DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report FINAL REPORT Breaking Barriers to Bike Share: Insights from Residents of Traditionally Underserved Neighborhoods NITC-RR-884b June 2017 NITC is a U.S. Department of Transportation national university transportation center. BREAKING BARRIERS TO BIKE SHARE: INSIGHTS FROM RESIDENTS OF TRADITIONALLY UNDERSERVED NEIGHBORHOODS Final Report NITC-RR-884b Prepared by: Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) Portland State University Nathan McNeil Jennifer Dill John MacArthur Joseph Broach Steven Howland Prepared for: National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) June 2017 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. NITC-RR-884b 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Breaking Barriers to Bike Share: June 2017 Insights from Residents of Traditionally Underserved Neighborhoods 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Nathan McNeil, Jennifer Dill, John MacArthur, Joseph Broach, Steven Howland 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Portland State University 11. Contract or Grant No. 884 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) P.O. Box 751 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Portland, Oregon 97207 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract Evidence has shown that higher income and white populations are overrepresented in both access to and use of bike share. Efforts to overcome underserved communities’ barriers to access and use of bike share have been initiated in a number of cities, including those working with the Better Bike Share Partnership (BBSP) to launch and test potentially replicable approaches to improve the equity outcomes. This report describes findings from a survey of residents living near bike share stations placed in underserved communities of select BBSP cities: Philadelphia, Chicago, and Brooklyn. These were neighborhoods targeted for focused outreach related to BBSP programs, and were majority-minority (79- 94% people of color) and lower-income (36-61% of households under 150% of the poverty level). Residents were also surveyed in control areas that did not receive BBSP targeted outreach in two of the cities. The research team mailed surveys to 6,000 residents in each city, and received 1,885 responses. Respondents closely matched area demographics on race/ethnicity and income in most study locations, but were somewhat more likely to be women, older and more highly educated. Findings are drawn primarily from an analysis of data from adults in the BBSP outreach areas under 65 years old and physically able to ride a bicycle. Of those respondents who provided race and income information (n=779), 42% were lower-income (defined as 300% of poverty or below) people of color, 27% were higher-income (above 300% of poverty) people of color, 6% were lower-income and white (not Hispanic), and 25% were higher-income and white. Race and income often influenced responses to bicycling and bike share in different ways. Differences in behavior and opinions sometimes correlated with income, sometimes with race, and sometimes with race and income combined. Both people of color and lower-income residents cited more barriers to bicycling generally and to using bike share than did higher-income white residents. The biggest barrier to bicycling generally is concern about traffic safety, regardless of race or income (cited as a big barrier by 48% of residents). For some, personal safety is also a concern. For example, 22% of lower-income people of color stated that a big barrier to riding was that doing so could cause them to be harassed or a victim of crime. Some of the most common barriers to bicycling cited by lower-income people of color were issues that bike share could address, such as: not having a bike or related gear (47%); not having a safe place to leave a bike where they need to go (36%); the expense of buying a bike or related gear (41%); and not having a safe place to store a bike at home (32%). High costs of membership and concerns about liability for the bicycle were big barriers to using bike share for about half of lower-income respondents (48% and 52% respectively), compared to 33% and 31% of higher-income respondents of color and only 18% and 10% of higher- income white respondents. Another set of barriers relates to knowledge, lack of knowledge or incorrect knowledge. Only 31% of all respondents knew the details about the availability of the reduced-price membership or pass option, and 34% of lower-income respondents of color said that not knowing enough about how to use bike share was a big barrier to using it, compared to 19% of higher-income respondents of color and 7% of higher-income white residents. Among potential program changes, lower-income people of color were significantly more likely than other respondents to indicate that certain changes would make them more likely to use bike share, including: several changes that could help with cost and liability concerns such as discounted membership or use options (80% stating somewhat or much more likely to use bike share with this change), access to free or low-cost helmets/gear (72%), and easier ways to pay with cash (67%); and several changes to help overcome knowledge or experience gaps, such as help finding safe ways to get where I need to go (70%), and organized rides for people like me (71%). Respondents generally have positive attitudes about bicycling and bike share. A large majority of all residents (73%) and lower-income people of color (74%) agreed that the city’s bike share system “is useful for people like me.” In terms of reasons for using bike share, getting exercise was cited by 71% of the lower-income respondents of color as a reason they would consider using bike share, a rate much higher than other respondent groups. Being able to ride with friends and family was cited by 48% of lower-income respondents of color, again higher than other groups. