Survey: Humboldt County Residents Want To Walk & Bike More, Drive Less

transportation

[Image from the Coalition for Responsible Transportation Priorities]

Press release from the Coalition for Responsible Transportation Priorities:

The Coalition for Responsible Transportation Priorities has released the results of a survey of Humboldt County residents about how they get around their communities, and how they feel about the transportation options available to them. The results show that how people use and perceive the local transportation system depends to a certain extent on where they live in the county. However, many opinions cross geographical boundaries.

“This is valuable and timely information with the County working on its Climate Action Plan,” said Fifth District Supervisor Steve Madrone. “It helps inform transportation planning for our entire community. For instance, the information collected in this study suggests that McKinleyville will need a much improved transit system before folks will choose to use it. We can do that, and this information will help support that effort.”

“The Coalition’s survey is an excellent example of citizen science and a demonstration of its commitment to gathering critical information needed to support data-driven and evidence-based decision-making,” said Dr. Andrea Hamre, Research Associate at the Western Transportation Institute, which was not involved with the survey. “One of the clear takeaways from the survey responses is the community’s appetite for safer and more convenient sustainable transportation options. In U.S. transportation planning, we often assume driving is the preferred default mode for most people and make investments accordingly. This survey provides important evidence to counter that narrative in Humboldt County and support a reimagining of transportation investment prioritization.”

Some of the key findings of the survey include:

  • Residents overwhelmingly enjoy walking and biking and want to do more of those things and less driving. However, residents prioritize convenience, time, comfort and safety when making mode choices, and often rank local non-car options low on these criteria. Residents broadly want to see better bike, pedestrian, and public transit systems developed locally.
  • Currently, driving is the most common mode of transportation, but most respondents also get around as a pedestrian or by bike daily or at least once a week.
  • People of different genders and ages use the local transportation system differently. Women ride the bus and/or carpool more frequently than men, and walk and/or bike less frequently. Older residents drive, carpool and/or ride the bus less frequently than younger residents.
  • Perceptions of the transportation system vary by gender, age, race/ethnicity, income and disability status.

o   Women are less likely than men to consider walking, biking and riding the bus as safe and easy ways to get around.

o   Older residents are less likely to consider walking and biking as easy and convenient and more likely to have positive perceptions of car ownership and driving.

o   People of color reported more positive perceptions of biking and riding the bus than did White/Non-Hispanic people.

o   Lower-income residents like biking, but don’t consider it as safe as higher-income residents do. Lower-income residents are less likely to consider driving pleasant or affordable and more likely to find current bus schedules inconvenient.

o   Residents with disabilities are less likely than residents with no disabilities to consider most modes of transportation safe, easy, convenient or pleasant. Residents with disabilities want to ride the bus more often but often have negative perceptions around public transit.

  • Reasons for choosing a transportation mode vary by gender, race/ethnicity, and income.

o   People of color are more likely to prioritize environmental impact in their mode choice decisions.

o   Lower-income residents, women and people of color are more likely to prioritize cost in mode choice decisions.

The Coalition hosted the online survey in both English and Spanish from February 8 through March 15, 2021. The survey was promoted through email, social media, and local news outlets. 128 Humboldt County residents responded. Detailed summaries of the survey’s findings are available at www.transportationpriorities.org. Raw survey data are available upon request, on the condition that no personally identifiable information of survey respondents be published.

For more information about the Coalition, visit www.transportationpriorities.org.

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules

Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

32 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Thirdeye
Guest
Thirdeye
3 years ago

So this is “citizen science?” Let’s see the peer review before we accept the conclusionary, ideologically loaded statement about how much priority various ethnicities give to environmental considerations.

UnflappableJack
Guest
UnflappableJack
3 years ago
Reply to  Thirdeye

It’s nonsense, more gibberish from the climate clowns.

J Clark
Guest
J Clark
3 years ago

OK Thirdeye,

Get the raw data and do your own analysis.

Reader
Guest
Reader
3 years ago

Not gonna lie, this may be the most worthless survey I’ve ever seen.

Lone Ranger
Guest
Lone Ranger
3 years ago

Build more race tracks and less bike paths.

Sam
Guest
Sam
3 years ago

I am saving up to up grade to electric assist for my pedal bike. Would like more dedicated bike lanes.

