Abstract Cities are investing in active transportation networks, yet little is known about travel behavior of different non-vehicle modes in the presence of multiple types of transportation infrastructure. At two sites in Austin, Texas, USA, with a cycle track, sidewalk, and street in parallel, we determined where different modes traveled and the likelihood of crossing from one infrastructure to another and of using “recommended” infrastructure—defined as sidewalk for walkers, dog walkers, and runners and bike lane with traffic for cyclists, e-scooter riders, and other wheeled micromobility users. We created the Mobility Behavior Tool to conduct observations of travelers on 50-m-long, straight segments of the parallel infrastructure at sites for one-hour sampling periods (n = 16 periods) in April–May 2021. In our sample (n = 2245 individuals), we observed that 20% of travelers crossed into other infrastructure and 35.8% used not recommended infrastructure. Using binomial logistic regression, we found statistically significant odds ratios for dog walkers (3.17), cyclists (0.56), e-scooter riders (1.85), and other micromobility users (3.06) crossing into other infrastructure compared to walkers (p < 0.001), and no significant differences between runners (0.50) and walkers (p > 0.05). A second model predicted statistically significant odds ratios for dog walkers (1.74), runners (3.88), e-scooter riders (1.38), and other micromobility users (2.74) using not recommended infrastructure compared to walkers (p < 0.001), and no significant differences between cyclists (0.86) and walkers (p > 0.05). Potential reasons for differences in travel behavior by mode include levels of understanding of local regulations and situational awareness, infrastructure preferences, frequency of passing, and propensity for weaving, swerving, and subversive behavior. Municipalities should consider how infrastructure design influences travel behavior and the travel efficiency, comfort, and safety of all modes.

    Highlights 20% of travelers crossed infrastructure and 35% used not recommended infrastructure. Cyclists less likely to cross into other infrastructure compared to walkers. Dog walkers, e-scooters, skateboards more likely to cross into other infrastructure. Walkers and cyclists more likely to use recommended infrastructure. Mobility Behavior Tool created for reliable observation of active travel behavior.


    Zugriff

    Zugriff prüfen

    Verfügbarkeit in meiner Bibliothek prüfen

    Bestellung bei Subito €


    Exportieren, teilen und zitieren



    Titel :

    Who travels where: Behavior of pedestrians and micromobility users on transportation infrastructure


    Beteiligte:
    Lanza, Kevin (Autor:in) / Burford, Katie (Autor:in) / Ganzar, Leigh Ann (Autor:in)


    Erscheinungsdatum :

    2021-12-17




    Medientyp :

    Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)


    Format :

    Elektronische Ressource


    Sprache :

    Englisch




    Safe micromobility

    OECD, International Transport Forum | TIBKAT | 2020


    MICROMOBILITY ELECTRIC VEHICLE ERGONOMICS

    VAN HOUTEN LUCAS JON / MURPHY CONRAD XAVIER / DELSAER NATHALIE et al. | Europäisches Patentamt | 2022

    Freier Zugriff

    Analyzing the Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Micromobility Transportation

    Hosseinzadeh, Aryan / Kluger, Robert | TIBKAT | 2021


    Surface detection for micromobility vehicles

    NORVILLE PELHAM / BETTRIDGE ROBERT TIMOTHY / BRUSER ILISSA BROOKE et al. | Europäisches Patentamt | 2023

    Freier Zugriff

    RETROREFLECTIVE ARTICLE FOR MICROMOBILITY APPLICATIONS

    BROVOLD SHAWN T / CLEAR SUSANNAH C / GANDRUD JONATHAN D et al. | Europäisches Patentamt | 2020

    Freier Zugriff