Active transportation refers to human-powered, non-vehicular modes of mobility that provide essential alternatives to driving, public transit, and other motorized options. It primarily includes walking and biking, but also extends to skateboarding, scootering, and mobility aids like manual wheelchairs and walkers. Designing for active transportation means offering safe travel solutions for those relying on all of these tools to navigate their environment. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT, 2024), active transportation infrastructure is vital for creating accessible, connected, and safe travel networks for all users, including pedestrians, cyclists, and wheelchair users. Despite over half of all trips in the U.S. being under three miles—ideal distances for walking or biking— American communities lack the necessary active transportation infrastructure (USDOT, 2024). This is primarily due to American traffic engineers prioritizing the efficiency of vehicular transportation over all other modes of transportation (Marshall, 2024).
The use of active transportation is crucial for redefining the purpose of a street as a space meant to accommodate a diverse array of users. By designing streets to be more inclusive, we can help reduce the effects of economic and physical discrimination that currently limit mobility options for many people. Anna Zivarts, in her book When Driving is Not an Option, examines the everyday hardships and systemic neglect faced by Americans who are unable to drive due to age, disability, financial constraints, or other reasons. Zivarts, a disability rights advocate and non-driver herself emphasizes how current transportation systems largely overlook the needs of this demographic. This is especially evident in Easton, PA, where gaps in infrastructure make navigating the city particularly difficult for non-drivers.
The sidewalks and streets in Easton require significant improvement, posing major challenges for pedestrians and cyclists. Through our on-site observations, we noticed many areas are obstructed by broken sidewalks, missing curb cuts, and other hazards that make safely commuting difficult. These deficiencies in the city’s infrastructure increase the risk of accidents and injuries, especially for those traveling on foot or by bike. High-traffic zones, such as LHD, are particularly problematic.
The social context allows us to see how pedestrians and drivers are affected by the current infrastructure and technologies that exist in Easton and more particularly LHD. Those groups break down even further to varying identities like the elderly, children, adults, people with disabilities, etc. We had issues with navigating around the intersection and will focus our attention on analyzing why it is ineffective, and unsafe, who it is unsafe for, and propose solutions. Likewise, the inclusion of these critical stakeholders in the redesign of the Larry Holmes Drive is especially important as they are the end users whom the project is intended to benefit. Another essential social aspect is recognizing civic duty and our role as socio-technical engineers to incorporate end users into the design process for active transportation improvements
Figure 1: Easton Census Data 2022 (Census Reporter, 2022)
Another essential social aspect is recognizing civic duty and our role as socio-technical engineers to incorporate end users into the design process for active transportation improvements. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Easton had nearly 29,000 residents as of 2022, with a demographic breakdown of 55% white, 14% Black, and approximately 25% Hispanic—a notably diverse community. For Easton, fostering an inclusive process that encourages input from all demographics, particularly minority groups, is crucial to ensuring equitable and community-centered urban planning.
By improving active transportation options, Easton could create safer streets and foster a healthier community overall. These health statistics from Northampton County underscore the need for increased physical activity and active transportation options in Easton. With “31% of the adult population classified as obese” and “64% of Medicare recipients experiencing high blood pressure,” the community faces elevated risks of chronic health issues, such as heart disease and diabetes, which are exacerbated by the lack of physical activity (LVHN 2023). The high heart disease mortality rate, particularly among males, at “104.3 per 100,000 compared to 52.7 per 100,000 for females,” highlights the urgency of preventive measures to improve cardiovascular health in the region (LVHN 2023). Expanding infrastructure for active transportation, such as bike lanes, parks, and well-maintained sidewalks, could promote regular physical activity, making it easier and safer for residents to incorporate movement into their daily routines. Prioritizing these improvements could help address high obesity and hypertension rates, ultimately supporting the well-being of the Easton community for the long term.