Reader
Guest
Reader
3 years ago
Reply to  Sam

the city of Eureka would be wise to combine addition of separated bike lanes with the obviously needed repaving of most streets. this would represent an actually good use of city funds for the first time in what appears to be many years.

note: it is not necessary nor advisable to remove a traffic lane from any major thoroughfares, such as H and I streets. these direct routes serve to reduce traffic on the side streets. J street, for example, is a very good candidate for a separated bike lane. Traffic is minimal and the street is very wide.

Mr. Bear
Guest
Mr. Bear
3 years ago
Reply to  Reader

H and I would be improved with a lane removed. They have far less daily traffic than other eureka roads that are just 2 such as Harris and Henderson

Bushytails
Guest
Bushytails
3 years ago
Reply to  Mr. Bear

Harris and henderson could use an extra lane!

H and I would be improved by continuing the one-way sections down to the gulch and paving a new road connecting them across to herrick, getting the traffic off F street. Also, continue the one-way sections of harris and henderson all the way to S.

Thirdeye
Guest
Thirdeye
3 years ago
Reply to  Reader

Bingo. I doubt if any of those who decided that converting H and I to two lanes + bike lanes actually ride bikes. If they did, they would recognize that other routes would remain preferred for bikers. Also, reducing the traffic lanes has the effect of spreading out the traffic, which creates more problems for cross-street traffic. The “platooning” effect of extra lanes is beneficial. Councilwoman Arroyo had a meltdown when she was told that by CalTrans. The one good thing about that plan is the bulbouts, which will increase visibility at cross-streets.

Bushytails
Guest
Bushytails
3 years ago
Reply to  Thirdeye

California’s recommendation, which I agree with, is to keep main bicycle and main vehicle routes separate. It makes much more sense to have a main route for vehicles, without bike lines, with the whole road dedicated to high-speed vehicle traffic, and a parallel route for bicycles, with wide bike lanes, narrow traffic lanes, and only low-speed local vehicle traffic. This way everyone is happy. Vehicles get a wide, fast route free of cyclists, and cyclists get nice wide bike lanes free of through vehicle traffic. Win-win. But, there’s a local contingent who seems to think that punishing vehicle owners is the main goal, not actually improving anything.

fred krissman
Guest
fred krissman
3 years ago
Reply to  Reader

AMEN! to the first point regarding Eureka’s pothole ridden roads and dearth of dedicated bike lanes…

Couldn’t disagree more with the second one though. H & I streets need “calming” from the current drag race sitch with more lights, stop signs, and, yes, conversion of a traffic lane into a bike path. I live on H and can testify to the road-rage and race-strip mentalities that currently hold sway among drivers seeking in shorten their “commutes” by a few measly seconds!

Bushytails
Guest
Bushytails
3 years ago
Reply to  fred krissman

If you reduce lanes, traffic will be denser and faster. The amount of traffic doesn’t go down just because there’s fewer lanes for it to drive on – instead cars are closer together, and moving faster to fit the same number of cars on the road.

Mike hunt
Guest
Mike hunt
3 years ago

Leftist being the dumbasses they are, as usual & believing everything they read….
Tisk tisk

Ullr Rover
Guest
Ullr Rover
3 years ago

I lived in Ourcata for 5 years and drove twice… the 2 times I moved. The rest was on foot or bike.

Guest
Guest
Guest
3 years ago
Reply to  Ullr Rover

Must have saved a ton of money.

Ullr Rover
Guest
Ullr Rover
3 years ago
Reply to  Guest

Gas was cheaper back then, but yes. And I was in really good shape.

Guest
Guest
Guest
3 years ago
Reply to  Ullr Rover

Yes but I’m assuming you weren’t paying for a car or associated costs, registration, insurance, maintenance, etc.

Ullr Rover
Guest
Ullr Rover
3 years ago
Reply to  Guest

Correct. I lived pretty cheap. Ate a lot of beans and rice too.

Bushytails
Guest
Bushytails
3 years ago

All of CRTP’s surveys are intentionally designed to give the results they want, not actual science. Even if you ignore how the questions are worded and how they claim the answers mean different things than the questions asked, the fact that their sample primarily consists of CRTP’s followers rather than any attempt at a representative segment of the public makes the results entirely worthless.

Really?
Guest
Really?
3 years ago
Reply to  Bushytails

Too true. I started filling out that survey and closed the page by the fourth question.

Allch Chcar
Guest
Allch Chcar
3 years ago

This is very obviously biased data. That Madrone would parrot it as evidence is unsurprising. A real study would need to be done to determine mass transit needs and desires.