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement bike share, equity No restrictions. Copies available from NITC: www.nitc-utc.net 19. Security Classification (of this report) 20. Security Classification (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 230 Acknowledgements This research was funded by the Better Bike Share Partnership (BBSP), a collaboration made possible by The JPB Foundation; and the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) under grant number 884, a program of the Transportation Research and Education Center at Portland State University and a U.S. Department of Transportation university transportation center. The research could not have been conducted without the significant participation of our city partners. These individuals shared their time and expertise, provided data, hosted our field visits, and provided feedback on surveys and findings: Carniesha Kwashie, Aaron Ritz and Cara Ferrentino (City of Philadelphia); Claudia Setubal and Kiera Smalls (Bicycle Transit Systems); Katie Monroe and Waffiyyah Murray (Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia); Amanda Woodall and Sean Wiedel (Chicago Department of Transportation); Eliot Greenberger (Motivate); Ronnie Harris and Rebecca Noble (Go Bronzeville); Jennifer McClain and Lynnette Washington (LISC Chicago); Dan Black (Slow Roll Chicago); Tracey Capers, Verna Ademu-John, Joanna Lee Jacob and Aysu Kirac (Bedford Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation); Anne Krassner and William Bissell (Citi Bike); Dani Simons (Motivate); Beth Heyde (New York City Department of Transportation), Philip Noyes (New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene); along with Ted Graves and Kate Fillin-Yeh (NACTO), Zoe Kircos, Martha Roskowski and Jennifer Boldry (PeopleForBikes). Thanks also to the students who worked on this project, including Kenneth Rankins, Michael Harpool, Layne Wise, Carlos Callava, and Jamaal Green. Disclaimer The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are solely responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the material and information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation University Transportation Centers Program in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of the U.S. government. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Recommended Citation McNeil, Nathan, Jennifer Dill, John MacArthur, Joseph Broach, Steven Howland. Breaking Barriers to Bike Share: Insights from Residents of Traditionally Underserved Neighborhoods. NITC-RR-884b. Portland, OR: Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC), 2017. TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................... i List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America
    Portland State University PDXScholar Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports Civil and Environmental Engineering Summer 2018 Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America David Soto Padín Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cengin_gradprojects Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Soto Padín, David, "Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America" (2018). Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports. 52. https://doi.org/10.15760/CCEMP.51 This Project is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP OF BIKESHARE AND TRANSIT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY DAVID RAFAEL SOTO PADÍN A research project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Project Advisor: Kelly J. Clifton Portland State University ©2018 Final Draft ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude for the academic guidance provided by my advisor Dr. Kelly J. Clifton. This project would not have been possible without the support and feedback of my fellow graduate students in the transportation lab of Portland State University. Any errors or omissions are the sole responsibility of the author. The author would like to thank bikeshare operators for making their data available, including Motivate and Bicycle Transportation Systems.
    [Show full text]
  • DATE: January 4, 2019
    DATE: January 4, 2019 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager ENC: NACTO Guidelines for the Regulation and Management of Shared Active Transportation (Version 1: July 2018) PREPARED BY: Greg Hermann, Interim Deputy City Manager Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager SUBJECT: SHARED ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION DEVICES The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to inquiries about the proposed operation of shared active transportation devices, such as scooters and bicycles. This memo provides pertinent background information, an overview of relevant City ordinances, policy and safety considerations and potential next steps for City Council consideration. Background In September 2018, the City was informed that Bird, an electric scooter sharing company, had unannounced plans to launch in San Luis Obispo without the proper permits or licenses. City staff reached out to Bird representatives and invited them to take part in a dialogue before beginning a “rogue launch” similar to the company’s practice in other cities. Bird responded favorably, traveled to San Luis Obispo and met with City staff to discuss their business model and has so far agreed to follow City policy and procedures relating to their business. Since then, four other scooter share companies have also inquired about operating in the City. They include Lime, Spin, Gotcha, and Uscooter. Staff has been in discussion with these companies and has informed them that a memo would be distributed to the Council outlining issues and potential paths and that no City actions would take place until such time as Council provided direction on whether to proceed with any ordinance changes and provide input on outreach, vendor selection, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes and Sources for Evil Geniuses: the Unmaking of America: a Recent History
