Cycling www.eu-portal.net NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

advertisement

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Vol. 1

Teaching &

Learning Materials – Update 2007

funded within the 6th Framework Programme of the EU as Specific Support Action

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Definition

Non Motorised Transport (NMT) includes

Walking, cycling, small-wheeled transport (e.g.skates, skateboards) and wheelchair travel

These modes provide both recreation and transportation

NMT are resource efficient travel modes

Can been seen as part of Mobility Management measures,

Transport Demand measures and Travel Awareness

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Objectives and skills

Know advantages and disadvantages of NMT

Know the different ways and techniques to improve NMT

Know different techniques to increase walkability

Know different techniques to improve cycling conditions

Be able to give advice when trying to increase NMT

Be able to provide examples of good practice in NMT

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

NMT in developing countries

Economic growth and urbanisations trends

 higher demand of public transport

NMT should be taken into account to improve the efficiency of the public transport system

Direct and indirect benefits of promoting NMT:

Increased safety

Economic viability

Environmental friendly

Health benefits

Transport options

SUTP as method of supporting NMT

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Measuring NMT

Measuring has significant influence on transport planning

Conventional transport surveys only count primary mode

Many types of pedestrian activities are ignored

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Measuring NMT

Purpose

Personal business/shopping/errands

Recreation/exercise

To transit

To or from school

To or from work

Walk dog

Other

Totals

Frequency Mean Distance Median Distance

Percent

48%

20%

16%

7%

4%

3%

2%

100%

Mile

0.44

1.16

N/A

0.62

0.78

0.71

0.57

0.68

Mile

0.22

0.56

N/A

0.33

0.25

0.25

0.22

0.25

NHTS Walking Trip Attributes (Weinstein and Schimek, 2005)

Mean Duration

Minutes

11.9

25.3

19.6

13.3

14.1

19.0

14.8

16.4

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Measuring NMT

Walk

Bicycle

Motorcycle/Moped

Car or Truck Driver

Car or Truck Passenger

Other private vehicles

Public Transit

Totals

Travel

Miles

192

34

36

3,466

Percent

2.8%

0.5%

0.5%

51%

2,047

162

897

6,833

30%

2.4%

13%

100%

Travel Time

Hours

64

5

1

140

Percent

18%

1.3%

0.4%

39%

82

7

62

361

23%

1.9%

17%

100%

Average Annual Travel by Mode (DfT, 2003)

Trips

Trips

245

14

3

401

Percent

25%

1.5%

0.3%

41%

226

8

92

990

23%

0.8%

9.3%

100%

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Modelling NMT

Factors

Land use density and mix.

Ease of street crossing.

Sidewalk continuity.

Comments

Higher density and more mixed population, commercial and employment tend to increase pedestrian travel.

Easier street crossings tend to increase pedestrian travel.

Sidewalks that do not connect create barriers to pedestrian travel.

Block size. Smaller block sizes tend to increase pedestrian travel.

Street connectivity (grid vs. cul de sac).

Connected streets allow better pedestrian access, which tends to increase pedestrian travel.

Topography.

Building orientation.

Trip distance.

Steep slopes tend to create barriers to pedestrians.

Commercial buildings oriented toward sidewalks rather than automobile parking tends to increase pedestrian travel.

Travel costs

Walking tends to be used for short (<1 km) trips.

Market trends or Transportation Demand Management measures that increase automobile trip costs may induce shifts from driving to walking.

Factors affecting pedestrian travel www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Modelling NMT (1)

Factors Bicycle Travel Impacts

Age

Gender

Education

Students

Bicycle use increases into middle age and then decreases. Cyclists tend to have lower average age than non-cyclists.

Men tend to cycle significantly more than women.

Bicycle use increases slightly with education.

Students are the largest bicycle commuter group. Universities, colleges and schools are major generators of bicycle trips.

People who do not have a car available are more likely to cycle. Car and License

Factors influencing Bicycle travel (based on Levitte, 1999) www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Modelling NMT (2)

Having a Drivers License People who cannot drive are more likely to cycle.

Size of Town A population of less than 100,000 appears to offer a better environment for cycling, and so may have higher rates of cycling than larger cities.

Employment Status

Professional Status

Higher unemployment is associated with more cycling.

Among employed people, professionals and managers appear more likely to cycle than blue collar and sales workers.

Household Income

Trip Length

Parking Fees

Facility Conditions

Utilitarian cyclists tend to have lower average incomes compared with noncyclists. Recreational cyclists tend to have higher than average incomes.

