2. Study Background:
Bikeability workshop
•October 8th, 2013
•Sponsored by Healthy Shasta (Public Health)
•Held on the Shasta College campus
•Focus: development of a bicycling plan
for Shasta College
• Outcome: three proposed bike routes for the
Shasta College campus
3. Focus of the present study
Investigating the bikeability of two of the proposed routes.
Bikeability: beauty (trees make a more beautiful route than
buildings), traffic (pedestrian and vehicular), and
convenience (proximity to destination).
5. Methodology
• Route one – 21 waypoints
• Route two – 15 waypoints
• GPS - Garmin Etrex GPS unit (An error
range of 1-15 ft.)
• The Garmin map datum - WGS 84
• Position format in degrees, minutes, and
seconds
• Elevation was recorded in feet.
6. Data Collected at each waypoint
• Number of trees within 50ft.
•Number of people within 50ft. in a
two minute period.
•Number of buildings within 50 ft.
•Number of buildings in sight
•Number of vehicles within 50 ft. in a two
minute period.
7. Results – bike route two
Focus on the Traffic
Map and Quantitative data
Waypoints collected: Dec. 6th, 2:30 – 4:00 P.M.
8.
9. Results – bike route two
Focus on the trees
Map and Quantitative data
Waypoints collected: Dec. 5th, 2:30 – 4:00 P.M.
10.
11. Results – bike route one
Focus on the traffic and trees
Map and Quantitative data
Waypoints collected: Nov. 25th, 10:00 – 11:30
12.
13.
14. Discussion: Findings
Beauty
• Both routes had trees along the entire path
Traffic
• Both routes encountered vehicular traffic at Shasta College Dr.
• Route two had vehicular traffic over a longer stretch than route one
• Route one had more pedestrian traffic , especially in front of two
buildings
Convenience
• Route one - more convenient for: Humanities
• Route two - more convenient for: Learning Resource Center,
student/staff parking
• Both routes protect from the elements but route one provides more
tree canopy than route two
15. Methodology Issues
• Problems with the GPS on route 2
•Differences in traffic – due to different days and time of day.
•Differences in tree count – different researcher estimates of
50 ft.
16. Recommendations for future
work
• Include path three in the study
•Standardize procedure for measuring distance
•Take the waypoints at the same time, day and
time of day (i.e.) employ multiple teams.