    Notes and Sources for Evil Geniuses: The Unmaking of America: A Recent History Introduction xiv “If infectious greed is the virus” Kurt Andersen, “City of Schemes,” The New York Times, Oct. 6, 2002. xvi “run of pedal-to-the-medal hypercapitalism” Kurt Andersen, “American Roulette,” New York, December 22, 2006. xx “People of the same trade” Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, ed. Andrew Skinner, 1776 (London: Penguin, 1999) Book I, Chapter X. Chapter 1 4 “The discovery of America offered” Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy In America, trans. Arthur Goldhammer (New York: Library of America, 2012), Book One, Introductory Chapter. 4 “A new science of politics” Tocqueville, Democracy In America, Book One, Introductory Chapter. 4 “The inhabitants of the United States” Tocqueville, Democracy In America, Book One, Chapter XVIII. 5 “there was virtually no economic growth” Robert J Gordon. “Is US economic growth over? Faltering innovation confronts the six headwinds.” Policy Insight No. 63. Centre for Economic Policy Research, September, 2012. --Thomas Piketty, “World Growth from the Antiquity (growth rate per period),” Quandl. 6 each citizen’s share of the economy Richard H. Steckel, “A History of the Standard of Living in the United States,” in EH.net (Economic History Association, 2020). --Andrew McAfee and Erik Brynjolfsson, The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies (New York: W.W. Norton, 2016), p. 98. 6 “Constant revolutionizing of production” Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1969), Chapter I. 7 from the early 1840s to 1860 Tomas Nonnenmacher, “History of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • CONNECTING the RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio
    RUTGERS UNIVERSITY BIKE SHARE CONNECTING THE RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio ABOUT THE STUDIO This studio project is an analysis of the health impacts of the We met with Bloustein professors, with planning professionals, potential new Bike Share program planned for the Rutgers-New and with the organizers and staff of bike shares across the coun- Brunswick community. It builds upon our client’s – the Rutgers try in order to ask questions and gain invaluable advice on how University Department of Institutional Planning and Opera- to proceed with our analysis. We used this collected knowledge tion (IPO) – Internal Bicycle Share Proposal. The IPO report to build impact projections and develop a list of actionable rec- highlighted existing bicycle infrastructure, robust public trans- ommendations targeted at maximizing positive health outcomes portation infrastructure, and the high concentration of bicycle while mitigating health concerns. commuters in the study area as support for their proposal. This studio expanded on that analysis by examining the physical, This studio course is intended to advance the goals of Healthier mental, social, and economic health of the users and residents New Brunswick, a network of partners in the City of New Bruns- of Rutgers campus and the surrounding areas. Our targeted wick that are working together to ensure that all residents have audience for this analysis was people who currently do not bike; equal access to the services and conditions that allow for good we paid close attention to equity issues and vulnerable popula- health and well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • BIKE SHARE in LOS ANGELES COUNTY an Analysis of LA Metro Bike Share and Santa Monica Breeze
    BIKE SHARE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY An analysis of LA Metro Bike Share and Santa Monica Breeze visit us at scag.ca.gov ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Prepared for Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) On behalf of Los Angeles Country Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) BY ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN Jean Crowther, AICP Michael Jones Mike Sellinger WITH MOORE & ASSOCIATES Jim Moore Erin Kenneally Kathy Chambers SPECIAL THANKS TO City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation City of Santa Monica City of West Hollywood Bicycle Transit Systems CycleHop And the many community members who gave their time and energy to participate in our outreach efforts and whose insights added to the value and relevance of this study and its recommendations. TABLE OF CONTENTS 01 PROJECT PURPOSE AND GOALS ..............................1 02 A TALE OF TWO SYSTEMS ..........................................3 03 WHAT THE DATA TELLS US ........................................5 04 WHAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS TELL US .................19 05 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE .................27 