#81 using data and survey information to guide safe routes to school programs and advocacy...
Upload: project-for-public-spaces-amp-national-center-for-biking-and-walking
Post on 29-Nov-2014
487 views
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Kids are Commuters Too!
The Mode Shift Potential of Walk to School Programs
Wendy Landman WalkBoston
September 2012
ProWalk ProBike
On twitter: @WalkBoston
Why do we need to better target Safe Routes to School programs?
What are the ingredients of a “successful” SRTS mode shift program (separate from safety focused programs) – and have we been getting there?
Brockton – One of WalkBostonʼs favorite urban, lower income municipal partners, and what we learned from our research…
Brockton has:1. Enthusiasm 2. City buy in – including funding for SRTS efforts at
five participating schools 3. Terrific leadership from school department wellness
coordinator 4. Participation by police, local semi-pro sports teams,
terrific local press 5. After two years of pretty intensive investment saw a
~2% increase in walking 6. Brookfield School selected to receive state SRTS
funds for infrastructure project
What we learned…• The SRTS program is thus being delivered almost
entirely to students who live far away. • It turns out that at the Brookfield School only about 25%
of the students live within ½ mile of the school and 35% within one mile – 65% of students live more than a mile from school.
• With 16 – 17% of all students walking, we may be seeing close to 70% of the students who live with ½ mile already walking which translates into only 40 students who live with ½ mile and are not already walking.
• The geographic distribution of students make the Brookfield School a poor choice for investing in amode shift focused SRTS program.
Conditions vary hugely - we should pick places where we can have impact• Whelan School: 330 students living within ½ mile are
being driven to school – and thus present great potential for mode shift programs of high impact – this the community that WalkBoston is now working with. Our goal is to add 5 – 8% walking trips each year and we have a lot of short car trips to work with!
• Lincoln School: 220 students are already walking and only 74 students are being driven from within ½ mile. This school has expressed interest in SRTS, but presents a relatively small opportunity for mode shift.
Back to the beginning: Our Research Questions1. Can we better target SRTS programs to achieve
mode shift, reach children in need, and reduce GHG emissions?
2. Can we find out what schools or school districts have a lot of children who live near school but are currently being driven?
3. What information is missing? • Walksheds of schools – not “as the crow flies” • Number of children near schools • Demographic information • School assignment policies • Geography of transportation choices
Walkshed Assessments – Sample 1
• Lots of sidewalks • Low
volume, low speed streets • Open space • Highly
connected street network
Walkshed Assessments – Sample 2
• Little street connectivity • High
volume, high speed streets • Missing
sidewalks
Community walksheds
How much of the community is within walking distance of any school?
How many children are there?
How many children are near schools?
How to target programs to children in need?
Because income is a good proxy for children at risk of overweight or obesity, % of children eligible for free or reduced price lunch was used to identify places of need
Assignment policies• Massachusetts does not maintain any consolidated
information on district assignment policies which vary from all neighborhood schools to district-wide magnet programs
• Almost every one of the stateʼs 351 cities and towns has a separate school district (332 districts)
• Based on density and demographic data we called many districts to find the ones that had primarily neighborhood-based school districts where most students go to nearby schools
• From among this set we solicited districts to participate in the survey
Surveyed Districts
We approached many districts – found nine who participated
Survey Instrument
• New, 6-question school commute survey
• Seven languages • Pilot survey in two
schools • On-line map
interface • 51% response rate
On-line tool, great in SOME districts
Sample Survey Results
Enormous range in commute patterns
Great variety in patterns
Great variety in patterns
Great variety in patterns
Understanding the Differences
Using data to make choices can lead to great differences in the success of mode shift programs
The Heart of the Matter
A few more details – which will help to inform program understanding and options
Morning and afternoon commutes
Connected (chained) vs dedicated trips
Trip chaining may make it more complicated to shift trips from cars to feet
Vehicle availability and mode choice
Fewer cars translate to more walking and bus use and less driving
Distance and mode choice
½ mile walking distance really seems to be the place where mode shift is most likely to succeed
GHG emissions and school mode choice Estimated Emissions and Cost of Auto School Commuting, by Surveyed District
Municipality
Annual GHG Emissions (kg) per
Student Auto Commuter*
Annual Fuel Cost per Student Auto Commuter*+
Annual Auto GHG per Household (kgs)
Avg. Student Commutes as a Share
of Avg. Household GHG
Brockton 425 $152 7,196 5.9% Lawrence 240 $86 5,611 4.3% Malden 329 $113 5,374 6.1% Newton 157 $59 7,485 2.1% Revere 267 $95 5,572 4.8% Somerville 369 $120 4,505 8.2% Winchester 266 $95 8,352 3.2% Source: MassGIS analysis of MA RMV vehicle inspection records, 2005-07; MAPC analysis; MAPC survey, 2011. * Surveyed Schools only, +Assuming Avg. gas price of $3.70/gal (fuel gauge report)
Molly O’Reilly, board member www.americawalks.org
National Unified Voice for Walking
Vision for a Walkable America • 300+ organizations … • Steering Committee • D.C. Advocacy • Walking Action Network
April-June, 2011
The National Walking Survey was a collaborative effort between America Walks and Hunter College Professors
Peter Tuckel (Sociology) and William Milczarski (Urban Planning).
