SDSU Bike and Skateboard Access Study

BIKE AND SKATEBOARD ACCESS SAFETY STUDY

SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared for:

Associated Students

San Diego State University

Prepared by:

Prepared:

OCTOBER 2009

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Table of Contents 1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Project Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.2 Existing Situation to be Addressed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3 Project Focus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.4 Specific Scope Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2 3 4 4

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1 Current Campus Bike and Skate Access Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Citation Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.3 Accessibility Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4 Previous Efforts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3.0 ACCESS ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3.1 Current Use Patterns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.2 Current On-Campus Use Patterns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.3 On-Campus Access Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.4 Access Routes to the Campus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.5 Bike Collisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.6 Existing Bike Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3.7 Summary Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11 11 14 14 13 15 15

4.0 RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.1 Other Campus Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.1.1 Michigan State University – East Lansing (MSU) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.1.2 University of Arizona – Tucson (UA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4.1.3 Arizona State University – Tempe (ASU). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.1.4 University of California – Berkeley (UCB). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.1.5 University of California – Irvine (UCI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.1.6 University of California San Diego – (UCSD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.1.7 Ripon College – Ripon, Wisconsin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.1.8 University of New England – Portland and Biddeford, Maine (UNE). . 34 4.1.9 University of Texas – Austin (UT). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4.1.10 University of Missouri - Kansas City (UMKC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4.1.11 University of North Texas - Denton, Texas (UNT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.1.12 Framingham State College – Massachusetts (FSC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 4.2 User Input: Questionnaire Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.3 Interpretation of Questionnaire Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Page ii

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

5.0 SOLUTION FRAMEWORK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 5.1 Proposed On-Campus Access Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.2 Bike Parking Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.2.1 Bicycle Parking Facility Guidelines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.2.2 Proposed Bike Parking Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.3 Near Campus Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

49 64 64 67 73

6.0 SAFETY AND REGULATORY RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . 97 6.0 Proposed Adjustments to SDSU Bike and Skate Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 6.1 Proposed Adjustments to Code Section 100.02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 6.2 Proposed Adjustments to Regulatory Signage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 6.3 Other Safety Issues and Concerns. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 6.4 Other Informational or Warning Signs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

7.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 7.1 Funding Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 7.2 Phasing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 7.3 Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

FIGURES Figure 1 Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 2 Areas of the Campus Where Riding and Skating are Allowed. . . . . . . 8 Figure 3 On-site Use Inventory Location Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Figure 4 Current On-Campus Routes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure 5 Off Campus Bike Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 6 Off Campus Common Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Figure 7 Collision Locations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Figure 8 Existing Bike Parking Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Figure 9 Plan View of Proposed Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Figure 10 Oblique View of Proposed Routes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Figure 11a/b Existing/Proposed Views along Aztec Walk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Figure 12a/b Existing/Proposed Views on Aztec Walk at Campanile . . . . . . . 57 Figure 13a/b Existing/Proposed Views at south end of Campanile. . . . . . . . . 58 Figure 14a/b Existing/Proposed Views on Campanile near Music Building . . 59 Figure 15a/b Existing/Proposed Views on Campanile at Hilltop Drive. . . . . . 60 Figure 16a/b Existing/Proposed Views at Hilltop Drive. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Figure 17a/b Existing/Proposed Views south of Music Building . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Figure 18a/b Existing/Proposed Views at Residence Halls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Figure 19 Recommended Rack Style and Spacing Requirements. . . . . . . . . . 65 Figure 20 Recommended Rack Layouts and Spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Figure 21 Potential Bike Rack and Locker Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-72 Figure 22 Recommended Bike Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Figure 23 Off Campus Bikeway Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page iii

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 24 Overview of Proposed Improvements on College Ave at I-8 . . . . . . 80 Figure 25 College South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Figure 26 College Central. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Figure 27 College North . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Figure 28a/b Existing/Proposed Views of College at Pedestrian Bridge . . . . . 88 Figure 29a/b Existing/Proposed Views of College mid-way south of I-8 . . . . 89 Figure 30a/b Existing/Proposed Views of College at Bridge over I-8 north . . . 90 Figure 31a/b Existing/Proposed Views of College at Bridge over I-8 south . . . 91 Figures 32-35a/b Existing/Proposed Views of College at I-8 Off-ramp. . . . 92-95 Figure 36 Proposed Walk Zone Regulatory Sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Figure 37 Proposed Path Use Regulatory Sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Figure 38 Proposed Lane Ending Sign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Figure 39 Proposed Lane Markings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Figure 40 Proposed Cyclist Yield Sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Figure 41 Tactile Warning Strip and Caution Stencil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 Figure 42 Share the Road Sign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Figure 43 Watch for Bikes Sign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Figure 44 Begin RIght Turn - Yield to Bikes Sign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Figure 45 Merge Across Painted Lane Signs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

TABLES Table 1 Full Day On-site Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Table 2 Full Day On-site Survey Results taken by Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Table 3 Full Week On-site Survey Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 4 Sample Blank Questionnaire. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37-38 Table 5 Questionnaire Respondents Residential Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Table 6 Summary of all Three Questionnaire Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39-41

Page iv

Chapter 5: General Solutions

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.0 Project Context

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

The link between land use, transportation and greenhouse gas emissions has become increasingly clear. In southern California, transportation is responsible for nearly 48 percent of carbon dioxide production. Total vehicle miles traveled and time spent in congested roadway conditions continues to climb. Although increased vehicle mileage efficiencies will help, their contribution to greenhouse gas emission reduction can only be considered to be a small part of the solution.

The most significant improvements will result from making changes where we live, work, play and learn and how we get between these places.

Recent State of California legislation provides direction for all state agencies and local municipalities for how greenhouse gas emissions reductions, land use and transportation planning should occur. Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, sets policies on monitoring, reporting, regulating and limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Senate Bill 97 provides for direction on California Environmental Quality Act review for greenhouse gas emissions. Senate Bill 375, Redesigning Communities to Reduce Greenhouse Gases, provides direction on reducing suburban sprawl and providing guidance in reducing total vehicle miles traveled, a metric which will make a substantial contribution to greenhouse gas reduction. Assembly Bill 1358, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, requires cities and counties to include complete street policies as part of their general plans so that roadways are designed to safely accommodate all users, including cyclists, pedestrians, transit riders, children, seniors and disabled persons, as well as motorists.

The acceptance of environmentally responsible activities and sustainable policies has greatly increased over the past five years.

The green movement is perhaps best represented among the country’s youth. Colleges and universities across the nation are great examples of how this new initiative has become mainstream.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page 1

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

1.1 Project Background Enviro-Business Society (e3) is a non-profit environmental advocacy group at San Diego State University responsible for providing encouragement and direction on this project.

According to the organization’s web site: “The Enviro-Business Society offers students of all majors a unique and beneficial way to make a positive environmental impact on campus, in the community and in the business world. e3 promotes modern business practices that maximize both profit and a sustainable future.

We believe that at the core of this revolutionary new business model there are three pillars which must always be upheld: ecology, ethics and economics.”

The funding for this study originated with Associated Students (AS) of SDSU. According to the AS web site: “AS is an independent student-directed corporation that is one of the largest student governance organizations in the CSU system. As an affiliate of San Diego State University, the programs and facilities AS manages are enjoyed by students, faculty, staff and the SDSU Community.”

Associated Students

San Diego State University

Of particular importance is Associated Students’ “Green Love Initiative” that hopes to establish a sustainable movement involving both the campus and the surrounding community. Some of its major goals are: • Create an awareness of sustainability throughout Associated Students.

• Measurably improve operations to meet as high a standard of sustainability as feasible.

• Create an awareness of sustainability throughout the University with an ongoing educational campaign.

• Encourage student organizations and residents to adopt sustainable habits.

• Assist SDSU in becoming a model University in sustainability.

Page 2

Chapter 1: Introduction

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

1.2 Existing Situation to be Addressed The primary focus of this study is to identify opportunities for increasing nonmotorized access to the campus from surrounding communities, as well as improved circulation and parking on the campus. The focus is in support of the goal to promote a more sustainable transportation pattern and to assist in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, to save energy and to promote healthier low impact lifestyles and transportation modes.

Historically, the campus had a much larger segment of it students utilizing bikes to get to and around the campus. Many individuals recently interviewed at SANDAG, the City of San Diego and Caltrans indicated that their memories and informal counts indicated a much larger amount of bike use to and on the campus. At one point, bike racks were all around the campus and those wishing to use them far exceeded the available parking capacity.

As is typical of most American college campuses, the amount of bike use far exceeds that in other segments of the population. Though SDSU has a substantial amount of bike and skateboard use, the current rates of these transportation modes are much smaller than most other similar campuses.

There are likely to be several factors contributing to a lower than normal bike utilization rate. These include: • The University is primarily a commuter-based campus. The majority of the student population lives and works off-campus, many at a distance that would make riding more difficult.

• The housing options near campus are primarily in single family residential neighborhoods, where student use is generally frowned upon and is now becoming regulated. This puts much of the housing options too far away from the campus to make biking realistic for some.

• The surrounding hilly topography limits easy bike access.

• The adjacent street and freeway network is not conducive to comfortable cycling.

• Current campus policies do not allow for broad bike use in many of the areas needed to provide reasonable access to classrooms and other destinations.

• The no bike use in “pedestrian areas” policies may be inequitably enforced and not understood by most students.

• The campus has provided inexpensive and extensive vehicular parking facilities.

• The City of San Diego has provided for high speed and high throughput roadways around the campus, benefitting vehicular use, but making cycling use of these roadways more difficult and potentially hazardous.

• The campus is just slightly too large to walk across in normal in-between class schedules, but not too large for many to take up cycling throughout the campus.

• Though several areas of the campus do have legal routes that can be used by cyclists (but not skateboarders), much of the interior of the campus is not legally accessible by bike or skateboard.

• Safe and secure bike parking facilities are in short supply and some of them lie within campus dismount zones.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Page 3

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

1.3 Project Focus The focus of this study is to find appropriate and safe routes of travel from offcampus and within the campus convenient to cyclists (that also has the potential for shared use with skateboarders and carts) and to provide for safe and secure bike parking locations.

Pedestrians use must be taken into account. The campus is very pedestrianfriendly and this travel mode is the most common among its students. Safety and risk management must be addressed in any recommendations. A high level of on-campus bike and skateboard use now occurs in areas considered to be pedestrian only and not taking action to better integrate bike, skateboard and pedestrian use is not appropriate. Relying solely on enforcement is not likely to correct the safety issues associated with mixed travel modes on campus walkways and roadways.

Furthermore, a higher degree of sensitivity and concern is needed for the visually impaired or those with other physical challenges. Though cyclists and skateboarders may be highly maneuverable, individuals with physical challenges are not. Even though close calls far outnumber collisions, the perception of safety is also important to consider. For those in wheelchairs or that may be visually impaired, these close calls can create stress and discomfort.

1.4 Specific Scope Items The following are specific scope items to be completed under this contract: 1. Field visit the campus to determine the current situation and potential solutions.

2. Create and administer a questionnaire to solicit input from various users.

3. Review current collision and citation date both on and off campus.

4. Complete use level counts for pedestrians, bikes and skateboarders.

5. Inventory areas of common bike use and determine if the use is legal or prohibited.

6. Determine major access routes and destinations for bike and skateboard use.

7. Identify routes that may currently be prohibited that could be modified for safe use.

8. Recommend changes in current policies.

9. Inventory bike racks and determine where bike parking capacity should be increased.

10. Prepare presentation materials and present to the AS Executive Committee along with members of Campus Planning and e3.

11. Prepare a document for circulation and adjust based on comments provided.

Page 4

Chapter 1: Introduction

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

CHAPTER 2: Existing Conditions

2.0 Existing Conditions This chapter discusses the existing conditions affecting bike access and skateboard use on the main campus of San Diego State University. The limits of the study area are shown on Figure 1: Study Area.

2.1 Current Campus Bike and Skate Access Policies SDSU’s current bicycle and skateboard access policies are summed up in the university’s police code section 100.02, entitled “Bicycle and Skateboard Regulations.” The full text is included here: (A) Bicycle riding is prohibited on the inner core of the University during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except weekends and holidays. The inner core consists of the following boundaries: north to Avenue of Art, west to Scripps Terrace, south to East Plaza Mall and east to Aztec Circle Drive.

(B) Riding bicycles is prohibited in all University buildings.

(C) Riding bicycles is prohibited in the inner core or in any other area where signs are posted restricting such activity.

(D) Riding skateboards is prohibited on all University property at all times.

(E) Roller skates, “scooters” and devices of a similar nature are included in this section.

(F) This section does not apply to Department of Public Safety personnel in the performance of their duties.

While the text of this code section is clear, there are some existing enforcement issues related to it. For example, while the inner core where bicycles are prohibited is clearly defined, existing on-site signage does not appear to coincide with this regulation (see Figure 2: Current Areas of Campus where Riding and Skating are allowed). A case in point is a widely used sign alerting users that riding in plazas is prohibited, but these signs are often placed in locations that are not obviously “plazas,” such as walkways. Additionally, these sign are often encountered well within the campus core area where wheeled use is not allowed.

From the amount of bicycle and skateboard use regularly occurring on campus, it appears that many, if not most, students are not aware of these regulations.

They may not know that bicycles are prohibited from routes such as Campanile Mall, or that skateboards are prohibited on the entire campus. There also seems to be confusion as where bicycles are allowed on Aztec Circle Drive, though it falls within the campus core as described in the code section above. Perhaps exacerbating this confusion may be by the fact that two of the routes used to define the campus core are actually streets, at least in part; Scripps Terrace and Aztec Circle Drive.

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions

Page 5

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Scrip

ps

Remington Ro

ad

Te rr

Hilltop

Way

ac

e

Campanile Mall

55th Street

Aztec Walk

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

Campanile Drive

0'

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Interstate 8

Crest Drive

Co lleg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared:

October 2009 August 21, 2009

tec

Az riv

eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND e

Campus Boundary

e

nu

g

lle

Co

Aztec Walk

ve eA

ridge Ped B

FIGURE 1 Campus Study Limits

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Scrip

ps

Remington Ro

ad

Te rr

Hilltop

Way

ac

e

Campanile Mall

55th Street

Aztec Walk

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

Campanile Drive

0'

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Interstate 8

rest Drive

Co lleg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: August 21, 2009

tec

Az eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND e

riv

Areas that are Clearly Posted for no Riding or Skating Areas where Riding is Allowed (Defined by Roads or Parking Lots) Areas where it is not Clear if Riding is Allowed or Not

e

nu

g

lle

Co

Aztec Walk

ve eA

ridge Ped B

FIGURE 2 Current Areas of the Campus Where Riding and Skating are Allowed

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

2.2 Citation Records A list of bicycle and skateboard citations issued between January 1st, 2007 and February 15th, 2009 was reviewed for this project. Of the 201 citations, nine were California Vehicle Code violations that occurred on roadways for infractions such as riding while wearing headphones, riding at night without appropriate lights and violating other users’ rights-of-way.