APPENDICES A - Technology Integration Memo B - Statistical Analysis Methodology and Find- ings C - Agency & Operator Interview Questions D - User Survey E - Survey Results LA BIKE SHARE STUDY 01 PROJECT PURPOSE AND GOALS The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), in The study centered on five core phases of analysis: partnership with Los Angeles Metro (Metro), commissioned a • User Survey: An online and intercept survey targeted existing study to better understand the role of bike share within the Los bike share users, available for 2 months in spring of 2019, Angeles regional transportation system. The results are intended which garnered 351 valid responses (201 from Metro users to guide decision-making related to future system investments and 150 from Santa Monica users) and provided a 95 percent and new shared mobility programs in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • The Geography of the New Teacher Pipeline POLICY RESEARCH Eric J
    ILLINOIS EDUCATION RESEARCH COUNCIL The Geography of the New Teacher Pipeline POLICY RESEARCH Eric J. Lichtenberger and Bradford R. White, Illinois Education Research Council ISSUE Karen J. DeAngelis, University of Rochester 01 | 2015 ABOUT THE AUTHORS Eric J. Lichtenberger, PhD, is an Assistant Research Professor at the Illinois Education Research Council and is a member of the faculty of Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. He holds a PhD in Career and Technical Education from Virginia Tech. He also attended Southern Illinois University Carbondale and earned a Master’s of Education in Workforce Education and Development and a Bachelor’s of Art degree in Political Science. Bradford R. White is a Senior Researcher with the Illinois Education Research Council. Karen J. DeAngelis, PhD, is an Associate Professor and the Director of the Educational Policy Program at the Warner School of Education and Human Development at the University of Rochester. The Geography of the New Teacher Pipeline The Geography of the New Teacher ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to acknowledge the dedicated work of IERC research assistants Nick Mehner and Jerrod Deerhake in preparing the dataset used in this study. We would also like to express our gratitude to Doug Franklin, Illinois Board of Higher Education, Jason Helfer, Illinois State Board of Education, and Michelle Reininger, Stanford University’s Center for Education Policy Analysis, for their invaluable feedback on an earlier version of this report. The authors wish to acknowledge IERC board member William Trent, former IERC board member Gerry McLaughlin, and Casey George-Jackson, for earlier discussions that led to some of these analyses and graphics.
    [Show full text]
  • Correlations of Race, Ethnicity, and Family Relations on the Developmental Outcomes of Youth Raised in Single Mother Headed Hous
    Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2016 Correlations of Race, Ethnicity, and Family Relations on the Developmental Outcomes of Youth Raised in Single Mother Headed Households Sabrina Blount Watson Walden University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations Part of the Developmental Psychology Commons, Family, Life Course, and Society Commons, and the Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Walden University College of Social and Behavioral Sciences This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by Sabrina Watson has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Dorothy Scotten, Committee Chairperson, Human Services Faculty Dr. Scott Hershberger, Committee Member, Human Services Faculty Dr. Kimberly Farris, University Reviewer, Human Services Faculty Chief Academic Officer Eric Riedel, Ph.D. Walden University 2016 Abstract Correlations of Race, Ethnicity, and Family Relations on the Developmental Outcomes of Youth Raised in Single
    [Show full text]
  • Strategies for Engaging Community
    Strategies for Engaging Community Developing Better Relationships Through Bike Share photo Capital Bikeshare - Washington DC Capital Bikeshare - Washinton, DC The Better Bike Share Partnership is a collaboration funded by The JPB Foundation to build equitable and replicable bike share systems. The partners include The City of Philadelphia, Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia, the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and the PeopleForBikes Foundation. In this guide: Introduction........................................................... 5 At a Glance............................................................. 6 Goal 1: Increase Access to Mobility...................................................... 9 Goal 2: Get More People Biking................................................ 27 Goal 3: Increase Awareness and Support for Bike Share..................................................... 43 3 Healthy Ride - Pittsburgh, PA The core promise of bike share is increased mobility and freedom, helping people to get more easily to the places they want to go. To meet this promise, and to make sure that bike share’s benefits are equitably offered to people of all incomes, races, and demographics, public engagement must be at the fore of bike share advocacy, planning, implementation, and operations. Cities, advocates, community groups, and operators must work together to engage with their communities—repeatedly, strategically, honestly, and openly—to ensure that bike share provides a reliable, accessible mobility option
    [Show full text]
  • What Affirmative Action? Where Are the Minority Educators in the Metropolitan Chicago Schools?
