forested urban greenbelt containing extensive social trails. The land is open for public use and recreation, but it has been the City's policy to not develop trails in these parcels. Why is there a policy not to develop trails on these parcels? If it is open for public use and recreation but is not managed accordingly a variety of problems may arise. These problems might include environmental degradation from erosion, loss of vegetation and or compromised wildlife habitat. If the original intention for acquisition was as a recreational greenbelt and it is not managed accordingly you run the risk of having it used as an example of why not to acquire additional land for the same purpose in the future. Users are almost entirely neighborhood residents who use the trails regularly and know the conditions. City staff wish to place signs at a few obvious access points clarifying that none of the trails in the area are officially recognized and that no maintenance is conducted --basically a "Swim At Your Own Risk" approach. Social trails in an urban environment are often times temporary. If the trails originate from private residences and the property owners change they often go away. If they are a result of children accessing the property as they grow older there interest will change also. If the access points can be managed then signs could be a consideration if not and you can not be reasonable sure that you are giving the same information to all people that are entering the property you might want to reconsider. The "use at your own risk" sounds like an attempt to minimize your liability in the event someone gets injured. Most states have laws and statues that define the responsibility of property owners with respect to tiability and recreation. Consider contacting your legal staff or risk manager before doing anything here. Info or opinions about the advisability of doing this, and/or actual text from signs used in any comparable situation would be appreciated. Thanks! I am sure that there is signage that is being used as you describe, I am unaware of any. On a bit of a lighter note I clipped the following from http://www.nelsonrocks.org I think you will all find it interesting .... there must be some interesting history behind the evolution of this document. Regards Chinook Associates Recreational Trail Consultants Kim Frederick 5900 Ward Road ·-'""~-. Jud}' Downs -trails-ano-greenwa}'SJ Ke: ~rgmng ~oc1a1 1 rems Arvada Colorado, 80004 (303) 421-1408 office (303) 403-0223 fax <A HREF="mailto: chinooksvc@aot.com">Chinook Associates</ A> email WARNING!! ALL GUESTS OF NELSON ROCKS PRESERVE MUST READ THIS! Nature is unpredictable and unsafe. Mountains are dangerous. Many books have been written about these dangers, and there's no way we can list them all here. Read the books. Nelson Rocks Preserve is covered in steep terrain with loose, slippery and unstable footing. The weather can make matters worse. Sheer drops are everywhere. You may fall, be injured or die. There are hidden holes. You could break your leg. There are wild animals, which may be vicious, poisonous or carriers of dread diseases. These include poisonous snakes and insects. Plants can be poisonous as well. We don't do anything to protect you from any of this. We do not inspect, supervise or maintain the grounds, rocks, cliffs or other features, natural or otherwise. Real dangers are present even on trails. Trails are not sidewalks. They can be, and are, steep, slippery and dangerous. Trail features made or enhanced by humans, such as steps, walls and railings (if any) can break, collapse, or otherwise fail catastrophically at any time. We don't promise to inspect, supervise or maintain them in any way. They may be negligently constructed or repaired . They are unsafe, period. Live with it or stay away. Stay on the trails whenever possible. The terrain, in addition to being dangerous, is surprisingly complex. You may get lost. Carry food, water and first aid supplies at all times. Rocks and other objects can fall from the cliffs. They can tumble down slopes. This can happen naturally, or be caused by people above you, such as climbers. Rocks of all sizes, including huge boulders, can shift, move or fall with no warning. Use of helmets is advised for anyone approaching the rock formations. They can be purchased or rented at Seneca Rocks. They won't save you if you get hit by something big or on another part of your body. A whole rock formation might collapse on you and squash you like a bug. Don't think it can't happen. Weather can be dangerous, regardless of the forecast. Be prepared with extra clothing, including rain gear. Hypothermia, heat stroke, lightning, ice and snow, etc. can kill you. Rain can tum easy terrain into a deathtrap. If you scramble in high places (scrambling is moving over terrain steep enough to use your hands) without proper experience, training aod equipment, or allow children to do so, you are making a terrible mistake. Even if you know what you 're doing, lots of things can go wrong and you may be injured or die. It happens all the time. f .... ~-- c Jud~ Downs ".:_ trans-ana-greenway~ Ke: ~1gnmg \:>OClal I ntms .. The Preseive does not provide rangers or security personnel. The other people in the preseive, including other visitors, our employees, agents, and guests, and anyone else who might sneak in, may be stupid, reckless, or otherwise dangerous. They may be mentally ill, criminally insane, drunk, using illegal drugs and/or armed with deadly weapons and ready to use them. We aren't necessarily going to do anything about it. We refuse to take responsibility. If you climb, you may die or be seriously injured. This is true whether you are experienced or not, trained or not, equipped or not, though training and equipment may help. It's a fact, climbing is extremely dangerous. If you don't like it, stay at home. You really shouldn't be doing it anyway. We do not provide supeivision or instruction. We are not responsible for, and do not inspect or maintain, climbing anchors (including bolts, pitons, slings, trees, etc.) As far as we know, any of them can and will fail and send you plunging to your death. There are countless tons of loose rock ready to be dislodged and fall on you or someone else. There are any number of extremely and unusually dangerous conditions existing on and around the rocks, and elsewhere on the property. We may or may not know about any specific hazard, but even if we do, don't expect us to try to warn you. You're on your own. Rescue seivices are not provided by the Preseive, and may not be available quickly or at all. Local rescue squads may not be equipped for or trained in mountain rescue. If you are lucky enough to have somebody try to rescue you or treat your injuries, they may be incompetent or worse. This includes doctors and hospitals. We assume no responsibility. Also, if you decide to participate in a rescue of some other unfortunate, that's your choice. Don't do it unless you are willing to assume all risks. By entering the Preseive, you are agreeing that we owe you no duty of care or any other duty. We promise you nothing. We do not and will not even try to keep the premises safe for any purpose. The premises are not safe for any purpose. This is no joke. We won't even try to warn you about any dangerous or hazardous condition, whether we know about it or not. If we do decide to warn you about something, that doesn't mean we will try to warn you about anything else. If we do make an effort to fix an unsafe condition, we may not try to correct any others, and we may make matters worse! We and our employees or agents may do things that are unwise and dangerous. Sorry, we're not responsible. We may give you bad advice. Don't listen to us. In short, ENTER AND USE THE PRESERVE AT YOUR OWN RISK. And have fun! NRP Management ------------------Yahoo! Groups Sponsor---------------> Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck Monitoring Seivice trial http://us.click.yahoo.com/MDsVHBlbQ8CAA/ySSFAA/KvOqlB/TM _________________________ ..., _____________________________ ..Aw-> Register Now for Traillink 2001: The 3rd International Trails & Greenways Conference St. Louis, MO -September 26-29, 2001 . -~-- Funding What are our funding parameters? How can we be creative in funding bikeway projects? (conversations with Ed Hard and Michael Parks) j~ Dow"V\.