Information on the remaining 192 citations included only incident location and date. More than half (109) were issued on Campanile Mall and more than a quarter (56) on Aztec Circle. Due to variations in location reporting, several other citations appeared to have issued along these routes as well.

Citations were issued on average about one every four days over the 25 month period. This implies that they were issued frequently enough that students should be aware of the regulations.

2.3 Accessibility Concerns Safety must be the primary priority of this study. Whatever issues may exist between pedestrians and bikes/skateboards can often be amplified for those that have some form of disability. The AS Student Disability Services Student Advisory Board (SDS SAB) expressed concerns regarding a potential bike lane and felt that the following three issues needed to be addressed: 1) If pedestrians cannot walk in the bike lane, this will create more congestion on the walkways, which could make it harder for individuals who use wheelchairs to maneuver around campus. Therefore, the Board recommends that the bike lane be accessible to individuals who use wheelchairs.

2) People who have vision impairments need to be made aware of the bike lane and learn how to navigate around it. Therefore, the Board recommends that the bike lane be marked with tactile cues to prevent pedestrians with vision impairments from being hit by bicyclists. Furthermore, Student Disability Services should be notified if and when the proposed bike lane will go into effect and ensure that students with vision impairments can be properly notified.

3) Student Disability Services uses a golf cart to transport students with mobility impairments around campus. Additionally, campus police, Physical Plant and other offices drive vehicles on and around campus in order to handle official business. Therefore, the Board recommends that the study address the flow of foot, vehicle and bicycle traffic to ensure that students with disabilities can continue to safely maneuver around campus.

2.4 Previous Efforts The 1998 Campus Master Plan for Existing Conditions and Analysis, identified the need for a more complete network of bike lanes on the campus. The study also identified the need to balance the safety and convenience of the dominant pedestrian mode on campus with the needs and efficiency of those that chose to utilize bikes to get around. However, the plan did not specify where and how to improve these facilities.

In early 2009, as part of the Green Love Initiative, e3 began to identify key potential bike lanes and additional bike parking locations.

Page 10

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

CHAPTER 3: ACCESS ANALYSIS

3.0 ACCESS ANALYSIS The problem statement for this study centers on increasing access to destinations on the campus, most of which are classroom buildings or buildings that house other student services. Origins on campus include dormitories and the transit center. Other origins associated with SDSU exist off campus, primarily housing. Access to the campus is mostly by way of private vehicles via city roads and adjacent freeways. However, the actual number of campus access points is quite limited based on topography and the adjacent roadway network.

In addition, the volume of vehicular traffic on the limited number of adjacent streets actually inhibits campus pedestrian and bike access.

This chapter looks at analyzing access to the campus and access around the campus itself.

To fully understand how the campus is being used by cyclists and skaters, on-site surveys were also needed.

3.1 Current Use Patterns The locations of these surveys are shown on Figure 3: On-site Use Inventory Location Points. Three surveys were conducted. The first survey attempted to determine use levels across a typical single day from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and was conducted at four locations. For results, see Table 1. An interim survey was taken by student volunteers associated with e3 (see Table 2). These surveys spanned several days and several different times of the day. The third survey was conducted over a one week period at a set time, from 10:30 to 10:45 a.m. The intent of the survey was to determine if there are weekly cycles of use. This survey was conducted in the same locations as the one-day survey. For results, see Table 3.

3.2 Current On-Campus Use Patterns The primary routes taken on campus are shown on Figure 4: Current On-Campus Routes. The determination of these routes included on-site observation, surveys, and marked up maps resulting from the bike day fair on March 16th. Actual volumes were not part of the field work. Most of the existing campus roadway systems are assumed to be used by cyclists on a regular basis. Pedestrian plaza areas and pathways away from roadways were observed more closely to determine common routes.

Chapter 3: Access Analysis

Page 11

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Table 1: Full Day On-site Survey Results (May 7, 2009)

0.2%

13%

7%

10%

9%

0.5%

15%

Survey Count Locations

1A 1B 1C 1D 2A

1 2 1 0 3 1 0 4 2 0 6 2 0 3 3 0 0 1 0 3 4 36

1 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 17

36 17 29 100 34 28 110 33 52 109 23 57 92 46 45 70 14 43 37 7 23 1,005

4.6%

0.6%

3.6%

1.7%

% Skaters/bikers vs. Pedestrians

1.8%

0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6

Cyclists Riding

0.1%

1 3 1 0 7 1 0 4 2 0 3 2 0 6 4 2 4 3 0 1 2 46

Pedestrians

1.2%

Totals

0.1%

23%

Skaters Walking

5.6%

13%

Cyclists Walking

5.4%

13 10 17 29 16 10 40 70 35 16 35 98 11 11 35 70 25 14 63 92 28 5 30 65 18 9 21 28 914

Skaters Riding

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2

Location

21 74 28 81 149 32 70 148 67 81 147 66 49 107 50 40 102 39 17 41 14 1,423

2A 21 8:00 2B 70 2C 24 2A 79 9:30 2B 137 2C 31 2A 69 11:00 2B 143 2C 67 2A 76 12:30 2B 143 2C 66 2A 48 2:00 2B 102 2C 49 2A 40 3:30 2B 100 2C 37 2A 17 38 5:00 2B 2C 14 Totals 1,371 96.3% Percent

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Time

Totals

0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 7

Area 2: North/Central Campanile

1A 10 1B 10 8:00 1C 13 1D 28 1A 12 1B 8 9:30 1C 30 1D 61 1A 30 1B 14 11:00 1C 28 1D 90 1A 11 1B 10 12:30 1C 29 1D 69 1A 22 1B 14 2:00 1C 55 1D 84 1A 28 1B 4 3:30 1C 24 1D 61 1A 17 1B 9 5:00 1C 15 1D 25 Totals 811 Percent 88.7%

0 0 3 1 1 2 4 3 3 2 4 5 0 1 2 0 2 0 3 5 0 1 2 1 0 0 4 2 51

% Skaters/bikers vs. Pedestrians

Skaters Walking

Cyclists Walking 0 2 2 1 7 1 0 3 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 26

Skaters Riding 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Area 1: West Aztec Walk/South Campanile 3 0 1 0 3 0 6 6 1 0 3 3 0 0 4 1 1 0 4 3 0 0 4 2 1 0 2 1 49

Daylong Survey Counts

0 2 2 0 5 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 17

Cyclists Riding

Pedestrians

Location

Time

% Skaters/bikers vs. Pedestrians

Totals

Skaters Walking

Cyclists Walking

Skaters Riding

Cyclists Riding

Pedestrians

Location

Time

SDSU Bicycle/Skateboard Access Study (Original 2 minute count interval)

Area 3: Aztec Center 3A 33 3B 12 3C 27 3A 97 9:30 3B 24 3C 26 3A 103 11:00 3B 25 3C 47 3A 106 12:30 3B 14 3C 53 3A 92 2:00 3B 35 3C 38 3A 66 3:30 3B 10 3C 36 3A 36 5:00 3B 3 3C 17 Totals 900 Percent 89.6% 8:00

7%

6%

2%

3%

4%

2%

4%

2B 2C 3A 3B 3C

Aztec Walk at Cox Arena (E/W) Path east of Cox Arena (N/S) Aztec Walk at Campanile (E/W) Campanile at Aztec Walk (N/S) Path btwn Music and Theater Arts

14%

10%

11%

9%

11%

13%

20%

Campanile at Open Air Theater Hilltop Drive at north end of Campanile Bridge over College Avenue at Aztec Center Aztec Circle north of College Avenue bridge Aztec Walk at Bus Transit Center

Note: Counts conducted for two minute intervals within 15 minutes of times shown, Thursday, May 7, 2009. See map for count locations.

Area 1 Area 2 Area 3

Percent users on bikes/skateboards (or pent‐up demand suggested by those walking bikes or carrying skateboards)

13% 4% 12%

Aztec Center/Walk

Friday

% Skaters/bikers vs. Pedestrians

Pedestrians

17% 15% 30%

Pedestrians

6 20 10

Thursday

Cyclists Riding or Skateboards

1 3 3

Bikes Parked

6

Pedestrians

1

Wednesday

Cyclists Riding or Skateboards

0%

20

Bikes Parked

1

8:30 AM 10:30 AM 12:00 NOON

Pedestrians

Cyclists Riding or Skateboards

B

Cyclists Riding or Skateboards

0

Tuesday

Bikes Parked

Bikes Parked

Student Services West / East

Pedestrians

5

Monday A

Cyclists Riding or Skateboards

1

Bikes Parked

0

Pedestrians

Cyclists Riding or Skateboards

5

Bikes Parked

8:30 AM

Time

Location

Area Designator

Table 2: Full Week On-site Survey Results taken by Students (Spring Semester 2009)

Totals

49

3

20

20 49 48

10:30 AM

13

1

19

13

1

19

5%

10:30 AM 12:00 NOON

27

1

4

27 46

1 0

4 8

25% 0%

48

3

10

C

Adams/E 700

D

Gateway/ENS 700

E

Music/Drama & Arts

10:30 AM 12:30 PM 2:00 PM

12 0 8

0 3 0

12 10 5

12 0 8

0 3 0

12 10 5

0% 30% 0%

F

Music / Campanile

9:00 AM 9:30 AM 10:00 AM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM

20 23 28

7 9 0 0 3

27 16 0 36 13

20 23 28 0 0

7 9 0 0 3

27 16 0 36 13

26% 56% 0% 0% 23%

46

0

8

G

Adams / Open Air Theater

10:30 AM

0

0

23

0

0

23

0%

H

Drama & Arts/Love Library

10:30 AM 12:00 NOON

15

2

46

15 12

2 2

46 25

4% 8%

I

Hepner Hall / HillTop Way (end of Campanile)

10:30 AM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM

22

1

16

22 0 15

1 5 0

16 54 7

6% 9% 0%

East Business Administration

9:30 AM 11:00 AM 2:00 PM 4:30 PM

21 24

2 1

3 8

12

0

7

21 24 35 12

2 1 4 0

3 8 32 7

67% 13% 13% 0%

408

12%

J

12 0 15

0

5

54

7

35

4

32

2

25

455

Page 12

Counts are for 3 minutes

48

Chapter 3: Access Analysis

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

% Skaters/bikers vs. Pedestrians

Totals

Skaters Walking

Cyclists Walking

Skaters Riding

Cyclists Riding

Pedestrians

Time

Location

Area Designator

Table 3: Full Week On-site Survey Results (Week of May 7 to May 13)

1D

MONDAY Campanile (South End)

10:45-10:50

100

14

5

0

1

20

20%

1D 2A

TUESDAY Campanile (South End) Campanile (Music Bldg)

10:45-10:50 10:45-10:50

201 244

4 7

1 3

1 2

0 3

6 15

3% 6%

1D 2A 2C

WEDNESDAY Campanile (South End) Campanile (Music Bldg) Campanile (Hilltop)*

10:45-10:50 10:45-10:50 10:50-10:55

43 86 127

0 3 5

0 5 4

2 0 1

1 0 3

3 8 13

7% 9% 10%

1D 2A

THURSDAY Campanile (South End) Campanile (Music Bldg)

10:45-10:50 10:45-10:50

40 57

3 8

2 1

0 1

0 0

5 10

13% 18%

Counts are for 5 minutes

0.6

1D

MONDAY Campanile (South End)

10:45-10:50

60

8

3

0

1

12

20%

1D 2A

TUESDAY Campanile (South End) Campanile (Music Bldg)

10:45-10:50 10:45-10:50

121 146

2 4

1 2

1 1

0 2

3.6 9

3% 6%

1D 2A 2C

WEDNESDAY Campanile (South End) Campanile (Music Bldg) Campanile (Hilltop)*

10:45-10:50 10:45-10:50 10:50-10:55

26 52 76

0 2 3

0 3 2

1 0 1

1 0 2

1.8 4.8 7.8

7% 9% 10%

1D 2A

THURSDAY Campanile (South End) Campanile (Music Bldg)

10:45-10:50 10:45-10:50

24 34

2 5

1 1

0 1

0 0

3 6

13% 18%

Adjusted counts for 3 minutes Note: Counts conducted daily at 10:45 for ďŹ ve minute intervals during the week of May 11, 2009.

Chapter 3: Access Analysis

Page 13

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

3.3 On-Campus Access Issues A vast majority of the primary destinations for students are located along the Campanile Mall, in the historic core around Hepner Hall, near Love Library the Aztec Center and Student Services West.

Though these areas have great plazas and a strong pedestrian circulation system, they do not allow students on skateboards or bikes to get close to their destinations. At the same time, for pedestrian safety, penetration into the core pedestrian areas may not be warranted. The compromise for improved access will center on allowing for some movement into the campus core, without crossing too many pedestrian areas. Areas near the loop roads of Aztec Circle, Scripps Terrace and Avenue of the Arts do not have a bike access problem. Likewise, some of the northern half of the historic core of the campus, through its system of alleyways and back of building parking lots, also does not have a bike access problem.

3.4 Access Routes to the Campus Routes by which cyclists can access the campus are essentially limited to College Avenue, Montezuma Road and Alvarado Road. The current City of San Diego Bike Master Plan and the SANDAG regional bike map were summarized and compared with known on-site designations. Figure 5: Off-Campus Bike Facilities Found in the Existing City of San Diego Bikeway Master Plan, shows the current designations and/or conditions of these primary routes. Based on user input and field surveys, common routes taken by students and other visitors to the campus, have been mapped on Figure 6: Common Access Routes to the Campus.

3.5 Bike Collisions The campus police department does not have an extensive database of collisions between bikes, skateboarders, vehicles and pedestrians. A collision database is maintained by the California Highway Patrol (CHP). Local law enforcement, CHP and traffic engineering departments contribute to the input and maintenance of this database. Figure 7: Locations of Collisions Involving Bikes, shows the location, year and circumstances related to each of these collisions.

