Influence of Individual Perceptions and Bicycle Infrastructure on Decision to Bike

The focus of this study is on the opportunities and challenges presented to cyclists on and around the campus of the University of Maryland, College Park. A web-based survey was conducted to understand the travel patterns and the specific issues regarding bicyclists. The survey included questions about possible bicycle infrastructure improvements, policy, and program innovations to assess the perceptions of the campus community regarding these changes. The findings of this survey, conducted to understand cyclists’ travel patterns and identify their issues and concerns, are discussed. Both nonbicycle commuters and bicycle commuters agreed that bicycle lanes, trails, and paths would encourage them to ride a bike (or ride more often) to the campus. Discrete choice models are estimated to model the commuters’ mode to campus. The findings of the models suggest that people are more sensitive to time for nonmotorized modes and women are less likely to ride a bicycle. Those who perceive walking and biking as a form of exercise and identify flexibility of departure time as an important factor in their mode choice are more likely to ride a bicycle. Those more likely to choose to drive an automobile to campus assume that they do not have other options to commute to campus. Policies designed to promote the use of bicycle transportation on and to the campus based on these findings are presented. The results of this study will help practitioners and campus transportation planners understand the reasons that prevent people from bicycling and evaluate the transportation improvements that may be considered to achieve bicycle-friendly campuses.

[1]  Ene-Margit Tiit,et al.  Computer‐Aided Multivariate Analysis. Third edition. A. A. Afifi & V. Clark, Chapman & Hall, U.K. 1996 (reprinted 1998). No. of pages: xxi+455. Price: £45. ISBN 0‐4127‐3060‐X , 1999 .

[2]  J. Pucher,et al.  Bicycling renaissance in North America? Recent trends and alternative policies to promote bicycling , 1999 .

[3]  Kevin J. Krizek,et al.  What is at the end of the road? Understanding discontinuities of on-street bicycle lanes in urban settings , 2005 .

[4]  Nebiyou Tilahun,et al.  Trails, Lanes, or Traffic: Value of Different Bicycle Facilities Using Adaptive Stated-Preference Survey , 2008 .

[5]  Chandra R. Bhat,et al.  Commuter Bicyclist Route Choice: Analysis Using a Stated Preference Survey , 2003 .

[6]  Mark D. Uncles,et al.  Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand , 1987 .

[7]  D. Levinson,et al.  TRAILS, LANES, OR TRAFFIC: VALUING BICYCLE FACILITIES WITH AN ADAPTIVE STATED PREFERENCE SURVEY , 2007 .

[8]  C. Bhat,et al.  Frequency of Bicycle Commuting: Internet-Based Survey Analysis , 2004 .

[9]  John Pucher,et al.  Why Canadians cycle more than Americans: A comparative analysis of bicycling trends and policies , 2006 .

[10]  Reid Ewing,et al.  Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis , 2001 .

[11]  Birgitta Gatersleben,et al.  Contemplating Cycling to Work: Attitudes and Perceptions in Different Stages of Change , 2007 .

[12]  Reid Ewing,et al.  Travel and the Built Environment , 2010 .

[13]  V. Clark,et al.  Computer-aided multivariate analysis , 1991 .

[14]  Robert Cervero,et al.  Built environments and mode choice: toward a normative framework , 2002 .

[15]  Carlos J. L. Balsas,et al.  Sustainable transportation planning on college campuses , 2003 .