San Angelo Survey for Bike & Pedestrian Projects

The San Angelo Metropolitan Planning Organization (SA-MPO) is a transportation planning agency that helps determine transportation priorities to improve the community. Enabling community participation by gathering public viewpoints on infrastructure project priorities is a primary responsibility of SA-MPO.

The Survey of Pedestrian and Bicycle Project Priorities (hereafter the “Survey”) was conducted on behalf of SA-MPO by Community Development Initiatives at Angelo State University. The Survey collected public opinion from 679 San Angelo residents between April and June of this year. The Survey questions addressed the following five areas:

1)         Bicycle and pedestrian use patterns.

2)         Public views on bicycle and pedestrian project priorities.

3)         Variations and differences by neighborhoods within the city.

4)         Public views of City performance on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.

5)         Public recommendations pertaining to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.

 Principal findings are:

•                     Pedestrian and cycling activities are of interest to residents throughout the city’s four residential ZIP Code areas. Approximately three-of-ten Survey respondents interested in pedestrian or cycling activity viewed themselves as experienced bicyclists or avid about walking or running.

•       Parks, museums, and other community centers are the most popular destinations for patrons of cycling and pedestrian activity. These are the only types of destination identified by a majority (54.8%) of Survey respondents as places where household members travel by foot or bicycle.

•                     Six-of-ten Survey respondents reported traveling by foot (walking or running) to a destination at least once per week. Three-of-ten reported using bicycles to travel at least weekly.

•                     The motivations most often cited by respondents for engaging in pedestrian and cycling activities are to reap health benefits, for recreation, and to stay-in-shape physically.

•                     A large majority of Survey respondents strongly agree that pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure projects should be prioritized on the basis of both their safety and potential health and recreation uses for current residents; but also on the basis of the potential for tourism, economic development, and promotion of the community as a “healthy” place to live.

•                     Pedestrian projects to provide safe-routes-to-schools, for Downtown development, and for the ASU Campus area neighborhoods were strongly supported by majorities of respondents from all residential ZIP Code areas.

•                     Projects to develop cycling facilities along the complete length of the Red Arroyo and around the Shores of Lake Nasworthy garnered support from respondents. However, support for giving priority to these projects does not rise to the same level as the most strongly supported the pedestrian projects. Residential ZIP Code areas differ substantially in prioritizing these facilities.

•                     Respondents do not have a positive view the City’s performance in developing and promoting pedestrian or cycling infrastructure and activities. Particularly challenging is a broad level of disagreement by respondents with the suggestion that the City successfully addresses “all population groups and neighborhoods.”

•                     A majority of residents across all the city’s residential areas appear to support the following general principles for funding pedestrian and cycling infrastructure projects:

·                     Expenditure of public funds should be reserved for infrastructure projects that address essential needs. The examples of safe-routes-to-school and sidewalks in residential neighborhoods seem to fall within the parameters of what the public views as essential needs.

·                     The City should aggressively pursue private funding opportunities (by way of private contributions, public-private partnerships, foundation grants, etc.) to augment projects that add neighborhood and community amenities beyond essential needs.

·                     The City should organize a continuing capital funding process for pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. The process should be a regular part of City budgeting with a revenue stream and appropriate expenditure guidelines.

•                     Residents across the city strongly agree that “more efforts are needed to educate the motoring public about traffic laws and safe driving with pedestrians and bicyclists along the roadway.”

•                     Residents also strongly agree that “the City should establish pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure standards and requirements for all future private and public development and redevelopment projects within the city limits.”