Bike Infrastructures

BIKE INFRASTRUCTURES VICTOR ANDRADE HENRIK HARDER OLE B. JENSEN LUKE LORIMER BAYLIS

1

TITLE BIKE INFRASTRUCTURES EDITORS Victor Andrade Henrik Harder Ole B Jensen EDITORIAL COORDINATION Victor Andrade RESEARCH COORDINATION Victor Andrade CONTRIBUTORS Victor Andrade Henrik Harder Ole B Jensen Jens Madsen Tom Godefrooij Kees van Goeverden RESEARCH TEAM Kristian Overby Luke Lorimer Baylis Niels Thuesen Anders Simonsen Nina K. Bregendahl Ann Sofie Grimshave Christensen LAYOUT Ann Sofie Grimshave Christensen Luke Lorimer Baylis COVER LAYOUT Ann Sofie Grimshave Christensen Victor Andrade Carneiro da Silva COVER PICTURES Victor Andrade PICTURES Victor Andrade Kristian Overby Luke Lorimer Baylis MAPS AND DRAWINGS Luke Lorimer Baylis Ann Sofie Grimshave Christensen Niels Thuesen PUBLISHER Architecture and Design Department Aalborg University ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN ISSN: 1603-6204 Volume: 69

2

bike infrastructures

3

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Danish National Survey

8

Bike Infrastructures Case Studies

4

11

23

The Dutch Reference Study . Cases of Interventions in Bike Infrastructure Reviewed in the Framework of Bikeability

222

recommendations

298

5

6

Introduction VICTOR ANDRADE

7

INDRODUCTION Increased transition of person transport from automobiles to bicycles is generally regarded as gain for society, most profoundly in terms of reduced emission and enhanced public health. However, the mode-share of cycling have decreased in recent years, leading to the conclusion by the Danish Government that conditions for cycling must be enhanced to increase the use of the bicycle for transportation (Regeringen et al 2009).

This research project departs from this conclusion and focuses on the preconditions for cycling; the possible effects of changes of the urban environment and cycling infrastructure; and methodologies for assessment of changes to existing bicycling infrastructure based on micro-level spatially explicit data. This way the strategic focus of the project is how to enhance bike-ability of urban areas.

This report presents the result of the research project titled Interventions to the bicycle infrastructure. This research is under the umbrella of a major project called Bike-ability: cities for zero emission and public health which consists of 5 interrelated work packages focusing on different scales and aspects of the analysis of cycling in relation to urban structure and bicycling infrastructure.

Finally, the research package Dutch References is a study of selected bicycling interventions in the Netherlands, focusing on bicycle infrastructure cases that helped increase local bicycle traffic significantly. This reference study will be based on considerations related to the classic study “Sign up for the Bike: Design Manual for a Cycle friendly Infrastructure” and these considerations will be compared to more recent studies from the Netherlands.

The primary purpose of this report is to provide policy makers, architects, urban designers or traffic engineers among others with a synthesis of information on bike infrastructures.

The main objective of this study is to analyze bike infrastructure cases in the Danish municipalities; their implementation; and significance in terms of contribution to the promotion of cycling; and finally identify infrastructure and design elements that can help promote cycling significantly.

It is the overall objective of the Bike-ability project to increase the level of knowledge in relation to bicycle based transport and thereby to contribute to more efficient and qualified urban planning and management. It is the specific societal/commercial objective to enable planners of urban areas to a) promote as high bike-ability of urban areas as possible; b) predict bicycle flows in planned or renewed bicycle infrastructures; and c) facilitate exchange of the Danish knowhow with respect to bicycle transport internationally.

Having said that, it is not the ambition of this report to fix a precise frame of techniques for interventions to bike infrastructures. It is however an intention to identify and debate critical topics that represent challenges facing the design and implementation of bike infrastructures and how they could enhance cycling.

The project Interventions to the bicycle infrastructure is divided in 3 research packages – Bike Infrastructures, National Survey and Dutch References.

The first 3 sections are dedicated to the 3 research packages that compose the Interventions to the bicycle infrastructure project. The Bike Infrastructure and National Survey sections include scientific articles which enhance a discussion and highlight critical themes.

Firstly, the package titled Bike Infrastructures is a comparative case study of 3 bike infrastructures with different typologies and in 3 Danish municipalities. The study aims to reveals recent experiences of implementation of bike infrastructures and their effects.

The package National Survey is an inventory of bike infrastructures implemented in all Danish municipalities between 1978 and 2009. Plus, it is investigate the structure and capacity of the municipalities to deal with implemen-

8

tation of bike infrastructures. The inventory is based on a web-based questionnaire which was sent to all Danish municipalities.

The report is divided in 4 sections – Bike Infrastructures, National Survey, Dutch References and Recommendations.

The latter section presents general recommendations which assemble the results from the national survey and comparative case studies for cross reading and analytical generalization, and in cooperation with planners from the projects case areas, provide recommendations for promotion of cycling through interventions to the cycling infrastructure.

9

10

DANISH NATIONAL SURVEY ENCOURAGING BIKE TRANSPORT AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL: RESULTS FROM A NATIONAL WEB QUESTIONNAIRE Jens Chr. O. Madsen Victor Andrade Ole B. Jensen Henrik Harder

11

INDRODUCTION As part of work package 4 a web questionnaire was carried out amongst the Danish Municipalities as these are a vital actor in the implementation of bike infrastructure projects. The aim of the survey was to describe infrastructural “Bikeability” projects and the municipal level in terms of both activity level, the nature of the projects and the motives behind the implementation of bike-projects. Furthermore, the municipalities were asked to evaluate the bike promoting and the safety potentials related to given types of bicycle projects. In terms of estimating the Bikeabilityeffects of investments in bicycle infrastructure a main aim of the questionnaire was to map the extent to which the municipalities have done before/after registrations in relation to implemented bike-infrastructure projects as these are required in order to perform such evaluations.

The findings from the national web questionnaire amongst the municipalities are reported below

Background At the moment large investments are made in bicycle infrastructure at the municipal level. The higher investment level is primarily initiated by the “Cycling Fund” (Danish: Cykelpuljen), which is administered from the state level by the Danish Road Directorate. Through the Danish Cycling Fund it is possible for the municipalities to obtain financial support from the Danish State, when it comes to financing bike promoting projects; the level of financial support from the state level may be as high as 50%. According to the Danish act on Green Transport Policy – passed by the Danish parliament – the goal of the Cycling Fund is to support projects specifically and actively aiming at improving the conditions for cycling (Transportministeriet, 2009). Over a period of 5 years 1 billion Danish Kroner will allocated Bike-promoting projects through the Cycling Funds with the expectation that the project partners will contribute with at least a corresponding investment.

Alongside the passing of the Cycling Fund, the Strategic Research Council decided to offer substantial financial support to the research project: ”Bikeability: Cities for zero emission travel and public health”, which focuses on producing scientifically based knowledge as to how socio-economics, geography, road environment and investments in bicycle infrastructures affects the use of the bike in daily transport.

12

Knowledge of this kind is vital to the Danish municipalities in order for them to identify ways of increasing the use of the bicycle in daily transport. More specifically knowledge and documentation on the effects of different kinds of bike-promoting projects are in demand in order to provide tools that enables the municipalities to systematically prioritize the projects relevant to them.

Purpose As part of the Bikeability project it was decided to perform a questionnaire amongst the Danish Municipalities. The main purposes of this questionnaire can be described as follows: • To describe the bicycle initiatives implemented at the municipal level in Denmark in the period 1/1 2007 until the summer 2011 with special focus upon the formulation of goals and plans for improving cycling, investment level and the nature and the character of the implemented projects.

• To map the primary motives amongst the municipalities when it comes to the background for implementing bikepromoting/bike-friendly projects.

• To get the municipalities assessment of given assumed bike-promoting/bike-friendly projects potential for actually promoting the use of the bike and the projects potential for actually improving bicycle safety respectively.

• To map the extent to which the municipalities perform before-after registrations in relation to local bicycle-projects which allows for evaluations of the effects of the project in terms of bicycle use and traffic safety.

The main reasons as why to conduct a municipal survey is reflected in the purpose of the questionnaire. Primarily, the questionnaire is performed in order to ensure that the research activities are in accordance with the goals, knowledge, initiatives and ideas at the municipal level, as it is a general priority for the Bikeability project as a whole that the research results are relevant and applicable to the central parties involved in increasing Bikeability at all levels. Hence the importance of mapping goals, motives and the implemented type of projects as well as the mapping of potentials, as the latter may serve as an indicator in terms of the projects that the municipalities may be inclined to implement in the future.

Secondly, the mapping of municipal projects with before/ after registrations serves to document the extent to which it is possible to perform classic before/after evaluations of bicycle effects (use of bike; safety of cyclists).

Methodology In preparing the questionnaire for the municipalities it was decided to apply a standardized and structured design applying a uniform formulation of questions and well-defined answering categories. This design holds the advantage that it is possible to compare the answers from the municipalities and it allows for statistical analysis to be applied to the comparison of answers.

The downside to the design is that it leaves the respondents with rather limited possibilities when it comes to motivate, elaborate and introduce light and shade on their answers.