Page 14

Chapter 3: Access Analysis

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Figure 3 On-site Inventory Location Points Scrip

ps

Remington Ro

ad

Te rr

Hilltop

2C

Way

I

ac

e

2B

Campanile Mall

2A

E

H

G

F

C

1D

1B 1A

1C

55th Street

D

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

Campanile Drive

0'

Aztec Walk

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Interstate 8

rest Drive

Co lleg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared:

October 2009 August 21, 2009

tec

Az

Figure 3 On-site Inventory Location Points

riv

eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND Campus Boundary

e

I

2A

J

H

2A

G

B

Aztec Walk

Full Week & Full Day Count Locations (KTU+A & Assoc. Students)

A

e

nu

C

Full Day Count Locations (KTU+A)

3B

Random Counts / Multiple Days (Associated Students)

g

lle

Co

ve eA

F

ridge Ped B

3A

FIGURE 3 On-site Use Inventory Location Points

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Figure 4 Current On-campus Routes Scrip

ps

Remington Ro

ad

Hilltop

Te rr

Way

ac

e

Campanile Mall

55th Street

Aztec Walk

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

Campanile Drive

0'

SDSU

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY

nyon Crest Drive

Prepared by:

Av en Co

lleg e

Interstate 8

Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: October 2009

tec

Az

Figure 4 Current On-campus Routes riv

eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND

e

Campus Boundaries Common Routes where Bike use is Currently Allowed

Campanile Mall

Common Routes Taken but are not Allowed under Current Policies

e

nu

g

lle

Co

Aztec Walk

ve eA

ridge Ped B

Campanile Drive

FIGURE 4 Current On-campus Routes

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Figure 5 Off Campus Bike Facilities Scrip

ps

Remington Ro

ad

Te rr

Hilltop

Way

ac

e

Campanile Mall

55th Street

Aztec Walk

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

Campanile Drive

0'

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Interstate 8

rest Drive

Co lleg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared:

October August 2009 21, 2009

tec

Az

Figure 5 Off Campus Bike Facilities

riv

eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND

e

Campus Boundaries Class 2 Existing Bike Lanes Class 2 Designated Bike Lanes (no improvements exist) Class 2 Proposed Bike Lanes (no improvements exist) Class 3 Existing Bike Route ue

g

lle

Co

Aztec Walk

n ve eA

(some Class 2 improvements exist on block between Campanile and College on the north side only)

ridge Ped B

FIGURE 5 Off-Campus Bike Facilities as Found in the Existing City of San Diego Bikeway Master Plan

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Figure

Remington Ro

ad

6

Off

SCampus Comcripp s T err mon Routes ac e

Hilltop

Way

Campanile Mall

55th Street

Aztec Walk

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

Campanile Drive

0'

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Interstate 8

rest Drive

Co lleg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared:

October21, 2009 August 2009

tec

Az eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND e

riv

Figure 6 Off Campus Common Routes

Campus Boundaries Primary Access Routes to the Campus (based on surveys & field observation) Secondary Access Routes to the Campus (based on surveys & field observation)

e

nu

g

lle

Co

Aztec Walk

ve eA

ridge Ped B

FIGURE 6 Common Access Routes to the Campus

Figure 7 Collision Locations 07/3

09/1

09/2

08/2 08/1 05/3

08/3

07/2 08/6

07/1 07/4

05/1 Cyclist westbound on Montezuma Drive rear-ended car 39 feet east of La Dorna St - 7:37 AM, Mon, 5/2/05 - Cyclist at fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries

07/1 Cyclist eastbound on Montezuma Drive rearended by driver making improper turn 203 feet west of Collwood Boulevard - 7:39 PM, Thu, 2/1/07 - Driver at fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries

08/1 Cyclist eastbound on Montezuma Drive sideswiped parked car 50 feet west of Campanile Drive - 3:43 PM, Friday, 1/15/08 - Cyclist at fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries

08/5 Cycl struck by e AM, Thu, 10 minor inju

05/2 Cyclist eastbound on Montezuma Drive on wrong side broadsided car 145 feet west of Falls View Drive - 7:35 AM, Thu, 8/11/05 - Cyclist at fault - Minor injuries to cyclist

07/2 Cyclist eastbound on wrong side of Montezuma Drive sideswiped stopped car at E. Campus Drive - 5:40 PM, Tue, 2/13/07 - Cyclist at fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries

08/2 Cyclist westbound on Montezuma Drive solo crashed 875 feet east of Santa Yerba Drive - 6:40 PM, Wed, 1/16/08 - Attributed to hitting loose material in low light conditions - Cyclist severely injured

08/6 Mont - Minor inj

05/3 Cyclist southbound (sic) on Montezuma Drive sideswiped by driver turning right (westbound) at 55th Street - 5: 25 PM, Fri, 9/16/05 - Driver at fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries

07/3 College Avenue at Zura Way, 4/07 - Minor injury - No other information provided

08/3 Cyclist westbound on Montezuma Drive solo crashed 20 feet east of Rockford Drive - 6:10 PM, Sat, 3/15/08 - Attributed to unsafe speed Cyclist severely injured

09/2 Park other infor

07/4 Cyclist northbound on College Avenue struck southbound car head-on 189 feet south of College Place - 1:49 PM, Thu, 5/3/07 - Cyclist 06/1 Cyclist eastbound on Montezuma Drive broadsided by eastbound driver making improper at fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries right turn 528 feet west of 63rd Street - 7:25 PM, Wed, 4/12/06 - Low light conditions - Driver at 07/5 Cyclist eastbound on El Cajon Boulevard fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries struck by driver turning left at Montezuma Drive - 1:30 PM, Sat, 5/12/07 - Driver at fault - Cyclist 0' 200' 200' 400' suffered minor injuries

N O RT H 1�=200’

08/4 Cyclist eastbound on Montezuma Drive struck by northbound driver at Gary Street - 5:49 PM, Friday, 10/3/08 - Cyclist at fault for violating ROW - Cyclist suffered minor injuries

9/01 Hard Minor inju

08/5

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared:

October 2009 August 21, 2009

Figure 7 Collision Locations

LEGEND Campus Boundary

07/3

08/3

05/1

09/2

07/2 08/6

05/2

Collision Locations (Year/Number) See text for details Source: All collisions are from SWITRs (State Wide Integrated Traffic Record System) database from 2001 to 2008, except for 07/3, 08/6, 09/1, 09/2 identified

by SDSU Campus Police

06/1 08/4

ive panile fault

08/5 Cyclist northbound on College Avenue struck by eastbound driver at Arosa Street - 7:40 AM, Thu, 10/13/08 - Driver at fault - Cyclist suffered minor injuries

rive Drive ing clist

08/6 Montezuma Drive at E. Campus Drive, 11/08 - Minor injury - No other information provided

rive - 6:10 ed -

09/2 Parking Lot H, 4/09 - Minor injury - No other information provided

05/1

07/5

9/01 Hardy Avenue at Calpulli Center, 7/09 Minor injury - No other information provided

08/5

ive - 5:49 lating

FIGURE 7 Locations of Collisions Involving Bikes: 2005-2009

Canyon Crest Drive

8

8

Avenue of Art

26 8

24

48

8 8

Figure 8 Existps Bike Parking ing Te rra ce Locations

Scrip 8

Remington Ro

ad

8

Hilltop

8

Way

64

12

24

12

15

Campanile Mall

24

48

28

60

28 10

8 100

55th Street

8

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

30

16 11

15

Campanile Drive

0'

64

16

Aztec Walk

22 22

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Interstate 8

Crest Drive

Co lleg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

26

Prepared:

26

October 20092009 August 21, 10

16

tec

16

Az

8

rcl

Ci

LEGEND

eD

10

riv

34

e

Figure 8 Existing Bike Parking Locations

64

64

Campus Boundary

12

32

Existing Bike Rack Locations (Number of spaces: 1,241)

56 16 24

e

nu

60

30

Co

Aztec Walk 22 22

g

lle

66

ridge Ped B

8

16

ve eA

24 80

28

4

FIGURE 8 Existing Bike Parking

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Page 28

Chapter 3: Access Analysis

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH SUMMARY

4.0 Research A review of the programs, policies and facilities at other similar sized campuses reveals that the issues addressed in this study are not unique to SDSU. Other campuses are implementing a number of approaches and solutions to provide and even encourage more equitable on-campus non-motorized access. A flurry of innovative campus transportation initiatives is taking place at colleges and universities across the country that are aimed at reducing carbon footprints and parking demand by encouraging students, faculty and staff to use their cars less in favor of bicycles, public transit, ride sharing or car-sharing programs. A number of these ongoing efforts are occurring at various California State and University of California campuses. For example, a study was recently prepared for UC Santa Barbara where it was found that nearly half the students utilize bikes to get to campus. Another study was completed for UC Berkeley, and also for CSU Long Beach, where bike riding is currently prohibited on much of the campus, as it is currently at SDSU.

4.1 Other Campus Research The following sections describe noteworthy highlights at some of these campuses that may be applicable to SDSU, including physical improvements, policy statements and programs to encourage bicycle use. All are intended to reduce reliance on motor vehicles as the primary transportation mode wherever possible.

It should be noted that campuses that have established bicycle or transportation plans generally do not address skateboard use.

4.1.1 Michigan State University – East Lansing (MSU) MSU has adopted a comprehensive bicycle master plan whose key elements include the following: • Provide a consistent system of safe bike lanes on campus roads.

• Improve bike lane treatments and transitions at intersections.

• Provide bike paths along major desired routes through campus open space.

• Improve safety through separation of bicycles and pedestrians.

• Underscore pedestrian’s right-of-way where pedestrian and bicycle routes intersect or coincide.

• Identify long-term bicycle parking options for future consideration.

In addition, its on-campus bike co-op rents bicycles at extremely economical rates. The long-term rates are in fact so low that renting is competitive with bike ownership, especially since rentals include maintenance: Hourly - $4, Daily - $12, Weekly - $20, Semester - $30, Yearly - $60 Chapter 4: Research Summary

Page 29

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.1.2 University of Arizona – Tucson (UA) Over the past decade, the University of Arizona (UA) has increased in size to make it one of the largest activity centers within metropolitan Tucson, attracting tens of thousands of person trips every weekday via all available transportation modes. This growth has occurred at the same time that the surrounding Pima County population has increased.

The population increase in both UA and the region, coupled with the university’s location along major commuting arterials within the City of Tucson has resulted in significant congestion and conflicts between modes of travel both within and around the campus. The congestion has increased even with significant efforts by both UA and the City of Tucson to provide multimodal transportation system improvements to increase the supply of transportation, separate alternative modes of travel and manage travel demand. For example, the Tucson/ East Pima Region is one of less than a hundred places honored by the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) as a designated Bicycle Friendly Community, with a Gold rating, awarded for outstanding provisions for bicycle transportation. The rapid growth has simply outpaced the effectiveness of the implemented transportation supply and demand management measures.

In response to these issues, UA conducted a needs assessment study in early 2008 which concluded that more travel demand management (TDM) measures were needed. The top 10 measures were: • Provide universal transit pass to all students and university staff.

• Increase cost of parking.

• Freshman packets should contain only alternative transportation modes.

• Increase marketing of alternatives modes to incoming students’ parents.

• Institute more staff telecommuting.

• Institute more internet/web-based classes.

• Compress the employee work week.

• No parking permits for on-campus students.

• Prohibit freshman from bringing cars to campus.

• Institute ad campaign to increase awareness of alternative modes available.

Page 30

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.1.3 Arizona State University – Tempe (ASU) ASU actively advertises the benefits of bicycling as a reliable, timely and convenient commuter mode, that also happens to be “…good exercise and great for the environment.”

ASU has implemented a number of measures to encourage cycling to campus and touts the use of alternate modes of transportation as contributing to community quality of life and local air quality. In keeping with its mission to provide sustainable transportation and access solutions, ASU’s Parking and Transit Services’ (PTS) Commuter Options Program provides a number of transit options, most of which are free.

These have been quite successful with more than 15,000 people riding to campus daily.

ASU’s Parking and Transit Services, through its Helmets and Headlights Program, offers high-quality bicycle helmets, headlights and U-locks at half the retail price. For example, a helmet, headlight/tail light set and U-lock costs students only $35.

ASU’s Undergraduate Student Government (USG) offers free bicycle rentals to the ASU community for two weeks at a time, as well as provides the campus community with a low-cost alternative to bike maintenance and repair at its Bike Co-Op, which provides reduced-cost tools, parts (both new and used) and assistance needed to repair bicycles.

ASU is further supported by the City of Tempe, a designated Bicycle Friendly Community at the Silver level. The city has 165 miles of bikeways, including bicycle lanes, paths and racks on the Tempe campus. In addition, the local transit provider, Valley Metro, provides bike racks on all buses and light rail trains to make it more convenient to ride a bike in conjunction with using the public transit system.

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Page 31

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.1.4 University of California – Berkeley (UCB) While bicycle racks are provided at convenient locations throughout the central campus area, the campus is also equipped with six secure, covered bike parking facilities that are free of charge to any university affiliates such as students, staff and faculty. Parking attendants staff some of these facilities on weekdays. Access is monitored with personal codes which make the parking areas available for use at all times. Also of interest is an animation on the UCB web site illustrating how to properly secure a bike with a U-lock.

4.1.5 University of California – Irvine (UCI) UCI’s transportation policies focus primarily on rules and regulations that pertain to bicyclists on campus. There are also regulations for motorized cart use on campus, which limits their use to certain times of the day and to certain areas.

Riding bikes and skateboards is banned from the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. in the campus center, except for a few through-ways where bicyclists are allowed to cross the central campus Ring Mall. All first-time infractions receive a warning after which students must complete a mandatory online safety quiz. Students who violate this policy multiple times receive a fine each time.

A campus Bicycle Advisory group reviews bike policies to avoid liability for hazardous conditions, to brainstorm ways to improve UCI’s bike flow and campus access and is working to make the campus more open to cyclists. The group includes student representatives and faculty and is jointly managed by both UCI Police Department and the Office of Parking and Transportation Services.

Page 32

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.1.6 University of California San Diego – (UCSD) UCSD maintains a loaner bike program, called Triton Bikes. These are bikes that were previously abandoned on campus, refurbished at the on-campus bike shop and covered with yellow vinyl tape.

To participate, students must show their driver’s license and student ID to check out a free bike at stations around campus. Departments or campus organizations can also host Triton Bikes for the exclusive use of their members.

Triton Bikes delivers bicycles, helmets, locks and bike racks to the campus department and performs needed repairs. The department performs routine maintenance such as cleaning the bike and inflating tires.

UCSD is also trying other ways to encourage students and employees to ride instead of drive. Among them is the popular Pedal Club, which gives 10 free days of parking each quarter to students and others who commit to riding their bikes to campus most of the time.

As UCSD has added programs, campus officials have seen a gradual shift in commuting behavior. Transportation data show that single-occupant vehicle usage around campus dropped from 66 percent in 2001 to 49 percent in 2008.

4.1.7 Ripon College – Ripon, Wisconsin Initially conceived solely to mitigate parking woes on campus, Ripon College’s Velorution Project (RVP) focus was expanded to address student wellness, fuel costs, pollution and safety. Incoming freshmen are offered a mountain bike, a helmet and a U-Lock if they pledge to leave their cars at home. The school raised about $50,000 from alumni, trustees and donors to pay for the bikes, which was far less than the cost of building a new parking structure. In its first year, some 60 percent of freshmen signed up for the program. The number of freshmen bringing cars to campus dropped from 75 to 25 percent over the first two years of the program.

In response to the program’s success, the school installed 32 new bike racks. Although this year’s participants could bring a car next fall if they wanted, 81 percent of respondents to a recent survey said they will not, either because their bike is sufficient (52 percent) or they do not own a car (29 percent). More than half of respondents said their bike use increased as a result of the RVP and 82 percent said they would encourage future students to sign the pledge. Variations on the program have been implemented at several other college campuses.

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Page 33

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.1.8 University of New England – Portland and Biddeford, Maine (UNE) UNE’s approach to curbing the campus carbon footprint, vehicular volume and parking demand includes offering free bicycles or free Zipcar usage to incoming freshmen who agree not to bring cars to campus, as well as free on-site bike tune-ups several times during the school year.. The program also provides free shuttle service and discounted taxi or limo service on the Biddeford campus and free taxi vouchers to students at the Portland campus.

