Are shelters in place? Mapping the distribution of transit amenities via a bus-stop census of San Francisco

IF 2 4区 工程技术 Q3 TRANSPORTATION
Marcel E. Moran
{"title":"Are shelters in place? Mapping the distribution of transit amenities via a bus-stop census of San Francisco","authors":"Marcel E. Moran","doi":"10.1016/j.jpubtr.2022.100023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Transit stops serve as crucial components of journeys for riders, but their condition is often left out of equity considerations. Two important empirical questions are what stop amenities, such as places to sit, clear signage, shelters for inclement weather, and unobstructed curbs are present, and how are they distributed across systems, which may reveal neighborhood or route-specific disparities. San Francisco, CA represents an ideal case for which to pursue this question, given it maintains a ‘transit first’ policy directive that mandates public space prioritize transit over private automobiles. An in-person census of 2964 street-level bus stops was conducted over three months, which finds that a majority of stops lack both seating and shelter of any kind, that route signage varies widely in format and legibility, and that roughly one third of all stops are obstructed by on-street parking, rendering them difficult to use and exposing riders to oncoming traffic. Stops in the city’s northern half are more likely to feature seating, shelter, and unobstructed curbs, whereas amenity “coldspots” nearly all lie within the city’s southern half. Stop amenities also vary sharply by bus route, such that routes with the longest headways (and thus waiting times) provide on average the least seating, shelter, and clear curbs. These three amenities – seating, shelter, and unobstructed curbs – are also present to a greater degree in Census tracts with higher shares of white residents. This census demonstrates that equity evaluations of transit must include stop amenities, which are often overlooked, can undermine transit’s attractiveness, and even compound long-standing imbalances in service quality for underserved communities. Furthermore, studies of this kind can inform where amenity upgrades should be prioritized, targeting those areas currently lacking in high-quality stops, and raising the minimum standard of stop amenities overall. Finally, given data collected in this census is almost entirely unavailable to riders within current trip-planning and wayfinding applications, this work raises the possibility of expanding transit-data standards to include amenity details.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47173,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Transportation","volume":"24 ","pages":"Article 100023"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1077291X22000236/pdfft?md5=822b38189c2e5bc957af9ccf5c2773bf&pid=1-s2.0-S1077291X22000236-main.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1077291X22000236","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Transit stops serve as crucial components of journeys for riders, but their condition is often left out of equity considerations. Two important empirical questions are what stop amenities, such as places to sit, clear signage, shelters for inclement weather, and unobstructed curbs are present, and how are they distributed across systems, which may reveal neighborhood or route-specific disparities. San Francisco, CA represents an ideal case for which to pursue this question, given it maintains a ‘transit first’ policy directive that mandates public space prioritize transit over private automobiles. An in-person census of 2964 street-level bus stops was conducted over three months, which finds that a majority of stops lack both seating and shelter of any kind, that route signage varies widely in format and legibility, and that roughly one third of all stops are obstructed by on-street parking, rendering them difficult to use and exposing riders to oncoming traffic. Stops in the city’s northern half are more likely to feature seating, shelter, and unobstructed curbs, whereas amenity “coldspots” nearly all lie within the city’s southern half. Stop amenities also vary sharply by bus route, such that routes with the longest headways (and thus waiting times) provide on average the least seating, shelter, and clear curbs. These three amenities – seating, shelter, and unobstructed curbs – are also present to a greater degree in Census tracts with higher shares of white residents. This census demonstrates that equity evaluations of transit must include stop amenities, which are often overlooked, can undermine transit’s attractiveness, and even compound long-standing imbalances in service quality for underserved communities. Furthermore, studies of this kind can inform where amenity upgrades should be prioritized, targeting those areas currently lacking in high-quality stops, and raising the minimum standard of stop amenities overall. Finally, given data collected in this census is almost entirely unavailable to riders within current trip-planning and wayfinding applications, this work raises the possibility of expanding transit-data standards to include amenity details.

避难所到位了吗?通过对旧金山公交车站的普查绘制交通便利设施的分布图
公交站点是乘客旅程的重要组成部分,但它们的状况往往没有得到公平考虑。两个重要的经验问题是,是什么阻止了设施的存在,比如坐下的地方、清晰的标志、恶劣天气的庇护所和畅通无阻的路沿,以及它们是如何在系统中分布的,这可能会揭示出社区或特定路线的差异。加州的旧金山是追求这个问题的理想案例,因为它坚持“交通优先”的政策指令,要求公共空间优先考虑交通而不是私家车。在三个多月的时间里,对2964个街道公交车站进行了亲自调查,结果发现,大多数车站既没有座位,也没有任何形式的遮蔽物,路线标志的格式和可读性差异很大,大约三分之一的车站被路边停车所阻碍,使它们难以使用,并使乘客暴露在迎面而来的车辆中。位于城市北半部的站点更有可能以座位、庇护所和畅通无阻的路边为特色,而舒适的“冷点”几乎都位于城市的南半部。车站设施也因公交路线的不同而有很大差异,例如,行驶距离最长(因此等待时间最长)的路线平均提供的座位、遮蔽处和清晰的路缘最少。这三种便利设施——座位、庇护所和畅通无阻的道路——在白人居民比例较高的人口普查区也更为普遍。这次普查表明,对交通的公平评估必须包括停车便利设施,这些设施经常被忽视,可能会破坏交通的吸引力,甚至会加剧长期以来服务质量不平衡的问题。此外,这类研究可以告诉我们应该优先升级哪些地方的便利设施,针对那些目前缺乏高质量站点的地区,并提高站点便利设施的最低标准。最后,鉴于本次普查收集的数据在当前的出行规划和寻路应用程序中几乎完全无法为乘客所用,这项工作提出了扩大交通数据标准以包括便利设施细节的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
26 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Transportation, affiliated with the Center for Urban Transportation Research, is an international peer-reviewed open access journal focused on various forms of public transportation. It publishes original research from diverse academic disciplines, including engineering, economics, planning, and policy, emphasizing innovative solutions to transportation challenges. Content covers mobility services available to the general public, such as line-based services and shared fleets, offering insights beneficial to passengers, agencies, service providers, and communities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信