Furthermore, it was decided to perform the questionnaire as a web-based questionnaire. The primary reason as why to apply this technique was that the questionnaire has a conditional answering structure, in the sense that the relevance of some of the later questions relies on the answers to earlier questions. By opting for a web-based questionnaire, it is possible to apply a dynamic design structure to the questionnaire, which makes it possible to skip questions irrelevant to the respondent (Madsen og Lahrmann, 2002).

In this case the application of the web-based design proved to have the weakness that it was hard for some of the municipalities to gain a full overview of the questionnaire, which proved to be a problem to them in terms for them to able to identify the person best suited for answering specific questions included in the questionnaire.

In order to ensure good quality answers to the questionnaire, it was decided to direct the questionnaire to the person(s) responsible for the cycling planning, activities and projects in each of the 98 Danish municipalities.

These persons were identified by consulting Bicycle networks, the participation lists from the annual Danish Bike Conference and by studying bicycle related planning documents from the municipalities. For these persons email addresses were retrieved and stored in a database. Accordingly, a personal email containing a link to the questionnaire was sent to each of the contact persons.

The questionnaire was conducted in the summer 2011 (June, July and August).

Participation From the 98 Danish Municipalities, approximately 70 municipalities responded. 20 municipalities replied that they did not have the resources needed to fill out the questionnaire. 50 municipalities activated the web questionnaire and 41 municipalities completed the questionnaire. This amounts to an answering rate of 42%.

Smaller as well as larger municipalities have completed the questionnaire. The answer rate is highest for the Southern Region of Denmark (68%). However, the questionnaire is dominated by the larger urban municipalities.

9 out of the 10 municipalities with the highest number of inhabitants have completed the questionnaire. In general there is also a high answering rate amongst the Capital area Municipalities.

The fact that questionnaire is dominated by the larger urban municipalities is likely to reflect that the questionnaire has appealed especially to urban municipalities with an outspoken tradition for focussing upon bicycle transportation. This represents a bias in the results from the survey; they are not likely to reflect the general “Danish Picture” on all aspects, as the results indicate variations in the answers obtained from the larger urban municipalities on the one hand side and the “rural” municipalities on the other hand side. Another contributing reason as to why the larger urban municipalities are overrepresented may be that they to a larger extent have the resources to participate in this kind of survey.

Goals, initiatives and motives Bicycle traffic is in general highly ranked on the agenda amongst the municipalities, who have completed the questionnaire. 75% municipalities state that the have specific goals on enhancing the use of the bike amongst the inhabitants, while 83% state that they have improved conditions for the cyclists as a specific municipal goal.

In terms of planning and prioritizing tools one out three of the participating municipalities have made a specific cycling action plan in order to promote the use of bike.

Furthermore 20% of the municipalities are in the process of making a cycling action plan. These plans typically contains a goal for promoting cycling and a description of applied strategies and concrete initiatives that the municipalities are planning to implement in order to fulfil the formulated goals, e.g. campaigns, education, investments in bike infrastructure.

13

Furthermore, 85% of the municipalities have made or are in the process of making plans for the provision of pedestrian and bicycle friendly infrastructure (footpaths, walkways, bicycle lanes, bicycle tracks, traffic calmed routes etc.).

Both the formulation of goals and the rather high level of cycling related plans indicate that cycling is a focus area amongst the participating municipalities. This also shows in the fact that 88% of the participating municipalities within the last five years (2007-2011) have implemented initiatives aiming at improving the conditions for the cyclists.

83% of the municipalities have indicated that they have implemented projects specifically aiming at increasing the use of the bike amongst the inhabitants.

Approximately 25% of the municipalities have invested more than 10 million DKK in cycling projects and initiatives from 2007 till 2011, including bicycle tracks, bicycle lanes, bicycle parking, cycling plans, developing cycling action plans etc. Only 14% of the participating municipalities have invested less than 1 million DKK in cycling projects and initiatives.

The majority of the invested funds have in fact been spent on actual bicycle infrastructure. More than half of the municipalities state that at least 80% of the invested funds has been invested in bicycle tracks, bicycle lanes, bicycle parking and at intersections, the latter with the focus on increasing cyclists safety. More specifically the municipal activities have mainly been focussed upon expanding the bicycle infrastructure. In that context the municipalities have prioritized the implementation of actual bicycle tracks to the implementation of the cheaper solutions; bicycle lanes and the appointing of bicycle routes along local roads, the latter not including significant changes to the existing infrastructure. In the Copenhagen Area focus has also been on the implementation of cycling commuter routes, which includes significant improvements to the bicycle infrastructure, including establishing separate bicycle tracks and out-of-level crossing of larger roads, thus ensuring fast connectivity between the suburbs and the capitol area of Copenhagen.

57% of the municipalities answer that they have not or only to a limited extent have applied solutions such as; speed reduction of cycling routes even though this measure will reduce accident risks and make the cyclist feel safer in traffic (Greibe et al., 2000). One third of the participating municipalities are though, to a large extent, working actively with speed management. Most of the municipalities are focussed upon improving the conditions for

14

the cyclists at intersections, with most of them focussing upon safety issues rather than improving the cyclist flow at the intersections.

Improving the possibilities of combining the use of bike and public transport by improving the transfer between the two modes of transport, has only been implemented by a minority of the municipalities and only to a limited extent in the municipalities where this measure has been implemented.

In general there is a large variation in the extent to which the municipalities have invested en better parking facilities. This initiative has mainly been implemented by the larger urban municipalities. Improved bathing and changing facilities at work places has been seen as a possible way of increasing the use of the bike when commuting.

However, this initiative has by and large not been implemented by the municipalities in Denmark.

In recent year there has been a specific focus upon the transport behaviour amongst children. It has been a growing concern that more and more children are driven by car to school by their parents rather than walking and cycling themselves. The concern is that this will have a negative impact on their travel behaviour as adults as they may grow increasingly in favour of travelling by car than by cycle in their adult life. Steps have been taken in order to get more school children to travel by bike, predominantly by investing in safer school routes. This is also reflected in the questionnaire as 80% of the municipalities to some extent have invested in safer school routes, e.g. by implementing bicycle tracks, employing traffic calming schemes, pedestrian crossings etc.).

Summing up on the characteristics of the implemented projects and initiatives, it can be concluded that the municipalities generally prefers to invest in bicycle tracks, although this solution is relatively expensive. The questionnaire does not shed light upon why this is the case.

However, it is likely that the preference towards bicycle tracks is due to the fact that it holds a highly symbolic value, “we encourage cycling�, it is perceived as a good solution in terms of both connectivity and safety and there is documentation that the construction of bicycle tracks increase the level of cycling (Jensen, 2006). Finally, and equally important, bicycle tracks is a solution often in demand amongst the cyclists.

Motives When it comes for the municipalities motives for investing in bicycle projects and initiatives the primary driving force is actually to reduce the accident risks amongst the cyclists as well as to improve cyclist security; the latter expressing the notion of traffic safety/accident risk amongst cyclists. As opposed to accident risk, which is the objective measure of traffic safety, security expresses the subjective measure of traffic safety. Focussing upon the level of security is relevant in the sense that if people feel safer, they are more likely to use the bike, in which case the traffic safety issue becomes relevant in terms of increasing the use of the bike.

Other dominant motives for the municipalities to invest in bicycle transport is a desire to enhance public health and to improve connectivity, and thereby the mobility of the cyclists. The latter may also prompt more car-users to opt for the bike at the expense of the bike in the future.

However, in comparison, the desire to move bike-users to the car in order to reduce environmental strains as well as congestion problems is to a lesser extent stated as a specific motivation by the municipalities.

However, in regards to having environmental strains and congestion problems as motivators for wanting to transfer car trips into bicycle trips there is a large variation between the municipalities. The larger urban municipalities especially states environmental concerns and congestion problems as a primary motivator, whereas the rural municipalities does it to a lesser extent. In comparison the safety and security issue is stated as a primary motivation by both urban and rural municipalities. The reason as to why this is the case is likely to boil down to the fact that the problems in relation to congestion and the environmental strains are evident in the urban municipalities, whereas the safety issue is a general concern and problem no matter the size of the municipality.

Potentials for increasing the use of the bike When it comes to increasing the use of the bike in daily transport, the municipalities state that the largest potential is related to projects that aim at improving the safety and security level along the school routes. This reflects the assumption that if the school routes are perceived as safe by the parents, the more likely it is that they will allow their kinds to go to school by bike. Given that increased use of bike as a child and youngster will led to a higher use of the

bike as an adult the rationale holds.

Besides improving the routes to and from school the municipalities in general point to improvements of the bicycle infrastructure as the most promising way of enhancing the use of bike. The largest potential for promoting the use of the bike is in the eyes of the municipalities attached to the construction of bicycle tracks. As bicycle tracks are perceived as a secure solution this indicates that projects that seeks to improve both the perception of safety as well as the level of connectivity are seen as promising projects by the municipalities.