Most of UNE’s Biddeford residential students bring cars to campus. The university lost critical parking spaces due to facility expansion and was faced with the unattractive prospect of having to pave over open space to accommodate additional parking. This scenario was deemed unacceptable and UNE was therefore faced with the challenge of finding ways to reduce vehicular parking demand.

The university chose to do it by motivating students to choose alternative transportation by providing attractive and convenient access to off-campus destinations, essentially changing the local transportation culture.

To discourage incoming resident freshman from bringing cars to campus, UNE increased the parking permit fee to $300 (upperclassmen pay $90). As an added incentive, resident freshman who agreed to leave their cars at home are given either of two alternatives. One was a bicycle, helmet and lock and the other was access to Zipcars on the Biddeford campus, with a gift card for 28 hours of free use and at a cost of seven dollars per hour thereafter. Though the Zipcar program has not yet become available on the Portland campus, students there can instead choose 20 free $10 taxi vouchers. Initial response was so successful that UNE is considering expanding the program.

Page 34

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.1.9 University of Texas – Austin (UT) The University of Texas is noteworthy in that it has developed written policies that define campus bicycle routes as being “usable and reasonable” to and within campus, without obstacles inhibiting bicycle use and providing adequate bicycle parking. In addition, bicycle facilities are to include signage informing cyclists that they must yield to pedestrians.

Specifically, “usable and reasonable” includes the following criteria: 1. Dismount zones should be considered only after all other alternatives have been explored. A dismount zone should be limited in distance and should only be used if other options for safe and effective pedestrian and bicycle intersections are infeasible. Where possible, UT will provide parallel bicycle routes to allow cyclists to travel around pedestrian-only areas.

2. Bike routes shall involve no detours that are long or uphill. Cyclists should not have to detour more than 100 meters on each end, compared to a direct route. A detour should not require a cyclist to climb a significant hill.

3. Bike routes shall be based on actual traffic and go where people want to go, i.e. there must be reasonable bike routes to and within the heart of campus where most of the traffic occurs.

4.1.10 University of Missouri - Kansas City (UMKC) UMKC maintains several programs to encourage students to ride bicycles instead of driving their vehicles. The primary goal is to reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips to campus.

The bike program is called Clean Commute, which loans bicycles for full semesters to students, staff and faculty. Along with other transit programs, Clean Commute is intended to work with a carpooling program and with public transportation to help reduce the university’s environmental footprint.

The bikes are loaned out for the length of a semester with the only requirements being that the bike is ridden and returned in decent condition. A credit card is required as a deposit but nothing is charged unless the bicycle is not returned at the end of the semester. An email notice is sent out prior to the card being charged. To accommodate the growing number of people interested in the program, borrowers must return bikes at the end of the semester and wait a semester before applying to borrow another bicycle. The program has been so successful that additional bikes are being added to keep up with demand.

The program is managed out of an on-campus bike shop where students, staff and faculty pick up their bikes and where bikes needing work done can be taken. Most basic repairs are offered at no cost to Clean Commute participants.

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Page 35

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.1.11 University of North Texas - Denton, Texas (UNT) UNT took one dramatic action that resulted in a noticeable reduction in students driving cars on campus. The campus simply installed over a thousand more rack spaces. On any given day there are now approximately 2,000 bikes on campus.

Campus officials noticed that “As soon as the bike racks were installed they were being used. We put them in one by one and as each one was installed, we would find bikes chained to it just about as soon as the construction tape was removed.

Obviously the students appreciated them.”

The initial motivation was to encourage students to bike instead of drive to class and school activities. UNT changed its policy recently to allow bikes within the campus core area. Since at least the early 1980s, bikes had to be parked at the perimeter of campus due to safety concerns with cyclists running into pedestrians on sidewalks.

As well as reducing parking demand, the rack installations were planned to be as sustainable as possible. The bike racks were installed on new concrete pads that used recycled “fly ash” as aggregate. All form work for the project was reused.

All excavated soil was redistributed on campus where needed. The sub-base material under the concrete pads came from a local landfill. Site disturbance was kept to a minimum, resulting in no construction runoff.

Not only are more students using pedal power to get around campus, but the green design cost the same as standard construction techniques.

4.1.12 Framingham State College – Massachusetts (FSC) A local transportation management authority sponsors the annual Framingham State Bike Extravaganza, a program aimed at promoting bicycle commuting on campus. Under this program, donated used bikes are refurbished and sold for only 20 dollars each, allowing students and staff who might not otherwise commute by bike to leave their cars at home. Anyone with an old bike in usable condition is encouraged to donate it to the program and all donations are tax deductible.

Page 36

Chapter 4: Research Summary

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

4.2 User Input: Questionnaire Results A questionnaire was developed to solicit input from students, staff and faculty about the prospect of having expanded bike and skateboarding facilities on the campus. It was designed to obtain opinions about where current bike and skateboard use occurs, where respondents would like to see priorities given for expanded facilities, as well as respondents’ opinions on potential conflicts between pedestrians and wheeled uses. Questionnaires were distributed four ways. First, e3 set up a table March 16th along Aztec Way soliciting input from passersby. Second, at the direction of the consultants, the students were asked to randomly select persons away from the booth and to not influence the respondents in any way. These random questionnaires were looked at as being more representative of the broader campus opinion. Third, paper copies of the questionnaires were filled out by some students. Finally, a web site was established providing an electronic version of the questionnaire (see Table 4 for a sample questionnaire form).

Table 4: Sample Blank Questionnaire SDSU • BIKE AND SKATEBOARD ACCESS STUDY • OPINION SURVEY The Associated Students of SDSU, through the Enviro-Business Society (e3), along with planning consultants KTU+A, are developing a Bike & Skateboard Access/Safety Study to improve non-vehicular transportation access to the campus, while maintaining pedestrian safety. Your input is needed to help define concerns and priorities for bike access and pedestrian safety needs on and near the campus. Completed questionnaires can be mailed to 3916 Normal Street, San Diego, CA 92103 or faxed to 619-294-9965, or completed on-line at www.sdsubikeaccess.org

1. Please select the answer that best describes who you are: Student living on campus  Student commuting to the campus Faculty member Campus staff Visiting campus 2. Please provide your Zip Code (for your primary San Diego County residence) _________________________________ 3. Most of the time I arrive on campus by:  Transit  Bike  Walk  Skate  Vehicle  Carpool  Live on campus 4. The second most frequent way I arrive on campus is:  Transit  Bike  Walk  Skate  Vehicle  Carpool 5. Infrequently I arrive on campus by:  Transit  Bike  Walk  Skate  Vehicle  Carpool IF YOU CURRENTLY RIDE YOUR BIKE TO OR ON CAMPUS (OR MIGHT RIDE IF CONDITIONS WERE DIFFERENT) THEN PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS #6-11, OTHERWISE SKIP TO #12

6. How far do you commute on bike?  On-campus only  Adjacent to campus (<1 mile)  Near campus (1-5 miles)  Away from the campus (>5 miles)  I drive or take transit to campus, then use a bike on campus 7. When riding on campus, do you?  Stay on roadways only and then walk in all pedestrian areas  Utilize roadways & other major pathways such as the Aztec Walk, Campanile Mall, or Aztec Green  Ride wherever needed, but not close to pedestrians or in crowded areas  I ride wherever I want to, I can get around pedestrians without a problem 8. Do you understand the rules for biking on campus?  I know clearly where I can ride on campus  I generally understand that I cannot ride in pedestrian plazas, but not sure where they are or how some areas are classified  I am unaware or confused by the rules, locations or hours when I can bike on campus 9. Have you been ticketed for riding on campus?  No  Yes, a long time ago  Yes, recently 10. What types of improvements would you most like to see for the campus?

(To help us develop priorities, please avoid marking everything as “High” priority...)

Off-Campus Lane or Route Improvement Priorities Bike lane or route improvements across I-8 on College to Montezuma Bike lane or route improvements on Montezuma or Campanile Dr. Bike lane or route improvements on Alvarado Road Bike lane or route improvements on 55th/Remington Road Improved signage for routes leading to the campus Improved bike detection loops for traffic signals around the campus

High      

Med      

Low      

On-Campus Lane or Route Improvement Priorities Bike lane or route improvements on Canyon Crest Drive or Aztec Circle Bike lane or route improvements on Hilltop and Scripps Terrace Bike lane or connection between Aztec Circle Dr. and Scripps Terrace Special marked bike lanes on Campanile Mall Special marked bike lanes on Aztec Walk Marked bike lanes (where they can fit) on pedestrian bridges across College

High      

Med      

Low      

Bike Parking Facility Priorities Increased number of bike parking racks throughout the campus Bike lockers with enclosed security of some kind Bike parking enclosures with roofs for rain protection and secured gates

High   

Med   

Low   

11. Would you start riding to the campus or ride more often if:  Off-campus routes were added, made more obvious and/or made safer  On-campus routes were added to complete one full perimeter loop  On-campus routes were added allowing 2-3 entry points into the interior of the campus  Campus rules on bike use were made clearer and citations more predictable  Safe places were added to store my bike while on campus  Realistically, I would probably not ride more often because of any of these improvements

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Page 37

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

IF YOU CURRENTLY GET AROUND THE CAMPUS ON A SKATEBOARD FOR EVEN PART OF YOUR DAILY TRIP, THEN PLEASE COMPLETE QUESTIONS 12-13, OTHERWISE SKIP TO #14

12 Would you start skating more on campus if?  On-campus routes were added to complete one full perimeter loop  On-campus routes were added allowing for 2-3 entry points into the interior of the campus  Campus rules on skating were made clearer and citations more predictable  I am fine with existing facilities, just let me skate in certain areas so I can get around better 13. Have you been ticketed for skating on campus?  No  Yes, a long time ago  Yes, recently COMPLETE QUESTIONS 14-15 FROM THE PERSPECTIVE AS A PEDESTRIAN WHILE ON CAMPUS

14. As a pedestrian, please describe your experience:  I have personally been involved with a collision involving me and a cyclist/skater on campus  Though never collided, I have had a number of close calls with cyclists/skaters on campus plazas or walkways  As a pedestrian, I am uncomfortable in areas where bikes & skates use campus walkways  As a pedestrian, I am comfortable in areas where bikes & skates use campus walkways 15. As a pedestrian, please indicate your opinion:  I think that bikes and skateboards should only be allowed on campus streets where cars are allowed and offenders of current rules should be cited  I can support some additional well marked lanes that provide bikes & skaters with a way of getting around the perimeter of the campus better  I could support well marked lanes around the exterior and interior of the campus as long as they are well marked, lit at night and in areas with no blind corners  Cyclists, skaters & pedestrians co-exist well now, you don’t need to make special lanes IF YOU ARRIVE ON THE CAMPUS BY TRANSIT, THEN PLEASE COMPLETE QUESTION #16

16. As a transit user, please describe your experience:  I ride to a transit stop & leave my bike at the transit stop but would bring my bike to campus if I could use it more to get around  I would like to be able to leave a bike on campus overnight in a safe location  I would take transit more often if I could use my bike or skateboard on campus to get around throughout the day  Bike or skateboard facilities on campus would have no affect on me as a transit user 17. Additional Comments______________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Please fold here to mail, tape the edges together and apply a stamp. Or fax to (619) 294-9965.

______________________ ______________________ ______________________

Table 5: Residential Location of Questionnaire Respondents* (not all respondents provided a zip code) Residential Location of Respondent

Page 38

Zip Code

# of Respondents

City

(optional question, not all filled in)

91913 91915 91942 91945 92064 92101 92102 92107 92108 92109 92115 92116 92119 92120 92126 92169 92173

2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 3 6 23 1 1 1 1 1 1

Chula Vista Chula Vista Near Campus Near Campus Poway San Diego San Diego San Diego San Diego San Diego On or Near Campus Near Campus Near Campus Near Campus San Diego San Diego San Ysidro

KTU+A 3916 Normal Street San Diego, CA 92103

Chapter 4: Research Summary

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Table 6: Summary of all Three Questionnaire Types PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING GENERAL QUESTIONS ON-LINE

1. Please select the answer that best describes who you are: Student living on campus Student commuting to the campus Faculty member Campus staff Visiting campus Total Answers

BOOTH

RANDOM

TOTALS

= yellow indicates the highest ranking response per column

64 27% 160 67% 0 0% 10 4% 4 2% 238

18 29 0 0 2

37% 59% 0% 0% 4%

9 11 0 0 0

49

45% 55% 0% 0% 0% 20

91 30% 200 65% 0 0% 10 3% 6 2% 307

2. Please provide the Zip Code of where you live: (for your primary San Diego County residence) Total Answers

3. Most of the time I arrive at campus by: Transit Bike Walk Skate Vehicle Carpool Total Answers

4. The second most frequent way I arrive on campus is: Transit Bike Walk Skate Vehicle Carpool Total Answers

5. Infrequently I arrive on campus by:

34

ON-LINE

BOOTH

16 7% 36 15% 58 24% 10 4% 111 47% 7 3% 238

8 6 21 5 8 0 48

19

ON-LINE

BOOTH

RANDOM

28 13% 35 17% 45 21% 18 8% 53 25% 33 16% 212

ON-LINE Transit Bike Walk Skate Vehicle Carpool Total Answers

272

226

43 21% 24 12% 47 23% 26 13% 32 16% 34 17% 205

12 17% 13% 44% 10% 17% 0%

3 6 10 6 4 4

9% 18% 30% 18% 12% 12%

RANDOM 0 3 9 2 4 1

0% 16% 47% 11% 21% 5%

0 1 4 1 1 0

0% 14% 57% 14% 14% 0%

33

7

BOOTH

RANDOM

4 3 7 1 2 3

20% 15% 35% 5% 10% 15%

0 1 1 0 1 1

20

0% 25% 25% 0% 25% 25% 4

TOTALS 24 8% 45 15% 88 29% 17 6% 123 40% 8 3% 305

TOTALS 31 12% 42 17% 59 23% 25 10% 58 23% 37 15% 252

TOTALS 47 20% 28 12% 55 24% 27 12% 35 15% 38 17% 230

IF YOU CURRENTLY RIDE YOUR BIKE TO OR ON CAMPUS PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 6-24, OTHERWISE SKIP TO #25 ON-LINE BOOTH RANDOM TOTALS

6. How far do you commute on bike?

On-campus only Adjacent to campus (less than 1 mile) Near campus (1-5 miles) Away from the campus (>5 miles) I drive or take transit to campus, then use a bike on campus

Total Answers

7. When riding on campus, do you?

ON-LINE

Stay on roadways only and then walk in all pedestrian areas Utilize roadways & major pathways such as the Aztec Walk, Campanile Mall, or Aztec Green Ride wherever needed, but not close to pedestrians or in crowded areas I ride wherever I want to, I can get around pedestrians

