下載/瀏覽

Download Report

Transcript 下載/瀏覽

Roadway and traffic
characteristics for bicycling
Author
Janice Kirner Providelo Suely da Penha Sanches
Presenter
謝博任
•
Abstract
• 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.
Introduction
 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)
Roadway and traffic characteristics for cycling
 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).
The survey
 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
Method of Successive Intervals
 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
Results
 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.
Conclusions
 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.