In assessing the potential for increasing the use of bike in general it seems as if the perceived potentials seem to fade with the visibility and clarity of the project. Project that clearly signals improvements of connectivity and safety/security are deemed to hold a larger potential than those with a lesser explicit focus on the cyclists. Specifically, general speed management at the municipal level and speed reduction schemes along cycling routes are deemed to hold a lesser potential than the provision of cyclist specific infrastructure such as bicycle tracks and bicycle lanes. The latter seems somewhat surprising in the sense that the car speed level has significant impact upon the perceived safety level amongst pedestrians and cyclists and furthermore it is well-documented that speed reductions significantly reduces both accident and injury risks amongst vulnerable road users, including cyclists (Madsen et al., 2008; Greibe et al., 2000). Based upon these facts, one could argue that reduced speed levels would enhance the use of the bike due to actually improved safety and security levels.

Newer Danish research have documented a 10% increase in the number of cyclists – in a Copenhagen context – when new bicycle tracks are constructed in an urban environment (Jensen, 2006). In order to be able to prioritize between projects, it would be highly fruitful to set up evaluation studies aiming at documenting the effects of speed reductions on the use of the bike. Traditionally evaluations of speed reductions focus on the safety effects only.

Potentials for improving safety for cyclists

traffic

When asked to assess the potential for improving traffic safety amongst cyclists the municipalities again primarily points to the construction of bicycle tracks. This is somewhat worrying as Danish research projects have shown that the construction of bicycle tracks does not significant-

15

ly improve the traffic safety level amongst cyclists (Agerholm et al., 2006). The results show that the number of accidents involving cyclists and the number of cyclists injured tend to fall on the road stretches, where bicycle tracks are implemented, but unfortunately the number of injured cyclists increases significantly at the intersections after the construction of bicycle tracks (Jensen, 2006).

In comparison the municipalities indicate that the safety potential related to speed reduction initiative holds a lower potential, when it comes to improving cyclist safety than the construction of various types of bicycle tracks and bicycle tracks. This despite the fact that there is comprehensive documentation that speed reductions significantly reduces accident and injury risks, see e.g. Elvik (2004).

This misconception of safety potentials is highly unfortunate from a safety point of view, as municipalities may opt for the construction of safety-inefficient bicycle tracks with the desire to promote safety rather than safety-efficient traffic calming schemes. Furthermore, the result highlights the importance of clearly communicating the results of traffic research projects to the municipalities.

The need for further evaluations of effects The results from the questionnaire generally reflect that the municipalities favour the provision of bicycle tracks.

It can be documented that the number of cyclists increases when new bicycle tracks (and bicycle lanes) are constructed, whereas there is no documentation that the provision of bicycle tracks in urban areas will improve the safety level. Recent research seems to reflect that the number of injured cyclists is in fact likely to increase (Jensen, 2006; Agerholm et al., 2006).

By consequence the municipalities should only opt for the construction of bicycle tracks, if the aim is to increase the level of cycling. If the aim is to improve cyclist safety, the municipalities are likely to do better, if traffic calming/ speed reducing schemes is implemented. In terms of the latter, there is a need for evaluations that investigate how traffic calming and speed reducing schemes affect the level of cycling. Documented knowledge on the effects upon cycling will generally improve the grounds for prioritizing between dedicated bike infrastructure projects

16

such as the provision of various types of bicycle tracks and lanes on the one hand side and more general traffic calming projects on the other hand side.

Given the investment in bike promoting projects and initiatives in Denmark, scientifically sound evaluations of the effects; being safety effects as well as cycling effects, are hard to come by. Therefore the municipalities were asked, if they do counts of cyclists before and after the implementation of cycling projects. Half of the participating municipalities actually stated that they had done before-after counts, which was actually more than expected. The survey does not reflect, if they have done before-after counts in relations to one project only or if they do before-after counts in all cases. However, when asked if the before-after counts could be made available for a scientific beforeafter evaluation of cycling effects, only 8 municipalities responded positive.

In order to provide further knowledge of the effects of bicycle promoting projects this reflects that it would be fruitful to provide further incentives for doing relevant beforeafter registrations at the municipal level as well as setting up a common set of guidelines for performing evaluations of bike-promoting projects and initiatives.

References Agerholm, N., Caspersen, S., Lahrmann, H. og Madsen, J. C. O., 2006, Cykelstiers Trafiksikkerhed: En før-efterundersøgelse af 46 nye cykelstiers sikkerhedsmæssige effekt, Article in ”Dansk Vejtidsskrift”, Vol 83, no. 12, p.p. 52-57 Elvik, R., Christensen, P. and Amundsen, A., 2004, Speed and Road Accidents: An evaluation of the Power Model, TOI Report 740/2004, Institute of Transport Economics Greibe, P., Nilsson, P. K. og Herrstedt, L., 2000, Håndbog i Hastighedsplanlægning for Byområder, Vejdirektoratet, Rapport 194 Jensen, S. U., 2006, Effekter af Cykelstier og Cykelbaner: Før-og-efter evaluering af trafiksikkerhed og trafikmængder ved anlæg af ensrettede cykelstier og cykelbaner i Københavns Kommune, Trafitec Madsen, J. C. O. og Lahrmann, H., 2002, Webbaserede Spørgeskemaer i Transportundersøgelser, Paper ”Trafikdage på Aalborg Universitet 2002”, Trafikforskningsgruppen, Aalborg Universitet Madsen, J. C. O. og Søbjærg, S., 2008, Trafikfarlige skoleveje – udpegning og vurdering, Vejforum 2008 Transportministeriet, 2009, Aftale mellem regeringen (Venstre og De Konservative), Socialdemokraterne, Dansk Folkeparti, Socialistisk Folkeparti, Det Radikale Venstre og Liberal Alliance om: En grøn transportpolitik, Transportministeriet.

17

Tables/illustrations

Indicated levels of investment in bicycle projects and initiatives amongst the participating municipalities (2007-2011).

Â

Activity Campaigns Provision of bicycle tracks Provision of bicycle lanes Provision of bicycle routes along local roads Provision of bike commuter routes Speed reduction of bicycle routes (with/without bicycle facilities) General speed management schemes applied Better traffic flow for cyclists at intersections Improvement of cyclist safety at intersections Improved transfer between bike and public transport (bus/train) Improved parking facilities for bicycles Improved changing and bathing facilities at Safety improvements of school routes

Not implemented 15 % 8%

To a limited extent 15 % 9%

To some extent 41 % 17 %

To a large extent 20 % 43 %

To a very large extent 9% 23 %

34 %

20 %

57 %

31 %

40 %

6%

-

6%

6%

-

59 %

12 %

17 %

6%

6%

34 %

23 %

32 %

11 %

-

27 %

31 %

9%

24 %

9%

20 %

28 %

29 %

20 %

3%

6%

17 %

37 %

29 %

11 %

47 %

21 %

24 %

6%

3%

29 %

29 %

21 %

18 %

3%

80 %

10 %

10 %

-

-

9%

11 %

40 %

23 %

17 %

Extent to which, the municipalities indicate to have implemented various cycling related activities in the period 2007 – 2012.

18

No potential

Limited potential

Potential

Large potential

Huge potential

The municipalities’ assessment of bike use promoting potentials of given projects and initiatives.

19

No potential

Limited potential

Potential

Large potential

The municipalities’ assessment of bike safety promoting potentials of given projects and initiatives.

20

Huge potential

21

22

BIKE INFRASTRUCTURES VICTOR ANDRADE HENRIK HARDER OLE B. JENSEN JENS MADSEN

23

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION 6 2.0 METHODOLOGY 8 3.0 CASES 14 3.1 CASE 1: SHARED SPACE VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS 3.1.1 ODENSE

16

16

MUNICIPALITY VISION 16 BICYCLE NETWORK 18 3.1.2 VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS

20

BEFORE AND AFTER 22 THE COSTS OF VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS

22

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS AND STREETSCAPE 24 CYCLIST COUNTINGS 36 THE WEB SURVEY 38 MAIN FINDINGS 39 RESIDENTIAL LOCATION OF RESPONDENTS 39 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 42

RELATIONS BETWEEN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND WEB-SURVEY ANSWERS

3.2 CASE 2: BICYCLE TRACK HANS BROGES GADE

48

64

3.2.1 ÅRHUS 64 MUNICIPALITY VISION 64 BICYCLE NETWORK 66 3.2.2 HANS BROGES GADE 68 BEFORE AND AFTER 68 THE COSTS OF HANS BROGES GADE 68 DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS AND STREETSCAPE 70 CYCLIST COUNTINGS 84 THE WEB SURVEY 86 MAIN FINDINGS 87 RESIDENTIAL LOCATION OF RESPONDENTS 87 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 90

24

RELATIONS BETWEEN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND WEB-SURVEY ANSWERS

96

3.3 CASE 3: BICYCLE BRIDGE BRYGGEBRO

112

3.3.1 COPENHAGEN

112

MUNICIPALITY VISION 112 BICYCLE NETWORK 116 3.3.2 BRYGGEBRO

118

BEFORE AND AFTER 118 THE COSTS OF BRYGGEBRO

118

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS AND STREETSCAPE 120 CYCLIST COUNTINGS 140 THE WEB SURVEY 142 MAIN FINDINGS 143 RESIDENTIAL LOCATION OF RESPONDENTS 143 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 146

RELATIONS BETWEEN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND SURVEY ANSWERS

4.0 GENERAL COMPARISON 5.0 CONCLUSION REFERENCES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES ANNEX

152

168 174 176 180 187 196

25

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Decisions on transportation projects are typically based on the potential for the project to contribute to broad public policy goals. Danish urban design solutions and urban policies effort aim to increase bike-ability. To make the best use of transportation funds there is a critical need for better information about two important considerations relating to bicycle infrastructure: the cost of different bicycle infrastructure and the effects of such investments have on bicycle use, which includes the resulting environmental, economic, public health, and social benefits. Therefore, information on how determined bicycle infrastructure enhances cycling will help decision makers to develop better design solutions.