Total Answers

8. Do you understand the rules for biking on campus?

35 29% 19 16% 49 41% 18 15% 121

ON-LINE

6 15 10 1 0

19% 47% 31% 3% 0%

BOOTH 3 4 9 15

10% 13% 29% 48%

RANDOM 0 2 1 6

31 13% 45% 42%

ON-LINE

BOOTH

No Yes, a long time ago Yes, recently Total Answers

115 91% 5 4% 6 5% 126

33 5 0

RANDOM 1 5 4

38

10% 50% 40% 10

87% 13% 0% 38

0% 22% 11% 67% 9

BOOTH 5 17 16

0% 56% 33% 0% 11% 9

Total Answers

9. Have you been ticketed for riding on campus?

0 5 3 0 1

32

21 17% 71 56% 34 27% 126

I know clearly where I can ride on campus I understand I cannot ride in ped. plazas, but not sure where they are I am unaware or confused by the rules, locations or hours when I can bike on campus

Chapter 4: Research Summary

19 15% 34 26% 47 36% 15 12% 14 11% 129

RANDOM 9 1 0

90% 10% 0% 10

25 15% 54 32% 60 35% 16 9% 15 9% 170

TOTALS 38 24% 25 16% 59 37% 39 24% 161

TOTALS 27 16% 93 53% 54 31% 174

TOTALS 157 90% 11 6% 6 3% 174

Page 39

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Table 6 Continued: Summary of all Three Questionnaire Sources WHAT TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS WOULD YOU MOST LIKE TO SEE FOR THE CAMPUS Off-Campus Lane or Route Improvement Priorities

= yellow indicates the highest ranking response per column = pink indicates the highest ranked answer for questions 10-14

10. Route improvements across I-8 on College to Montezuma Low Moderate High Total Answers

11. Route improvements on Montezuma or Campanile Dr. Low Moderate High Total Answers

12. Bike lane or route improvements on Alvarado Road Low Moderate High Total Answers

13. Improved signage for routes leading to the campus

14. Improved bike detection loops for signals near the campus Low Moderate High Total Answers

ON-LINE 14 11% 40 32% 72 57% 126

BOOTH 4 18 18

10% 45% 45%

RANDOM 2 2 6

20% 20% 60%

40

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

2 9 29

5% 23% 73%

0 4 6

0% 40% 60%

40

10

ON-LINE

BOOTH

RANDOM

32 48 45 125

8 16 15 39

26% 38% 36%

27 21% 39 31% 61 48% 127

ON-LINE 17 14% 45 36% 62 50% 124

21% 41% 38%

BOOTH 5 8 26

13% 21% 67%

1 4 5 10

10% 40% 50%

RANDOM 2 2 6

20% 20% 60%

39

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

5 9 25

13% 23% 64%

2 0 8

39

20% 0% 80% 10

TOTALS 30 17% 63 36% 83 47% 176

TOTALS 16 9% 53 30% 107 61% 176

TOTALS 41 68 65 174

24% 39% 37%

TOTALS 34 19% 49 28% 93 53% 176

TOTALS 24 14% 54 31% 95 55% 173

= yellow indicates the highest ranking response per column = pink indicates the highest ranked answer for questions 15-20

15. Route improvements on Canyon Crest Drive or Aztec Circle Low Moderate High Total Answers

16. Route improvements on Hilltop and Scripps Terrace Low Moderate High Total Answers

17. Bike lane or connection for Aztec Circle & Scripps Terrace Low Moderate High Total Answers

18. Special marked bike lanes on Campanile Mall

ON-LINE 29 24% 43 36% 49 41% 121

ON-LINE 36 30% 41 34% 44 36% 121

ON-LINE 28 23% 49 41% 44 36% 121

ON-LINE Low Moderate High Total Answers

19. Special marked bike lanes on Aztec Walk

7 6% 37 31% 77 64% 121

ON-LINE Low Moderate High Total Answers

20. Marked bike lanes (where they can fit) on pedestrian bridges Low Moderate High Total Answers

Page 40

24 19% 43 34% 59 47% 126

ON-LINE Low Moderate High Total Answers

On-Campus Lane or Route Improvement Priorities

ON-LINE

9 7% 26 21% 88 72% 123

ON-LINE 8 6% 29 23% 87 70% 124

BOOTH 7 11 21

18% 28% 54%

RANDOM 2 4 4

20% 40% 40%

39

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

4 15 21

10% 38% 53%

3 0 7

30% 0% 70%

40

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

3 10 27

8% 25% 68%

2 1 7

20% 10% 70%

40

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

4 8 28

10% 20% 70%

1 2 7

10% 20% 70%

40

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

1 10 29

3% 25% 73%

1 0 9

10% 0% 90%

40

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

0 10 30

0% 25% 75% 40

1 0 9

10% 0% 90% 10

TOTALS 38 22% 58 34% 74 44% 170

TOTALS 43 25% 56 33% 72 42% 171

TOTALS 33 19% 60 35% 78 46% 171

TOTALS 12 7% 47 27% 112 65% 171

TOTALS 11 6% 36 21% 126 73% 173

TOTALS 9 5% 39 22% 126 72% 174

Chapter 4: Research Summary

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Table 6 Continued: Summary of all Three Questionnaire Sources Bike Parking Facility Priorities

= yellow indicates the highest ranking response per column = pink indicates the highest ranked answer for questions 21-23

21. Increased number of bike racks throughout the campus

22. Bike lockers with enclosed security of some kind

23. Bike parking enclosures with roofs & secured gates

Low Moderate High Total Answers

ON-LINE 10 8% 48 39% 65 53% 123

ON-LINE Low Moderate High Total Answers

32 26% 45 36% 48 38% 125

ON-LINE Low Moderate High Total Answers

24. Would you start riding to the campus or ride more often if:

Off-campus routes were added, made more obvious and/or made safer On-campus routes were added to complete one full perimeter loop On-campus routes were added allowing 2-3 entry points into the interior of the campus Campus rules on bike use were made clearer and citations more predictable Safe places were added to store my bike while on campus Realistically, I would not ride more often because of any of these improvements

Total Answers

35 28% 40 32% 49 40% 124

ON-LINE 28 22% 24 19% 54 42% 9 7% 4 3% 9 7% 128

BOOTH 2 8 30

5% 20% 75%

RANDOM 0 3 7

0% 30% 70%

40

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

4 14 21

10% 36% 54%

3 2 5

30% 20% 50%

39

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

5 16 18

13% 41% 46%

3 1 6

30% 10% 60%

39

10

BOOTH

RANDOM

7 4 23 3 2 0

18% 10% 59% 8% 5% 0%

5 0 4 0 1 0

39

50% 0% 40% 0% 10% 0% 10

TOTALS 12 7% 59 34% 102 59% 173

TOTALS 39 22% 61 35% 74 43% 174

TOTALS 43 25% 57 33% 73 42% 173

TOTALS 40 23% 28 16% 81 46% 12 7% 7 4% 9 5% 177

IF YOU CURRENTLY GET AROUND THE CAMPUS ON A SKATEBOARD THEN PLEASE COMPLETE QUESTIONS 25-26

25. Would you start skating more on campus if:

ON-LINE

On-campus routes were added to complete one full perimeter loop On-campus routes were added allowing for 2-3 entry points into the interior of the campus Campus rules on skating were made clearer and citations more predictable I am fine with existing facilities, just let me skate in certain areas so I can get around better

24 29 9 23

Total Answers

26. Have you been ticketed for skating on campus?

No Yes, a long time ago Yes, recently Total Answers

28% 34% 11% 27%

BOOTH 3 15 2 2

14% 68% 9% 9%

RANDOM 2 3 0 4

22% 33% 0% 44%

85

22

9

ON-LINE

BOOTH

RANDOM

69 8 7

82% 10% 8%

19 1 1

84

90% 5% 5%

7 1 0

21

88% 13% 0% 8

TOTALS 29 25% 47 41% 11 9% 29 25% 116

TOTALS 95 84% 10 9% 8 7% 113

COMPLETE QUESTIONS 27-28 FROM THE PERSPECTIVE AS A PEDESTRIAN WHILE ON CAMPUS OTHERWISE SKIP TO #29

27. As a pedestrian, please describe your experience: I have personally been involved with a collision involving me and a cyclist/skater on campus I have had a number of close calls with cyclists/skaters on campus plazas or walkways As a pedestrian, I am uncomfortable in areas where bikes & skates use campus walkways As a pedestrian, I have never had any problems with any cyclists/skaters on campus

28. As a pedestrian, please indicate your opinion:

Total Answers

I think that bikes and skateboards should only be allowed on campus streets where cars are allowed and offenders of current rules should be cited I can support some additional well marked lanes that provide bikes & skaters with a way of getting around the perimeter of the campus I could support well marked lanes around the exterior / interior of campus as long as they are well marked, lit at night and have no blind corners Cyclists, skaters, and pedestrians co-exist well and no special lanes are needed

Total Answers

ON-LINE

BOOTH

14 7% 39 19% 26 12% 132 63% 209

0 10 2 30 42

17

ON-LINE

BOOTH

RANDOM

0% 24% 5% 71%

RANDOM 1 10 1 5

6% 59% 6% 29%

TOTALS 15 6% 59 22% 29 11% 167 62% 270

TOTALS

20

9%

26

62%

5

31%

51

19%

38

18%

5

12%

9

56%

52

19%

111 53% 42 20% 210

4 7

10% 17%

1 1

6% 6%

42

16

116 43% 50 19% 269

IF YOU ARRIVE AT THE CAMPUS BY TRANSIT, THEN PLEASE COMPLETE THE NEXT QUESTION

29. As a transit user, please describe your experience:

ON-LINE

I ride to a transit stop and leave my bike at the transit stop but would bring my bike to campus if I could use it more to get around I would like to be able to leave a bike on campus overnight in a safe location I would take transit more often if I could use my bike or skateboard on campus to get around throughout the day Bike or skateboard facilities on campus would have no affect on me as a transit user

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Total Answers

BOOTH

RANDOM

TOTALS

8 10

12% 15%

6 5

33% 28%

0 0

0% 0%

14 15

16% 17%

26 24

38% 35%

5 2

28% 11%

2 1

67% 33%

33 27

37% 30%

67

18

3

89

Page 41

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Table 6 Continued: Summary of all Three Questionnaire Sources Questionnaire Written Comments: 1. A bike lane on campus is desperately needed.

2. I would also like a safe place to be able to leave my bike without fear of it being stolen on campus, especially over night.

3. Go e3!! Get that bike lane for us!

4. GET SDSU A BIKE LANE! Finally.

5. SDSU is too small of a campus to add interior bike / skate lanes. People are just being lazy.

Walk! on Campus!

6. Just make it legal I cant pay for the tickets, I’m a self supported student.

7. Freedom!!

8. It is scary to walk on campus when people are riding bikes and skateboards.

9. Please get wheels back on campus or at least bike lanes.

10. We are foolish to think that bicycles and skateboards are not useful modes of transportation.

All of us need to use special care whether we are driving, walking, biking or skating....and all should be able to coexist!

11. Without a skateboard I’m often late for class I always do my best to avoid pedestrians and I don’t think the ticket for skating is fair, over $50 is ridiculous.

12. There are currently signs on the ends of the pedestrian bridge that request no biking/skating across the bridge. Nowhere else on campus are signs posted about where or where not to bike/ skate.

13. More annoying than bikers/skaters are cars! I hate that there are always cars (mostly SDSU staff) driving around. Especially in between classes, they drive extremely close to students and make us walk on the grass so they can get by. This is ridiculous, they should especially not be allowed to drive around in between classes.

14. Just let it be free, it is too silly to prohibit it just to make some money decreasing the possible accidents. We cannot be Americans without being free!

15. I think a separate bike lane would be nice on the main walkways. But, I doubt the pedestrians would respect them. Also, why have bike racks near the library and other buildings if you can’t ride your bikes to those places? And, I think if cars are allowed to drive on the walkways, etc, then bikes should be allowed to, also.

16. I would love to be able to ride my bike on and to campus next year but would want well marked bike lanes. I also hate how some people on this campus ride over the pedestrian bridges they are very inconsiderate and make no attempts to slow down or avoid hitting people. They are very very rude! If they had alternate routes or were more considerate, I would definitely support more bikes and boards on campus!

17. Please make it possible to ride a bike or skate on campus. Thanks.

18. Specific bike lanes around the SDSU campus and safer bike paths out of campus.

19. Please add bike lines within campus!

20. I skate from my car because the parking at this campus is horrible. I have never been or have seen anyone involved in a collision with a bike/skate and a pedestrian. The majority of people use common sense and get off their bikes or skates when it is too crowded since it’s too hard to navigate anyways.

21. UCSB is a prime example of how well bike lanes can work on a campus. We could learn a lot from their model. It is ridiculous that our school preaches going green and still continues to support a model with a huge amount of vehicle commuting.

22. Just make paths for bike and skateboards. Problem Solved!

23. I think it would be a good idea, but live to far from campus to use a bike to get around.

24. We want a bike lane ASAP!!!

25. Add skateboards to anywhere on campus.

26. LET ME LIVE!!!

27. Let skates be used.

28. Make skating on campus easy and efficient.

29. I think everything the schools could do to encourage eco-friendly way of transportation would be great.

30. I would rather you use school money to decrease student fees than spend it on special lanes.

31. As a pedestrian, I’m more concerned about golf carts running me down.

32. Bike lanes need to be around campus; Police officers need to lay off bikers riding in streetsthere is nothing wrong with this.

33. Biking is fine, I hate skaters.

34. Worthwhile project. Good luck with it!

Page 42

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

4.3 Interpretation of Questionnaire Results The following is an analysis of the responses received via the questionnaire. A total of 307 students, visitors and staff filled out questionnaires, 238 of them online. The subsequent sections are numbered to coincide with the questionnaire numbering system.

1. Of the 307 respondents, 65 percent were students who commuted to campus and 30 percent were students living on campus. The remaining five percent were campus staff and visitors.

2. This question asked the respondentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s primary San Diego County residence.

Areas represented in the responses included the 92115 zip code on or near campus (46 percent), several other zip codes near campus (12 percent), zip codes in other areas of San Diego (13), as well as the cities of Chula Vista (eight percent), San Ysidro (two percent) and Poway (two percent).

3. When asked how they most frequently arrived on campus, the largest portion of the respondents (40 percent) arrived on campus via personal automobile, but an impressive 29 percent walked and 15 percent biked to campus. The remaining 17 percent arrived via transit (8 percent), skateboard (six percent) or carpool (three percent). This means that exactly half of the respondents came to the campus under their own power.

4. When asked the second most frequent way they arrived on campus, 23 percent of the respondents said they walked or drove and 17 percent biked. Arriving by skating, transit and carpools were at 10, 12 and 15 percent respectively. It appears that when respondents do not drive, their secondary mode choice is spread evenly among the others.

5. When asked what other modes they used infrequently, the responses were fairly evenly distributed from a high of 24 percent who reported walking, to 12 percent who skated. (Note that reported transit, skating and carpool use increased consistently over the last three questions, while the only mode to decrease significantly was driving. Walking and biking remained relatively steady.)