$ Partnerships Does Bryan have a bikeway master plan? f e!I Should we try to coordinate with Bryan to have common tie in points? ye S What areas can we work with T AMU /Brazos Transit District/ City of Bryan to promote biking among the community? (e.g. bike racks on busses, etc.) When planning a bikeway facility on a TxDOT roadway, who do we deal with? Do we have to participate in cost sharing of the facility? Planning/Scheduling What are the major milestones that we need to set? Are there any other internal players that we need to include on the bikeway master plan team? Who is going to be responsible for each section of the bikeway master plan? What is our schedule (i.e., tying the milestones to dates) Should we consider a public meeting at some point to get community input? ww-..t •~ ~ fn>c:.e.~r .fo.-.. ~r-+i~? Policy How aggressive do we want to be with policy? (e.g. add policy to include showers/ changing facilities at the workplace, bike racks, water fountains, etc.) Once the bikeway master plan has been completed, how do we carry it out? How can we encourage biking in the community? (developers, citizens, policymakers, etc.) Have we ever conducted a campaign for biking in the community? Facilities Which facilities on the bikeway master plan are existing? What does it take for a planned bikeway facility to become existing? (e.g., new construction, overlay, development, etc.) How much emphasis has there been (should there be) put on planning bikeways into greenways, public utility corridors, along creeks, etc.? -t -\:>.~ l~L,:l~ ==.JIU=.-~ "~~~ ~S-~~ {-~ • ~=-=~- ~i4lA~.A-o.P. f-j ~ -~··~ -:.;:;•n·o===-~ -====liii,,,,,.,__-'-'f\t~+, ~ ~ --===~----~~ 7h-.,t~-t ~e4" . ~ '1 ~ :l""" ~.f.-.... ~l; <. S~e.c:,... -~11'\N ~ -=-=lliM= ~ ~.\-... e>/ IS -lA·v-- ~ ,c.~~ ~=- ~ S C-o'-' .S vl+'""-'f ~~~~=-=l&liit-~>~'PS i~~+;~ ~ce-r~"'s . ..... L?l~ ~ ~('17 -~ ~ vt ~ ~ l..e£.7 --~~°"""*n=--~ -le.>4-s ~ 4 ~ ~.,... -f?<or lr<v-.. "? ~"P<'r -~ -"'-~ ~:._.~ -:p........{ ==· nu~~~ 1'1~ ~t Avi· .. ~~') ~~ ~-~~ -v{M,\ ~O'-"S L le'] ~) ('-· ~ . i ~ ~ j j ['v J -~ ·~ . ; l I ill J_ ~ "' ~ I "~ ) ! ~ \_ 2 '\) i .:S ~ 1 ~ Q\ ,_ I \ \ ("} ...._,. L ~~~~ °T . "'?G ~~ ~ ~ ortf\ , ·~~1~-j ' /' -~~~o ~ "¥ 's---· t.P'"' '1-.kl~' ~~l ~o· ~ .,_. /J--· ~ -~ ' ~~ o~ ~04J \ "'! ' ~w--~..., ~\YV1~~M~ (\ ("'\ ,-~ .r, 4-M --\;P-v1 ~ -a./'O~ - 0 ~rfllf? ~ ~~VIB'-o~ ~ 96'rv) -- ~ame '8ollege Station Sike 'Loop 'R!,bbon '8utting ~ddress ::.....t....Li.!!.L.L.L.-L.......:........~~---__;::..lo!:...!.l.!;..._.:....;;..:;_;__.......L...L.;.:::::q____;;i;_.r....pt11.~:...._c____;,')_7;,,,,_:,;,_;::~~;.:....I}--f:)V MB A 3qo3 w Ji \Jv~tL \ Q S 7 7 ~vs -B\[W\~J\. ( ) The City of College Station, Texas Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future. P.O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue • College Station, TX 77842 • (979) 764-3500 October 11, 2001 Ms. Catherine Hejl, P.E. Bryan Area Engineer Texas Department of Transportation 2102 Tabor Road Bryan, Texas 77803 www.ci.college-station.tx.us Re . SH 40 Pedestrian/Bicycle Underpass Dear Ms. Hejl: As the City of College Station continues to develop to the south, we are updating our Bikeway Master Plan so as to plan for future bikeway facilities in this area. One of our concerns is that SH 40 will be a physical barrier for pedestrians and bicyclists between the residential areas south of the roadway and the attractions (i.e., schools, parks, residential, and retail uses) north of the roadway. Some preliminary estimates indicate that if the area continues to develop about 50 bicyclists will use this facility on a daily basis once the high school is built. My fear is that if there is no grade-separated crossing, pedestrians and bicyclists will cross this high-speed roadway at-grade and present a significant safety concern. Therefore, we would like to work with your staff to incorporate a bikeway and pedestrian underpass into the SH 40 design. It appears that there are two potential creek crossings on the proposed SH 40 alignment between Barron Road and SH 6 that could be ideal locations for an underpass. The northern location is Spring Creek while the southern is a tributary of Spring Creek. Our preferred underpass location would be the northern crossing of Spring Creek. This location would provide a direct path between the Castlegate residential development and the future high school location between Barron Road and SH 40. We understand that the design of the crossing (i.e., box culverts or bridge) will play a significant role in our ability to locate the bikeway underpass. Please let me know what our options are and what we can do to help you in this process. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at 764-3570. Sincerely, e.~u-- Transportation Planner Attachment Home of Texas A&M Uni versity " bee: Jim Callaway, Director of Development Services Jane Kee, City Planner Judy Downs, Greenways Program Manager Dale Picha, City Traffic Engineer ' 1988 MUTCD 1988 MUTCD 2000 MUTCD 2000 MUTCD & 2000 MUTCD ~ LANE ~ ONLY ~ LANE AHEAD RIGHT LANE ~ ONLY ~ LANE ENDS R3-16 24" x 30" R3-17 24" x 30" R3-16 24" x 30" R3-17 24" x 30" R3-16a 24" x 30" \ NO db PARKING ANY TIME • • I PARKING db BIKE LANE & TOW-AWAY ZONE 11:1:@1~11 d1J [Em ~ l:J ~ D dk m ~ a R7-1 12" x 18" R7-9 12" x 18" R7-201 12" x 6" R5-6 24" x 24" 011-1 24" x 18" M4-11 12" x 4" M4-12 12" x 4" M7-1 12" x 9" M7-2 12" x 9" M7-3 12" x 9" M7-4 12" x 9" ' d}u = M7-5 12" x 9" dJaJ I!! M7-6L(R) 12" x 9" ~ m M7-7 12" x 9" db ~ MS-1 12" x 9" db ~ MS-2 12" x 9" dJu ~ M6-1 12" x 9" ~ , M6-2 12" x 9" & rn M6-3 12" x 9" & ~ M6-4 12" x 9" & ~ M6-5 12" x 9" d1J [!;] M6-6 12" x 9" ~ t;r M6-7 12" x 9" dkJ [E M6-8 12" x 12" db ~ M6-9 12" x 9" \ d]u II BEGIN II d1J ~ M4-6 24" x 12" M4-6 24" x 12" W11-1 36" x 36" Pavement Markings Bike Symbol BIKE LANE Left Arrow Right Arrow Blkeway Master Plan Focus Group List Name Home Address Work Address Home Phone work Phone E-Mail ~ffiliations Robert Rose 400 Naole #502. ColleQe Station, TX 77840 104 ~e Main, Col~ Station, TX 77840 091-2453 JWI 1er of Cycles Etc. John and Janna Rauser 1811 Lawyer, College Station, TX 77840 David Scott 1019 Guadaluoe, CoAeae Station, TX 64-5892 845-5334 ldscott@rots.tamu.edu Ande Bk>om 1209 Glade Street, CollAOA Station, TX James Munnertvn 3802 Garter Creek Parkway, Bryan, TX 77802 '3VMBA Jeannie Kantz 3403 Wildrve, Co11eae Station, TX 77845 llVMBA Cindv McMichen 1405 Bavou Woods, Colleae Station, TX 77840 Michael and Jennifer Nations 6596 Waterway Drive, CoUeqe Station, TX 77845 Tim and Jan Elliot 322 Dunn Street, Bryan, TX 77801 '3VMBA Brian and Ben Reeves 1204 Berkeley Street, College Station, TX 77840 Cindv Gieclraitis 2013 Oakwood Trail, Colleae Station, TX 77840 Robert Van Brent 2714 Camelot, Brvan, TX 77802 Scott and Debe Shafer 117 Pershing, College Station. TX 77840 69&-6379 845-3837 ~hafer@rpts.lamu.edu Shawn Turner exas Transoortation Institute -Mobmtv Anatvsis Proaram Edwin Hard exas Trans nn"'tion Institute -Transnnn"'tion PlanninQ Joey Dunn "-'ity of Bryan -Planning Michael Parks Brvan/Colleoe Station Metrooolitan Plannino Oroanization Cecelia McCord xDOT BirvnA Coordinator Lindsay Reed 2110 Bent Oak Street. Colleqe Station, TX 77845 094-8508 091-4590 Ed Hadden 1201 Charles Court. College Station, TX 77840, 693-8509 Rich Woodward 1001 Pershino Or., Colleae Station, TX 77840-3083 695-0219 !45-5864 -woodwam1£111::imu.edu Mike Everett 362-2129 m-everett11rm"'rr u.edu Collin Anen Uepartment a rr 111UMJp11y, I exas /'\Clr,M university, """"'""~"" '"''°'ion, IX ,.,..,,....,., :145-5660 1COlin-alle111wld11 u.edu "vc, AMCC ~·~ 'I II ~~~ ""'--+-~~======-===-~=~-=~=-=~ A-Asl-lro -1~.r ~ ~ ~'f ~ \»< ~ !&""1 1<.w,• zb-6 ~...--ri~ .-::(--....;.:r (...;";, <>~verlrh.i .L-,~-==.;_.:c.:o_~~..,.,. ~ t;, ~-S lte-rl--..{..,_ ......,,.,U I \..o~"l .,,i.C., -= ~ ~~ ( ~sf o(: ~ r---•(' ~~,._.). -f;.r\M"cJ tni~~ lA-tM)==~------------===~ ·~·----Ill ~~ ~~ ~~~ a;t-~ == q(f--vn--( ~~Iii= '7rt , T~.I ~--~ ~.