This research project picks up from this conclusion and focuses on the possible effects of changes to the cycling infrastructure, investigating and analyzing cycling motivation related to distinct bike infrastructure typology characteristics.

This research aims to identify bicycle infrastructure typologies and design elements that can help promote cycling significantly. The study was structured as a study case based research where there were three cycling infrastructures with distinct typologies – Vestergade Vest in Odense (shared-use space in the core of the city); Hans Borges Gade in Aarhus (an extension of a bicycle route linking the suburb to Aarhus Central station) and Bryggebro in Copenhagen (a bridge for cyclists and pedestrians crossing the harbor) – were analyzed and compared.

In order to achieve this goal, the study got a more detailed insight in what design characteristics are relevant for cyclists when riding a bike and how cyclists do evaluate a cycling infrastructure based on these characteristics.

To achieve this goal, this report is organized as follows.

First, there is a debate in regards to the main concepts and notions used in this research. In section 2, the research method is explained. This section is followed by a description of the research sample. In section 3, the analysis of each of the three cases is presented. A comparative analysis between the three cases is described in section 4. Finally, the report ends with conclusions and suggestions for future research and also for urban designers, planner and engineers.

26

The achieved knowledge will be used to contribute to more efficient and qualified urban planning and management – promoting a better quality bike-ability of urban structures as possible and assess potential effect of investments in bicycle infrastructure.

Therefore, this research project will inform urban designers and planners in the context of Danish municipalities by identifying opportunities and barriers for cycling in the physical environment. Bridging research and policy, the findings of this research project can also support bike friendly design and planning, and cyclist advocacy.

Figure 1.1: Cyclist riding his bike at Bryggebro.

27

2.0 METHODOLOGY

The report presents a methodology and tools for mapping and evaluating the potential benefits of the implementation of bicycle infrastructure. The results will help to better understand what characteristics from a bicycle infrastructure are relevant to enhance cycling. Consequently, the findings will also help urban designers and planners to develop more effective bicycle infrastructures.

There is also an effort to better understand how relevant socio-demographic variables are in relation to the individuals` perception of bicycle infrastructures and to possible influential design characteristics on the decision to ride a bike.

Through ex-post studies of three bicycle infrastructures with distinct typologies, this research aims to identify design characteristics that can enhance bicycling. The studies are based on the impact of the bicycle infrastructures on cyclists` travel behavior and the cyclists` views upon the design characteristics of the infrastructures.

Moreover, the report has a brief description of the implementation process of the selected bicycle infrastructures and the local government context that regards cycling network and campaigns.

THE CASE STUDIES AND SELECTION CRITERIA First of all, it is relevant to mention that this research does not intent to represent an exhaustive analysis of all typologies of infrastructure and neither all new infrastructures implemented in Danish cities in the last 5 years.

While some critical analysis was done to select the particular three case studies analyzed in this report, their inclusion depended to a great extent on three criteria: recently implemented infrastructures (less than 5 years); distinct typologies between the cases; and located in municipalities which were interested and willing to share detailed information about the interventions.

The infrastructure should be less than 5 years old, presenting a reasonable time to individuals that ride their bicycles there to remember their travel habits before and after the intervention.

Three interventions with distinct typologies were subjected to ex-post studies: Vestergade Vest and Mageløs in Odense (shared-use space in the core of the city); Hans

28

Broges Gade in Aarhus (improvement of a section of an existing bicycle corridor that links the suburbs to the core of the city) and Bryggebro in Copenhagen (a bridge for cyclists and pedestrians crossing the harbor).

ÅRHUS

COPENHAGEN ODENSE

Figure 2.1: Location of the cities from the three case studies

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS The project applies a multi-disciplinary approach to research on bicycle infrastructure, correlating quantitative determinants and qualitative knowledge types.

Both primary and secondary data have been employed.

For each infrastructure, the data was collected through a questionnaire based on a web survey, counting of cyclists, local observation, diary of the daily flow and atmosphere and image collection, interviews and exchange of e-mails with key actors, review of reports, official documents, newspaper articles and press releases.

According to Denzin (1978), a triangulation method can be defined as "the combination of methodologies in the study of the same phenomenon”. Considering the geometric characteristics of a triangle, it can be assumed that distinct viewpoints allow for greater accuracy.

BICYCLE COUNT The bicycle count is a strategic tool to better understand how changes in an infrastructure either encouraged or discouraged cycling. The bicycle count from Hans Broges Gade and Bryggebro was provided by respectively Aarhus municipality and Copenhagen Municipality.

In the case of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, a manual count was done on the Tuesday the 12th of September 2010. The manual count is defined as a count where one or more data collectors register the volume of traffic (Vejdirektoratet, 2004).

The data collectors used counting boards with manual click counters fitted to them and they recorded their counts on a paper sheet at the counting board after each thirty minute periods. In addition, the counting sheet also included the following information: date, day of the week, weather condition and data collector`s name.

The count can be conducted manually or with automatic count technologies; having both advantages and disadvantages. Because the counts were done manually, it was possible to have two categories – cyclists riding a bike and cyclists walking and pushing their bikes.

The data collected was the number of cyclists riding a bike and cyclists walking with their bikes in each direction on the midpoint of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs. The counts were done by a team of three field data collectors.

There was always one data collector for each direction at the counting point from 7am until 7 pm. A third counter functioned as a backup, making possible for every data collector have a break every hour.

The count was taken over a 12-hour period between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m on a Wednesday of September. And following the recommendations of the Vejdirektoratet (2004), the data collectors that developed the counting were placed in a spot that did not interfere with the traffic flow.

In order to minimize the chance of external interferences – weather, sport events, manifestations – in the data collected, the date of the counting was carefully picked.

The Vejdirektoratet (2004) suggests that the count should be taken on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday in September. Due to their sporadic travel patterns, Monday and Friday should be avoided for not being representative of a typical weekday.

In parallel of the count activity, a diary was written describing the different flow patterns, speed and atmosphere of the infrastructures through the day.

DATA ANALYSIS After the data collection, an ex-post analysis of the counting figures was implemented. Moreover, it developed a relation between the count figures and the diary with the description of the different flow patterns, speed and atmosphere of the infrastructures through the day.

The data was compiled and displayed on graphs to make comparisons that are useful for analytical purposes. A graph with the results was also used to develop a comparison with the diary of the infrastructure and images taken during the day.

AN ANALYSIS OF BIKE INFRASTRUCTURE PERFORMANCE THROUGH THE LENGHTS OF CYCLISTS The bicycle is an important and strategic means of transport in urban areas. In Danish cities, the traffic system already offers a large amount of bicycle infrastructures – e.g. bicycle lanes with special pavement, bicycle tracks, green corridors, shared spaces – and cycling policies, campaigns and cyclist friendly traffic regulations.

In this context, it emerges a need to measure the impact on travel behavior of the new bicycle infrastructures implemented in urban areas. Having three case studies, this report expands on how these assessments can be done.

The web based survey was conducted aiming to define how much the implementation of the bicycle infrastructure had enhanced cycling, to identify influential design factors in the decision to cycling and to assess the bicycle infrastructure through the lengths of the cyclists.

In order to analyze bicycle infrastructures through the lengths of cyclists, the web survey targeted the cyclists as potential respondents. The web survey involved designing a questionnaire to find out the cyclists perception of cycling infrastructures and what characteristics of these infrastructures have encouraged or discouraged cycling.

Relevant questions in the context of cyclists perception and evaluation of cycling infrastructure are ‘what design characteristics do cyclists mostly observe/perceive while they are using the cycling infrastructure?’ and ‘how do cy-

29

clists evaluate these design characteristics?’.

However, there are several studies focusing in the cyclists perception of the physical environment where they are travelling through and most of them conclude that cyclists have a small knowledge of the physical environment their used to travelling through (Bovy et al, 1990; Landis et al, 1997; Noël et al, 2003).

Despite this small knowledge cyclists have, it is important both to identify which design characteristics from a bicycle infrastructure are relevant for them when they are riding a bicycle and to develop an assessment of a cycling infrastructure based on the cyclists perspective.

Taking in consideration social demographic characteristics – gender, age and educational level – the study also aims to better understand how relevant socio-demographic variables are in relation to the individuals` perception of cycling infrastructures and to possible influential characteristics on the decision to ride a bike.

WEB SURVEY There is an increasing number of web-based surveys, being important to highlight the specific design characteristics of this tool. Manfeda et al. (2002) comments that “Since there is no help from an interviewer for the respondent taking a Web survey, the design of self-administered Web questionnaires is even more important in order to achieve high data quality. Question wording, form and graphic layout of the questionnaire are particularly important.”

