School Safe Route in Sumbersari District, Jember Regency

The number of underage accidents in Jember Regency in 2011-2012 increased from 37 to 190 cases. Therefore, bicycle and pedestrian paths were planned through the School Safe Route program that could encourage students to choose to ride a bicycle or walking. The method of this study was the Level of Service analysis (LOS), student and travel characteristics, cross tabs, bicycle lanes, pedestrians, and road equipment facilities. The results showed that the level of road service on each road section varied, including LOS A, B, D and E. The characteristic and common cross tabs analysis results showed that most transportations used by students were motorcycles. Still, there was a relatively large proportion of students’ willingness to change their transportation mode in operational conditions if bicycle and pedestrian path facilities were provided. Cycle path analysis showed that the types of bicycle lanes were planned, specifically type A and C, with a bicycle lane width was 1.44 m for each lane. From the calculation of the minimum effective width of the sidewalk obtained 1.01 m with a crossing facility in the form of a pelican crossing with waiting stalls. Several road equipment facilities were planned, such as traffic signs, road markings and Traffic Signaling Equipment (TSE). Bicycle and pedestrian routes were planned at Tawang Mangu Street, Danau Toba Street, Mastrip Barat Street, Kalimantan Street, Jawa Street, Karimata Street, M.T. Haryono Street, Letjen S. Parman Street, Letjen Panjaitan Street and Letjen Suprapto Street.


INTRODUCTION
The Jember Police Traffic Unit revealed that the number of underage accident cases in 2011-2012 increased from 37 cases to 190 cases. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated that there were 857 cyclists killed. The number of pedestrians increased >3%, with 6,283 pedestrians in traffic accidents in the United States in 2018. The accident sites at Letjen. Panjaitan Street and Letjen. S Parman Street are categorized as a black spot area in Jember District [1].
The Ministry of Education and Culture made a school zone policy as stated in Article 16 of the Education and Culture Minister No. 14 in 2018 that schools are required to accept students who live in the closest radius to school. The close distance was expected to motivate students to walk or ride bicycles [2]. To reduce traffic accidents, a School Safe Route program was planned [3]. The School, Safe Route program, aimed to encourage students and parents would prefer walking, cycling, or using public transportations to go to schools rather than using motorcycles which could trigger accidents [4]. Therefore, bicycle and pedestrian paths were needed because it could increase students' awareness of switching modes of transportation from motorized vehicles to non-motorized vehicles to reduce traffic congestion and accidents and actualize the School Safe Route program.
This study aims to identify the existing road conditions, analyze student and travel characteristics and plan bicycle and pedestrian paths in actualizing School Safe Route facilities, including signs, markings and traffic signalling devices. The analytical method used were the analysis of the Level of Service (LOS), student and travel characteristics, cross tabs, criteria for bicycle lanes, pedestrians, and road equipment facilities.

METHODOLOGY Case Study
The case study was in Sumbersari District, Jember Regency. It was divided into several educational zones, including: 

Data Collection Methods
This study required primary and secondary data. Primary data was obtained from a survey of the existing road conditions and the distribution of questionnaires to students in each of the studied schools. The secondary data were obtained from school location map and vehicle traffic volume data on each studied road in Jember Regency. Sampling was taken by using a non-probability technique, namely purposive sampling and the Slovin's formula, to determine the number of samples required.

Road Service Levels Analysis
Road service level analysis aimed to determine the Level of Service (LOS) on each road segment using the 1997 Indonesian Road Capacity Manual module [5]. The data needed to assess the level of road service included traffic volume (V), road capacity (C) and degree of saturation (DS) or v/c ratio.

Student and Travel Characteristic Analysis
The selection of student and travel characteristics was generated from a questionnaire. It was processed by using a descriptive analysis method with a quantitative approach. Therefore, the socio-economic and students' travel characteristics were known.

Cross Tab Analysis
Cross tab analysis aimed to compare the relationship between the school distance from home and the modes used by the students to go to school and get back home. Cycle lane criteria analysis aimed to determine the type of bicycle lane needed based on the needs of  bicycle lane users. There were three types of bicycles paths; type A bicycle lane (roadway bicycle lane),  type B bicycle lane (sidewalk bicycle lane) and type C bicycle lane (road bicycle lane).

Pedestrian Analysis
This analysis aimed to determine facilities for pedestrians needed by the students. They are sidewalks facilities and pedestrian crossing safety like zebra or pelican cross.