~~-=-=--==-~....,= lMU~~ ( -'~W' Se'>~·CM -~ert' ~ l·~ ~ eF~oCA5" wt ~ W~,-~ wtM--~ C/Mr t7 ~1w~')(K~+Lt~ M~-K7r l ~CAd6 m ~ ~ l ~fl} 1) ~t.,tif WMrl-~ -l~~ ~ \it\Gi~, l''I \~. rJ t-i4 ~{ -{,lhoJ.µ; ~~~ -V2 We,e\<J ArJA .~· l""~-h·A. \ ~L.~ \l'-C.~.:~ . ~ e..v-e."""~ ~ ~ ~""-Oo-. ( s~~ ~ ). ~ c... .. _,_ s ArJ~~ 11<-o"\S t -~ "+--<· ~ (l.. .s .. i .,..f-e ... <l\.t. t ,.....,.~ '1 · . . ) q~'1 vVtSStS· -Jk0 f UPV' ~· ~@ ~r-v~ e (IV'~~~ ~ ~c---4'\~) t~+~t ~ -Fn-~ 1~· ~C?A..SJ 1~-flf~@ ~~~ -+ ~ ~Ve. ~1· CQiMV-.f\-~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~, -)' ~ ~ ~~~~-~ qc,teJ~ . ~~~ -~~,,;,~t;,;..'y~'J tel -V-&<f· r~rr'""' ~ + Afr~ 4-C"J~ ~ (!.> ~ -11.sy~ ot-~~ ~ c,.s? ~ ~~ '1"' ~~"? ~_.41 ""'t' ~f 6-r .:;., ..... ~~? ~' ;~~ v-e.·~ f c:r~ ~.~. ~"'",_,-J G4 ~) Jc-t~-~ l) ~ "~~+., L.~s""'-ef ~,.._( ~~ v-.c..._.% ~ g;., (r ret t~ ~L Ii -so~ 1"-...... :~ to, °t)ec:.. Lt:fu_. tc t . ~\ ~---~ -KJ (. ~~~c:.) c.-~~ ~.e-f...r~ -~--~ ~tit <:.~ I \ :i-c+ (~ ~ -· J'--~ &-er- ~e, ~ ~'Pt.\.l+~~ +o ~ ~ i't ~l~HI( t--f•"""""l -~~ CW-{ 1e sw.,. (Of1 s) -Fi--J2; ~ ~t. '-"~~ -~ ....... , c;l--.-\.~~ ~ ~-~~ ~~') ..... ~ -~~ /l~ -t-''-~ ~~~~ /f ~~ '1~ c:--~-+vs ~~ - ~ t'~~e~~-~ ~~~~ 6f ~~~ ~~~~ -~-~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ __r·~M-----I~ -~ ~ -( ~..._ ¢ ~-<.-" ~1 Co-? ~~~ c.-R. ~~ -~~ ~e-~ ~ ~4~~-~ ~- ._J ~ -J-z 11 <~I ~~~ vrl,., #pt,~ "1ka (~) ~14 q~ ~StJ~ ~· -~~ ,--c~-~ @~ ~~··-Z ~...J. >?\""' -z: Vvtl ~ ~rl . ® ~ 5·4 ;( 71~ · ~~61 @ ·~ (!:? .cp ~~~ ~ (£) / / ... . - ·' .. t ' --. ................. i ". -l I '· \ ' ,- " I .· L ... ·~ .:.· .. ' ... .;: .. _ ~ ........ -•. ~~!~ -. ; XJ_~· Project . CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Project Master Inquiry DS0202 Bikeway Master Plan 12/05/01 14 :14:24 Position to Starting character(s) Type options, press Enter. l=Select Opt Account number Description Budg: 1-4360-571.24-32 MISC SUPPL: FOOD AND ICE 1-4360-571.62-10 ADVERTISE: LEGAL NOTICES 1-4362-577 .21-30 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PHOTO 1 190£ 31 I .Of 16 ADVERTISE : LEGAL NOTICES 1 100£ 51 I .62 SJ ADVERTISE: PROMOTIONAL 1-4362-577 .62-90 ADVERTISING/ ADVERTISE: OTHER 1-4362-577.65-11 PRINTING/ PRINTING: INTERNAL 1-4362-577.65-12 PRINTING/ PRINTING: EXTERNAL Pre-encurnb: .00 Encurnb : .00 PTD: .00 Balance: 2002 YTD : . 00 Project to Date .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 F3=Exit FS=Refresh F9=Misc. info Fll=Budqet F12=Cancel F17=Subset G!J ;o I02 Project . CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Project Master Inquiry DS0202 Bikeway Master Plan 12/03/01 08:52:29 Position to Starting character(s) Type options, press Enter . l=Select Opt Account number 1-4360-571 .24-32 1-4362-577 .21-30 1-4362-577 .62-10 1-4362-577.62-30 1-4362-577.65-11 1-4362-577.65-12 Description MISC SUPPL: FOOD AND ICE OFFICE SUPPLIES : PHOTO ADVERTISE : LEGAL NOTICES ADVERTISE: PROMOTIONAL PRINTING / PRINTING: INTERNAL PRINTING I PRINTING: EXTERNAL Budg: Pre-encumb: .00 PTD : 2002 YTD: .00 Encumb : .00 Balance : .00 Project to Date .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 F3=Exit FS=Refresh F9=Misc. info Fll=Budget F12=Cancel F17=Subset • ... ' I City of College Station Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan -Public Meeting 1 Positive -Written Comments On-Street Lanes/Routes At TAMU there are bike lanes Awareness of the bike lanes Bike lane route to TAMU was the major deciding factor in purchasing our home and a major factor in choosing College Station over Bryan Bike lanes (existing) Bike lanes are good where they exist Bike lanes really help safe cycling (where they are present) Good lanes around campus Good system on campus Most bike lanes work pretty well, George Bush Drive is a good example. Now on both sides of the road Roads for the most part are well maintained. They are not laden with potholes as they are in Bryan Shoulders on some roads (potential for lane) Some of the high-speed routes have shoulders (2818 primarily) The bike lane system is established in the North South direction and it's great that they extend South to the new neighborhoods (south of campus) There appears to be good routes into the University from the high density student neighborhoods Useful where they exist. (Anything is better than nothing) Well marked and easily accessed Wide roads (potential for lane) Wide streets You have bikeways and bike paths. San Marcos doesn't have them Off-Street Paths Future Bike Loop. Great greenway at Lemon Tree Park Loop, such that it is, is nice New bike loop sections in Lemon Tree, Bee Creek, Central Park, & Thomas Park are the right idea New off street paths nice for recreation That some short paths and trails already exist Connectivity Convenient to areas where I live I find the North I South bikeways to be very good, especially between Welborn and Texas. Very difficult to cross Texas Looking towards connecting areas, schools, shopping, etc. together with routes Some routes have continuity You correctly see that we need to connect outdoor centers (like the parks) General Basically clean with little debris City Planning? -Receptivity General willingness on the part of the City to think about improvements Great potential for improvement Growing interest in improvement Incorporating not only TAMU but parks and schools It's a good start! Given the size of the community, you've done a lot It's good to have the few that we do have, especially the minimal number of sidewalks Looking to the future and activity planning for bikeways Pedestrian facilities are too limited to comment on , where bike lanes exist they are great Pedestrian facilities seem limited by suburban design of the community, there is no downtown Possibilities to walk and I or bike to work, school Recreation Relative to most of Texas, quite a bit of bike paths, routes, etc. That it exists in some form That some exist and they (the city) are looking to improve them The overall organization around the immediate areas of campus The present system addresses a variety of users Use of variety of structures to address needs of cyclists (bike paths, lanes, routes, etc.) You are making an effort to improve You have a department working on it You have a lot of people that ride bikes and walk Design Elements The signage is pretty good and accurate Usually surface is smooth Usually traffic signal works for bike Usually well marked Support Facilities Education/Safety Bike to work day helps awareness by public Good lighting Large number of bikes on the road, increase exposure. Relatively cooperative motorist groups They provide safety in the biking transportation City of College Station Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan -Public Meeting 1 Negative -Written Comments On-Street Lanes/Routes At TAMU, cars sometimes park in bike lanes Bike lanes dirty Bike lanes not well marked as bike only Bike routes do not necessarily make cycling safe since an area is not set aside for bikes Cars often park in bike lanes making it dangerous for bicyclists Cleaning the bike paths seems like a lower priority For commuters on bicycles we need to be able to cycle on Texas and University Avenues so that we can travel quickly Incomplete bike routes (e .g. Walton) that peter out (Krenek Tap -currently useless) eo~~~-c::. ... Fv t+, Kids too often have to use sidewalks. This is not a substitute for bike commuting Many awkward dangerous intersections Many of the current routes and lanes are in bad condition , especially bad for roller blades Shoulder of road too narrow Too few bike lanes along roads in College Station Very few lanes I routes Very limited number of bike lanes Off-Street Paths Greenways I park bike routes would be a much better facility if they joined up with one another I would like to see us make more use of undeveloped "greenways" (I think it's in the plans) Loop that doesn't connect (work in progress though) More lighting would help on bike routes at night Not enough off street routes Paths at city streets -problem with intersections Should have bikeways, trails to schools Too few actual greenways on the ground to facilitate