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 403 348 UD 031 461 AUTHOR Heller, Rafael TITLE What Affirmative Action? Where Are the Minority Educators in the Metropolitan Chicago Schools? INSTITUTION Chicago Urban League, Ill.; Latino Inst., Chicago, IL. SPONS AGENCY Spencer Foundation, Chicago, Ill. PUB DATE [92] NOTE 59p.; Foreword by Gary Orfield. PUB TYPE Reports Evaluative/Feasibility (142) Statistical Data (110) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Affirmative Action; Elementary Secondary Education; *Employment Patterns; Enrollment; Equal Opportunities (Jobs); Inner City; *Minority Group Teachers; Neighborhood Integration; Racial Composition; School Segregation; *Suburban Schools; *Teacher Supply and Demand; *Urban Areas; Urban Schools IDENTIFIERS *Illinois (Chicago Metropolitan Area) ABSTRACT Teacher employment patterns in metropolitan Chicago (Illinois) were studied using data from the Illinois State Board of Education. Findings show no signs of affirmative action in many of the region's rapidly growing school systems. In many of the metropolitan area's districts, there is a persistence of segregated employment patterns and the exclusion of minority professionals. A review of hiring patterns in the districts around the city show that no progress is being made in improving minority representation on faculties. Since 1980, suburban minority enrollment has grown to 24.5% of the total, but the minority teaching force has risen only 0.6% to 5.8%. The Chicago suburbs employ nearly 64% of the region's teachers but only 16% of the black teachers. Although 1 in 12 suburban students is Hispanic, only 1 in 100 suburban teachers is Latino. Almost 1 in 12 suburban students is Asian, only 1 of 1,100 principals is from an Asian background.
    [Show full text]
  • Disparate Impact and Mortgage Lending: a Beginner's Guide
    13. 88.4 GANO_FINAL (DO NOT DELETE) 5/19/2017 4:14 PM DISPARATE IMPACT AND MORTGAGE LENDING: A BEGINNER’S GUIDE ALEX GANO* In the aftermath of the Great Recession, the federal government began to enforce fair lending laws with a vigor previously unseen. To hold lenders accountable for the racially discriminatory effects of their mortgage lending practices, federal prosecutors and financial regulators applied the theory of disparate impact to fair lending laws for the first time. Unclear, however, is what legal standards exist to evaluate allegations of discriminatory effects in this industry. No court has ever decided a fair lending case under a theory of disparate impact on its merits. That will likely change soon as major municipalities are pushing the boundaries of this theory to its outer limits. Last June, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Bank of America v. City of Miami to address a pair of discrete issues in this area. This Comment attempts to answer some foundational questions about how the theory of disparate impact will be applied to mortgage lenders moving forward. It also makes a normative argument for judicial acceptance of this theory and continued governmental enforcement of fair lending laws. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 1110 I. DE JURE DISCRIMINATION, THE FAIR HOUSING ACT, AND FAIR LENDING ENFORCEMENT: 1968–2008 ............. 1116 A. De Jure Discrimination Before 1968 ....................... 1116 B. The Disparate Treatment Era: 1968–2007 ............
    [Show full text]
  • Full 2018 Indego Business Plan Update
    2018 Business Plan Update Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 2013 Business Plan ............................................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Strategic Vision ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Purpose of the Strategic Vision ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1 Vision & Mission ............................................................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures ......................................................................................................... 5 2.2.1 Performance Measures ............................................................................................................................................... 5 3 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Developing a Bike-Share Program for Salinas and CSUMB
    California State University, Monterey Bay Digital Commons @ CSUMB Capstone Projects and Master's Theses Capstone Projects and Master's Theses 12-2016 Developing a Bike-Share Program for Salinas and CSUMB Brittany Whalen California State University, Monterey Bay Ryan Blackman California State University, Monterey Bay Monica Mata California State University, Monterey Bay Madi Hare California State University, Monterey Bay Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/caps_thes_all Recommended Citation Whalen, Brittany; Blackman, Ryan; Mata, Monica; and Hare, Madi, "Developing a Bike-Share Program for Salinas and CSUMB" (2016). Capstone Projects and Master's Theses. 67. https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/caps_thes_all/67 This Capstone Project (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by the Capstone Projects and Master's Theses at Digital Commons @ CSUMB. It has been accepted for inclusion in Capstone Projects and Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ CSUMB. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 Brittany Whalen Ryan Blackman Monica Mata Madi Hare Daniel Fernandez, PhD. ENSTU 471 Fall 2016 Developing a Bike-Share Program for Salinas and CSUMB Introduction Bike-share programs are alternate forms of transportation most commonly found on college campuses or in city centers. These programs allow citizens, visitors, students and others to check-out a bike from a self-serve station and take it from point A to point B. Bike-share programs have grown worldwide at an increasing rate within the past decade. Image 1 shows that in 2001 there were only four worldwide cities that adopted a bike-share program, but that number dramatically increased from the years 2002 to 2014, when there were eight-hundred and fifty-five worldwide cities with bike-share programs.
    [Show full text]