The next series of questions were directed to those who currently rode bikes to or on campus.

6. Fully 65 percent of respondents reported riding to campus from five miles away or less, while 15 percent rode on campus only and nine percent either rode from more than five miles away or arrived via transit and then used a bike on campus. The 15 percent who rode only on campus may live on campus, be leaving a bike on campus, or bringing a bike from off campus via transit or automobile.

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Page 43

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

7. About a third of respondents (37 percent) who biked on campus rode wherever they needed, but in a safe manner. Those who stayed on roadways only and walked in pedestrian areas and those who rode anywhere and got around pedestrians totaled 24 percent each. The remaining 16 percent limited their riding to roadways and major pathways like Campanile Mall.

8. When asked if they understood the campus biking rules, only 16 percent answered positively. Fully half (53 percent) said they understood not to ride in pedestrian areas, but were not sure where those were. The remaining 31 percent reported being unaware of or confused by the rules.

9. Nine percent of respondents had been ticketed for riding a bike on campus, with six percent saying it had happened a long time ago and three percent saying it had happened recently.

The next 15 questions asked about bicycle facility improvement priorities.

10-14. In terms of off-campus improvements, 61 percent of respondents gave improvements on Montezuma Road or Campanile Drive a high priority, followed by improved bike detection loops for signals near campus (55 percent) and then by other improvements like bike route signage (53 percent). There was slightly less interest in improvements on Alvarado Road or across Interstate 8.

15-20. In terms of on-campus improvements, 73 percent of respondents gave marked bike lanes on Aztec Walk a high priority, 72 percent felt the same about marked lanes on pedestrian bridges where they can fit, followed closely by marked lanes on Campanile Mall at 65 percent. There was less support for route improvements on other campus roadways, but even these generated 42-46 percent support as high priorities.

21-23. These three questions specifically addressed bike parking priorities. More that half of respondents (59 percent) considered increasing the number of bike racks a high priority, though there was significant interest in bike lockers (43 percent) and covered bike parking enclosures (42 percent).

24. This question was designed to gauge which in a series of improvements would most likely encourage respondents to ride more often, whether they currently ride or not. The most popular by far was on-campus routes with entry points into the campus interior (46 percent), better marking of off-campus routes (23 percent) and an on-campus perimeter loop (16 percent). Interestingly, the lowest score (four percent) was for safe bike storage. Note that this appears to conflict with the previous three questions in which respondents gave such facilities high priority. This may be a result of differences between the perceptions of current bike commuters and other respondents who do not currently get to campus by bike.

Page 44

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

The next two questions addressed those who skate on campus.

25-26. Respondents were asked which of four scenarios would encourage them to skate on campus more. The most popular (41 percent) was adding on-campus routes with access to the campus interior, virtually the same response given in the previous question when asked about bicycle facility preferences.

Adding a perimeter loop and not changing existing facilities both received 25 percent support. A few skaters (nine percent) said they would like to see campus skating rules clarified and citations more predictable.

This is highlighted in the subsequent question responses, in which 16 percent of skaters reported being cited, nine percent long ago and seven percent recently. Considering that skating is not allowed on campus implies that enforcement is inconsistent at best. The decision to issue a citation may be based on controlling particularly unsafe skater behavior and may also be affected by the density of other users on the pathway at the time.

The next two questions addressed the experience of walking on the campus.

27-28. Pedestrians’ perceptions were considered important because according to the 1998 campus master plan the current rules were intended to “emphasize the pedestrian over others.” It also states: “Since 1988, bicycle, skateboard and in-line skate use has been severely restricted or prohibited on campus. The policy is in response to accident prevention.”

The percentage of respondents who said they had experienced close calls on plazas or walkways was 22 percent, 11 percent felt uncomfortable where bikes and skateboards used campus walkways and six percent reported actually being involved in a collision with a cyclist of skater on campus. Yet almost two-thirds of respondents (62 percent) said they had never had any problems with cyclists or skaters on campus. While the number of respondents who felt comfortable sharing the campus with bikes and skates was high, the number who did not feel comfortable, or who had experienced close calls, or who had even been in a collision, was not insignificant. Multiplied across the campus as a whole yields a fairly large number. However, these responses reflect the experience of most multi-use paths where close calls routinely far exceed actual collisions. The perception of risk is not matched by actual incidents, but pedestrians may not be particularly comforted by that fact.

Interestingly, in the subsequent question asking pedestrians what they thought was the best policy for bikes and skateboards on campus, the highest support (43 percent) was for a system of lanes throughout the campus, provided it was well marked, lighted and provided proper sight distances. The other three choices all received 19 percent each. These choices were that use should be confined to roadways and offenders cited, marked lanes should be installed around the campus perimeter, or all users currently coexist and that no special lanes were needed.

Chapter 4: Research Summary

Page 45

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

29. This last question addressed transit users who said they used a bike or skateboard to get to a transit stop or who rode or skated once on campus.

Over a third (37 percent) of respondents said they would use transit more often if they could use their bike or skateboard to get around campus. How much more is not known, but this could represent a significant increase in transit ridership in combination with a related decrease in automobile use as they reduced the number of days they drove to campus.

The next highest response category (30 percent) was respondents who said that campus bike or skateboard facilities would not affect their transit use.

Some transit users (17 percent) expressed the desire to be able to leave a bike on campus overnight in a safe location. That was closely followed (16 percent) by transit users who currently left a bike at their starting point, but would bring it to campus if they could use it to get around more.

Page 46

Chapter 4: Research Summary

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

CHAPTER 5: BIKE and SKATEBOARD ACCESS and PARKING RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 Solution Framework While campus settings are unique, this study strives to incorporate universal bicycle standards where feasible and sensible, or intuitive features when those standards are not applicable.

Although college campuses can be said to resemble cities in many ways, the significant difference that distinguishes them is that campuses give priority to pedestrians rather than vehicles. In this respect, campuses are more like parks within a city where alternative modes of movement predominate. Further compared with a cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s vehicular traffic, campus traffic is relatively slow moving.

Non-motorized travel such as cycling and skateboarding can be a vital component of the campus fabric, an important means of movement on campus and a valued campus commute mode. Separating cyclists and skaters from pedestrians may not be necessary in all locations and typical striping may be considered a visually distracting element in the campus landscape. However, where separation is desirable, other pathway delineation methods may be acceptable, especially combined with appropriate signage. Because of the volume of pedestrian use and the lower awareness levels to potential dangers that pedestrians on campus currently have, a separated and highly visible lane marking system is warranted. Sensitivity to how this lane appears in important urban form areas of the campus is essential to helping it fit in and stand out at the same time.

This study aims to determine the feasibility of expanded bicycle and skateboard access for students, faculty, staff and visitors. As the firstever such study for SDSU, this document initiates the formal integration of non-motorized travel modes into campus policies.

This study is also intended to create a longterm vision supported by a variety of implementation measures. While dealing with existing conditions and issues on the campus, this study considers connections to the larger urban context. The recommendations offer an improved campus bikeway system, connected with city and regional systems. This travel network, coupled with bicycle and skateboard education, enforcement and promotional programs, will create a more bicycle and skateboard-friendly campus. The anticipated result of implementing the lanes and parking recommendations, is an increase in commuters choosing to bicycle or skate to and from campus.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Page 47

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Currently, bicycling is generally permitted on campus roadways. In many other areas, cyclists are required to dismount. Cycling between the campus and the City of San Diego can be a challenge, especially north of the campus where Interstate 8 and Mission Valley form a significant physical barrier.

As noted previously, a pervasive issue on similar college campuses is that bicycle and skateboard access rules are unclear and existing signage may not be consistent with written regulations. This is the case at SDSU and is an ongoing source of confusion for cyclists, skateboarders, pedestrians and even enforcement officers.

This study is intended to address cyclist and skateboarder access to the majority of the campus, but it is understood that some areas should remain “walk zones.”

The need for “walk zones” is based on safety issues caused primarily by high pedestrian volumes and limited sight distances. Even so, walk zones should be avoided where safe routes could be made available. A 100 yard access zone is suggested as a campus goal. Simply stated, bikes should be able to ride to within 100 yards of all campus destinations, with bike parking facilities located at the edge of the “ride zones and walk zones.” Cyclists and skateboarders would only have to dismount and walk no more than 100 yards to their destinations. This is a reasonable distance to walk and still preserves the core of the campus as pedestrian designated “walk zones”.

Page 48

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

5.1 Proposed On-Campus Access Routes Based on field work and current use surveys, it is clear from all types of field observation that bikes and skateboards are routinely in use across the campus in numbers that can not be ignored. To better accommodate this use, a series of suggested new bike and skate routes are recommended for the campus, as well as defined areas as walk zones where wheeled use would be prohibited at all times. (Note that current regulations allow for weekend use of all campus pathways, but with these recommendations, access would be improved for wheeled users overall, allowing them to get closer to their destinations before having to dismount. That being the case, it would simplify enforcement and improve safety by making these dismount zones in effect at all times. These are areas that are not conducive to mixed use in any case, such as the historic core immediately north of Hepner Hall/Communications Building.)

The suggested new routes are primarily on Aztec Walk and Campanile Mall, with additional segments adjacent to the Music Building and the east campus residence halls. Please see Figure 9: Suggested New Bike and Skate Routes on Campus. The proposed routes were observed to be in steady use by all user types. They provide efficient access through key sections of the campus on pathways wide enough to accommodate their current use. These recommendations would therefore codify routes already in use, but would also better clarify where wheeled users must dismount by using clear signage and pavement markings.

Figure 10: Proposed Access Routes further illustrates the proposed routes shown in Figure 9, but in an oblique aerial photo format and at a larger scale.

Examples of stained concrete on campus

Figure 9 also indicates where existing routes are recommended to be retained.

These routes were specifically selected to remain because they maintain access to existing and proposed bicycle parking areas at the edges of the walk zones and therefore limit the distance that users have to walk to reach their final destinations. Most of these existing routes to remain utilize the back side of buildings to access existing or proposed bike parking.

Most of the proposed projects would be delineated by polymer staining of existing pavement, along with new signage and pavement striping and stenciling. Staining is recommended as a more cost-effective and visually appropriate method of lane marking than typical painting.

Staining prevents the slip hazards sometimes associated with painting. The stain does not need to be solid. If the surface layer wears over time, the penetrating stain will remain visually prominent. Staining is also feasible because these routes are not typical streets and are therefore not subjected to a similar level of motor vehicle tire scuffing.

Also, what little motor vehicle traffic that does occur on these routes is very low speed and all users, including drivers, will be able to discern the lanes more easily than they would on typical streets. These routes are further illustrated using photo-simulations to show how they would look from the userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s viewpoint in Figures 11-18: Suggested New Bike and Skate Route Simulations.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Page 49

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Scrip Remington Ro

ps Figure 9 Te rr view aceof

ad

Plan Proposed Routes

Hilltop

Way 3

Campanile Mall

4

1

Aztec Walk

55th Street

2

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1â&#x20AC;?=200â&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Campanile Drive

0'

Future crossing comp cro interse int redevelo

SDSU

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Co lleg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Interstate 8

rest Drive

Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: October 2009

tec

Az e

riv

eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND

Figure 9 Plan view of Proposed Routes

Campus Boundaries Existing Routes Currently Available for Bikes Existing Roads / Paths providing access to bike parking Suggested 8â&#x20AC;&#x2122; wide Class 1 Multi-use Trail Suggested no-ride, no-skate zones, posted and enforced Proposed On-campus Bike Lanes

e

nu

Aztec Walk

ridge Ped B Not needed if new bridge built

5a Future bridge or at-grade crossings should be made compatible with bike crossings at this intersection and be an integral part of redevelopment of this area

1

Aztec Walk Bike Lane Project

2

Campanile to Hardy Connector

3

Campanile Bike Lane Project

4

Music Building Bike Lane Project

5

East Campus Housing Lane

g

lle

Co

ve eA

5

5a East Campus Housing Lane

FIGURE 9 Suggested New Bike & Skate Routes on Campus

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Projects 1: Aztec Walk Bike Lane, is a proposed east-west route following Aztec Walk. This route connects the Viejas Arena area with the transit center and traverses the southern end of Campanile Mall. Project 1 would involve primarily polymer staining to delineate the bike lanes directly on Aztec Walk (see Figures 11 and 12 for simulated views). Special signage will be required along the lane to remind pedestrians that they are not supposed to walk in the lane. Wheelchairs, however, have the option of using the lane or using other pedestrian areas. Electric carts that are 3-5 feet in width would also be allowed to use these lanes.

Additional warning signs will be posted near where the pedestrian movements near crossing the lanes. This signage would remind the pedestrian to be cautious when crossing the bike lane.

Projects 2: Campanile to Hardy Connector is a short north-south route connecting Hardy Avenue with Campanile Mall. Project 2 would involve primarily polymer staining to delineate the bike lanes on the west 10 feet of the western side of Campanile Walk. It may also require the widening of the existing pedestrian ramp that leads from Hardy onto Campanile. (See Figure 13 for a simulation view of Project 2.)

Projects 3: Campanile Bike Lane is a proposed north-south route following Campanile Mall. Project 3 would involve staining, striping and signing the western half of the western leg of the Campanile Mall. The northernmost segment would sweep west toward Hilltop Drive and require some demolition of landscape treatments, minor grading and new pathway construction. (See Figures 14 through 16 for simulation views of Project 3).

Adjustments would be needed at the coffee / snack stand located near the Drama and Music buildings. The line for the purchase of coffee and snacks often extend out onto the Campanile walk. Space exists on the south side of this facility that should be able to accommodate retaining this use in this area. A metal rail would need to be added along the edge of the proposed bike lane if the east side of this facility is intended to be left open to service customers. This rail is required in order to limit pedestrians and customers from walking out onto the lane, from a blind corner behind the tent structure. (See Figure 14 for a simulated view of these changes).

Additionally, two locations exist that would require the placement of trash receptacles, rails or benches in order to keep pedestrians from coming onto the lane from behind the two retaining walls located along the west side of the walk.

These barriers would need to offset the pedestrian several feet from the walls in order to assure higher visibility where pedestrians first approach the proposed bike lane.

Page 52

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Projects 4: Viejas Arena to Campanile Mall- is a proposed east-west connection between the Viejas Arena area and the central area of Campanile Mall.

Project 4 would consist of staining the existing paving just south of the Music Building. A connector lane would be required at the end of the more formal road (north of the Music Building) going north to south until it reaches the east west walkway south of the (See Figure 9 and 10 as well as Figure 17 for a simulated view of Project 4.)

Projects 5: East Campus Housing Lane- is shown in an inset at the upper left of Figure 10. Project 5 is a connection between the College Avenue pedestrian bridge at the Aztec Center and the large parking structures at the east end of the campus. It passes through the large dormitory complex between these termini.

Project 5 would consist entirely of staining on existing paving. A portion of this route would not be needed if an additional pedestrian bridge across College Avenue was built as a planned component of the future Paseo Linda Verde development.