Purpose: to examine attitudes and behaviors concerning walking ◦ Focus on frequent walkers
www.pedbikeimages.org/LucianoRizzi
On-line survey sponsored by America Walks Partner Organizations:
AARP (participating state chapters) Active Transportation Alliance
Alliance for Biking & Walking American Public Health Association Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP) Bike Walk Virginia California Walks Initiative for Bike & Ped Innovation (IBPI) at Portland State U. PedNet Coalition PEDS Rails-To-Trails Conservancy Safe Routes to School National Partnership Vermont Bicycle & Pedestrian Coalition Walk Boston Walk San Diego Walk San Francisco Walking.About.com Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
About the survey: Survey conducted between April 27 & June 13 Publicized through
homepages e-mails Facebook
Went “viral” – Facebook, twitter, blogs Purposive sample; n = 7,019 Some less avid walkers also included among
respondents
“I love it. Power walk 40 minutes a day outside...rain, snow, or sleet...never miss it.”
“Walking rocks! It is the best stress buster going and free and easy to do!”
“Walking is a very important part of my life.”
“My parents encouraged me to walk a lot when I was a young child and the habit of walking and my pleasure in it has persisted.”
Demographic profile Survey U.S. ◦ Race White, non-Hispanic 90.1% 67.0% Asian 1.6% 4.8% African-American 2.4% 11.6% Hispanic 2.1% 14.2% ◦ Education Bachelor’s degree 33.8% 17.4% Grad training or degree 47.2% 10.1% ◦ Median HH Income $46,256 $41,994 ◦ % ≥ 45 55.0% 34.4% ◦ % Female 65.0% 50.9%
Frequency of Walking Frequency Percent
◦ Never 33 0.5 ◦ Rarely 257 3.7 ◦ A few times a month 415 6.0 ◦ 1-2 days a week 889 12.8 ◦ 3-4 days a week 1589 22.8 ◦ 5-6 days a week 1510 21.7 ◦ Everyday 2264 32.5
Total 6957 100.0
77.0% are avid walkers!
Walk Frequency by Age
Frequent Infrequent Age Walker Walker 18-24 63.7% 36.3%
25-30 57.6% 42.4% 31-44 51.6% 48.4% 45-64 52.9% 47.1% 65+ 61.1% 38.9%
18-24 25-30 31-44 45-64 65+
63.7 57.6
51.6 52.9
61.1
36.3 42.4
48.4 47.1 38.9
frequent infrequent
Walk Frequency by Education
Length of Time a Person Has Been Walking Frequency Percent ◦ < 1 year 301 7.5 ◦ 1 year up to 2 years 349 8.6 ◦ 2 years up to 3 years 356 8.8 ◦ 3 years up to 5 years 439 10.9 ◦ > 5 years 2,592 64.2
Total 4,037 100.0
Almost two-thirds have been walking more than 5 years.
Where Do People Walk?
