Roadway and traffic characteristics for bicycling Author Janice Kirner Providelo • Suely da Penha Sanches Presenter 謝謝謝
Roadway and traffic characteristics for bicycling
AuthorJanice Kirner Providelo • Suely da Penha Sanches
Presenter謝博任
• The promotion of bicycle transportation includes the provision of suitable infrastructure for cyclists.
• The present paper describes research developed to define which roadway and traffic characteristics are prioritized by users and potential users in the evaluation of quality of roads for bicycling in urban areas of Brazilian medium-sized cities.
• A focus group discussion identified 14 attributes representing characteristics that describe the quality of roads for bicycling in Brazilian cities.
Abstract
The five most important attributes, in their opinion, are: (1) lane width; (2) motor vehicle speed; (3) visibility at intersections; (4) presence of intersections; and (5) street trees (shading).
Therefore, the research suggests that to promote bicycle use in Brazilian medium-sized cities, these attributes must be prioritized.
Abstract
The promotion of bicycling is part of the current strategy of urban planning and transport.
In order to determine if a road is suitable for bicycling or not, and what improvements need to be made to increase the level of service for bicycles on specific situations, it is important to know how cyclists perceive the characteristics that define the roadway environment.
Introduction
A prior focus group discussion identified the following 14 characteristics as the ones that can best describe the quality of roads for cycling in Brazilian cities:
1. motor vehicle traffic volume
2. motor vehicle speed
3. signalized intersections
4. presence of heavy vehicles
5. presence of intersections
Introduction
6. direction of traffic flow (one-way or two-way)
7. visibility at intersections
8. pavement condition,
9. lane width
10. driveways and side streets
11. on-street vehicle parking
12. roundabout
13. grades (slope)
14. street trees (shading)
Introduction
A focus group discussion was carried out in the Brazilian city of Rio Claro, in the state of Sao Paulo.
The focus group was conducted with eight participants, whose profile varied among:
1. experienced bicyclists 2. participants of a local
NGO related to bicycling 3. students and professors
from the Department of Geography of a local
University (UNESP, Rio Claro) involved in
transportation planning or similar fields 4. members
from the Secretary of Transportation of the local
municipality.
Roadway and traffic characteristics for cycling
The data collected in the discussion was then analyzed through the method of Content Analysis, developed by Bardin (1995).
Roadway and traffic characteristics for cycling
The method chosen to assess the perceptions of individuals was the application of questionnaires based on the Likert-type scale.
participants also answered a series of questions
about their profile: 1. gender 2. age 3. education
level 4. whether or not they could ride a bicycle
5. bicycle availability at the household 6. what
type of cyclist they were 7. travel motives in
which the bicycle is used 8. types of
infrastructure used to ride a bicycle and
frequency of bicycle use.
The survey
The survey was conducted between March and April of 2009.
A total of 451 questionnaireswere distributed in the cities of Sao Carlos and Rio Claro.
The analysis was performed on 447 complete questionnaires.
The survey
The survey
The survey
In this research, the Method of Successive
Intervals, developed by Guilford (1975) was
chosen. It is based on psychometric scales
for estimation of individuals’ opinion,
originally proposed by Thurstone (1927).
These scales have been broadly used in
fields such as applied psychology, health and
marketing (Blischke et al. 1975), and also in
several researches in the field of
transportation (Correia and Wirasinghe
2007).
Method of Successive Intervals
As an example, Fig. 1 presents the observed frequencies for the attribute ‘‘presence of heavy vehicles’’. Most of the respondents (59.5%) are in category 5, which means they totally agreed with the statement, and only 2.7% are in category 1
Method of Successive Intervals
Method of Successive Intervals
As can be seen in Table 9, the respondents considered ‘‘lane width’’ to be the most important attribute of shared use roadways (score 1.00) followed by ‘‘motor vehicle speed’’ with score 0.87.
Several published researches also identified the width of the road as a main factor in the evaluation of the shared road quality for bicycles (Sorton and Walsh 1994; Harkey et al. 1998; Epperson 1994; Landis 1994, 1996; Landis et al. 1997, 2003; Dixon 1996).
Results
The least important attributes were
‘‘driveways and side streets’’ (score 0.00),
and ‘‘pavement condition’’ (score 0.07).
Surprisingly, ‘‘motor vehicle volume’’
appeared as rather unimportant, with a
score of 0.30, while in most bicycle level-of-
service models, the volume of vehicles has a
significant importance.
Results
It was verified that the most important characteristic in the evaluation of quality of roads for bicycling was 1.lane width 2. followed by motor vehicle speed 3.visibility at intersections 4. presence of intersections and 5. street trees.
Therefore, the research suggests that to promote bicycle in roadways of shared traffic in Brazilian medium-sized cities, these attributes must be prioritized by 1. providing larger lane width 2.reducing motor vehicle speed 3. increasing visibility at intersections 4. reducing the number of intersections and 5. increasing the number of street trees 6. to guarantee more shading on the roads.
Conclusions
One of the interesting findings is that, for
these survey participants, the motor vehicle
speed is more important than the motor
vehicle volume, meaning that they are
willing to ride a bicycle sharing the road with
a great number of cars, if those are
travelling at lower speeds, and as long as
the lane is wide.
Conclusions
Further studies on this topic could contribute
to the understanding of the opinion of users
and potential users on the quality of roads
for bicycling. As a suggestion, other surveys
focusing different profiles of participants, or
including different attributes, would be
recommended.
Conclusions