The web survey has a great advantage to get the data already in an electronic format and the electronic format can also eliminate data entry errors. Moreover, the web survey made it possible to do a non stop flow of cyclists in the studied infrastructures. Through the distribution of web-cards, we have achieved our target group and, at the same time, we did not disturb their routine.

Through comparative studies between responses rate of web surveys to other survey modes, Lozar (2001) highlights that web surveys usually obtain lower response rates. Complementing, Gonzalez-Bañales and Adam (2007) indicates that response rate for web surveys is around 10% or lower.

30

In order to optimize the number of respondents, complex questions should be avoided and the web survey should only be closed after six weeks from the distribution of the web card. (Gonzalez-Bañales and Adam, 2007) The web survey design, implementation and analysis were divided in five phases: planning the survey; writing the questionnaire; designing the web questionnaire and web cards; distributing the web cards; and data treatment and analysis.

It should be considered that of the studied population could be unwilling to devote much time to a web survey.

In order to optimize the response rates and the number of completions, it was needed to make the survey as short as possible but still enabling to gather all the relevant information.

The use of incentives can additionally contribute to attract respondents. As a strategy to attract more respondents, a lottery having a bicycle – with the value of 3500DKK – as price is presented in the web cards and web page. All the respondents participated in the lottery.

At the web page, there was an image of the cycling infrastructure being analyzed by the respondents and the logo from Aalborg University. Moreover, it provided information about the research project and goals, contact for further inquiries, information about the lottery and an explanation about the privacy policy in regards to the respondents.

QUESTIONNAIRE The questionnaire was designed aiming to find the demographic profile of the cyclists, the relevant design characteristics for the cyclists and which extended the implementation of the infrastructure enhancing cycling. Cyclists were asked to indicate which cycling infrastructure characteristics they had observed during their trip. They were also asked to evaluate the observed cycle infrastructure characteristics. In addition, respondents were invited to make comments about the infrastructure (see model of the questionaire on page 198).

In order to develop the survey – especially the questionnaire – journal articles and research reports in the area of urban cycling studies were reviewed to identify consistent infrastructure characteristics that could enhance cycling – e.g. safety, aesthetics, accessibility, fast connectivity (Pikora, T. et al, 2003; Kweon, B.S. et al, 2004). At the end of the questionnaire, there was a space for general comments.

questionnaire and the associated data collection methodology. After the pilot web survey, the necessary modifications in the questionnaire were made accordingly.

THE STUDIED POPULATION AND SAMPLE SIZE Respondents of the survey are bicyclists that have at least once ride a bicycle in the studied infrastructure.

Despite of the consideration that part of the studied population would be unable to access the Internet, the Internet users are becoming more and more similar to the general population because the accelerate increase in internet usage (Pastore, 2001).

Figure 2.2: Screen print view from the Vestergade Vest`s questionnaire.

Vestergade Vest

FLYER DISTRIBUTION For every studied infrastructure, the distribution of the flyers occurred from 7am until 7 pm in one weekday (Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday) with good weather conditions (no rain or heavy wind) in the month of September.

From 7am until 7pm, web cards were offered to every cyclist riding a bicycle in the infrastructure in both directions.

The flyers were distributed on the same day of the count survey. For each of the cases, the web survey was available from the date of the web card distribution until four weeks later (see model of the flyer on page 197).

Hans Broges Gade

Bryggebro

September 14/Tuesday

September 2/Thursday

September 1/Wednesday

October 12

October 1

September 30

Vestergade Vest and Mageløs Flyers distribution & web survey opening Web survey closing

Table 2.1: Date of flyers distribution, web survey opening and web survey closing for the three case studies.

SVAR PÅ SPØRGSMÅLENE

VIND EN NY CYKEL

ØNSKER DU EN BEDRE CYKELBY? VI ER MIDT I ET FORSKNINGSPROJEKT OM CYKELBYEN OG MANGLER NETOP DIN HJÆLP TIL AT FORBEDRE DEN. DET GØR DU VED AT SVARE PÅ FÅ SPØRGSMÅL PÅ:

www.detmangfoldigebyrum.dk/vestergade/ For yderligere information om projektet: vsil@create.aau.dk

VESTERGADE VEST & MAGELØS SVAR PÅ SPØRGSMÅLENE

Figure 2.3: Flyer distributed to individuals riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs on the 2nd of September 2010.

VIND EN NY CYKEL

PILOT WEB SURVEY

ØNSKER DU EN BEDRE CYKELBY?

VI ER MIDT I ET FORSKNINGSPROJEKT OM CYKELBYEN OG MANGLER NETOP DIN HJÆLP TIL AT FORBEDRE DEN. DET GØR DU VED AT SVARE PÅ FÅ SPØRGSMÅL PÅ:

A pilot web survey was carried out under the same conwww.detmangfoldigebyrum.dk/vestergade/ ditions than the real survey. The pilot web survey was held in the street named Vesterbro (Aalborg) in August of VESTERGADE VEST & MAGELØS 2010.

The pilot web survey functioned as a review of the For yderligere information om projektet: vsil@create.aau.dk

SVAR PÅ SPØRGSMÅLENE

VIND EN NY CYKEL

Hans B. Gade

Bryggebro

and Mageløs

ØNSKER DU EN BEDRE CYKELBY?

Total no bicycle trips/ day

6446

1251

7352

Estimated no bicyclists/ day

4189

813

4778

Flyers handed

1328

605

3020

Respondents

298

163

290

(65% of total)

Table 2.2: Number of bike trips, cyclists, flyers handed out and a number of respondents for the three case studies.

DATA ANALYSIS The data analysis aimed to better understand the impact of the examined infrastructures in the bicycling activity.

The data collected was examined and uncover relationships among the data were highlighted.

Data collected from the questionnaires were entered into the statistical software Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) for analysis and then statistical tests were applied to identify describe the results and level of dependency between variables.

Table and graphics are also used for displaying the data in a variety of formats in order to identify patterns and differences among the results set.

The collected data from the web survey was analyzed in the four different stages and using a distinct statistical treatment.

Firstly, the residential location of the respondents was spatially identified and then analyzed in relation to the distance to the infrastructure. In a second stage, Descriptive statistics were applied to describe collected data and highlight singular characteristics and relevant patterns.

Socio-demographic patterns of the respondents were identified and the distribution of the answers was described with patterns.

Finally, the Chi2 test was applied to identify possible relations between socio-demographics (independent variables) and the variables originated from the web survey questions (dependable variables). Considering the nature of the studied variables – the majority of them are nominal – the Chi2 test was selected to this analysis.

31

INTERVIEW AND ELETRONIC CORRESPONDENCE WITH KEY ACTORS Through non-structured interviews and electronic correspondence, personal opinion and information about the studied infrastructures were also gathered from both technicians from the studies municipalities and cyclists.

DATA ANALYSIS A data basis was developed in the Excel with all the interviews and questionnaires. This data base identifies relevant information to be used in the report. The interviews and electronic correspondence functioned as support information to the count figures and web survey findings.

FIELD OBSERVATIONAL SURVEY AND IMAGE COLLECTION Observation is a major source in the field research, the three infrastructures were analyzed in loco, local conditions during the day were observed and a diary was writing. The observation aimed to identify possible design characteristics of the infrastructures that may affect people’s traveling behavior.

The design detail characteristics analyzed in loco were: infrastructure typology, pavement material and lay out, on-street parking facilities, priority signs at crossings, hierarchy of the modes of transport (pedestrians, cyclists, car drivers), traffic calming solutions, public art, signage, greenery, lightning (day and night) bicycle paths and lanes.

DATA ANALYSIS An image data base was implemented and the material was used in several sections of the report to visually exemplify findings. Moreover, images took from the site were used to compare with the counting and illustrate the local conditions throughout the day.

The descriptions from the diary were also a strategic data used to be compared with the count figures and the web survey findings.

32

Figure 2.4: Member of the research team delivering flyers to cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs on September 14th 2010.

33

3.0 CASES

ODENSE SHARED SPACE

VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS 34

AARHUS BICYCLE TRACK

HANS BROGES GA

ADE

COPENHAGEN BICYCLE BRIDGE

BRYGGEBRO 35

3.1 CASE1 shared space vestergade vest and magelØs

3.1.1 ODENSE Odense is the third largest Danish municipality and has a population of 188777 inhabitants in 2010 (Statistikbanken, 2010). The municipality is located in the island of Funen and it is part of the South Denmark Region.

ODENSE

Figure 3.1.1: Geographical location of Odense.

MUNICIPALITY VISION In December 1993, the Danish government presented a strategic plan for sustainable transportation – named Traffic 2005 – aiming to create a balance between economic development and environment based on principles of sustainable growth. One of the main objectives was to increase the share of cyclists in overall individual transportation in the country until 2005 (Trafikministeriet, 2000)

36

The Danish Ministry of Traffic and the Danish Road Directorate financially supported Odense with ten million Danish krones to implement solutions aiming to enhance cycling. The Odense counterpart was ten million Danish krones. A broad range of projects were implemented, ranging from campaign activities to physical interventions in the built environment.