2% 1% 0%
8% 2%
64%
23%
Gym Treadmill at home Mall
Parks/forests Other Sidewalks/streets
Combination of places
Source of Original Encouragement Frequency Percent ◦ Family member 287 5.4 ◦ Friend 219 4.1 ◦ Health care professional 212 4.0 ◦ Organization in my community 59 1.1 ◦ Organization I work for 140 2.6 ◦ Media 353 6.6 ◦ Just decided on my own 3,037 56.7 ◦ Don’t remember 284 5.3 ◦ Other 763 14.3
Total 5,354 100.0
Only 4% received encouragement to walk from a health care professional
Orientation toward Walking for Non-Pet Owners & Pet Owners
41%
35%
24%
Non-Pet Owners
Both reasons Health/relaxation Get to a destination
69%
17%
14%
Pet Owners Care for pet & health
Care for pet & destination
Care for pet
Orientation toward Walking by Age (excludes pet owners)
18-24 25-30 31-44 45-64 65+ TOTAL Health/ relaxation 7.7% 13.0% 27.6% 45.8% 52.5% 35.3%
Get to a destination 50.5% 43.3% 31.4% 13.0% 10.3% 23.6%
Both reasons 41.8% 43.7% 41.0% 41.3% 37.2% 41.2%
Walking for health/relaxation increases with age.
What is a Walkable Neighborhood?
There are many places to go within easy walking distance of my home.
It is easy to walk to a transit stop (bus, subway, train) from my home.
There are many interesting things to look at while walking in my neighborhood.
Walking and Walkability
64.9
78 88.1
35.1
22 11.9
Low walkability Middle walkability High walkability
Frequent walker Infrequent walker
Percent of people who are frequent walkers
by neighborhood walkability
People in highly walkable neighborhoods are much more likely to walk
“We moved to Baltimore City's Federal Hill neighborhood specifically because of its walkability.”
“When deciding which neighborhood to live in, walkability was a main factor for me.”
“My neighborhood is really nice in terms of walkability.”
“Walkability is a dealbreaker for me. Won't live anywhere without good transport and local shopping.”
Orientation toward Walking and Walkability (excludes pet owners)
Low Medium High Walkability Walkability Walkability TOTAL Health/relaxation 56.2% 32.8% 14.2% 31.4%
Get to a destination 11.5% 25.0% 35.6% 25.7%
Both reasons 32.3% 42.3% 50.3% 42.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Low walkability – health/relaxation; high walkability – instrumental.
Orientation toward Walking and Population Density (excludes pet owners)
Low Middle High Density Density Density TOTAL Health/relaxation 59.4% 41.3% 12.4% 35.1%
Get to a destination 8.7% 19.1% 38.1% 23.6%
Both reasons 31.9% 39.6% 49.4% 41.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Low density – health/relaxation; high density – instrumental.
Orientation and Duration of Walking (mins.) (excludes pet owners)
15 to < 30 30 to < 60 60 to < 90 90+ Don’t know Health/ relaxation 33.9% 50.1% 12.2% 3.6% 0.3%
Get to a destination 83.5% 14.0% 0.8% 0.8% 1.0%
Both reasons 57.1% 33.2% 6.4% 2.3% 1.0%
Health/relaxation – long trips; instrumental – short trips
Reasons for Walking (percentage who answered very important)
Walking helps me to maintain good health - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 71.1 Walking helps me to feel calm and less stressed - - - - - - - - - - -60.6 Walking gives me more physical energy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 58.2 Walking gets me out of the house and I feel better afterwards - - - 53.6 Walking helps me to maintain my weight - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 52.0 Walking allows me to get to a specific destination such as work, school, or a store - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 51.8 Walking gives me an opportunity to go out and explore my surroundings - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 47.7 Walking helps me to lose weight - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 34.2 Walking allows me to take care of my pet - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -22.4 Walking is how I get to/from transit stops - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 22.1 Walking gives me an opportunity to spend time with family or friends - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 17.0 Walking is my main form of transportation - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9.7
“It is a win/win form of transportation.”
“Walking helps me reduce my environmental impact.”