Figure 2: PennDot Active Transportation Plan Health Statistics (PennDOT, 2018)
While Easton currently lacks pedestrian-friendly infrastructure, there is hope for positive change. We can take some inspiration from cities like Columbus, Ohio, which have made efforts to integrate active transportation features. Columbus’s adoption of elements like bike lanes, ample sidewalks, parks, and open spaces has not only enhanced pedestrian safety but also encouraged healthier lifestyles by making it easier and safer for people to move around without cars. This shift would not only address current safety concerns but also support the community’s long-term health and well-being by promoting an active lifestyle.
Figure 3: Columbus Healthy Places (Public Health Reports, 2011)
To get into more detail, Easton could draw inspiration from successful models like Columbus’s Columbus Healthy Places (CHP) program, which integrates public health goals into urban planning. In the article, it states, “CHP conducted 10 walk audits during the first year of the program. Residents walked the neighborhood and gave input on preferred locations to walk or bike, and whether they felt safe doing so, as well as locations perceived as unsafe or not preferable to walk or bike” (Green & Klein, 2011). Including the direct voices of the community encourages more specific and tailored solutions that directly benefit and accommodate their needs and desires.
The Columbus Healthy Places (CHP) program has effectively transformed community design to promote active transportation by implementing a social-ecological approach that emphasizes environmental and policy changes. Since its inception, CHP has seen “64% of new developments voluntarily include features such as bike racks (82%), sidewalk connections (26%), and 5-foot sidewalks (18%),” illustrating a significant shift in urban planning that aligns with public health goals (Green & Klein, 2011). The program also initiated a new parking code that requires “walking and biking infrastructure features” in parking lots, ensuring a permanent commitment to active transportation. While quantifying the direct impact on community walking and biking rates poses challenges, CHP has established a framework for collaboration between public health and urban planning, demonstrating that strategic partnerships can foster a healthier built environment. By linking public health objectives to city planning initiatives, CHP not only addresses the obesity epidemic but also promotes an active lifestyle, making it a valuable model for other metropolitan areas aiming to improve community health outcomes (Green & Klein, 2011). Drawing on models like Columbus’s Columbus Healthy Places program, Easton has the potential to implement meaningful changes that make walking and biking safe, viable options for all residents.
The next section highlights the socioeconomic benefits and limitations within Easton’s transportation system, bridging the wider health and safety benefits of active transportation with an emphasis on equality. Beyond enhancing the physical infrastructure, addressing inclusion and accessibility may create a community where all citizens, regardless of ability, income, or ethnicity, feel secure and supported.
There are implicit driver biases built into our current transportation system. For example, drivers are less likely to yield to black pedestrians attempting to cross the street in crosswalks (Burden, 2017). Studies also show that pedestrians with mobility impairments or disabilities are not adequately accounted for within the design of our current transportation system; we see this through a lack of curb cuts, lack of adequately timed crosswalks, as well as steep inclines, and broken or cracked sidewalks. It is already not ideal for an able-bodied pedestrian to cross many busy streets, so it is virtually impossible for disabled and mobility-impaired individuals to rely on active transportation methods in their everyday lives.
Figure 4: Commuter Transportation Metrics (datausa.io, 2022)
This graph shows the data regarding the breakdown of how Easton residents commute. It shows that although the majority of households commute by driving their personal vehicles alone or carpooled, the next method of transportation with 5.78% of households utilizing it is walking. Public transportation and bicycling are also notably used methods of commuting within this graph. With that being said, it is surprising and frustrating that the current infrastructure in place for commuting is lacking heavily in terms of accessibility and comfort for all non-vehicle commuters.
We also researched the benefits and costs of active transportation infrastructure. The cost/benefit analysis regarding active transportation is promising. Not only is active transportation economically beneficial, but the source also mentions the physical health and fitness benefits, as well as reduced roadway congestion, pollution reduction, and energy conservation. We also cover the factors that affect the impacts of active transportation infrastructure and methods for monetizing the costs and benefits. The reading (Litman 2024, p.44) mentions how the user travel time is one of the largest “costs” of commuting. Since walking and biking tend to be slower than commuting by car, they are usually looked at as inefficient and costly modes of transportation. However, under favorable conditions, active travel has low or even negative time costs as users typically consider time spent walking or cycling a benefit rather than a cost as it is enjoyable, provides health benefits, and helps achieve a healthy lifestyle and mindset. Therefore, users may take active transportation rather than other modes of transportation, even if they take longer than driving or carpooling.