biking Watching people ride bikes on University Ave. on the center divider-why not have a multi-use (bike/pedestrian) along this corridor When the bike path goes through the intersection there is no indication of it for a car driver Connectivity Barriers Bike lanes don't connect Bike lanes just end -esp. when they terminate into turn lanes for cars Bikeways dead end Can be hard to negotiates the difficult areas (crossing Texas) Dead end routes Disconnected I fragmented Extremely difficult access to A&M from East of 6 Bypass Few connections to Bryan Few ways to cross Texas Ave which splits College Station Insufficient access to A&M from Southwood Valley Lack good connections to schools, parks, and businesses Lack good North-South route especially east of Texas Ave Lack of advanced planning -routes should be places before subdivisions are built Lack of bikeways in certain sections of the City Limitations on East West routes that is -crossing Wellborn Road or Highway 6 bypass or Texas Avenue-making commuting from neighborhoods in these out lying regions difficult Lots of places are, practically speaking, unreachable by bike Making good connections for families to cycle around town as a means of transport and recreation Many disconnects for commuting Most stores and services along busier roads are essentially off limits without knowing the back way in Need more connectors between neighborhoods No connections between neighborhoods on bypass side of 6 No way to get to main business district (Texas Avenue) Not connected some of the lanes well enough (dead-ends) Not easy to get from South areas to the campus (one must learn a route from someone else) Not many East-way routes Pedestrian facilities are extremely limited and not well connected. We would like to be able to walk to school and grocery stores as a family Some of them are very short and not continuos The lack of continuity of the present system Very difficult to get across Texas Avenue General City Council and officials are not bikers I have no negative aspects to bikeway and pedestrian facilities Inadequate Make parks more bike friendly with more bike activities Need a central meeting place where public can bike walk and get a full exercise experience. (ie: Town Lake in Austin) needs to be 3-5 miles Pedestrian I bike crossing is not enough Pedestrian-wise: set sidewalks back from busy I fast roads like Southwest Parkway Peds and bikes together Possibly too much effort focused at I towards TAMU (traffic towards and away) Rather scarce, few Takes too long, historically, to get anything done form time funding is obtained to project completion. Shorten time needed to check guideline compliance The cutting down of trees in the parks for the new walk and bikeways The patriarchal view point that the City has taken regarding cyclists, as evidence by the ban of cyclists on portions of Texas Avenue. This is the only case of a bicycle ban that I know of on a City street They are not completed They are not every where Too limited in extent Design Elements -Almost no bike sensitive lights -Left hand turns at light _ Many lights don't trip with bikes _ No way to request left turns at signals Older detectors don't trip (or have been overlaid so don't know location) Poor lighting in some areas Poorly marked Pressing the button -Some existing lanes have very poor pavement, broken pavement etc. (Holleman) , Speed limits in this town far exceed safety rating STOP signs are unsafe for cyclists compared to traffic lights (motorists don't necessarily stop) There aren't signs that say "this is a bike way, watch for cyclist." There is only a picture of a bike _ Very difficult to trip light signal on bike Support Facilities Businesses don't have places to lock up bikes Very few bike racks Education/Safety Businesses don't encourage employees to bike-if they did, they would have showers Careless drivers Cyclists don't use facilities correctly I think it is dangerous to try and get around town on a bike It is dangerous to go on long rides Lack of education I information on bike facilities Lack of education of both cycling and non-cycling public; not enough bike lamps, reflectors etc. on bikes Need a program to publicize and giveaway bicycle helmets for children Need to include bike safety and emergency vehicle awareness at Drivers' Education classes Not enough enforcement of existing laws Not well respected by cars, especially on campus routes (cars parked, or pull into bike lanes when turning corners) Theft (especially at A&M) is high This town lacks a cycling I non-automobile commuting ethic and lacks decent public transit, hence increasing bike routes is very important Un-educated populace thinks that bikes don't belong on road City of College Station Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan -Public Meeting 1 Improvements -Written Comments On-Street Lanes/Routes All new roads should have adequate width for multi-use Allow bikes to travel to often-used destinations by providing wide-curb-lanes on Texas. City ordinance should be modified as TxDOT widens Texas Ave. Better routes to school for all ages but especially elementary marking routes, getting kids off street Consider traffic control on bike routes (i.e.: place fewer stops on bike paths to advocate efficiency) Keep lanes I routes maintained and clean Lanes around schools (like College Hills Elementary, completing lane on Walton Drive) Maintain lanes by more sweeping and pruning of trees and bushes Mandate that developers create bike routes within subdivisions and plan so before building More bike lanes More paths/lanes/routes Put a bike lane on major traffic areas such as those near the University. One on George Bush Drive, Texas 6, and University Drive Repair bike lanes, inventory problem areas with paving near gutter and work to repair (reduce) traps that catch cyclists off guard Require new communities to have bike lanes and connect to network Retrofit present roadways when road improvements taken on any segment of the roadway Sweep bike lanes periodically Think about the idea of providing at least one route of safe travel from every city subdivision Off-Street Paths Build paths along creeks Commit to providing bike only facilities on roads Create better crossings at grade and as many grade separations as possible. These types of connections make the use of bike or walking much easier for Develop many more off street paths Finish the present Bike Loop Greenways are needed to facilitate aesthetically pleasing biking More off road routes and routes along creeks Multi-use trail along University Avenue especially on campus -there aren't even sidewalks Connectivity Both need to be more extensive and connected Complete bike routes from one populates location to another Connect bike lanes Connect more routes Connect neighborhoods with paths Connect to Bryan's bike net -or at least have C.S. net ready to connect to Bryan's when it has one Connections Convenient access to routes from all East side developments (e.g.: bike lane on Southwest Pkwy from 6 to Dartmouth, bike route on Holleman to Texas) Create a bikeway from campus to Albertson's for people in Northgate and North side of campus Develop well-connected bike paths and bike routes E-W and N-S, with good signage and enforce traffic rules related to violations of use Ensure that Texas A&M is well linked to the plan, perhaps even a hub for overall plan Focus on connectivity Give people "blocked" by Route 6 Bypass some way to get safely to campus Link up bike pathos in parks I greenways Make Longmire go through from behind Kroger to Barron Road Make provision for bike/ped connections in cul-de-sacs More off-street More routes than connect Provide short cuts between cul-de-sac neighborhoods Put them in undeveloped areas Tie them together to make long trails Vehicular traffic calming (A 4!.