Cycling is most common for short (<5 mile) trips.

Commuters who must pay for parking may be more likely to bicycle.

Bicycle facilities (paths and lanes) and roadway conditions considered favourable to cycling tend to increase bicycle travel.

Factors influencing Bicycle travel (based on Levitte, 1999) www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Modelling NMT (3)

Trip distance

Travel costs

Bicycle Parking

Community values

Cycling tends to be used for moderate (<5 km) trips.

Market trends or Transportation Demand Management measures that increase automobile trip costs may induce shifts from driving to bicycling.

Bicycle parking may affect some cycling decisions, particularly the availability of high-security, covered bike storage at worksites.

Some communities appear to accept and support utilitarian cycling more than others.

Factors influencing Bicycle travel (based on Levitte, 1999) www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Walking

Walkability should take into account:

Pedestrian network quality (quality of paths, sidewalks, street crossings).

Pedestrian network connectivity (how well sidewalks and paths are connected, and how directly pedestrians can travel to destinations).

Security (how safe people feel while walking).

Density and accessibility (distance between common destinations, such as homes, shops, schools, parks).

www.eu-portal.net

Cycling

Reconstructed trend lines of the bicycle share in the total of car, moped and public transport movements,

1920-1995

(in %)

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Cycling -

Explanation model for developments in bicycle use www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Cycling

– Benchmarking cycling policies

NATCYP

a benchmark program directed by Velo Mondial, supported by DG

TREN of the European Commission, and with five participating countries; Czech Republic, England, Finland, Scotland and The

Netherlands.

3 main aspects:

The choice of the appropriate indicators for an efficient and productive assessment and comparison

A more in-depth exchange of experiences on specific topics of interest using a site visit.

The compilation of conclusions and recommendations for this stage, and the identification of other countries who are interested to be involved in a further stage of this program.

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Cycling

– Benchmarking cycling policies

BYPAD ( www.bypad.org

)

• a European benchmarking and quality management tool for improving local cycling policy

.

Elements to keep in mind are the following:

• history of cycling policy in your city

• spatial structure of your city bicycle use

• safety who is involved / responsible in cycling policy ?

Which action programs on cycling are running now (infrastructure, training, education, …)

Budget for executing cycling policy

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Cycling

– Benchmarking cycling policies

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Cycling

Velo.Info: The European Network for Cycling Expertise

• an EU funded project launched within the 5th FP.

The goals and objectives were described as:

Create a critical mass of expert knowledge that covers the best references on planning for cycling.

Make use of state of the art information technologies: there will be developed a database with cycle knowledge in al kinds of policy fields.

This database is available on the Velo.Info website and works with a powerfull search engine.

Guarantee high-level quality development through the co-operation of the European stakeholders.

www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Cycling

SPICYCLES (2006-2008)

• a STEER project launched in 2006

• aims to realise that the minor role the bicycle still plays in the overall transport systems

To solve the problem, there is a need for an articulated strategy that tackles the issue from different but equally important perspectives.

www.eu-portal.net

Cycling

SPICYCLES: 6 participating cities

Barcelona,

Berlin,

Bucharest,

Göteborg,

Ploiesti,

Rome www.spicycles.velo.info

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

National differences

Country

Austria

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

Netherlands

Sweden

Switzerland

UK

USA

39%

Car

74%

42%

54%

52%

44%

36%

38%

62%

84%

Transit

13%

14%

14%

12%

11%

8%

11%

20%

14%

3%

Cycling

9%

1%

20%

4%

10%

27%

10%

10%

8%

1%

Source: Pucher and Lefevre, 1996

Walking

31%

10%

21%

30%

27%

19%

39%

29%

12%

9%

4%

3%

4%

2%

8%

Other

1%

3%

0%

0%

1%

www.eu-portal.net

Examples and study sites

Civitas Initiative in Ploiesti

Urban planning and development includes also infrastructure for cycling and walking which is a novelty in Ploiesti.

Implementation of a package of modern solutions, offering better design, access and security for pedestrians and cyclists

Increase city viability.

Improving of the convenience and safety of pedestrians/cyclists

Enhancing the pedestrian/cycling environment.

Encouraging the use of transport resources with lower pollution emissions

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT www.eu-portal.net

NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT

Exercises

1. Fill out a walkability tool for your city / municipality

2. Give an example of a method for benchmarking cycling policies

3. Sum up initiatives to improve NMT

www.eu-portal.net

Download