NACTO 2013 - SFCTA Apps
25
-
Upload
san-francisco-county-transportation-authority-technology-data-analysis -
Category
Government & Nonprofit
-
view
197 -
download
1
description
Presentation given at the NACTO 2013 conference in Phoenix AZ.
Transcript of NACTO 2013 - SFCTA Apps
Who am I and Where do I come from?
27513
Who am I and Where do I come from?
94114
Participatory Planning in SF
Outreach Objectives
USEFUL
FAIR
PRACTICAL
Are all constituents able to participate?
Are benefits commiserate with costs?
Mutually beneficial exchange
Technology
1. MyStreetSF.com
2. sfbudgetczar.com
3. Cycletracks
M:\PnP\2013\Memos\01 Jan 15
mystreetsf.com
sfbudgetczar.com
All age, racial, ethnic and income groups reached, but
Over-representation of: Ages 25-40 White Higher-Income
9
sfbudgetczar.com – responses
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
CycleTracks
Amazon EC/2 Server running Apache
mySQL
JSONPHP PHP
CycleTracks
Broad User Base• 20% (500+) users infrequent cyclists (10% of
trips)
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 13
Less than once a month Several times per month Several times per week Daily
187 411 852 853577
2,036
9,122
13,506
Trips and Users by Cycling Frequency
Users Trips
Broad User Base• Half of users submit > 5 trips• 10% of users submitted > 20 trips• 40 users submitted >100 trips (Max = 685)
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 14
1 2-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-7000
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
80031%
20%
8%
5%3%
10%
Users by Trips Submitted
Combined Reach: ~44,000 trips
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 15http://goo.gl/maps/DuqGh
Combined Reach
Bias?
• 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?
M:\PnP\2013\Memos\01 Jan 15
Combined Reach: ~44,000 trips
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 17http://goo.gl/maps/DuqGh
Where does it fit in Value Chain?
Planning for Network Connectivity
Identify Potential Barriers
Before and After Analysis
Photo courtesy of Nathan Wilkes, City of Austin
Before
After
After
Represent in Regional Model
Represent in Regional Model
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 0.00Prop. wrong way --13.30 0.67 --19.87 0.00Prop. bike paths 1.89 0.31 6.17 0.00Prop. bike lanes 2.15 0.12 17.69 0.00
Cycling freq. < several per wk. 1.85 0.04 44.94 0.00Prop. 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 0.00Log(path size) 1.07 0.04 26.38 0.00
Value of Bike Facilities
