Bicycle Level of Service Model for the Cycloruta, Bogota, Colombia

Open access

Abstract

Segment videos were produced at different peaks to reflect different sampling criteria like land use characteristics, trails, Ciclocarrils and Ciclovia. Each segment was filmed for 20–40 seconds during bicycle rides at a speed of about 5km/h with a camera strapped, at an angle of 45 degrees, on the head. Curb lane variables such as bicycle pathway widths, curb lane motorised volume (veh/h) and vehicle speed (km/h), bicycle volume on segment, and median width were recorded in addition to secondary data. About 1,360 ratings were acquired from study participants and used in the estimation process. Ordered probability models were used to estimate random parameters of cyclists LOS perception to account for unobserved heterogeneity for all respondents. The deviance (1.085) and Pearson Chi-Square (2.309) with 1,635 degree of freedom at 0.05 level of significance shows that our model provides a better fit of the data. The study observed that BLOS was strongly influenced by side path separation, vehicle speed, motorised traffic volume and conflicts with pedestrians. However, many other factors were found to have high probabilities to influence level of service with unit change. They include bicycle lane width, wide outside lane, pavement conditions, trees and benches, daylight, gender and experience of cyclist. The impact of the variety of observed factors affecting bicyclists reveal the nature and character of urban transportation in Bogota which suggests a range of important trade-offs in further planning and management of the Cicloruta bicycle paths.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] BANISTER D. Sustainable urban development and transport-a Eurovision for 2020. Transport Reviews 20(1) 113-130 (2000).

  • [2] BBC News Magazine 2013 (8 August)

  • [3] BHAT C. An analysis of evening commute stop-making behavior using repeated choice observations from a multi-day survey. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological33(7)495-510.doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(99)00003-X(1999).

  • [4] BOHLE W. Attractiveness of bicycle-facilities for the users and evaluation of measures for the cycle-traffic. Paper presented at the Traffic Safety on Two Continents Conference (pp. 89-94) (2000).

  • [5] CERVERO R. Progressive Transport and the Poor: Bogota’s Bold Steps Forward. (2005).

  • [6] DAVIS W. J. Bicycle safety evaluation. Auburn University. (1987).

  • [7] DIXON L. B. Bicycle and pedestrian level-of-service performance measures and standards for congestion management systems. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1538(1) 1-9. (1996).

  • [8] EDDY N. Developing a level of service for bicycle use. Paper presented at the Pro Bike Pro Walk 96: Forecasting the future Portland Me. (1996).

  • [9] EPPERSON B. Evaluating suitability of roadways for bicycle use: Toward a cycling level-of-service standard. In Transportation Research Record 1438 TRB National Research Council Board Washington DC. (1994).

  • [10] FRIDSTRØM L. IFVER J. INGEBRIGTSEN S. KULMALA R. & THOMSEN L. K. Measuring the contribution of randomness exposure weather and daylight to the variation in road accident counts. Accident Analysis & Prevention 27(1) 1-20. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-4575(94)E0023-E. 1995.

  • [11] GARRARD J. ROSE G. & LO S. K. Promoting transportation cycling for women: The role of bicycle infrastructure. Preventive Medicine 46(1) 55-59. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.07.010 (2008).

  • [12] GREENE W. H. &HENSHER D. A. Modelling ordered choices: New York (2009).

  • [13] HANKEY S. LINDSEY G. WANG X. BORAH J. HOFF K. UTECHT B. &XU Z. Estimating use of non-motorized infrastructure: Models of bicycle and pedestrian traffic in Minneapolis MN. Landscape and Urban Planning 107(3) 307-316. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.005. (2012).

  • [14] HARKEY D. L. REINFURT D. W. &KNUIMAN M. Development of the bicycle compatibility index. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1636(1) 13-20. (1998).

  • [15] HICKMAN R. SAXENA S. BANISTER D. &ASHIRU O. Examining transport futures with scenario analysis and MCA. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 46(3) 560-575. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2011.11.006 (2012).

  • [16] HULL A. Transport matters: integrated approaches to planning city-regions: Routledge Ltd. (2010).

  • [17] HCM Highway Capacity Manual Transportation Research Board National Research Council Washington D.C.. (2000).

  • [18] IDU. Ciclorutas. Instituto de Desarrollo Urbano (IDU) City of Bogota Colombia. Available at: http://www.idu.gov.co/web/guest/espacio_Ciclorutas. (2009).

  • [19] JENSEN S. U. Pedestrian and Bicyclist Level of Service on Roadway Segments. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2031(1) 43-51. (2007).