-$1'"'-"J We need to be able to cycle on Tex~s Avenue (or have a cycle-ped path that goes North-South continuously) There is no reason that cycling can't be as Work hard for providing ways to cross Texas Avenue General Also, check with Austin for ideas Build sidewalks! Especially to malls and grocery stores -need bike paths to these too and to schools Check with City manager in McAllen Texas; they recently put in an extensive bike path, very nice. How did they do it? Expand it, it is a great idea Include Bicycle I multi-modal design considerations in all new roadways and subdivision development Many ideas are already on your planning maps! Separation of pedestrian and bikes Strong push for bicycling commuting -incentives? Work closer with TAMU Design Elements Add "turtles" to separate the path from the road -Adjust lights to trip with bikes Be mindful of lighting conditions Better signage, i.e.: "bike routes," watch out for bikes," etc. -Bike sensitive lights Busy intersections need some work -maybe paint more bike lanes in glow paint (""c::-+ P\ ~~""' 4::-~ f(e"-J Continue to build on the excellent bike lane system (my compliments!) Designated bicycle crossings across the major streets to increase safety Detectors should be bicycle sensitive and allow left and through movements Don't paint lanes on roads like deacon, its safe for bikes that way. Has benefit of slowing cars down Improve traffic light detection devices to sense bicyclist Install foot operated traffic light (ped buttons) trippers Integrate system with entrances to campus -Also -how about a vela-way? More lighting Provide markers or other system for identifying location on bike path in case of emergency (for police and EMS) Set sidewalks back from curb by three feet (makes pedestrians feel safer) Signs Slow traffic on some roads currently posted too high The ideas of the buttons is good Traffic lights I not stop signals on bike lane routes. Traffic lights activated by bikes (doesn't happen now, need a car to activate green) Support Facilities Bike racks located at businesses and close to entrance, easily seen Bike-maps were a good idea Businesses need to accommodate bikers Hook in local businesses (green business classification) to provide bike racks, etc. Involve mass transit with bikes, ie: racks on buses Provide bicycle recreation facilities at city parks, BMX track, half pipe and vert park facility Education/Safety Add a few education signs at 4-way stops that cyclists have same rights and responsibilities as autos. Alternatives to bike tickets I bike defensive driving Better (some) education though Parks & Rec and I or CSISD Create commuting ethic, not just with schools and A&M, but with overall community. Develop co-operative public education I awareness campaigns by working with local businesses, interest groups and student groups on special events and Don't assume bikes and pedestrians mix much better than either does with cars Educate drivers Education about existing and planned facilities Education of both cyclists and non-cyclists Enforce the no parking restrictions in bike lanes Have a bike day -sponsors can furn ish drinks and prizes Help BVC promote rallies, bike to work day, races Improved education of car drivers! Increased awareness Issue citations to adult cyclists riding on sidewalks Look at traffic flows at intersections and what provides safe pedestrian I bike crossing Make them safer Need a detailed environmental education, public awareness program and campaign Promote more bike safety programs for children Provide tourist info center and Chamber of Commerce center with Greenways hike and bike maps Put some idea in the newspaper, get people to think about it Safety education Work with schools to encourage safe bikeways to schools. Sidewalks are no substitute for good bike lanes Question 1: activities walking 14 1Utr,. bicycling i rt \kf\l H... running/jogging j. 11 · other I Question 2: importance 4 5 What is the trail surface made out of Width of the trail surface Separation between trail and street Directional signs along the trail Lighting for use of trail at night Steep grade changes in the trail Question 3: trail surface types concrete asphalt compacted stone gravel natural soil Question 4: trail width 5 feet 8 feet 10 feet 12 feet Question 5: intersections at grade -no crosswalk at grade -crosswalk grade separated -under grade separated -over User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to e involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging / other ------ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 2 (!) 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 (p 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street CD 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 <Y 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 4 Q Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 4 G Il. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: concrete _asphalt _ c5)Htpacted stone ~avel 5 natural soil/dirt Trail width: 5 feet _8jtd _t.A feet 5 12 feet 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked crossing at street level, marked _/osswalk marked ~ossing under the street 4 (underpass bridge, tunnel) _ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. J User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) / _walking _V_ b biiC)cycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important · neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 2 3 4 1i) Width of the trail surface 2 CJ 4 5 Separation between trail and street lP 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 @ 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 @ 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 & 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: ~concrete _!f_ asphalt __;}__ compacted stone ___3_ gravel _L natural soil/dirt Trail width: I 5 feet _2__ 8 feet _i 10 feet '{ 12 feet J 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: j_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked J crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _L crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) 2. crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging __{other ~A_u_,, __ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 2 cD 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 @ 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 0 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 @ 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 Q/' 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 Q) 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: S concrete _\ asphalt _ compacted stone _1_gravel _j_ natural soil/dirt Trail width: _fl__ 5 feet _\ 8 feet _l_ 10 feet __:t_ 12 feet ___s._ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: 2._ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _l_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _2_ crossing under the street L..l (underpass bridge, tunnel) _:_i_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking __ bicycling ~running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is _unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 2 3 w 5 Width of the trail surface 1 2 3 5 Separation between trail and street 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 © 5 Lighting for use of trail at night CD 2 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 CD 3 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: S concrete _l_ asphalt _l_ compacted stone ~ gravel _!:l_ natural soil/dirt Trail width: t 5 feet I 8 feet 3 10 feet ~ 12 feet '("' 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _g_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _'1_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _J_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) _L_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. ser Survey ike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) $walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, l is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 Q 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 CD 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street CD 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 0 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 CD 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 CD 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: S--concrete "7[_ asphalt '3> compacted