NACTO 2013 - SFCTA Apps
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•655 views
The San Francisco County Transportation Authority uses several apps and online tools to engage the public in transportation planning, including MyStreetSF.com, sfbudgetczar.com, and CycleTracks. These tools receive thousands of user submissions providing data on transportation issues and preferences. However, users tend to be overrepresented by ages 25-40, white, higher-income residents. The Authority analyzes user data along with other sources to inform planning of bicycle networks and facilities, transit funding priorities, and regional transportation modeling.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (14)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (12)
Similar to NACTO 2013 - SFCTA Apps
Similar to NACTO 2013 - SFCTA Apps (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
NACTO 2013 - SFCTA Apps
- 1. San Francisco County Transportation Authority: Our Apps elizabeth@sfcta.org @e_lo
- 2. Who am I and Where do I come from? 27513
- 3. Who am I and Where do I come from? 94114
- 5. Outreach Objectives USEFUL FAIR PRACTICAL Mutually beneficial exchange Are all constituents able to participate? Are benefits commiserate with costs?
- 6. Technology M:PnP2013Memos01 Jan 15 1. MyStreetSF.com 2. sfbudgetczar.com 3. Cycletracks
- 9. All age, racial, ethnic and income groups reached, but Over-representation of: Ages 25-40 White Higher-Income 9 sfbudgetczar.com – responses
- 10. sfbudgetczar.com – what we heard 1. Useful tool 2. Back to the basics of existing system 3. Faster, more frequent service 4. Improve cycling and walking conditions. 5. Core capacity improvements 6. Faster project delivery 7. Mixed support for congestion pricing 8. Support for more revenue
- 11. CycleTracks Amazon EC/2 Server running Apache mySQL JSON PHP PHP
- 12. CycleTracks
- 13. Broad User Base • 20% (500+) users infrequent cyclists (10% of trips) Trips and Users by Cycling Frequency 2,036 9,122 Users Trips 577 852 853 187 411 13,506 Less than once a month Several times per month Several times per week Daily SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 13
- 14. Broad User Base • Half of users submit > 5 trips • 10% of users submitted > 20 trips • 40 users submitted >100 trips (Max = 685) 31% 20% Users by Trips Submitted 8% 5% 3% 10% SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 14 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1 2-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-700
- 15. Combined Reach: ~44,000 trips Combined Reach SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY http://goo.gl/maps/DuqGh 15
- 16. Bias? M:PnP2013Memos01 Jan 15 • Tradeoff between bias and quantity – But bias can be dealt with if quantity is high enough. • Which biases are acceptable and when? • i.e. does income affect how adverse to biking up hills you are (vs. biking around them) ? • What biases can we undo with technology?
- 17. Where does it fit in Value Combined Reach: ~44,000 trips SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Chain? http://goo.gl/maps/DuqGh 17
- 18. Planning for Network Connectivity
- 20. Before and After Analysis Photo courtesy of Nathan Wilkes, City of Austin Before After After
- 21. Represent in Regional Model
- 22. Represent in Regional Model
- 23. Value of Bike Facilities Attribute Coef. SE t-stat. p-val. Length (mi) --1.05 0.09 --11.80 0.00 Turns per mile --0.21 0.02 --12.15 0.00 Prop. wrong way --13.30 0.67 --19.87 0.00 Prop. bike paths 1.89 0.31 6.17 0.00 Prop. bike lanes 2.15 0.12 17.69 0.00 Cycling freq. < several per wk.1.85 0.04 44.94 0.00 Prop. bike routes 0.35 0.11 3.14 0.00 Avg. up-slope (ft/100ft) --0.50 0.08 --6.35 0.00 Female --0.96 0.22 --4.34 0.00 Commute --0.90 0.11 --8.21 0.00 Log(path size) 1.07 0.04 26.38 0.00
- 24. Value of Bike Facilities
- 25. San Francisco County Transportation Authority elizabeth@sfcta.org @e_lo
Editor's Notes
- We have come along way since the freeway revolts of the 1960s …although some would say we’ve swung to far in the other direction and nothing gets done (i.e. Octavia Blvd vote yes/no/yes/no) board expects that we do significant outreach and engage community in meaningful ways Example photos More of a conversation. Try to make it convenient: we’ll come to you Try and make it fun: entice you to give us your opinion and care about someing so obtuse about long range planning. but it is always a challenge to engage the public in meaningful ways about LONG RANGE planning. Many don’t care about a project until it is about to be constructed Or Just want to complain / don’t have helpful suggestions. (i.e. fix my street, but don’t let other people drive on it, and I don’t want to pay for it) Technology has allowed us to have Greater reach Ask more meaningful questions Give more frequent updates
- Certainly the advent of webinars, email lists, and websites themselves have allowed us to be more constantly connected with constituents… I’m going to spend the rest of my time discussing three tools that we developed at SFCTA to help us improve outreach on all fronts.
- Allows public to understand “what’s going on” with my transportation dollars… …also useful for city coordination!
- Objectives: 1. Educate the public about transportation needs and available revenues 2. Use “Budget Game” to gather input on how best to prioritize available funds Maintenance and operations vs. smaller programs vs. larger expansion projects 3. Obtain feedback about potential new revenues for “Vision” scenario investments 4. Reach a broad cross-section of San Francisco stakeholders Geographic, ethnic, racial, income diversity Residents, employees, business owners
- This map shows the home zip code of budget game respondents. About 45% of respondents did not indicate their home zip code, but of those who did, about 15% did not live in San Francisco. N > 700
- Recurring themes get back to basics – fix and invest in existing system Importance of improving institutional efficiencies.
- Certainly the advent of webinars, email lists, and websites themselves have allowed us to be more constantly connected with constituents, but
- Certainly the advent of webinars, email lists, and websites themselves have allowed us to be more constantly connected with constituents, but
- Certainly the advent of webinars, email lists, and websites themselves have allowed us to be more constantly connected with constituents, but
- 44,000 trips as of end of 2012
- Certainly the advent of webinars, email lists, and websites themselves have allowed us to be more constantly connected with constituents… I’m going to spend the rest of my time discussing three tools that we developed at SFCTA to help us improve outreach on all fronts.
- 44,000 trips as of end of 2012
- Important connection from UT campus into Downtown; Rio Grande bike Boulevard or “neighborhood greenway”.
- Currently there is a lack of data on how to identify barriers; planners might rely on citizens adivsory comittees, or even a city 3-1-1 program. Objectively identify barriers; assumption is that repeated devations from the shortest path signal that there may be a barrier. OR they are willing to go out of their way. Either way, these areas arrant close examination. Green- street segments that cyclists took despite the fact that it wasn’t their shortest path Red- areas that were their shortest path, but that they avoided for one reason or another.
- Powerfull visual to justify spending on infrastructure.
- Powerfull visual to justify spending on infrastructure.
- Powerfull visual to justify spending on infrastructure.
- Powerfull visual to justify spending on infrastructure.
- Powerfull visual to justify spending on infrastructure.