In Sohum, a car is absolutely essential. Those without cars bum rides from friends or family. The bus is a last resort if all else fails. There is already a bus system in operation but I’m fairly certain it’s extremely underutilized. Maybe if they advertised more and integrated it with Google Maps?

W.H.
Guest
W.H.
3 years ago

translation: Humboldt County Planners want you to walk and bike more,drive less

North west
Guest
North west
3 years ago
Reply to  W.H.

The city’s trying to fix the hit and run statistics by putting more folks on foot? If we all rode bike and walked would be a great thing.
I think the cure is move damed 101 out of the middle of town.

local
Guest
local
3 years ago
Reply to  W.H.

this would explain the condition of the streets

Ben
Guest
Ben
3 years ago

Madrone is starting to really push his lib(communist) agenda. Not so sure hes gonna make the cut.

Smallfry
Guest
Smallfry
3 years ago

Yes! More bicycle and walking! Interesting study! I wonder what the happiness Index is on communities that are more suited for walking and Bicycling? So Hum is difficult to Bike around in. One of the major draw backs of So Hum life.. in my eyes.. but not impossible..

humboldtfrog
Guest
humboldtfrog
3 years ago
Reply to  Smallfry

For me, being able to bike and walk safely in the community is top priority for health and wellbeing…I live in Arcata, and bike everywhere all the time, and McKinleyville is pretty good for cycling, but Eureka is crazy dangerous on a bike which bums me out and for the residents of the city it must be awful. If Eureka could get it’s streets in order, we would all be better off.

Thirdeye
Guest
Thirdeye
3 years ago
Reply to  humboldtfrog

There was an analysis of car vs bike accidents in various parts of Humboldt done a few years ago. In Arcata and McKinleyville, the majority were driver-at-fault. In Eureka, the majority were cyclist-at-fault. When you see who makes up a sizeable contingent of Eureka cyclists, that’s not surprising. The only close call I had in Eureka involved another cyclist and you can probably guess what kind of cyclist it was.

The condition of the street surfaces in Eureka is pathetic. Fat tires are the way to go.

Guest
Guest
Guest
3 years ago

First while people might say they like the option of safely walking or biking, they certainly vote with their dollars to drive cars most of the time the minute they have the dollars to buy them. Cars let a person travel more safely and faster with fewer trips. Also in places where shopping, especially food shopping, is widely spaced and the weather wet , non motorized travel for the family with children or older people is a PITA. Especially they have to travel away from the flat lands near the bay.

That a Supe like Madrone would look at this survey as more than wishful thinking, they also
recognize that, if TPTB want less vehicles, they need to provide areas where people feel safe, (IE no people wandering around looking to steal) and clustered shopping that is more expensive without big box stores, that is available to residential districts with plenty of parks and entertainments wherever they are. Visions of picturesque Danes cycling through clean, flat cities needs more government control than Humboldt County would be willing to offer. They can’t keep people from shitting on the streets, much less make citizens feel safe without being inside their own vehicles.

VMG
Guest
VMG
3 years ago

First, Humboldt County needs to BAN all V-8 powered pickups.

Then, bypass Eureka. Completely. Forever.

Check this out:

https://www.facebook.com/theoxygenproj/

I know, I know, plant flowers instead of dope, and build windmills to power electric trains that run absolutely everywhere… I’m just a Dutch Hippie I guess…

Look, this is easy, dump your grow-dozer, get a Honda CT125 Trail Bike!

https://powersports.honda.com/street/minimoto/trail125-abs

With the money you save on gas, build a windmill or 2…

Feed the power into the Arcata City Council Office, and the geniuses on the City Council will have a “Millennial Meeting” and they will figure out how to get people to walk, and bike, instead of running hot down the 101 to nowhere in particular.

Then, charge up your cell phone, and order your potting soil etc, from Amazon.

That will work!

Also, ban “water delivery”, ban Semi Trucks on roads like Briceland, Shelter Cove, Alderpoint, Honeydew, Dyerville etc, and then, force everyone to move to Eureka, Arcata, and McKinleyville! That will work too! You can all cooperate and “share rides” and call UBER!

It will be great, as great as this whole study, and as great as the concept that Humboldtians would ever agree on anything at all…

FJJ
Guest
FJJ
3 years ago

128 is a tiny fraction of Humboldt County. I don’t think it tells us much about what the greater community thinks we need.