“Gives me uninterrupted talk time with my husband or daughter.”
“I enjoy the time alone.”
“I simply feel better after a walk.”
“Walking is the most sensible way to go short distances.”
Type of Walker and Medical Conditions
Frequent Walkers Infre- Health/ Get to a quent
relaxation destination Both walkers TOTAL ≥ 15 lbs. overweight 36.6 19.5 25.9 41.9 31.8 Hypertension 19.4 7.2 12.5 18.7 15.0 Depression 7.8 9.3 9.4 12.8 9.9 Arthritis 11.8 5.2 9.2 10.9 9.6 Asthma 7.8 8.4 9.1 8.5 8.5 Osteoporosis 6.9 1.4 4.1 4.1 4.4 Diabetes 6.1 1.8 3.5 4.8 4.2 Heart disease 4.4 0.6 2.0 3.1 2.7 Cancer 2.2 0.5 1.5 1.6 1.5 None of the above 36.4 60.3 49.0 38.5 44.9 You
should walk
more.
Frequency of Walking and Medical Conditions
number of Frequent Infrequent conditions Walker Walker 0 48.7% 40.5% 1 31.0% 30.2% 2 13.0% 18.3% 3+ 7.3% 11.1%
Number of Medical Conditions
Type of Walker
Walkability and Medical Conditions
Residents of more walkable communities have fewer illnesses.
# of Medical Conditions 0 1 2 3+
Neighborhood walkability:
Physical Activities Besides Walking
Swimming Tennis Golf Jogging Skiing Bicycling Hiking Physical fitness (e.g., aerobics,
weight lifting) Gardening Bird watching Team sports Yoga
Physical Activities Besides Walking: Frequent Walkers number of Infrequent Frequent
activities Walker Walker Total None 7.1% 4.5% 5.7%
1 – 2 35.9% 29.0% 32.2% 3 – 4 36.2% 40.0% 38.3% 5+ 20.7% 26.6% 23.9%
Frequent walkers participate in other activities. This is true even when controlling for several demographic variables.
Physical Activities Besides Walking: Dog Walkers
number of Without With activities a Dog a Dog Total None 5.3% 3.1% 4.8%
1 – 2 31.6% 24.1% 29.8% 3 – 4 39.3% 40.5% 39.6% 5+ 23.8% 32.4% 25.8%
Most walkers participate in other physical activities; dog walkers even more so.
Walkability and Physical Activities Besides Walking
number of Walkability activities Low Medium High
0 7.5% 4.8% 3.7% 1 – 2 36.8% 31.5% 27.0%
3 – 4 37.2% 37.4% 41.5% 5+ 18.5% 26.3% 27.8%
People in walkable communities are more active in general.
www.pedbikeimages.org/MaxBushell
Reasons for Not Walking (percentage who strongly agree)
I am involved in other physical activities and do not feel the need to walk more - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 16.9 In my neighborhood things like not enough sidewalks or speeding motor vehicles discourage me from walking more - - - 13.3 I do not have time to walk more - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12.8 With things like work or family responsibilities, I do not have the energy left to walk more - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10.8 There are not many desirable places nearby in which to walk - - - 10.6 I am just not that enthusiastic about walking more - - - - - - - - - 6.9 The level of crime in my neighborhood discourages me from walking more - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.4
“no sidewalks, speeding cars, and unrestrained dogs”
“laziness!”
“My girlfriend does not like walking that much.”
“There's no point. You have to drive anywhere to get to anything.”
“I don't usually consider walking as an alternative. I just hop in the car to go somewhere without thinking.”
Safety Problems for Walkers Very big Somewhat of problem (%) problem (%) Total% Drivers talking on cell phones or using other electronic devices _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 26.5 27.7 54.2 Speeding motor vehicles _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 22.9 30.3 53.2 Unsmooth sidewalks or other walking surfaces _ _ 13.4 24.7 43.4 Not enough sidewalks __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 18.7 20.7 39.4 Poorly-lit streets _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 10.7 22.6 33.3 The sidewalks are too narrow _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6.8 16.5 23.3 The walk signs or street signals do not give me enough time to walk across the street safely _ _ _ 5.5 12.6 18.1 Crime _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3.4 10.1 13.5 Dogs or other animals _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3.4 9.7 13.1
“Drivers in my area do not give pedestrians the right of way in cross walks.”