Project 5a is a north-south connection along the west side of College Avenue between the bridge mentioned in the previous paragraph and the Aztec Center.

The proposed bridge is also a part of this alternative project. The portion of Project 5a represented by the bridge itself would be new construction, while the remainder along College Avenue would consist of staining on existing pavement.

The bridge will need to be at least 22 feet in width to accommodate two outer edge bike lanes at five feet each and a two-way center lane for pedestrians 12 feet in width. Allowing bikes on this bridge will make the enforcement of keeping bikes off of the other pedestrian bridges easier. If the project does not build a grade-separated bridge, an at-grade facility should be provided that increases safety and access for bike use from the east to the central portion of the campus, as it crosses College Avenue. Special pedestrian walkway, bike-sensitive loop detectors and lane markings should be provided to help both bikes and pedestrians get across this roadway at the existing traffic signal.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Page 53

5

5a

NC

Figure 10 Oblique view of Proposed Routes

NC

1 NC

Aztec Walk Bike Lane Project

2 Campanile to Hardy Connector

= New construction of pathway, all others are striping and staining only

3 Campanile Bike Lane Project

4 Music Bu

1

3

2

Figure 10 Oblique view of Proposed Routes

4

SDSU

SAN D IEGO STATE U NIVERSITY

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY NC

Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: O C TO B E R

4 Music Building Bike Lane Project

5 East Campus Housing Lane Future Bridge or at grade connection

5a with bike facilities between housing and the Plaza Linda Verde project

2009

FIGURE 10 Recommended Access Routes

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 11a: Existing view west along Aztec Walk, south of Adams Humanities Building

Figure 11b: Proposed view with improvements along Aztec Walk Page 56

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 12a: Existing view east down Aztec Walk as it crosses Campanile

Figure 12b: Proposed view with improvements on Aztec Walk as it crosses Campanile Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 57

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 13a: Existing view looking north down Campanile

Figure 13b: Proposed view with improvements on west side of the west half of Campanile Page 58

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 14a: Existing view north along Campanile near the Music Building

Figure 14b: Proposed view with improvements along Campanile on west edge of west half of Campanile Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 59

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 15a: Existing view north along Campanile looking northwest to Hilltop Drive and the east end of the park

Figure 15b: Proposed view with improvements along Campanile on existing walkway, connecting with Hilltop Drive Page 60

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 16a: Existing view from Hilltop Drive looking southeast through the east end of the park

Figure 16b: Proposed view with new lane markings, signage, pedestrian markers, ramp upgrade, cut through and bike racks Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 61

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 17a: Existing view looking east, south of Music Building

Figure 17b: Proposed view with improvements south of Music Building Page 62

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 18a: Existing view looking west between Tepeyac, Cuicacalli and Olmeca Resident Halls

Figure 18b: Proposed view with improvements looking west between Tepeyac, Cuicacalli and Olmeca Resident Halls Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 63

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

5.2 Bike Parking Areas The SDSU campus currently provides parking for approximately 1,257 bicycles in several different types of rack configurations. A number of the existing racks are the recommended “inverted U” type that appears to be the standard for most recent installation. However, many are types that support the bike via one wheel only and do not provide for locking the frame or supporting the bike by its frame. Some of these racks are also within walk zones, which will make future enforcement more difficult. There are two secured “bike barns” at residence halls on the east side of campus, but one is being used as a recycling center.

There are currently no bike lockers on campus.

A modest goal of 10 percent of the current 33,000 students enrolled at SDSU translates to 3,300 students commuting by bicycle. This leaves a deficit of 2,043 bike parking spaces.

However, in addition to this number, more should be added for faculty and staff bike commuters, as well as a small percentage of students who live on-campus and travel by bike and who therefore may need more than one parking space (one at their trip origin and another at their trip destination). In general, the currently used polished steel inverted U racks are recommended for all new installations.

In addition, especially at transit centers, bike lockers are recommended where regularly used, long-term, secure parking is needed.

Some students and faculty may be encouraged to ride transit if they know they can leave a bike on campus overnight, in a safe locker. Selected lockers should provide visual access to ensure that the lockers are being used for their intended purpose while still providing for a secure locking facility.

5.2.1 Bicycle Parking Facility Guidelines The selection and placement of bicycle racks is an important issue because the lack of secure parking keeps many people from using their bikes for transportation. Leaving a bicycle unattended, even for short periods, can easily result in damage or theft. Not being able to find a bike rack or having to use one that is not conveniently located can be frustrating and discourages this alternative mode of transportation.

Whenever possible, the racks should be placed within 50 feet of building entrances where cyclists would naturally transition to pedestrian mode. The rack placement would ideally allow for visual monitoring by people within the building and/or people entering the building. The placement of the racks should minimize conflicts with both pedestrians and motorized traffic. All bicycle parking provided should be on paving and located a minimum of two feet from a parallel wall and four feet from a perpendicular wall (as measured to the closest center of the rack).

Page 64

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Review of developments for transportation impacts should address how on-site bicycle facilities are planned. Bicycle storage racks should be provided at locations convenient to building entrances and ideally covered from the elements. For outdoor parking, lockers are preferred because they completely secure the bicycle from theft of the entire bicycle or its parts and are weatherproof. More detailed rack and location guidelines are addressed in the following sections.

Rack Element The rack element is the part of the bike rack that supports one bicycle. It should support the bicycle by its frame in two places, prevent the bicycle wheel from tipping over, allow the frame and one or both wheels to be secured and support bicycles with unconventional frames.

Figure 19: Recommended rack style and spacing requirements.

Racks shown in photos below are not of the recommended types.

Inverted U type racks are most often recommended because each element can support two bicycles. Commonly used â&#x20AC;&#x153;waveâ&#x20AC;? type racks are not recommended because they support the bicycle at only one point. In addition, cyclists often park their bikes parallel with the rack, instead of perpendicular as intended, which reduces the rack capacity by half. (See Figure 19 for Recommended Racks.)

The rack element should also resist being cut or detached using common hand tools, especially those that can be concealed in a backpack.

Such tools include bolt cutters, pipe cutters, wrenches and pry bars.

Rack The rack itself is one or more rack elements joined on a common base or arranged in a regular array and fastened to a common mounting surface.

The rack elements may be attached to a single frame or remain single elements mounted in close proximity. They should not be easily detachable from the rack frame or easily removed from the mounting surface. The rack should be anchored so that it cannot be stolen with the bikes attached, such as with vandalresistant fasteners.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Page 65

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Rack Area

Figure 20: Recommended rack layouts and spacings

Page 66

The rack should provide easy, independent bike access. Typical inverted â&#x20AC;&#x153;Uâ&#x20AC;? rack elements mounted in a row should be placed on 30 inch centers.

Normally, the handlebar and seat heights will allow two bicycles to line up side-by-side in opposite directions. If it is too inconvenient and time-consuming to squeeze the bikes into the space and attach a lock, cyclists will look for an alternative place to park or use one rack element per bike and reduce the projected parking capacity by half.

The rack area is a bicycle parking lot where racks are separated by aisles. A rack area or â&#x20AC;&#x153;bicycle parking lotâ&#x20AC;? is an area where more than one rack is installed separated by aisles measured from tip to tip of bike tires across the space between racks.

The minimum separation between aisles should be 48 inches, which provides enough space for one person to walk one bike. In high traffic areas where many users park or retrieve bikes at the same time, such as at campuses, the recommended minimum aisle width is 72 inches. The depth for each row of parked bicycles should also be 72 inches. (See Figure 20 for Recommended Spacing.)

Large rack areas in high turnover areas should have more than one entrance. If possible, the rack area should be protected from the elements. Even though cyclists are exposed to sun, rain and snow while en route, covering the rack area keeps cyclists more comfortable while parking, locking the bike and loading or unloading cargo. A covering will also help keep the bicycles dry, especially the saddles.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Rack Area Site The rack area site is the relationship of a rack area to the building entrance or approach. In general, smaller, conveniently located rack areas should serve multiple buildings, rather than a larger combined, distant one. Racks far from the entrance or perceived to be vulnerable to vandalism will not receive much use.

Rack area location in relationship to the building it serves is very important. The best location is immediately adjacent to the entrance it serves, but racks should not be placed where they can block the entrance or inhibit pedestrian flow. The rack area should be along a major building approach line and clearly visible from the approach.

The rack area site should be no more than a 30 second walk (120 feet) from the entrance(s) it serves and should preferably be within 50 feet. A rack area should be as close or closer than the nearest car parking space, be clearly visible from the entrance it serves and be near each actively used entrance.

5.2.2 Proposed Bike Parking Areas The campus was evaluated during on-site surveys to determine where additional bike parking facilities could be installed in locations that coincided with generally established guidelines for such facilities. These locations were photographed and numbered to coincide with the call-outs on Figure 21 and as shown on the map on Figure 22. Many of the recommendExample of covered bike parking on a college campus ed locations were selected so that bike racks could be provided as close to desired destinations as possible while keeping them outside recommended dismount zones. In some cases, the recommended racks are in addition to existing racks. Note in Figure 22 that existing racks in current dismount zones have been retained, such as immediately east of the library, The following images illustrate where additional bike parking could be installed to supplement and better distribute parking facilities across the campus. Their suggested locations follow the siting guidelines discussed earlier in this chapter.

Together these locations represent the potential for 622 more bike parking spaces within racks and 18 more in bike lockers. Note that 96 of these spaces are represented by the return to its intended use as covered bike parking of an existing bike barn currently being used as a recycling center.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Page 67

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Figure 21: Potential Bike Rack Locations

(Angled parking)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

(Remove wall section)

Page 68

Chapter 5: General Solutions

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Chapter 5: General Solutions

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16 Page 69

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Page 70

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24 Chapter 5: General Solutions

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

Chapter 5: General Solutions

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32 Page 71

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

33

34

35 Potential Bike Locker Locations

1

Page 72

2

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

5.3 Near Campus Recommendations No campus non-motorized wheeled access system can function efficiently without addressing the connections to the system from outside the campus. As noted earlier, there are relatively few access points around the SDSU campus from the adjoining area and the roadways that serve the campus are generally wide and carry high volumes of high speed vehicular traffic. This makes these roadways less than ideal for cycling, but the following paragraphs describe recommended improvements designed to mitigate the situation.

Figure 23 addresses the roadway environment immediately around the campus on Montezuma Road, Campanile Drive, 55th Street and College Avenue. Existing bike lanes (Caltrans Class 2) are shown in blue, while sections that were thought to exist but do not are shown in yellow. There are two such sections on Montezuma Road and both appear to have been removed to accommodate vehicles lane widening some time in the past few years. Additionally, the remainder of Montezuma Road along the campus is designated as having bike routes (Caltrans Class 3), which are recommended to be upgraded to Class 2 lanes. All proposed offcampus improvements would need to be implemented by the City of San Diego and utilize Caltrans Chapter 1000 of the Highway Design Manual for Bikeway Planning and Design.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Page 73

Canyon Crest Drive

8

8

1/8 2/8

3

Avenue of Art 4/6

26

8

24

6/8 8/6

Figure 22 Proposed Bike Racks

48

Scrip

8

ps

Te rr

8

29/20

Hilltop

8

25/24

Way 24/20

ac

Remington Ro

9/10

8 8 26/24 27/8 28/8

e

23/24 22/24

21/8

ad

64

19/12 12

24

12

15

48

18/24

Campanile Mall

24

20/12

17/24

16/24 1

28

60

28 10

8 100

55th Street

8

200' 200'

400'

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

30

16 11

15

Campanile Drive

0'

64

16

66

1/6

Aztec Walk 22 22

SDSU

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Interstate 8

Crest Drive

Co l l eg eA ven ue

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by: Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

1/8 2/8

26 3/4 4/6

Prepared:

26 5/4

October 2009

7/8

6/8 8/6

10

Figure 22 Proposed Bike Racks

Ci 10

eD

rcl

9/10

8

16

tec

16

Az

8

28/8

riv

34

25/24

LEGEND Campus Boundary

e

10/18

11/10

21/8 64

64

12

32 12/80

12

56

5/24

Potential Bike Rack Locations* (Location/Estimated spaces: 622)

2/12

Potential Bike Locker Locations (Location/Estimated spaces: 18)

16 13/24 24 14/6

30

Co

Aztec Walk 22 22

g

lle

66

1/6

2/12

ve eA

*See photos of potential bike parking locations on Pages 68-72

ridge Ped B

8

16

e

nu

16/24 15/54 60

Existing Bike Rack Locations (Number of spaces: 1,257)

5

30/6

32/6 24 35/96 28 31/4 96

34/6 33/6

35/96

4

FIGURE 22 Recommended Bike Parking

Canyon Crest Drive

Avenue of Art

Figure 23 Offcampus Lane Improvements Scrip

ps

Te rr

Hilltop

Way

ac

Remington Ro

e

ad Campanile Mall

55th Street

Aztec Walk

YIELD TO BIKES

0'

200' 200'

400'

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES

Montezuma Road

N O RT H 1”=200’

Campanile Drive

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES

SDSU

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY

ue

YIELD TO BIKES

Prepared by:

Av en

Interstate 8

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE

Co ll

ege

YIELD TO BIKES

n Crest Drive

Alvarado Road Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE

Prepared:

YIELD TO BIKES

Az tec

Figure 23 Offcampus Lane Improvements

October 2009

Campus Boundaries

e

riv

eD

rcl

Ci

LEGEND

Class 2 Existing Bike Lanes Class 2 Designated Bike Lanes that are missing Class 3 Designated Bike Lanes Recommended as Class 2 Additional Class 2 Bike Lanes Recommended under this Plan Special Dashed Lanes or Bike Pockets at Intersections Needed

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES

e

nu

g

lle

Co

Aztec Walk

ve eA

Special Signage

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE

ridge Ped B

1. “Share the Road” (MUTCD 11-1/11-16)

YIELD TO BIKES

or

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE

2. “Watch for Bikes” (No MUTCD standard) 3. “Begin Right Turn-Yield to Bikes” (MUTCD R4-4)

YIELD TO BIKES

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES

FIGURE 23 BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES

Suggested Changes to the City of San Diego Bikeway Plan for Improved Access to the Campus

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Additional Class 2 lanes are recommended on Campanile Drive between Montezuma Road and Hardy Avenue at the south end of Campanile Mall and along College Avenue from south of Montezuma Road to north of Interstate 8. Field investigation and aerial mapping revealed that adequate width is available on College Avenue for Class 2 lanes along this entire segment except for a short section adjoining Parking Structure 1. This remains a viable route even with this narrower section because it occurs on the downhill northbound leg of College Avenue where cyclists can often match vehicle speeds due to grade and congestion. Transition markings are recommended where connecting roadways enter College Avenue at an oblique angle. These are shown as dashed lines on Figure 23. These dashed markings indicate where motorists and cyclists can legally make lane changes. These locations should all include appropriate bikeway signage, which is recommended along all routes, but especially along College Avenue. See Chapter 6 for signage details.