Road Equipment Facility Analysis
This analysis aimed to determine the availability of production facilities and the existing condition in the form of traffic signs, marking roads and traffic signaling devices to fulfil the School Safe Route design.

School Safe Route Zone Analysis
Based on the regulation of The Transportation Ministry Number 16 in 2016, it is stated that the School Safe Route area's determination refers to the first paragraph of article six. The minimum number of schools in one School Safe Route area is three schools with at least three hundred students for each school. The School Safe Route zone division based on the number of schools and students was divided into three educational zones from the identification results. The classification of schools in each educational zone above has fulfilled the requirements of the School Safe Route area criteria based on the rule of Transportation Ministry Number 16 in 2016.

Overview of Respondents and Existing Roads
Existing road conditions were required as road segment inventory data to calculate road segment performances on each road segment. The survey results were gained by distributing questionnaires to the students. There were 421 samples. The number of samples was obtained from the results of calculations by using the Slovin's formula.

Road Service Level Analysis Results
Road service levels were reviewed based on traffic flow, road capacity and saturation degree by using the 1997 Indonesian Road Capacity Manual Module. The traffic flow data used was in the year of 2022 at 06.00 -07.00 WIB period. At that hour, the reason was the highest point of traffic volume and the time of students' departure to school. The data was obtained in 2018, so the vehicle volume prediction was calculated by using the formula for vehicle growth per year with the equation: . (2)   The calculation results of the road service level in the period 06.00-07.00 WIB in 2022 showed that the LOS standard on each road segment varied based on the v/c ratio value. LOS A indicated that the traffic flow was free, and the average travel speed was 80 km/h. LOS B indicated that the traffic flow was stable, and the average travel speed was up to 40 km/h. LOS D suggested that the traffic flow became unstable, and the average travel speed dropped to 25 km/h. LOS E indicated that the traffic flow was unstable and the average travel speed was 25 km/h with traffic volume approaching road capacity.

The Results of Student and Travel Characteristics Analysis
The total number of respondents who filled out the questionnaire in google form were 421 students. They were divided into two attribute characteristics, socio-economic and student travel characteristics. Most respondents who filled out the questionnaire were female (56%) and at age 7-<12 years (43 %) and at age 16-<18 years (42%), and the majority of vehicle ownership owned by students' parents was motorcycles (70%). Based on the regulation of The Transportation Ministry Number 16 in 2016, the maximum distance from home to school by foot is 1 kilometer, whereas by bicycle maximum 5 kilometers. From the survey results obtained distances including <500 m (9%), 500 m-< 1000 m (10%), 1,000 m-< 2,000 m (22%), 2,000 m-< 3,000 m (22%) and 3,000 m-< 6,000 m (29%) etc. The mode of transportation mostly used by students to go to and get back from school was a motorcycle, with the percentages of which were 80% and 73%, respectively.

Results of Cross Tab Analysis
The program used in the cross-tab analysis was the statistical analysis program. It showed the relationship between the variables of the distance from home to school and the mode of transportation used by students to go to school and get back home from school.  Based on cross -tab analysis of the distance from home to school and the mode used showed that students who rode motorcycles had a larger proportion than other modes with a total of 79.8% when they went to school and 72.9% when they went home from school. However, there was a proportion of 3.1% students riding bicycles and 8.8% students walking to school, while for leaving school there was a proportion of 2.9% students riding bicycles and 12.1% students walking.
Although the results of cross tab analysis showed that the proportion of riding bicycles and walking was small, it did not rule out the possibility of the students who changed modes of transportation. From the survey results, if bicycle lane facilities were provided, 55% of students had the willingness to ride a bicycle on the lane facilities; if sidewalk facilities were provided, 46% of students would use sidewalk facilities. If a zebra cross was provided, 53% of students would use that facility. Therefore, students need special bicycle lanes and adequate pedestrian paths so that they could be safe, secure, and comfortable.

