Network Connectivity for Low-Stress Bicycling

Furth, Peter G.; Mekuria, Maaza C; Nixon, Hilary

doi:10.3141/2587-06

Cited by 78 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, reducing the stresses of bicycling through dedicated infrastructure, such as protected bike lanes (Monsere et al, 2014) and complete low-stress networks (Furth, Mekuria, & Nixon, 2016), could increase the well-being of bicycle travelers and encourage more people to try cycling for transportation purposes. Efforts to make these healthy and active modes more friendly and fun, including by enhancing social connections through transportation, offers the potential to increase SWB and help achieve some of the nonauto modal goals of various jurisdictions (City of Portland & Multnomah County, 2015).…”

Section: Contributions and Policy Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the positive utility of travel and mode choice

Singleton

2020

Mapping the Travel Behavior Genome

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do people travel? Underlying most travel behavior research is the deriveddemand paradigm of travel analysis, which assumes that travel demand is derived from the demand for spatially separated activities, traveling is a means to an end (reaching destinations), and travel time is a disutility to be minimized. In contrast, the "positive utility of travel" (PUT) concept suggests that travel may not be inherently disliked and could instead provide benefits or be motivated by desires for travel-based multitasking, positive emotions, or fulfillment. The PUT idea assembles several concepts relevant to travel behavior: utility maximization, motivation theory, multitasking, and subjective well-being. Despite these varied influences, empirical analyses of the PUT concept remain limited in both quantity and scope. There is a need for more fundamental development and classification of the PUT idea and its multifaceted nature. The wide variety and quality of ways to measure PUT attributes are further research challenges. Additionally, few studies investigate both major aspects of the PUT concept-travel activities and travel experiences-simultaneously. Finally, research is only beginning to examine empirical associations between PUT measures and travel behaviors such as mode choice. This dissertation addresses many of these gaps in conceptualizing, measuring, and modeling the PUT concept. First, a literature review strengthens the definition, classification, and empirical support for a PUT, defined as "any benefit(s) accruing to a traveler through the act of traveling." The two primary PUT categories are travel activities (travel-based multitasking) and travel experiences (travel subjective well-being), and the most useful PUT measures involve gathering self-reported assessments of these topics. Based on this ii review, an online questionnaire is designed and administered to nearly 700 commuters in the Portland, OR, region. The survey includes detailed questions about commute mode choice, activity participation, travel usefulness, positive emotions and fulfillment, and travel liking for a recent home-to-work trip. Next, these PUT measures are empirically examined using factor analyses, finding groupings of activities and common unobserved constructs of hedonic ("Distress," "Fear," "Attentiveness," "Enjoyment") and eudaimonic ("Security," "Autonomy," "Confidence", "Health") subjective well-being. Many of these factors exhibit large variations among travel modes-walking and bicycling commuters are the most satisfied and appear to value time spent exercising-and are predicted (somewhat less strongly) by other trip and traveler characteristics in ordered logit regression and structural equation models. Finally, integrated choice and latent variable models are estimated to examine relationships between measures of the PUT concept and commute mode choice. This is made possible by the unique dataset that collects PUT measures for not only the chosen mode but also modal alternatives. Measures of travel-based multitasking are signi...

show abstract

Section: Contributions and Policy Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the positive utility of travel and mode choice

Singleton

2020

Mapping the Travel Behavior Genome

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, the LTS indicator has been used in various cities to identify and prioritize infrastructure interventions with the goal of creating an interconnected network of low-stress routes ( Bearn, 2015 , Berkeley City Council, 2017 . G. Furth et al, 2016 , Mekuria et al, 2012 , Moran et al, 2018 , Murphy and Owen, 2019 , Pérez et al, 2017 , Prabhakar and Rixey, 2017 , Semler et al, 2017 , Vogt and Rachel, 2015 ). The indicator can contribute to planning processes by: (1) approximating cycling safety conditions at a city level; (2) identifying missing links in the low-stress network; (3) evaluating the benefits of new infrastructure; and (4) prioritizing infrastructure investment to maximize impact and avoid wasteful spending.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is an indicator that classifies the components of a road network according to the stress experienced by cyclists (P. G. Furth et al, 2016 , Mekuria et al, 2012 ). The original LTS indicator classifies every road segment in a range from 1 to 4 using decision trees ( Murphy and Owen, 2019 ), based on 21 variables related to bicycle infrastructure, roadway size and layout, and intersection characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Level of traffic stress-based classification: A clustering approach for Bogotá, Colombia

Huertas

Palacio

Botero

et al. 2020

Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights Data-informed methodology calculates the level of traffic stress of cyclists. Method scales to massive data sets by coupling a classifier with a predictive model. Methodology tested on the road network of Bogotá (Colombia) Web-enabled dashboard supports policy making and interventions to reduce stress. Number of bicyclists’ collisions per kilometer correlates with higher stress.

show abstract

“…This definition of an acceptable detour distance was based, in part, on previous research showing that ninety percent of cycling trips were less than 25% longer than the shortest route [40]. Based on Dutch cycling design standards, LTS 1 or 2 classifications are considered low stress and acceptable to most adults who would like to cycle but are still concerned about traffic interaction [35] [36] [41] [42]. Thus, a low stress route connecting an origin and destination would be one in which a cyclist can ride exclusively on road segments classified as LTS 1 or 2, without having to increase the distance ridden between those points by more than 25% over the shortest possible path.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fear Factor: Level of Traffic Stress and GPS Assessed Cycling Routes

Crist

Schipperijn²,

Ryan

et al. 2019

JTTs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Cycling currently comprises only 1% of transport trips in the U.S. despite benefits for air pollution, traffic congestion, and improved public health. Methods: Building upon the Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) methodology, we assessed GPS trip data from utilitarian cyclists to understand route preferences and the level of low stress cycling connection between origins and destinations. GPS data were obtained from adult transport cyclists over multiple days. All bikeable road segments in the network were assigned an LTS score. The shortest paths between each origin and destination along bikeable roadways and along low stress (LTS 1 or 2) routes were calculated. Route trajectories were mapped to the LTS network, and the LTS and distances of observed, the shortest and low stress routes were compared. LTS maps and animations were developed to highlight where low stress connections were lacking. Results: There were 1038 unique cycling trips from 87 participants included in the analysis. An exclusively low stress route did not exist for 51% of trips. Low stress routes that were possible were, on average, 74% longer than the shortest possible path and 56% longer than the observed route. Observed routes were longer and lower stress than the shortest possible route. Conclusions: Results indicate that transport cyclists traveled beyond low stress residential areas and that low stress routes with acceptable detour distances were lacking. Cyclists appeared to weigh both route distance and quality and were willing to trade maximum directness for lower stress. GPS data provide additional information to support planning decisions to increase the impact of infrastructure investments on cycling mode share.

show abstract

Network Connectivity for Low-Stress Bicycling

Cited by 78 publications

References 10 publications

Exploring the positive utility of travel and mode choice

Exploring the positive utility of travel and mode choice

Level of traffic stress-based classification: A clustering approach for Bogotá, Colombia

Fear Factor: Level of Traffic Stress and GPS Assessed Cycling Routes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About