stone 2..gravel ~natural soil/dirt Trail width: l 5 feet _k._8 feet _3_ 10 feet _!d_ 12 feet _!i 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: lJ-crossing at street level -f-no crosswalk marked _3 crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked 2-crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) .i_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking ..2{_ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 CV 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 (i) 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street {j) 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 CJ) 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 €) 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 4 (j) II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: 3 concrete ~asphalt -L-compacted stone --5:_gravel _!:L natural soil/dirt Trail width: __[_ 5 feet _i 8 feet -z, 10 feet --L 12 feet ~ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: __:J_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _1_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _\_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) _:k_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions.· User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking (S' bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, l is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 G. 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface Cb 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 2 d> 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 ® 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 G> 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 G> 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: '2...concrete _\_asphalt _1_ compacted stone --2._gravel 3 natural soil/dirt Trail width: S 5 feet _1_ 8 feet _\_ 10 feet 2. 12 feet _3_ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: 2... crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _\_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked 3 crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) q crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) / _walking __ bicycling _V_ m running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) , important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of Q 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 0 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street I ® 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail I 2 (3) 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night CD 2 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail I 2 G) 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a I for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: .2 concrete _L asphalt _:[_ compacted stone :3 gravel $natural soil/dirt Trail width: ~5 feet jf;_ 8 feet '_:3 · 10 feet 2 · 12 feet _L 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _i_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _3__ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked 2. crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) _j_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. J User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? ( mary mly one) _Vw_ waallking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 2 3 @ 5 Width of the trail surface 1 (fJ 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 2 (j) 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 (i) 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 © 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 4 (5) II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: 5" concrete 2-asphalt _L_ compacted stone _,J_ gravel _!f_ natural soil/dirt Trail width: ~ 5 feet _/_ 8 feet 2-10 feet ±_ 12 feet S 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: ~ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked Zr crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _I_ crossing under the street J (underpass bridge, tunnel) __L crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) '_j walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a nwnber from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 2 3 @ 5 Width of the trail surface 1 (j) 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 2 3 CD 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 © 5 Lighting for use of trail at night cD 2 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 0) 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: ~concrete _!j_ asphalt _J_ compacted stone £.gravel i natural soil/dirt Trail width: ~5 feet _I_ 8 feet _k__ 10 feet i 12 feet _!t_ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: (f')crossing at street level /::) no crosswalk marked lY--crossing at street level, marked / crosswalk marked @-~-crossing under the street 1 :\ (underpass bridge, tunnel) lbl-crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) Lwalking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from I to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of ~ 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface ~ 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 (i;> 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 @ 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night tD 2 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 ro 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: > _t, concrete _I_ asphalt J_.k_ compacted stone ~gravel -5-natural soil/dirt Trail width: £ s feet I 8 feet ~ 10 feet _1_ 12 feet ~ 14feet Trail/Street intersections: ~ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked 2.. crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked .J_ crossing under the street ) (underpass bridge, tunnel) _ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. ' User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) *walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 Q) 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface CD 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street CL) 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 Q) 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night D 2 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 CD 3 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: _l concrete _t;l asphalt _!l compacted stone 5 gravel -3_ natural soil/dirt Trail width: 5 s feet T 8 feet ~ 10 feet _;J. 12 feet 4 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _f_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) _ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as ymG msider the potential for a system of off street trail"iJ in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking __ bicycling ~ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from I to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of Q 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 0 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 G> 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 3 4 ti> Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 © 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 © 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: tf concrete T_asphalt 1-compacted stone 2_gravel _\_natural soil/dirt Trail width: 5 5 feet _!I_ 8 feet _l_ 10 feet 2-12 feet ---3_ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: .!._ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _I_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked l_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) !j__ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking )(_bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a nwnber from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of v 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface CD 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 (iJ 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 @ 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 4 ~ Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 ~ 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: £concrete ~asphalt ~ compacted stone _.