In 2002, the Odense municipality achieved the projects main goal, increasing more than 2% the share of cyclists in comparison with figures from 1999. In 2008, Odense municipality decided to revitalize its policies towards cycling and started to promote itself as the Cyclists` City and presented this vision for its own future: “Odense must be a city where cyclists have the best conditions because Odense makes the experience of cycling easier, safer, more comfortable and more exciting” (Odense Municipality, 2010f).

Currently, 25% of all commuting trips – to work or study – are made cycling in Odense (Odense Municipality, 2010d). The goal within the vision is to increase the amount of trips on bike 25% in 2012 to have reached a total increase of 35% in 2020 in relation to the 2007 numbers. Further 10% more cyclists should feel safe in traffic (Odense Municipality, 2010c).

According to Figure 3.2, 25% of the trips made in Odense have a bike as a transportation mode. The amount of bike trips peeked with 27% of the total in 2000 – during the period of the National Cyclists City policies – and then went down to 24% in 2006. In 2008, the starting year of its new vision as the Cyclists’ City, the amount was 25%.

Therefore, Odense municipalitys goal is to achieve a ratio of 32,5% of bike trips from the overall traffic count.

In order to achieve this objective, 4% of individual transportation should be moved from private automobile to bicycle or walking. In practice, it means that all trips shorter than three kilometres should start to be made by private motorized vehicles to healthier and environmentally friendly modes – cycling and walking.

Currently, all the cyclist related campaigns from Odense municipality are organized under the umbrella of the vision named Cyklisternes By – or Cyclists` city. The decision to change the title of its vision from “Odense Bicycle City” to “Odense Cyclists` City” was based on the intention of change the focus from the bikes towards their cyclists.

In that context, Odense was selected to function as a lab for new solutions and became the National Bike City and it was name “Odense Bike City”. The main goal was to increase 2% of trips made by bike in the period from 1999 until 2002.

A webpage has been launched for the new branding with news, information, cyclist maps etc. The Odense Cyclists` city campaign also has a weekly column in the local newspaper – Fyens Stiftstidende – every Thursday since July 2010 (Odense municipality, 2010g).

In the international level, Odense municipality has built its own stand on the 2010 Shanghai Expo where there the image of city is represented by both its bike infrastructure and cyclists and the fellow-townsman Hans Christiansen Andersen (Odense Municipality, 2010h).

According to the interview with Dorthe R책by and Rune Bugge Jensen, one of the challenges that Odense municipality faces is to convince commuters living 5 kilometres away from the core of the city to use their bikes as main transportation mode to go work or study. Tackling this challenge, Odense Municipality has launched a campaign in the spring 2010 where it lent 100 electric bikes during a period of six months to car users living more than 5 kilometres away from the centre. A new round of the campaign started in autumn 2010.

Another strategic action towards enhancing cycling was to implement monitors in the main bike infrastructures of the municipality counting and displaying the amount of cyclists riding their bikes per day and per year (Odense municipality, 2010e).

100%

80%

60%

13%

15%

8%

6%

22%

22%

4%

7%

17% 3%

55%

52%

48%

47%

55%

24%

27%

26%

24%

25%

2000

2002

2006

2008

40%

20%

0% 1998 OTHER

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

2004 CAR

BICYCLE

Figure 3.1.2: Distribution of the trips by transport modes within Odense Municipality from 1998 until 2008. Source: Danmarks Statistik.

37

BICYCLE NETWORK The majority of the streets in Odense are bike friendly and bikes have the same hierarchy than motorized vehicles. Moreover, Odense municipality has a total of 510 kilometres of bicycle tracks and lanes (Odense municipality, 2010a).

In comparison to Copenhagen municipality, Odense municipality has approximately more 110 kilometres of bike tracks and lanes. It means that Odense municipality has 2,7 metres per inhabitant of bike lanes and tracks, while Copenhagen municipality has 0,77 metres of cycle track per Inhabitant. (Statistikbanken, 2010).

Signaturforklaring

SevĂŚrdigheder

Cykelpumper

Cykelparkering

Asfalterede stier

Grusstier

Cykelring

Rekreative grusstier

BanegĂĽrd

Turistinformation

Points of interest

Bicycle pumps

Bicycle parking

Paved paths

Unpaved paths

Bicycle route in the city

Nature paths

Railway station

Tourist information

N

N

Figure 3.1.3: Map of the main bike tracks and lanes in Odense`s inner city.

Source: Odense Municipality.

38

MAGELØS

VESTERGADE VEST

N

Figure 3.1.4: Ortophoto of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs. Modified from original picture from Google Earth

39

3.1.2 VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS The intervention in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs was completed on the 19th of August 2010. The former crowded street by motorized vehicles was transformed in a shared-used space for pedestrians, cyclists and a future central electrical bus ring – being allowed the access for cargo-carrying motorized vehicles. All the buses were rerouted to parallel streets nearby. (Odense municipality, 2009i).

The transformation of Vestergade-Vest and Mageløs is part of an overall plan to improve quality of urban life within the core of Odense described in the Traffic and Mobility Plan 2008 (Odense municipality, 2009i).

A study conducted from Gehl Architects indicated that the amount of pedestrians in the core of the city was decreasing. One of the pointed reasons is the increasing competition between street based retail and large commercial centres located in the outskirts of Odense – for example the shopping centre named Rosengårdscenteret that has a 100.000 m2 of stores.

In that context, the municipality has been implementing several physical interventions towards a more lively urban core in the near. According to the interview with Dorthe Råby and Rune Bugge Jensen, one of the main targets of these interventions is the improvement to the quality of the experience of walking and cycling.

On the first of August 2010, Vestergade Vest and Mageløs were closed for motorized vehicles traffic and the urban transformation began. The approach to change the street was done in a rather untraditional way. Due to low budget, it was decided to try to change the street through minimal interventions with temporary elements that would be easy to rearrange things that did not work out properly.

The Vestergade Vest and Mageløs can be seen as a lab where temporary interventions were made in order to understand how the population would react to new experiences and the public space. The pavements and levels of the former street were kept and elements were inserted in the streetscape to indicate pedestrian only paths along facades and shared space in the middle of the road.

The new layout promotes walking, cycling, shopping, playing and eating. It also offers the opportunity to promote products outside shops and to have outdoor seating for cafes and restaurants.

40

During the first 14 days after the street was closed for for vehicles, several elements were inserted in the streetscape – plastic guiding markers, bicycle parking racks, ping pong tables, etc – and then Vestergade Vest and Mageløs started to look more like flexible and informal space and open for different experiences.

The former car lane and sidewalk pavements were kept.

During the 14 days intervention, several drawings were made in the pavements. These drawings have diverse functions where some of them indicate the beginning of the shared-user space and others have a more playful purpose.

The entire urban transformation took only 14 days and the official opening was on the 14th of August 2010. But the project is not finalized yet and the intention is exactly that: to be a designing in process space. More elements will be added over time as well as evaluations of the space might change the layout over time.

The intervention made possible to implement new changes with a low cost. After the first month, the technicians from the municipality had feedback from users – pedestrians, cyclists, shopkeepers, people dining, etc – and then rearrangements were made with the mobile equipments and plastic markers were relocated.

Rune Bugge Jensen – landscape architect from Odense Municipality and responsible for the design solution at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs – has emphasized how important is to improve urban life experience in the core of Odense. In regards the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, he mentioned “I wanted to push the limits from what experiences people have in the public space and I also wanted to make them start to question and reflect for what a public space could be used for… It has been very provocative to put ping pong tables on the former motorized vehicle lanes… It has been a challenge to reinvent the former motorized vehicle lanes into a space for urban life, play and exercise” (interview with Rune Bugge Jensen, 2th of September, 2010).

Since the opening of the new shared-use space, there has been quite some media attention on the street. On the 13th of September, the local newspaper – Fyens Stiftstidende – wrote an article with the headline “Chaos plagues the new pedestrian street” (Fyens Stiftstidende, 2010b).

And on the 15th of September, the main editor of the Fyens Stiftstidende wrote “Bicycles must be out of pedestrian streets” (Fyens Stiftstidende, 2010c). Both articles were questioning if it is possible to have a schared-use space environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

Figure 3.1.6: Article with the title “Chaos in the pedestrian streets”, published on 15th of September in the newspaper Fyens Stiftstidende (Fyens Stiftstidende, 2010b).

Figure 3.1.5: Article with the title “Bicycles must be out of pedestrian streets”, published on 15th of September in the newspaper Fyens Stiftstidende (Fyens Stiftstidende, 2010c).

41

BEFORE AND AFTER BEFORE Formerly, Vestergade Vest and Mageløs had more than two hundred buses passing every day causing noisy pollution, air pollution and also inhibiting a more friendly space for pedestrians, cyclists and other potential activi-

AFTER After the urban transformation, the public space changed its profile completely – enhancing walking, cycling, shopping, eating, playing, etc. According to the interview with Dorthe Råby and Rune Bugge Jensen, the urban transformation has been enhancing a discussion about public domain and also has regenerated the image of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs towards a lively spot.

42

THE COST OF VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS PROJECT Due to the municipality short budget, the technicians had to develop a proposal with a cost of only five hundred Danish krones. The challenge was rewarding and the technicians came up with a creative solution, using temporary elements that made it possible to rethink the design concept through the time.