The Results of the Analysis of Determination of Bicycle Path Criteria
Parameters used in determining the criteria for bicycle lanes include topography levels, road functions and standards. Those were the parameters to assess bicycle lanes, whether types A, B or C.
 Assessment based on topography Topography which is used in the assessment should be less than 4%, considering the convenience of cyclists because bicycle is transportation that is driven by pedaling.  Assessment based on road function The criteria for bicycle lanes used in the assessment based on the road functions were for types A and C bicycle lanes. In these types, bicycle lanes were planned on the road. Type A bicycle lanes consisted of secondary arteries, primary arteries, and secondary collectors. Type C bicycle lanes consisted of primary local roads, secondary local roads, secondary collectors, secondary environments and primary environments.   Two-way bicycle lanes were not planned on Jawa Street, Mastrip Barat Street, Danau Toba Street and Karimata Street. The reason was the width of the road after deducting the width of the bicycle lane is ≤ 7 m, which means that the road width requirement for medium roads will be reduced if two-way bicycle lanes are planned. However, in this study, bicycle lanes were still planned. In increasing the capacity of the road after reducing the bicycle lanes, the steps were as follows: 1. We are reducing obstacles on the road, such as parking and street vendors. 2. Implementing a one-way road that can be planned permanently or temporarily. Temporary oneway road, i.e. if conditions are not peak hours. A two-way road is applied during the morning rush hour. It is made in the same direction and vice versa during the afternoon rush hour. 3. Road widening. In meeting the standard road width of 7 m, the road widening outside the bicycle lanes were recommended as follows:  Jawa Street, the existing lane is widened by 1.06 m  Mastrip Barat Street, the existing line is widened by 1.56 m  Danau Toba Street, the existing line is widened to 3.76 m  Karimata Street, the existing lane is widened to 1.76 m.
The recapitulation of the bicycle lanes division in each road section is described as follows:

Pedestrian Analysis Results
The selection of crossing facilities was based on the flow of road crossings and vehicles, while the sidewalk planning was based on the pedestrian volume, the minimum effective width of the sidewalk and additional width according to local conditions. Therefore, a pedestrian analysis was carried out to see if the existing pedestrian facilities could be used or should be improved by increasing the width of the sidewalk or crossing facilities in the form of a pelican crossing.

 Pavement planning
It was known from the availability of sidewalks in the existing condition at Mastrip Barat Street, Bengawan Solo Street, Jawa Street, Karimata Street and Letjen Panjaitan Street. However, the sidewalk facilities in those streets were not used as pedestrian facilities but for street vendors along the sidewalks. Based on The Ministry of Public Works and Housing [7], the selection of the minimum effective width of the sidewalk using the following formula:  The existing sidewalk width on the left and right lanes had a greater width than the minimum effective width of the sidewalk. It showed that the existing sidewalk width had reached the minimum adequate sidewalk width standard.  The criteria for crossing facilities in the existing condition were in the form of a zebra cross and upgraded to a pelican crossing with waiting stalls.

The Results of Road Equipment Facility Analysis
According to [8], the School Safe Route could be created by providing road equipment facilities in the form of signs, markings and traffic signaling devices.  There are still many traffic signs needed to fulfil School Safe Route that is not available on every road. Therefore, this study recommended traffic signs on each road segment based on the General Director of Land Transportation Regulation in 2015.

 Traffic Signs
Determining the maximum speed limit was obtained from the 85 percentile speed calculation results. The 85th percentile speed was the speed at 85% of drivers who drive a vehicle on the highway without being affected by slower traffic speeds or lousy weather. The 85th percentile speed was used to determine the ideal speed limit on the studied road section according to the average vehicle speed. An example of a graph for calculating the speed of the 85th percentile on Jawa Street was as follows:  Many bicycle lanes and pedestrian crossing markings which are needed to fulfil School Safe Route that has not been available yet on each road segment. Therefore, this study recommended road markings on each road section based on [9] (a) (b)   There were still many things needed to realize School Safe Route that have not been available yet on each road segment. Therefore, this study recommended TSE based on [10] regarding Guidelines for Placement of Road Equipment Facilities.
The 1-color TSE (yellow) is installed at the intersection of Prosalina to be careful when crossing the intersection. The 2-colors TSE is installed at each school at the crossing lane with the purpose of being a light pelican crossing. 3-colors TSE in the existing condition has been installed, such as the Mastrip Barat Street, Danau Toba Street, Karimata Street and Letjen Panjaitan Street. And it is not recommended to be installed on Jawa Street and Bengawan Solo Street because there is a roundabout on the road that is large enough so that there is no need to plan for 3-colors TSE.
Thus, it was assumed that students in each village of Sumbersari District passed through several roads. The detailed information is described as follows:

Recommendations
Future studies can use this study results to conduct further research by considering other aspects of bicycle and pedestrian paths. The results of this study can be used for the Transportation Department of Jember Regency as guidelines in the context of developing facilities and infrastructure in realizing the School Safe Routes in Jember.