$._gravel L natural soil/dirt Trail width: I s feet -2:._ 8 feet ~ 10 feet ~ 12 feet _£14feet Trail/Street intersections: J_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _I_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _,d_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) l crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. \ User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station lease answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) X walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from I to 5 for each item, l is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 2 3 GJ 5 Width of the trail surface 1 CD 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street (i) 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 G) 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 <D 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 CD 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in ·each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: i-1 concrete i asphalt _l_ compacted stone _L gravel _5__ natural soil/dirt Trail width: _i_ 5 feet 2. 8 feet _L 10 feet 3 12 feet S 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _2_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _1_ crossing at street level , marked crosswalk marked A_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) ~ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) / _walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is wlimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 2 (j) 4 5 Width of the trail surface 2 © 4 5 Separation between trail and street 0 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 4 (j) Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 Q 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 (9 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: 2 concrete __!__asphalt _I_ compacted stone _1__ gravel S" natural soil/dirt Trail width: i 5 feet _/_ 8 feet ~ 10 feet ~ 12 feet T 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _.!_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _I_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked ~ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) !1_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mary nly one) ____y{valking Acycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 ~-3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 2 <D 4 5 Separation between trail and street 0 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 Q 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 {i) 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 0 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: concrete _asphalt _ compacted stone _gravel natural soil/dirt Trail width: 2. 5 feet _1_8 feet __2_ 10 feet 4-12 feet _5_ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: ~ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked I crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked 3 crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) __1_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A fl w questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station P ase answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails i College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be eported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? , (mark only one) _walking ~bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface (]) 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street CD 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 2 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail Q) 2 3 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: _.3_ concrete _A_ asphalt _1_ compacted stone ~gravel _5_ natural soil/dirt Trail width: _,J__ 5 feet I 8 feet z 10 feet 4-12 feet _s_ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _I crossing at street level no crosswalk marked ~crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked ~ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) ___±_crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? ~konlyone) f--walking ___f5hicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 2 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 2 3 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each ca egory below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: ±concrete asphalt _ compacted stone _gravel natural soil/dirt Trail width: 5 feet _J8 feet / fiO feet 7 12 feet 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked ¥crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked L crossing under the street l (underpass bridge, tunnel) _ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station ease answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails · n College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) V _walking ~bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, l is important and 5 is unimportant) . important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of co 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface @ 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 2 ·~ 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 4 CD II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: 2 concrete asphalt compacted stone _gravel _£_natural soil/dirt Trail width: _.s:... 5 feet f 8 feet 10 feet ;). 12 feet _L 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _!J._ crossing at street level J no crosswalk marked _ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _!_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) ;l crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking V bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 6) 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface (!) 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street CD 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 a> 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 (§> 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 CD 3 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: -z.,.. concrete _\_asphalt ~ compacted stone __2 gravel _1_ natural soil/dirt Trail width: '5 5 feet _j_ 8 feet \ 10 feet -z.. 12 feet J 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: L\ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked '-crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _\_ crossing under the street 7 (underpass bridge, tunnel) _.J_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) ?walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from I to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 cTJ 3 4 5 <Y Width of the trail surface 2 3 5 0 Separation between trail and street 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 3 4 91 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 4 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 4 cD II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: ') concrete _---,-_ asphalt 1..,. compacted stone ~gravel -/-natural soil/dirt Trail width: 1--rs feet l T s feet ----}_ 10 feet _A 12 feet ~14 feet Trail/Street intersections: t.f crossing at street level no crosswalk marked t crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _l crossing under the street 4 (underpass bridge, tunnel) _...,;>_crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank yo u for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking ___:x_ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a nwnber from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of Cb 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface Q) 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 (j) 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 4 G) Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: I concrete i asphalt _I_ compacted stone _~_gravel _2._ natural soil/dirt Trail width: ' 5 feet _l 8 feet 3 10 feet _i_ 12 feet S 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: --1:.._ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _l_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked j_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) ~crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking v/'bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of CD 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface Q-:0 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street CD 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 3 ~ 5 Lighting for use of trail at night CD 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 (f:) 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: "3. concrete _L asphalt _!j:__ compacted stone 'S'" gravel Z... natural soil/dirt Trail width: '2 5 feet _l_8 feet _3_ 10 feet _!