Meghan Winters1, Kay Teschke. 1. Department of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. mwinters@interchange.ubc.ca
Abstract
PURPOSE: To provide evidence about the types of transportation infrastructure that support bicycling. DESIGN: Population-based survey with pictures to depict 16 route types. SETTING: Metro Vancouver, Canada. SUBJECTS: 1402 adult current and potential cyclists, i.e., the "near market" for cycling (representing 31% of the population). MEASURES: Preference scores for each infrastructure type (scale from -1, very unlikely to use, to +1, very likely to use); current frequency of use of each infrastructure type (mean number of times/y). ANALYSES: Descriptive statistics across demographic segments; multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Most respondents were likely or very likely to choose to cycle on the following broad route categories: off-street paths (71%-85% of respondents); physically separated routes next to major roads (71%); and residential routes (48%-65%). Rural roads (21%-49%) and routes on major streets (16%-52%) were least likely to be chosen. Within the broad categories, routes with traffic calming, bike lanes, paved surfaces, and no on-street parking were preferred, resulting in increases in likelihood of choosing the route from 12% to 37%. Findings indicate a marked disparity between preferred cycling infrastructure and the route types that were currently available and commonly used. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence for urban planners about bicycling infrastructure designs that could lead to an increase in active transportation.
PURPOSE: To provide evidence about the types of transportation infrastructure that support bicycling. DESIGN: Population-based survey with pictures to depict 16 route types. SETTING: Metro Vancouver, Canada. SUBJECTS: 1402 adult current and potential cyclists, i.e., the "near market" for cycling (representing 31% of the population). MEASURES: Preference scores for each infrastructure type (scale from -1, very unlikely to use, to +1, very likely to use); current frequency of use of each infrastructure type (mean number of times/y). ANALYSES: Descriptive statistics across demographic segments; multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Most respondents were likely or very likely to choose to cycle on the following broad route categories: off-street paths (71%-85% of respondents); physically separated routes next to major roads (71%); and residential routes (48%-65%). Rural roads (21%-49%) and routes on major streets (16%-52%) were least likely to be chosen. Within the broad categories, routes with traffic calming, bike lanes, paved surfaces, and no on-street parking were preferred, resulting in increases in likelihood of choosing the route from 12% to 37%. Findings indicate a marked disparity between preferred cycling infrastructure and the route types that were currently available and commonly used. CONCLUSION: This study provides evidence for urban planners about bicycling infrastructure designs that could lead to an increase in active transportation.
Authors: Anne C Lusk; Patrick Morency; Luis F Miranda-Moreno; Walter C Willett; Jack T Dennerlein Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Anne C Lusk; Patrick Morency; Luis F Miranda-Moreno; Walter C Willett; Jack T Dennerlein Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-05-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Kay Teschke; M Anne Harris; Conor C O Reynolds; Meghan Winters; Shelina Babul; Mary Chipman; Michael D Cusimano; Jeff R Brubacher; Garth Hunte; Steven M Friedman; Melody Monro; Hui Shen; Lee Vernich; Peter A Cripton Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-10-18 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Anne C Lusk; Peter G Furth; Patrick Morency; Luis F Miranda-Moreno; Walter C Willett; Jack T Dennerlein Journal: Inj Prev Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 2.399