The single most problematic intersection affecting bicycle access to the SDSU campus is the College Avenue overcrossing of Interstate 8. This location was extensively evaluated, including taking roadway and bridge width measurements that were then verified using as-built drawings of the interchange obtained from the California Deartment of Tranportation (Caltrans). A series of detailed plans (Figures 24 to 27) were prepared to help determine how to address bicycle access across the freeway. Figure 24 is an overview of the entire segment, showing existing and proposed striping. Figures 25, 26 and 27 are more detailed views of the southern, central and northern portions of this segment, respectively.

Page 78

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

In Figures 25 to 27, the Class 2 marked bike lanes are shown as solid coloration. This is not simply a graphic convention. While such lanes are usually delineated with white painted lines, it is proposed that these lanes be fully painted, a safety technique that has been widely used in Europe and successfully implemented in Portland, Oregon, in Tucson, Arizona and in New York City. The newest such lanes now employ a bright green pigment specifically selected for this application. Such painted lanes are installed in conjunction with a series of signs warning motorists that cyclists have the right-of-way within the painted lane. The bright color is intended to draw motoristsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; attention to the likely presence of cyclists and to drive accordingly. The first application of this technique in the United States in Portland, Oregon was where several major streets crossed Interstate 5 with dual on- and off- lanes to the freeway, a daunting proposition for even experienced cyclists who are trying to proceed straight to cross the freeway. This first application reduced bicycle-related collisions by 85 percent and was subsequently adopted for use elsewhere. However, it should be noted Caltrans has not yet approved painted lanes.

See Figures 28 to 35 for simulation views of various sections of College Avenue from near Aztec Center to Interstate 8, including examples of the proposed painted lanes and the associated signage. See Chapter 6 for more details on the signage.

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Page 79

Figure 24 College Ave. Overview

Figure 24 College Ave. Overview

SDSU

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: AUGUST 28, 2009

FIGURE 24 Overview of Proposed Lane Changes to College Avenue over I-8

Figure 25 College South

Figure 25 College South

SDSU

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: AUGUST 28, 2009

FIGURE 25 Proposed Lane Changes to the Southern Segment of College Avenue over I-8

Figure 26 College Central

Figure 26 College Central

SDSU

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: AUGUST 28, 2009

FIGURE 26 Proposed Lane Changes to the Central Segment of College Avenue over I-8

Figure 27 College North

Figure 27 College North

SDSU

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

B I K E & S K AT E B O A R D A C C E S S S A F E T Y S T U DY Prepared by:

Prepared for:

Associated Students S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Prepared: AUGUST 28, 2009

FIGURE 27 Proposed Lane Changes to the Norther Segment of College Avenue over I-8

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 28a: Existing view southwest at College at top of hill

Figure 28b: Proposed view southwest at top of hill with improvements at College Page 88

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 29a: Existing view south at College south of Interstate 8, half way up hill

Figure 29b: Proposed view south with improvements at College south of Interstate 8, half way up hill Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 89

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 30a: Existing view north at College over Interstate 8

Figure 30b: Proposed view north with improvements at College over Interstate 8 Page 90

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 31a: Existing view south at College over Interstate 8

Figure 31b: Proposed view south with improvements at College over Interstate 8 Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 91

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 32a: Existing view south at College near Interstate 8

Figure 32b: Proposed view south with improvements at College near Interstate 8 (striping only) Page 92

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 33a: Proposed view south with improvements at College near Interstate 8 (blue lane)

Figure 33b: Proposed view south with improvements at College near Interstate 8 (green lane) Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 93

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 34a: Existing view south at College near Interstate 8

Figure 34b: Proposed view south with improvements at College near Interstate 8 (striping only with lane break) Page 94

Chapter 5: General Solutions

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

Figure 35a: Existing view south at College near Interstate 8 (striping through the on-ramp)

Figure 35b: Proposed view south with improvements at College near Interstate 8 (green lane) Chapter 5: General Solutions

Page 95

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Page 96

Chapter 5: Bike Access and Parking Recommendations

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

CHAPTER 6: SAFETY and REGULATORY RECOMMENDATIONS

6.0 Proposed Adjustments to SDSU Bike and Skate Policies The planning and construction of SDSU campus facilities should consider the provision for usable and reasonable bicycle routes to and around the campus.

These bike and skateboard facilities should be provided without obstacles while considering pedestrian safety and the access needs of those with some form of physical challenge. Not only are physical circulation improvements needed, but bike parking facilities and regulatory/warning signage are needed as well.

In all cases, route facilities need to inform bicyclists that they must yield to pedestrians and caution pedestrians when they are about to cross or mix with faster moving bicycle or skateboard users. These routes should accommodate the access needs and requirements of those in wheel chairs as well as those in electric carts and other service vehicles. The proposed bike lane facilities should be designed to allow bikes, skaters, skateboarders, wheel chairs and service vehicles can all utilize the facilities safely and efficiently.

“Usable and reasonable” facilities should be defined to include the following criteria: 1. “Pedestrian only Zones” or “Walk Zones” should be considered after other alternatives have been explored. A walk zone should be limited in distance and should only be used if other options for safe and effective pedestrian and bicycle intersections are infeasible. Where possible, SDSU should provide parallel bicycle routes to allow cyclists to travel around pedestrian-only areas.

2. Bike routes should involve no long or steep detours. Cyclists should not have to detour more than 100 yards on each end, compared to a direct route. A detour should not require a cyclist to climb a significant hill when the more direct routes is mostly flat.

3. Bike routes should be based on actual traffic and go where people want to go, i.e. there should be reasonable bike routes to and within the heart of campus where most of the destinations are. Providing some form of access near the heart of the campus is essential in order to make enforcement of “Pedestrian Walk Zones” effective. The goal should be to provide penetration into the campus center to a point where the walking portion of the trip is no more than 100 yards to the final destination.

The recommended routes shown on Figures 9 and 10 provide cyclists and skaters wheeled access to within a reasonable distance of the entrances of all major classroom and residential buildings. Most of these recommended routes are located on wide pathways, such as the Campanile Mall. A number of access points, however, are accommodated within the unique mixture of alleys and parking lots behind buildings. These routes usually terminate at bike parking areas so that cyclists can leave their bikes as close to their classroom destinations as possible at the ends of these low volume pathways.

Chapter 6: Safety and Regulatory Recommendations

Page 97

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

The remaining areas designated as “Walk Zones” are those where existing physical impediments make mixed use problematic and potentially unsafe, such as within the historic core near Hardy Memorial Tower or in the pedestrian intensive areas of the campus core. The breadth of these zones allow them to be easily accessed on foot from where bike racks would be readily available. These walk zones would be definitively signed as well, which would allow for more effective, consistent enforcement, minimizing the confusion as to where wheeled use is permitted.

6.1 Proposed Adjustments to Code Section 100.02 SDSU’s current bicycle and skateboard access policies are summed up in the university’s police code section 100.02, entitled “Bicycle and Skateboard Regulations.” The full text is included here with suggested additions reflecting the recommendations in Section 6.1 in bold italic font for additions and red strikethroughs for suggested deletions: (A) Bicycle riding is prohibited on the inner core (all marked “walk zones”) of the University during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except weekends and holidays. The walk zones are generally defined by the following boundaries: north to Avenue of Art, west to Scripps Terrace, south to East Plaza Mall and east to Aztec Circle Drive, except where designated bike and skateboard lanes exist.

(B) Riding bicycles is prohibited in all University buildings.

(C) Riding bicycles is prohibited in the inner core or in any other area where signs are posted restricting such activity.

(D) Riding skateboards is prohibited on all University property at all times except for roadways and other designated bike and skateboard lanes.

Figure 36: Proposed walk zone regulatory sign

(E) Roller skates, “scooters” and devices of a similar nature are included in this section and are limited to roadways and other designated bike lanes.

Wheelchairs are allowed in all pedestrian areas as well as on the designated bike and skateboard lanes.

(F) This section does not apply to Department of Public Safety personnel in the performance of their duties.

6.2 Proposed Adjustments to Regulatory Signage Two regulatory signs are proposed for the campus. First, the Walk Zone signage would be placed along all walkways, lanes, plazas and paths where they are within the Walk Zone of the Campus near the end of legal bike and skateboard access routes (see Figure 36). Anyone riding a bike or a skateboard in this specific geographic area would be subject to a fine. Wheel chairs would be exempt and it is likely that the service carts would also be allowed. Bike parking racks should be located near areas that interface between bike access areas and the “walk zones”.

Figure 37: Proposed trail use regulatory sign

Page 98

A second regulatory sign would be required to let pedestrians, cyclists and skaters know where they are and are not supposed to be, relative to the red marked lanes (see Figure 37). These signs would be placed along the edges of the marked lanes apparent to cyclists and skaters, as well as to adjacent pedestrians, warning them not to walk on the lane surface. Wheel chair users would have the option to use the lane or the adjacent pedestrian areas. Small carts would be required to utilize these lanes where they exist, but may be allowed to use other areas.

Full size vehicles should not use the marked lanes. Finally, where bike lanes end, signage such as that shown on Figure 38 should be considered.

Chapter 6: Safety and Regulatory Recommendations

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

B I KE LAN E R3-17

A H EA D R3-17a

ENDS Figure 39: Proposed lane markings (On and off campus)

6.3 Other Safety Issues and Concerns Safety should be of utmost concern. Certain types of signage and path markings are needed to warn the various user types about the other uses that may affect their safety. In addition to the regulatory signs suggested in the previous section, lane markings are essential to making the entire length of lanes clearly visible. A technique of using polymer concrete stains are proposed to clearly identify the riding and walking zones. The stain can be applied to concrete or paver units.

Concrete staining will make these lanes prominent to cyclists, skateboarder and pedestrians. These markings should also include stenciling of bike lane logos (Figure 39) and center line stripes to denote the two-way nature of these lanes. A speed limit of 10 mph should be posted and enforced. Though it may be difficult to discern actual bike and skateboarder speeds, posting a speed limit provides enforcement officers the ability to ticket for unsafe behavior or conditions. Research has found that pedestrians are often knocked down in collisions with bike travelling at speeds above 10 mph, but at lower speeds the pedestrian may remain standing.

6.4 Other Informational or Warning Signs As an integral part of the on-campus route recommendations described in Chapter 5, certain physical safety improvements are also highly recommended. Among them are two versions of pole-mounted signage addressed both to wheeled users and pedestrians and features such as pavement markings and high contrast tactile strips (red raised truncated dome panels) at intersections.

The pole-mounted signage addressed to wheeled users would emphasize that pedestrians have the right-of-way wherever the two modes intersect and that wheeled users must yield (see Figure 40). Different pole-mounted signage directed to pedestrians would emphasize that wheeled users have priority within their lanes. In addition, there would be â&#x20AC;&#x153;Watch for Bikesâ&#x20AC;? warning stencils painted at intersections on the paving (see Figure 41). In deference to disabled users, these locations would also employ ADA approved tactile strips so that visually impaired users will know when they are approaching a wheeled lane. These strips would be red in color, since this color provides a strong contrast against the typical warm grey of concrete paving.

Chapter 6: Safety and Regulatory Recommendations

R3-17b Sign images from the Manual of Traffic Signs <http://www.trafficsign.us/> These sign images copyright Richard C. Moeur. All rights reserved.

Figure 38: Proposed lane ending sign (On and off campus)

YIELD TO PEDS R9-6 Sign image from the Manual of Traffic Signs <http://www.trafficsign.us/> This sign image copyright Richard C. Moeur. All rights reserved.

Figure 40: Sign proposed where cyclists must yield where trails cross major pedestrian areas

Figure 41: Tactile warning strip and caution stencil where trails cross major pedestrian areas Page 99

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

A variety of other Manual of Unified Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) approved signs are needed for the off-campus lane improvements. These would include the use of “Share the Road” signs (see Figure 42) at locations along Montezuma or College where Class 2 “Bike Lanes” are not possible to include. In some cases, such as at merging driveways/lanes coming from the campus onto College Avenue, signs indicating “Watch for Bikes” should be used (see Figure 43). In still other cases, information indicating where a vehicle should merge across a bike lane may be warranted (see Figure 44). Where a painted bike lane is proposed, signage instructing the need to yield to bikes in the lane may be necessary (see Figure 45). Signs describing where to yield to bikes in painted bike lanes have not yet been used in California, but an effort should be made to convince Caltrans to utilize these in certain situations similar to what other states have already implemented.

“Share the Road” (MUTCD 11-1/11-16) Figure 42: Sign proposed for College Avenue wherever bike lanes can not be provided

Figure 43: Sign proposed for College Avenue wherever driveway traffic may enter College Avenue

BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE

YIELD TO BIKES

“Begin Right Turn-Yield to Bikes” (MUTCD R4-4) Figure 44: Sign showing where vehicular merging across a bike lane should safely be initiated.

Page 100

Figure 45: Merge across lane signage for College Avenue at Interstate 8. Alternative colors depend on lane color choice, but green appears to be becoming the new standard for similar bike lanes.

Chapter 6: Safety and Regulatory Recommendations

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

San Diego State University

CHAPTER 7: IMPLEMENTATION and COSTS

7.0 Implementation Overview This study was not scoped to be an exhaustive implementation and cost analysis. However, some discussion needs to occur on how the recommendations in the study can potentially be implemented.

7.1 Funding Sources All of the off-campus improvements would normally be funded by the City of San Diego. Regional bikeway grants and funding sources exist for the addition and improvement of Class 1 (bike path), Class 2 (bike lane) and Class 3 (bike route) facilities. Some of this funding comes from the Bicycle Transportation Account and others come from Trans-net funding sources. The proposed projects must compete for this funding, but considering the status of the campus, the current conditions and the potential for significant bike commuter increases, the projects should receive a high priority for funding. Only a few community and regional route options exist in the general area of the campus, so fixing problems for campus students on these routes will also fix them for a large number of cyclists that pass by the campus. On-campus facilities will need to find other funding sources related to capital improvements and maintenance project sources. It is not likely that off-campus funding sources will be able to fund these on-campus projects. The improvements are most closely related to transportation and parking so potential funding could be investigated from these sources.

7.2 Phasing Figures 9 and 10 indicate the general phasing of the major project bike lanes.

The order can be changed, but certain links may need to be accomplished prior to other pieces. The Aztec Walk improvements may be able to be done independently of the other projects. The two projects on Campanile Mall, along with the Music Building project, need to be carefully phased. The improvements associated with the east campus housing area can probably be done independently. The future pedestrian and bike bridge project will be completely dependent upon the Paseo Linda Verde project to be built on Foundation land. Bike parking improvements can be accomplished without any phasing discussions. Off-campus improvements will be phased based upon priorities set by the City of San Diego.

7.3 Costs Costs were initially developed for each of the proposed lanes and bike parking projects. Because of the wide fluctuations in construction costs and the short shelf life of costs estimates, the estimates are bound in a separate document that can be obtained from SDSU Facilities Planning and Construction.

Chapter 7: Implementation and Costs

Page 101

San Diego State University

Bike and Skateboard Access Safety Study

S AN D IEGO S TATE U NIVERSITY

Page 102

Chapter 7: Implementation and Costs