“The greatest physical danger to frequent walkers in my community are speeding drivers who run red lights and fail to slow at crosswalks.”
“I would walk MUCH more often if we had sidewalks and more tickets for cell-phone/texting drivers.”
“Cars turn right on red without stopping or looking even when I have the WALK signal.”
“Distracted drivers is my number one concern while walking.”
Transportation Used by Grade K – 8 Children of Respondents (n=775) Automobile - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 31.4% Walking - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 23.5% School bus/van - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20.4% Child (children) uses a combination of means - - 14.8% Bicycle - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.6% More than one child in elementary school and they use different means of transportation - - - 2.8% Public transportation - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.7% Other - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.7%
Transportation to School by Walkability Walkability of Neighborhood Transportation Low Medium High Total
to school Automobile 38.3% 32.3% 17.2% 29.4% School bus 25.7% 20.4% 9.9% 18.7% Bike 1.5% 4.4% 5.9% 3.9% Walk 17.0% 21.7% 40.4% 26.1% All other 17.5% 21.2% 26.6% 21.7%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Transportation to School and Parents’ Walking Walking by Parents
Transportation Infrequent Frequent Total to school Automobile 45.5% 26.4% 31.3% School bus/van 22.5% 19.6% 20.3% Bicycle 3.0% 4.0% 3.8% Walking 16.0% 26.2% 23.6% All else 13.0% 23.8% 21.0%
Only 6.6% heard or read about the benefits of walking through the media.
Only 4.0% said that a health care professional encouraged them to walk. ◦ Even among those with serious medical conditions, only a
small proportion received encouragement to walk from a health care professional.
Many health/relaxation walkers have a serious medical condition. ◦ For them, walking is for the purpose of preventing further
deterioration in health. Greater efforts are needed to publicize the multiple
benefits of walking.
Among infrequent walkers, a higher percentage cite “neighborhood” factors (e.g., not enough sidewalks, speeding motor vehicles) rather than “personal” factors (e.g., not enough time).
54.2% of respondents cite “drivers talking on cell phones or using other electronic devices as a “very big problem” or “somewhat of a problem.”
53.2% of respondents cite “speeding motor vehicles” as a “very big problem” or “somewhat of a problem.
More resources should be devoted to protecting people walking, especially from motor vehicles.
Large percentages of respondents noted infrastructure as a problem: ◦ Unsmooth sidewalks (43.4%) ◦ Lack of sidewalks (39.4%) ◦ Poorly lit streets (33.3%)
Walkability matters. Walkability and population density are not the same. Avid walkers are in
cities, suburbs and rural areas. Walkability matters. Children walk to school if their parents are walkers
and if they live in walkable neighborhoods. Walkability matters.
People in more walkable neighborhoods have a fewer number of serious medical conditions. This finding holds even after controlling for age, sex, education and other background variables.
Walkability matters. People in more walkable neighborhoods engage in
a greater number of physical activities besides walking. This finding holds even after controlling for age, sex, education and other background variables.
Walkability matters.
Meet the needs of health/relaxation walkers
Make neighborhoods walkable ◦ Nearby destinations ◦ Connectivity ◦ Accessible to transit stops ◦ Attractive, safe, interesting walking environment ◦ Tame the motor vehicle ◦ Safety from crime
The medical community needs to advocate walking with their patients one on one
Health/fitness messages need to be aimed at young adults to build walking habits that will endure or be restored later
Organizations working for arthritis, heart and other specific types of health need to continue their work to get people walking
Messages need crafting for minority populations and those less advantaged ◦ Why walking is important ◦ Fitting walking into your busy life ◦ Walking is cool
Walking infrastructure needs improving ◦ Safe, usable by all, and attractive
Slower, safer vehicle speeds
Walking Action Network ◦ Steps to a Walkable Community ◦ Training and technical assistance ◦ Information Collection and Dissemination ◦ Evaluation
Thank you…….