  • [20] KANG K. & LEE K. Development of a bicycle level of service model from the user‘s perspective. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 16(6) 1032-1039. (2012).

  • [21] KENWORTHY J. R. Chapter 9 - Energy Use and CO2 Production in the Urban Passenger Transport Systems of 84 International Cities: Findings and Policy Implications. In D. Peter (Ed.) Urban Energy Transition (pp. 211-236). Amsterdam: Elsevier. (2008).

  • [22] KMOCT Korean highway capacity manual Korean Ministry of Construction and Transportation.Gwacheoun (2001).

  • [23] LANDIS B. W. VATTIKUTI V. R. OTTENBERG R. M. MCLEOD D. S. &GUTTENPLAN M. Modeling the roadside walking environment: pedestrian level of service. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1773(1) 82-88. (2001).

  • [24] LANDIS B. W. VATTIKUTI V. R. &BRANNICK M. T. Real-time human perceptions: toward a bicycle level of service. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1578(1) 119-126 (1997).

  • [25] LANDIS B. W. Bicycle interaction hazard score: a theoretical model. Transportation Research Record 1438 TRB National Research Council Washington DC 3-8. (1994).

  • [26] LANDIS B. W. Bicycle System Performance Measures: The Interaction Hazard and Latent Demand Score Models. ITE Journal 66(2). (1996).

  • [27] LANDIS B. W. VATTIKUTI V. R. OTTENBERG R. M. PETRITSCH T. A. GUTTENPLAN M. & CRIDER L. B. Intersection level of service for the bicycle through movement. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1828(1) 101-106. (2003).

  • [28] MCPB. Fiscal year 94 Annual Growth Policy. Motgomery County Planning Board and Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission Dec 1992.

  • [29] MOHAN D. &TIWARI G. Sustainable transport systems: Linkages between environmental issues public transport non-motorised transport and safety. Economic and Political Weekly 1589-1596. (1999).

  • [30] NELDER J. A. &WEDDERBURN R. W. M. (1972). Generalized Linear Models.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General) 135(3) 370-384. doi: 10.2307/2344614

  • [31] OKON I. BRUSSEL M. J. G. VAN DEN BOSCH F. H. M. MORENO C. A. and van Maarseveen M. F. A. M. A statistical approach to the estimation of bicycle level of service models for the Cicloruta in Bogota Colombia. Urban Transport XXIII Vol 176 265-282. doi:10.2495/UT170231 (2018)

  • [32] PROVIDELO J. K. & DA PENHASANCHES S. Roadway and traffic characteristics for bicycling. Transportation 38(5) 765-777. (2011).

  • [33] QI Y. SMITH B. L. &GUO J. Freeway accident likelihood prediction using a panel data analysis approach. Journal of transportation engineering 133(3) 149-156. (2007).

  • [34] RCI. Florida Road Index Development of the Bicycle Compatibility Index: A level of service concept. Retrieved from (1998).

  • [35] SENER ELURU &BHAT An analysis of bicycle route choice preferences in Texas US.Transportation 36(5) 511-539 2009

  • [36] SISSON S. B. LEE S. M. BURNS E. K. & TUDOR-LOCKE C. Suitability of Commuting by Bicycle to Arizona Elementary Schools. American Journal of Health Promotion 20(3) 210-213. doi: 10.4278/0890-1171-20.3.210 (2006).

  • [37] SORTON A. & WALSH T. Bicycle stress level as a tool to evaluate urban and suburban bicycle compatibility. Transportation Research Record TRB National Research Council Washington D. C. 17-24. (1994).

  • [38] TITZE S. STRONEGGER W. J. JANSCHITZ S. &OJA P. Association of built-environment socialenvironment and personal factors with bicycling as a mode of transportation among Austrian city dwellers. Preventive Medicine 47(3) 252-259. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.02.019 (2008).

  • [39] WASHINGTON S. P. KARLAFTIS M. G. & MANNERING F. L. Statistical and econometric methods for transportation data analysis: CRC press. (2011).

  • [40] WHYTE W. H. City: Rediscovering the center: University of Pennsylvania Press. (1988).

  • [41] WHO.: Road traffic accidents death rate by country. World Health Organisation (2011).

  • [42] WEY W.-M. & CHIU Y.-H. Assessing the walkability of pedestrian environment under the transitoriented development. Habitat International 38(0) 106-118. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2012.05.004 (2013).

  • [43] YAZID M. R. M. ISMAIL R. &ATIQ R. The Use of Non-Motorized For Sustainable Transportation in Malaysia.Procedia Engineering 20(0) 125-134. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.147. (2011).

Search
Journal information
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 27 27 27
PDF Downloads 29 29 29