Washington County TSP 2035 • Existing Conditions and Future Needs Report **DRAFT 10/22/12** Chapter 4: Active Transportation and Transit 4.1 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION OVERVIEW This chapter describes existing conditions and future needs for three “active” modes of travel: walking (including the use of personal mobility devices), bicycling and taking transit. 4.1.1 What is Active Transportation? Active transportation refers to human‐powered travel, including walking and bicycling. Public transit is also a component of active transportation because accessing transit stops usually involves walking or bicycling. Widespread use of the term began in the first decade of the 21st century as policymakers placed increased emphasis on non‐automobile modes, and as the links between human health and transportation planning became more evident. Active transportation modes are essential components of the overall transportation system, meeting a variety of societal, environmental and economic goals. These include: • Environmental stewardship. In Oregon, approximately 34% of greenhouse gas emissions – the largest share – can be attributed to motor vehicles.1 Replacing automobile trips with active trips reduces the emission of greenhouse gases, air toxics and particulates, helping to improve regional air quality and address one of the leading causes of climate change. • Congestion alleviation. It is simple arithmetic that walk, bike and transit trips reduce the number of motor vehicles vying for space on roadways and in parking lots. The active mode share for commuting from Washington County is about 11%, representing roughly 27,000 people who do not drive to work.2 Reduced congestion improves air quality, quality of life, and economic productivity. • Health. America is facing a health epidemic related to obesity and inactivity. About 1/3 of adult Americans were obese in 2008, and an estimated 200,000 people die prematurely each year from inactivity.3 Using active transportation, which involves moderate‐intensity physical activity, can help people lose weight and stay healthy. • Safety. As walking and bicycling trips increase, so does the relative safety of those modes. In Portland, for example, the bicycle crash rate (reported crashes normalized by counted bicycle trips) has shown a general downward trend in the past decade, even as daily bicycle trips have more than doubled.4 This can be partly attributed to increased attentiveness on the part of motorists as they see more bicyclists on the road. The same trend applies to pedestrian safety. • Efficient travel. For many trips, active transportation is the most sensible, efficient mode. For very short trips, such as a quarter‐mile trip to a grocery store, walking is often the best choice. Trips in the one‐ to five‐mile 1 Clean Fuels Program, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2012 http://www.deq.state.or.us/aq/cleanFuel/index.htm 2 American Community Survey 2010 One‐Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, 2011. 3 TCRP Report 95: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, Chapter 16: Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities, Transportation Research Board, 2012. 4 2011 Bicycle Counts Report, Portland Bureau of Transportation, 2012. 1 Chapter 4 • Active Transportation and Transit **DRAFT 10/22/12** Washington County TSP 2035 • Existing Conditions and Future Needs Report **DRAFT 10/22/12** range are often ideal for bicycling. For trips to places with limited or paid parking, such as downtown Portland, many people choose to ride transit for cost and convenience reasons. • Cost savings and social equity. Many people in Washington County and nationwide cannot afford to own a car or pay for gasoline. For these and other people who need or want to reduce transportation costs, active transportation is a clear solution. The savings associated with not purchasing, registering, insuring, fueling or maintaining a vehicle – the “green dividend” – can go toward other costs such as housing, food and education. • Attractive, efficient urban form. The advent and popularity of walkscore.com joins other evidence that neighborhoods designed around active transportation are growing in desirability. From the historic, tree‐lined streets of Forest Grove to the still‐growing Orenco Station neighborhood, active transportation amenities like sidewalks, bike lanes and frequent transit are drawing residents and businesses. Walkable neighborhoods tend to be compact, using urban land efficiently and helping to meet other regional land use policies such as agricultural preservation. 4.1.2 Active Transportation Trends and Forecasts Perhaps because of the benefits and policy goals above, a growing proportion of Washington County residents are using active transportation modes for some or all of their trips. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 11% of workers who live in Washington County walked, biked or took transit to work in 2010, compared to about 8% in 2000 (Table 4‐1). With an estimated 249,753 workers in Washington County, that amounts to approximately 27,000 commuters using active modes. Bicycling saw the greatest increase, quadrupling from 0.4% of commutes in 2000 to 1.6% in 2010. Commuting by transit, representing 5.7% of trips, was statistically flat between 2000 and 2010. Washington County active mode shares are lower than the tri‐county average (Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington county), but higher than national rates. The tri‐county average is heavily influenced by Portland, whose mode split includes the highest share of bicycle commuters of any large American city: 6%. Conversely, only 5% of Clackamas County workers use active modes – less than half of the Washington County rate. Table 4-1: Use of Active Transportation Modes for the Journey to Work Washington Co. Clackamas Multnomah Tri‐County Area United States Co. Co. Walk 2010 3.6% 1.8% 4.7% 3.7% 2.8% 2000 2.2% 2.1% 4.6% 3.2% 2.9% Bicycle 1.6% 0.2% 4.9% 2.8% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 1.5% 0.9% 0.4% Transit 5.7% 2.8% 10.9% 7.4% 4.9% 5.8% 3.1% 11.1% 7.6% 4.7% Total Active 10.9% 4.8% 20.5% 14.0% 8.2% Modes 8.4% 5.4% 17.2% 11.8% 8.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2010 One‐Year Estimates and 2000 Decennial Census Summary File 3 Looking at mode split data from Metro’s regional travel demand model, active mode share appears more modest. Comparing different trip types and locations reveals additional distinctions. In general, transit rates are lower and walking rates are higher for non‐work trips, compared to work trips. This reflects a general tendency to use transit more for commuting and less for mid‐day errands, as well as the convenience of walking for short utilitarian trips. Comparing urban and rural portions of Washington County reveals an expected contrast in active mode usage. 2 Chapter 4 • Active Transportation and Transit **DRAFT 10/22/12** Washington County TSP 2035 • Existing Conditions and Future Needs Report **DRAFT 10/22/12** Rural walking and biking rates are roughly 2/3 the urban rates; transit is less than half. Not shown in any of the data are potentially thousands of recreation or exercise trips that begin and end at the same point, i.e. going for a jog or bike ride. Table 4-2: Active Transportation Trips and Mode Share, Washington County, 2010 Urban Area Rural Area Entire County Work Trips* Non‐Work All Trips All Trips All Trips Trips** Walk trips 20,660 146,652 167,312 4,403 171,716 share 2.1% 5.3% 4.5% 2.9% 4.4% Bicycle 6,619 27,847 34,466 918 35,383 0.7% 1.0% 0.9% 0.6% 0.9% Transit 34,782 32,686 67,469 1,250 68,719 3.5% 1.2% 1.8% 0.8% 1.8% Total Active 62,061 207,185 269,247 6,571 275,818 Modes 6.3% 7.6% 7.2% 4.3% 7.1% Source: West side component of Metro Regional Travel Demand Model, 2010 *Includes home‐based work and non‐home‐based work trips, explaining part of the discrepancy with Census data in Table 4‐1. **Includes college, recreation, shopping, non‐home‐based, school (but not school bus) and other trips. The past decade also saw a slight increase in households with no vehicles available, from 5.6 to 6.2% of households. Though small as a percentage, the 2010 figure represents about 12,000 households across the county that do not have access to a personal vehicle. Other than staying home or getting a ride from someone else, these households assumedly rely on active transportation to get around. Table 4-3: Vehicle Availability at Households Number of Washington Co. Tri‐County Area United States vehicles available Zero 2010 6.2% 9.9% 9.1% 2000 5.6% 1 31.7% 33.5% 33.8% 33.5% 2 44.1% 38.7% 37.6% 43.9% 3 or more 28.1% 17.9% 19.5% 17.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey 2010 One‐Year Estimates and 2000 Decennial Census Summary File 3 Future Demand Forecasting future active transportation demand is challenging. Modelers must make assumptions and guesses about a number of future conditions, from land use and density patterns to fuel and parking prices. The regional travel demand model estimates future mode split in each traffic analysis zone based on these and other factors. The mode split forecast for Washington County in 2035 predicts very meager gains in active transportation mode share. Walking and bicycling rates increase by just a few tenths of a percentage point in all categories and geographies. The rural transit share actually decreases. The greatest gain is in transit use for work trips in the urban area, increasing 1.1 percentage points, or a 31% relative increase.