Currently, the Technical Department from Odense Municipality is applying for more than three hundred Danish krones for further improvements in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.7: View of Vestergade Vest from the 10th of May 2010. Source: Odense Municipality

Figure 3.1.8: View of Vestergade Vest from the 2nd of September 2010.

43

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS DESIGN CONCEPT

Vestergade Vest and Mageløs is a very funky and diverse space encompassing cafés, entertainment, restaurants, shops, and playful elements. The street was originally a stream of cars infiltrating into the core of the city, it has now being closed off and strictly reserved for everyone from cyclists to pedestrians, families and youths. It is a very progressive shared user space created on a very low budget of only 500,000 krones, which has pushed the imagination even further into a fusion of creativity. It is also a very temporary and flexible space where experimentation can take place. Technically the street it is about 240 metres long and 15 metres wide consisting of one lane in the middle with sidewalks on both sides of the street. Fundamentally it is a continuation of the pedestrian and shopping street Vestergade.

TECHNICAL DRAWINGS Since this project was completed on a very low budget no technical drawings were done.

Legend Blue: Shared Space Green: Safe Space Turquoise: Cycle Parking Pink: Outdoor Cafe Yellow: Playground

Figure 3.1.9 Draft of the design concept of Vestegade Vest and Mogeløs. Source: Odense Municipality.

44

SURFACE AND FLOW STRUCTURE The flow of cyclists and pedestrians at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs moves in multiple directions with the main flow of cyclists through the middle of the street. Sidewalks are reserved solely for pedestrians with the lane in the middle of the street shared equally by pedestrians and cyclists. Traffic flow in the morning is relatively calm as no pedestrians are congesting the space allowing cyclists to flow freely through. Cyclists are focused and know exactly how to navigate and avoid other cyclists.

Pedestrian path

Pedestrian crossing Bike path

Pedestrian path

Bike path

In the afternoon the street transforms into a multiple shared space, therefore the flow is a bit more congested.

The pedestrians begin to occupy the shared space in the middle of the street thus disturbing the flow of eager cyclists. Conversely there are many pedestrians crossing the street while cyclists and pedestrians are diverting into many directions creating a complex situation.

The flow structure in the afternoon is then completely different from the morning flow. In the evening the shops close down at 6 pm and people begin to bounce around the space in multiple directions crowding the infrastructure, some going out for dinner, some going out to get drunk. At the same time cyclists are eager to ride fast through the street creating a complex and chaotic zone where cyclists need be weary of crossing pedestrians, and pedestrians need to be weary of fast moving cyclists (Figure 3.1.10).

Figure 3.1.10 Section and plan of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

45

PAVING MATERIAL DESIGN The pavement in the street utilises a flagstone material.

The sidewalks are in a light color in contrast to the lane in the middle of the street which is in a darker color. Between the lane and the sidewalk there is a line made of the same flagstones turned in the other direction. The lane is lowered by 10 cm and together with the opposite stones it marks the border between the two speed levels.

(Figure 3.1.11) To slow down the speed of the cyclists there is a speed bump placed in one of the most critical points of the street where many programs like a cafĂŠ, ping pong tables and shops are placed side by side (Figure 3.1.12). In the morning cyclists are trying to avoid the speed bump by taking a detour at the sidewalk instead of continuing the lane. In the afternoon it is more difficult for the cyclists to avoid the speed bump because of the crowded pedestrian flow on the sidewalks (Figure 3.1.13) On the sidewalks there are blue plastic guides integrated in the pavement showing where the shops are allowed to place their signs and articles see Figure 3.16. This solution is good for the pedestrians because it ensures that they have enough room for walking. The guides help give the shop owners borders for their signs, however some shops like Superbrugsen challenge the signage and place their signs into in the middle of the street which creates less room for the cyclists and pedestrians. The surface of the street is generally in a good condition and it has not been modified at all. Also there are no cracks and potholes which mean that it is safe for the users to move on the street (Figure 3.1.14).

Figure 3.1.12: Speed hump at Vestergade Vest

CYCLIST AVOIDING SPEED HUMP

SPEED HUMP

Figure 3.1.13: Cyclists avoiding speed hump.

FLAGSTONE

LIGHTER

Figure 3.1.11: Pavement material.

46

DARKER

Figure 3.1.14: Blue plastic guides at Vestergade Vest.

BLUE PLASTIC GUIDES

VELOCITIES In the morning the street is not occupied by shop signs or cafĂŠ tables like it is in the afternoon making it possible for the cyclists and delivery vans to move swiftly unobstructed through the street. On contrary to the afternoon when the street is more crowded producing a more congested and chaotic flow. However cyclists still persist to ride at high speeds, but they are disturbed by pedestrians moving in multiple directions and at slower paces. It means that the cyclists sometimes have to brake suddenly or come to a complete stop and carry their bike through the space.

In the evening the street is calmer and there are not as many people on the street so cyclists can go a lot faster.

To restrict cyclists going to too fast a speed hump has been built into the street, although as previously mentioned many cyclists go onto the pedestrian path to avoid the speed hump (Figure 3.1.15).

Figure 3.1.15: Speed hump

VEHICLES Vehicles are not allowed to enter the street, but it’s possible for delivery vans with an errand to enter the street during the day, but they must take the cyclists and pedestrians into consideration. Also from 10pm to 6am, taxis are permitted in the area.

When a delivery van or a cargo truck is driving through the street it blocks the street and it is not easy for the cyclists and pedestrians to access the street in their usual way.

They have to find another way to get through the street and sometimes the cyclists have to get off their bike.

There is also a big problem with the mopeds, which disturb the street because of their speed and noisy sounds.

Figure 3.1.16: Cargo trucks

Figure 3.1.17: Bikes and motorized vehicles

47

BICYCLE PARKING One of the main elements in the shared space is the bike parking racks, which makes it possible for the cyclists to park their bikes right in the center of the pedestrian shopping area. In the afternoon the racks are full and occupy a major part of the shared user space and congest the room of pedestrian flow. In the morning and evening time there is not so many bicycles parked in the racks thus freeing up the space more (Figure 3.1.18 and Figure 3.1.19).

Even though there are many bicycle racks a large amount of bikes are parked in front of the shops and lean against signs, taking up a lot of the space on the sidewalks thus making it difficult for the pedestrians to move unobstructed (Figure 3.1.20 and 3.1.21).

Figure 3.1.19: Bike parking racks

Figure 3.1.20: Parked bikes in front of shops Figure 3.1.18: Bike parking racks.

Figure 3.1.21: Parked bikes in front of shops

48

TREES AND LANDSCAPING DESIGN The most dominating greenery in the streetscape are the trees. Different kinds of trees exist but the most common is the marble tree, which is placed in the centerline of the sidewalks (Figure 3.1.22).

Additionally there are different kind of green elements, like small flower bowls and green fences, which are used by the shops and cafĂŠs to define the entrances or the private space for cafĂŠ tables. In one spot there are a couple of big flower bowls placed between the lane and the sidewalk.

The placement and existence of the green elements produces a warm and inviting atmosphere (Figure 3.1.23).

Figure 3.1.22: Trees and landscaping design

Figure 3.1.23: Trees and landscaping design

49

STREET FURNITURE Technical elements Garbage bins are placed at the sidewalks and have different shapes and characters. Some of them are standing on the ground and some are lifted up from the ground by rods. And several of them have special notes to make people use them. In front of all the entrances and the backyards to the street small poles have been erected to prevent vehicles from entering the space.

Urban elements There are no benches in the street and if people want to sit down they must go to a cafĂŠ or to the benches at the pedestrian shopping streets.

The street also contains colorful playful elements which include a couple of ping pong tables and a letter game which is drawn on the ground (see Figures 3.1.24 and 3.1.26). In the afternoon the street is usually very crowded and it is difficult to use the playful elements, but in the morning and evening it is calmer creating more access to use them. The playful elements supply the street with a more lively and relaxed atmosphere and enhance the concept of a shared user space (Figure 3.1.25).

Figure 3.1.24 Street games painted in the pavement.

GAMES

CAFE SPACE

TABLE TENNIS

Figure 3.1.25: Layout of streetscape.

Figure 3.1.26: Street furniture

50

BIKE SYMBOL

SHOP SIGNS

STREET LIGHTS In the evening the street is lit up by hanging street lamps from the middle of the street and by lamps placed on the sidewalks. Additionally the shop windows light up the street creating a more inviting night atmosphere (Figure 3.1.27).

Figure 3.1.27: Street lights

51

SIGNAGE The street offers different kinds of signs which give information about various subjects. The most dominating signs in the street are the shop signs which are placed at the entrances or at the front of the shops (Figure 3.28).

These signs are very noticeable due to their use of the colorful graphics and design. Other signage includes information by municipality dictating different rules about the traffic flow and other transportation modes that are allowed to enter the street (Figure 3.1.29). Some of them also give information about attractions in the city that may be interesting to visit. They designed to look old and lead you to different parts of the city such as cultural sites like squares, theaters, museums and other exciting places (Figure 3.1.31). The last category of signs is those which are integrated into the design of the street. These signs give information about the use of the space in a more playful way and is indicated by the symbol of a footprint and bicycle wheels painted onto the pavement (Figure 3.1.30)

Figure 3.1.28: Shop signs.

