Indicator ST.3.g Area score on the Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index
|
Below is a description of the Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index (PEQI).
The PEQI methodology is currently being refined, pilot tested and peer reviewed.
Please contact the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH), Program on Health, Equity and Sustainability (PHES) for additional information about using the PEQI. Information regarding the PEQI and future updates will be accessible on the PHES website, at the following link:
http://www.sfphes.org/HIA_Tools_PEQI.htm
/
Please note that applications of the PEQI are site specific and not citywide.
|
|---|

Data Source
PEQI data collection requires a SFDPH-trained observer to visually assess street segment and intersection features (Table 1, below) while walking and check the corresponding box on a simple survey form created by SFDPH. Once collected, data is entered into a user-friendly Microsoft Access database that automatically scores the data. A PEQI score, reflecting the quality of the physical environment for pedestrians and based on a weighted scale informed by surveys of national experts, is created for each street segment and intersection in a defined study area. An example of the mapped PEQI street segment scores is displayed above. Maps can be made on the basis of the PEQI score or could depict a single PEQI environmental factor (e.g., lighting) or PEQI category (e.g., street design). SFDPH is finalizing a field manual with instructions on how to conduct the survey, use the PEQI Microsoft Access database, and geocode and display PEQI results. SFDPH also anticipates a Summer 2008 release of a report on the PEQI methodology, including variable selection, weighting, and score cut points.Explanation and Limitations
Background
While many people enjoy walking as a simple way of getting around, an urban environment may present considerable barriers to incorporate walking into people's everyday routine. Some obstacles to walking include high traffic speeds, narrow sidewalks, unsafe intersections, and a lack of lighting. Researchers and planners have developed checklists and level of service (LOS) instruments for walking as one way of promoting attention to pedestrian needs in planning.
Objective
The objective of the Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index project is to develop a quantitative observational instrument to describe and summarize street and intersection environmental factors known to affect people's travel behaviors (i.e., whether they walk) and pedestrian safety.
Methods
Drawing on research from multiple sources we have identified five main categories for this study which embody physical environmental factors important for pedestrian quality. These categories include intersection safety, traffic, street design, land use and perceived safety (see Table 1 below).
Study Area
Applications of the PEQI include assessments of physical pedestrian environmental conditions on Treasure Island in collaboration with the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition as a part of a community-based planning effort funded by CalTrans to create a walkable, bikeable Treasure Island. We have also used the PEQI in collaboration with PODER, UC Berkeley researchers and environmental justice students to assess pedestrian conditions in the Excelsior neighborhood of San Francisco. SFDPH also has or is currently applying the PEQI in our health impact assessment work in select areas of San Francisco's Eastern Neighborhoods (the Mission, South of Market and Potrero Hill) and Executive Park.
Data Collection and Analysies
Details are included above, in the "Data Source" section.Application
The results from this project will be an assessment of the relative quality of the walking environment at a street-level scale in San Francisco neighborhoods that are surveyed. We developed the PEQI for a number of purposes, including assessing existing physical conditions and demonstrating the need for improvements in the course of land use and transportation planning, community education regarding built environmental factors that either promote or discourage walking in local neighborhoods, and to fill a gap in data regarding the physical environment on our city streets in order to assess how it predicts key health determinants such as physical activity.
| Table 1: Categories in the Pedestrian Environmental Quality Index (PEQI) | ||
|---|---|---|
| TRAFFIC: | INTERSECTION SAFETY: | STREET DESIGN: |
| Number of Vehicle Lanes | Crosswalks (and if Ladder) | Width of Sidewalk |
| Two-Way Traffic | Pedestrian Countdown Signal | Sidewalk Impediments |
| Vehicle Speed | Crossing Speed | Presence of Curb |
| Traffic Volume | Crosswalk Scramble | Driveway Cuts |
| Traffic Calming Features | Traffic Calming Features | Large Sidewalk Obstructions |
| Signal at Intersection | Trees | |
| Additional Signs for Pedestrians | Planters/Gardens | |
| No Turn On Red Signs | Public Seating | |
| Presence of a Buffer (Parallel Parking, Bike Lane) | ||
| LAND USE: | SAFETY (OTHER): | |
| Restaurant or Retail Use | Illegal Graffiti | |
| Public Art/Historic Sites | Litter | |
| Lighting | ||
| Construction Sites | ||
| Abandoned Buildings | ||
Why is this a Community Health Indicator?
A high quality pedestrian environment can support walking both for utilitarian purposes and for pleasure. Recent studies in the United States have demonstrated that people walk on average 70 minutes longer in pedestrian oriented communities.a,b In turn, walking contributes to minimum requirements for physical activity, an established protective factor for cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and some types of cancer.c As a form of transport, pedestrian trips do not contribute to noise or air pollution emissions. Finally, a vibrant pedestrian environment may contribute to both economic vitality and social interaction in a place, furthering the development of social capital.
Parental concerns about the lack of traffic lights and controlled crossings on their child’s school route reduce the likelihood that their child will actively commute to school.d In an evaluation of a Safe Routes to School program, the presence of pedestrian safety measures at street crossings was associated with a greater likelihood of walking to school for children.e Finally, physical activity among children is higher when they have access to sidewalks, desirable destinations to walk to, and when children face fewer traffic hazards.f
- Frank LD, Schmid TL, Sallis JF, Chapman J, Saelens BE. Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: findings from SMARTRAQ. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28(2 Suppl 2):117-25
- Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Black JB, Chen D. Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(9):1552-8.
- Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Increasing Physical Activity: A Report on Recommendations of the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. October 26, 2001.
Davison KK, Lawson CT. Do attributes in the physical environment influence children's physical activity? A review of the literature. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2006;3:19.
Boarnet MG, Anderson CL, Day K, McMillan T, Alfonzo M. Evaluation of the California Safe Routes to School legislation: urban form changes and children's active transportation to school. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2005;28:134–140.
Bauman A, Bull F. Environmental Correlates of Physical Activity and Walking in Adults and Children: A Review of Reviews. London: National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence; 2007.