Enhancements to active transportation go beyond safety; they also call for a reconsideration of Easton’s general walkability. Easton may promote healthier lives and safer streets by emphasizing the creation of walking-friendly surroundings. Improving walkability makes it easier for locals to move about the city, which in turn encourages people to use active transportation choices and creates a more lively and connected neighborhood.
It is shown that a system that promotes the use of cars will lead to more car traffic. Even though it seems logical that accommodating cars will help car traffic, this often doesn’t happen in urban planning. The reason is induced demand. If a highway has been widened to accommodate more cars, more people will choose to use it. If a city is designed around making car travel as convenient as possible, people will drive. In addition to concerns about safety and CO2 emissions, large groups of cars take up more space than an equal number of people. This makes cars less convenient to plan around for a tightly packed city
Bike lanes sometimes face criticism for taking space away from cars. A study from Bogota, Columbia, where numerous permanent and temporary bike lanes were created during the COVID-19 pandemic, investigated if their presence had any effects on average vehicle speeds. The result was somewhat inconclusive, with some roads seeing a decrease in average speed of as much as 19%, and other roads seeing an increase in speed (Pena-Bastidas et al, 2024). It makes sense that traffic flow across a whole city is so complex that the effect of such a change is hard to quantify. Based on our observations of Larry Holmes Dr, drivers exceeding the speed limit seem common. Because of this, and because of the other benefits a bike lane will provide, we will still look into adding a bike lane, even if it has the potential to slow drivers down.
Through their literature review, Miriam Zuk discovered that transit-induced gentrification examines how transit investments, like new rail or bus lines, can increase nearby real estate values and reshape neighborhood demographics. Studies show that when transit provides a car-free option, it often attracts higher-income residents, leading to increased demand and land values. This demand can push existing lower-income residents out as property prices rise.
The issue of gentrification intensifies as we improve public assets such as schools, parks, highways, and transit infrastructure. When public investment, like the proposed enhancements to active transportation along Larry Holmes Drive, increases accessibility and aesthetic appeal, it may inadvertently drive up property values. This risks displacing the very community members these projects aim to benefit, as rising property prices can make the area unaffordable for lower-income residents. This concern is particularly relevant to Easton, where residents like Brenda Williams and her mobility-impaired husband have shared insights on the lack of equitable public infrastructure funding, particularly in neighborhoods like the West Ward.
Easton is divided into Downtown and the West Ward, with Downtown receiving significantly more investment. This disparity is apparent in the well-maintained streets, curb cuts, and general cleanliness Downtown, compared to the West Ward, which features deteriorating sidewalks, limited accessibility, and a generally lower-income population. While improvements along Larry Holmes Drive make it safer and more attractive to pedestrians and cyclists—a sentiment echoed by local users and workers—this raises concerns that similar investments across Easton could lead to unintended displacement.
The team’s visit underscored the stark contrasts within Easton, revealing and documenting the disparities between Larry Holmes Drive and other neighborhoods. Users reported that Larry Holmes Drive feels notably safer and more pedestrian-friendly, especially compared to areas beyond 6th Street, where safety concerns rise significantly at night. However, this improvement-focused approach requires careful planning to avoid spiking property values and inadvertently fueling gentrification. Without such planning, increased investment in active transportation and amenities could contribute to gentrification.
The social context of active transportation initiatives not only within Easton but around the world tends to prove the many benefits that result from improvements in active transportation and making cities become more walkable, granting safety and inclusivity to all stakeholders and users of active transportation methods. This also reduces congestion and vehicle traffic, as well as fatal vehicle accidents as there will be more users of active transportation resulting in fewer cars on the streets.