}__ 12 feet -r::;--14 feet Trail/Street intersections: ~ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked S crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked Z, crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) _I_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Th;mk you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Whic type of act:z·vity e you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mar only one) alking bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ ing about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following chara teristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is im rtant and 5 is unimportant) What the trail surface is made of Width of the trail surface Separation between trail and street Directional signs along the trail Lighting for use of trail at night Steep grade changes in the trail important 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 neither 3 3 3 4 4 4 (j) 4 unimportant 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 0 CJ 4 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: ..2. concrete __l__asphalt _SC_ compacted stone _!L gravel $.natural soil/dirt Trail width: _!}_ 5 feet _J_ 8 feet ~ 10 feet ~ 12 feet -7-14 feet Trail/Street intersections: .!:i._ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked 3_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked / crossing under the street "1 (underpass bridge, tunnel) _°"-_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) ~ _walking __ bicycling running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 ~ 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street (!) 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 CD 3 4 5 Lighting for use of traii at night ([) 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 Q 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: y concrete " ~ -3._ asphalt f ' ~i..Jl ~ _J_ compacted stone C~ro"e,, _s_ gravel ~natural soil/dirt Trail width: S 5 feet _.a. 8 feet _J_ 10 feet _3-12 feet --¥14 feet Trail/Street intersections: ~ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked l_ crossing at street level , marked '2 crosswalk marked -7_ crossing under the street 1 L,. (underpass bridge, tunnel) 1-crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? ( j k only one) walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, I is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 0 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 Ci) 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street CD 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 0 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 G) 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: 3 concrete 5 asphalt _.'.i_ compacted stone ..(L_gravel _l_ natural soil/dirt Trail width: I 5 feet ...2.. 8 feet _J_ 10 feet _Ji 12 feet ___s::-14 feet Trail/Street intersections: 1:_ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _I_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked 3 crossing under the street , / (underpass bridge, tunnel) _!£_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) -rh.w.t.-c ~~ \,<}~ A'\'A Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. IAri ~ ~~ T , A t-~ t ~e_ ~~ '-f\U..~~~,4)a..~5 /)-r ~ UC "'~) _Q_._lkk. / ~ /User Survey V Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) ~walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a nwnber from 1 to 5 for each item, l is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 (}) 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 2 CD 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 2 CD 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 2 3 4 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 3 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: \ concrete _asphalt _±__ compacted stone .!f_gravel 5 natural soil/dirt Trail width: 5 feet -1:::_ 8 feet ~ 10 feet 't 12 feet S 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _ crossing at street level '1.. no crosswalk marked c_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) _ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. /User Survey t/ Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking /bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of CD 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface CD 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street (i) 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 Cf) 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 2 Q) 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 3 4 ® II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: ~concrete _J_ asphalt i compacted stone ____!i_ gravel ~natural soil/dirt Trail width : / __)__ 5 feet _!f-8 feet _L 10 feet ~ 12 feet l 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: !f-crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _d_ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked J_ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) ~ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) .L_ walking __ bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of 1 CD 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface 1 (J) 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street @) 2 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 CD 3 4 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 2 3 0) 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 0 3 4 5 II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: _Lconcrete _asphalt _ compacted stone _gravel natural soil/dirt Trail width: 5 feet 8 feet 10 feet =:t:(f2 feet 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: _ crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _ crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _0rossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) _ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. J User Survey Bike/Pedestrian Master Planning Meeting April 9, 2002 A few questions about your opinions on off-street trails in College Station Please answer the following as you consider the potential for a system of off street trails in College Station. Your answers will not be associated with you and will only be reported as part of a summary. Which type of activity are you most likely to be involved in on College Station Trails? (mark only one) _walking / bicycling __ running/jogging other _____ _ I. Thinking about trails in urban areas, how important are each of the following characteristics to a trail ' s usefulness? (Please circle a number from 1 to 5 for each item, 1 is important and 5 is unimportant) important neither unimportant What the trail surface is made of CD 2 3 4 5 Width of the trail surface Q) 2 3 4 5 Separation between trail and street 1 @ 3 4 5 Directional signs along the trail 1 2 3 @) 5 Lighting for use of trail at night 1 a> 3 4 5 Steep grade changes in the trail 1 2 0 4 ~ II. Please rank preferred characteristics in each category below using a 1 for the highest rank (most preferred), 2 for next preference and so forth. Trail surface types: _J_ concrete ~asphalt i compacted stone _.1:_ gravel ---2._ natural soil/dirt Trail width: _L_ 5 feet -2-8 feet _..L. 10 feet ~ 12 feet ~ 14 feet Trail/Street intersections: -4-crossing at street level no crosswalk marked _I crossing at street level, marked crosswalk marked _}__ crossing under the street (underpass bridge, tunnel) .z_ crossing over the street (overpass trail bridge) Thank you for taking time to answer these questions. \i-, ______ x~J / ~ V:J~ J ~ "O 7'-0 -za) rz)~ · wt\?Sf JI ) ] c-Z (_l J +1 -b / J oz. -4- ~ -e> ~ ( f + - t N r -~ <.K 1 N