In general there are no signs in the street telling you about speed and behavior, but that is also the concept of shared space. The signage is functional because it both gives information about legal and cultural issues relating to the city.

Figure 3.1.29: Signage dictating rules about how to use the space.

Figure 3.1.30: Playful sign informing the transportation modes allowed.

52

Figure 3.1.31: Signage designed to look old.

53

PUBLIC ART OR OTHER UNIQUE FEATURES The street pavement hosts some kind of art in the form of painted words which gives synonymous of the street name; Mageløs. This is located only at one spot in the street and does not repeat in other places (Figure 3.1.32).

Compensating for the minimum byways is a series of small corridors through and between buildings opening up for cyclists and pedestrians to enter the street. The entrance from east is in a cross of two pedestrian streets in eastern direction, Vestergade-east, and northern direction, Kongensgade, and the continuous shared space between cyclists and pedestrians in the southern direction in the street Mageløs. The link between the two streets has been marked with a curve, signalising that this is only road to enter for cyclists. The link is paved with cobbled stones, different from both the pavement on Vestergade and in the pedestrian streets (Figure 3.1.33 and 3.1.34).

Figure 3.1.32: Painted words in the pavement.

ACCESSIBILITY AND INTERSECTIONS The street is accessed from the intersection of Vesterbro and Ny Vestergade on the western end, from a crossing of two pedestrian streets, Vestergade(east) and Kongensgade, and from Mageløs which is a shared cyclist and pedestrian street, in the eastern end.

Figure 3.1.33: Crossing point paved with cobbled stones.

Where Vestedgade Vest and Mageløs meet there is a change in the materials which marks that you have to slow down and be aware of the street. Entrance from Vesterbro is marked with a shift from asphalt paving continuing around a curve and the pedestrian sidewalk continuing in a similar curve. This facility was probably made to signal no entry for cars in the former one-way street in Vestergade. Entering the street happens from a dedicated bicycle path. When leaving, a bicycle path does not appear until approximately 300 meters later.

Only one byway is entering the street. The street, Pantheonsgade, is located 70 meters from the exit in western end. The entrance to Vestergade is made with no regulations, but like mentioned earlier a path of special pavement has been implemented in Vestergade to signal the beginning of the byway.

54

Figure 3.1.34: Intersection between Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND USES The street is faced by buildings with two to four stories.

The ground floor is primarily used for commercial activity with shops, cafes and food vendors. The higher stories are used for residences.

The buildings facing the street are part of a medieval structure with various different building volumes behind them. The blocks are not enclosed block structures, rather small open networks within the blocks. Many people enter the street through building corridors coming from the spaces behind the buildings facing the street (Figure 3.1.35)

Figure 3.1.35: Built environment around Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

55

NO. OF CYCLISTS PER HOUR ON SEPTEMBER 14TH 2010

500

400

300

200

100

CYCLIST COUNTINGS NUMBER OF CYCLISTS

7-8

8-9

9-10

10-11

11-12

12-13

13-14

14-15

15-16

16-17

17-18

18-19

AGAINST VESTERGADE FROM VESTERGADE

1000

800

600

400

200

0

7-8

8-9

9-10

11-12

7-8

9-10

12-13

700 bikes Bicycles in high speed. No other transportation modes

350 bikes Cargo hour and lowest numbers in morning.

500 bikes Different transportation modes and uses in the street.

Figure 3.1.36: Cyclists counting and traffic flow at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

56

10-11

12-1

13

NO. OF PEDESTRIANS WITH BIKES PER HOUR ON SEPTEMBER 14TH 2010

50

40

30

20

10

7-8

8-9

9-10

10-11

11-12

12-13

13-14

14-15

15-16

16-17

17-18

18-19

AGAINST VESTERGADE FROM VESTERGADE

13-14

14-15

15-16

16-17

17-18

15-16

18-19

850 bikes Large number of cyclists and pedestrians. Different transportation modes and uses in the street.

380 bikes Street gets empty and cyclists riding their bikes in high speed

18-19

57

THE WEB SURVEY The web survey analysis is divided in four sections. Firstly, main findings are presented. The second section describes the spatial distribution of the residential location of the respondents. Thirdly, it is presented a descriptive statistic to analyze all the answers. In search of finding relationships between socio-demographic variables and the web survey answers, the last section presents a statistical analysis using the Chi2 test.

A total of 298 individuals that were riding a bike at Vestergade Vest on September 14 answered the questionnaire in the period between September 14 and October 12.

From the count done in September 14, there were 6446 bicycle trips at Vestergade Vest from 7am until 7pm – including both directions. Estimating that 35% of these cyclists ride their bikes at least once per day in the infrastructure, it was stipulated a total of 4189 individuals ride a bike at Vestergade Vest per day.

A total of 1328 web flyers were distributed to individuals riding their bikes in the infrastructure from 7am until 7pm and from these total 298 answered the questionnaire.

Based on these figures, the respondents represents 7,12% of the total of individuals riding a bike per day in the infrastructure and 22,43% of individuals that collected the flyer on September 14 while riding a bike.

58

MAIN FINDINGS

RESIDENTIAL LOCATION OF RESPONDENTS

In conclusion the data from the survey reveals a picture of Vestergade Vest as a piece of infrastructure used for a balanced distribution of purposes (39% to work, 34% to shopping, 15% educational institutions and 12% to others destinations). The figures are directly connected to the built environment were the infrastructure is located – the core of the city with several working places, shops and educational institutions in the surroundings.

The residential addresses of the respondents – individuals riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs on September 14 – were registered and geo-referenced in order to produce a map (see Figure 3.37). According to the Table 3.43, the majority of the respondents (65,9%) live within a radius of 2 kilometer and 92,6% of them living within 5 kilometers distance from the infrastructure.

After the Chi2 test was applied, the results highlight that most of the answers do not have a relation with socio-demographic conditions. However, some representative relations between the independent variables – gender, age and educational level – and the questionnaire answers were identified.

Respondents living more than 5 kilometers from the infrastructure correspond to 7,4% of the total and from this amount only 14,2% are living more than 10 kilometers away of the infrastructure.

There is a relation between the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and both gender, age and educational level.

The impact of the intervention in Vestergade Vest in the individuals` decision to ride a bike more often has also a relation both with gender, age and educational level.

The findings highlight that gender is a strategic variable which has a relation with the satisfaction with the design solution for Vestergade Vest, safety and signage conditions at the infrastructure.

Finally, age seems to have a relation with the frequency that individuals ride a bike at Vestergade Vest and their opinion on regards obstacles against cyclists riding at the infrastructure.

The following section provides the actual data for each of the questions asked.

NO. DWELLINGS % DWELLINGS

0-1 KM

1-2 KM

2-3 KM

3-4 KM

4-5 KM

134 45,0%

62 20,8%

42 14,1%

20 6,7%

17 5,7%

5-10 KM 19 6,4%

10-15 KM 1 0,3%

15-20 KM 2 0,7%

20 KM< 1 0,3%

Table 3.1.1: Absolute and percentage distribution of respondents according to the distance of their residential location from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

59

10 km

5 km

4 km

3 km

2 km

1 km

N Figure 3.1.37: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 5km map.

60

30 km

20 km

15 km

10 km

5 km

N Figure 3.1.38: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location - 20km map

61

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AGE

AGE

EDUCATION LEVEL

EDUCATION LEVEL

40%

40%

35%

35%

30%

30%

25%

25%

20%

20%

15%

15%

10%

10%

5%

5%

0%

0% NO 00 - 10 ANSWER YEARS

11 - 20 YEARS

21 - 30 YEARS

31 - 40 YEARS

41 - 50 YEARS

51 - 60 YEARS

61 - 70 YEARS

71 - 80 YEARS

NO ANSWER

81 - 90 YEARS

PUBLIC SCHOOL

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

HIGH SCHOOL

SHORT HIGHER

MEDIUM HIGHER

LONG HIGHER

EDUCATION

EDUCATION

EDUCATION

Figure 3.1.39: Distribution of the respondents by age groups.

Figure 3.1.41: Distribution of the respondents by educational level.

The majority of the respondents at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs are between 21-30 years of age (36%), followed by respondents aged 31-40 (14%), 41-50 aged (15%), and 51-60 aged (17%). Older respondents range from 61-70 years old (9%). Younger respondents were aged between 11-20 (6%), and 3% gave no answer. This results shows that Vestergade Vest and Mageløs mainly is used by the younger generation of 21-30 years old followed by a more even distribution of people between the

A large majority of respondents answered that they have a medium and long high education (35%), followed by a long, higher education (21%). 11% respondents answered that they had attended higher education for a short amount of time, and another 11% respondents answered a vocational education. 13% of the respondents had a gymnasium education, 6% had receiving a public school education, and 2% giving no answer. The majority of the respondents using Vestergade Vest therefore have a medium higher education followed by a long higher education.

GENDER

RIDING A BIKE AT VESTERGADE VEST HOW OFTEN DO YOU BIKE ON VESTERGADE?

GENDER 2%

35% 30% 25%

NO ANSWER

44% 54%

MAN WOMEN

20% 15% 10% 5% 0% NO ANSWER

62

6-7 DAYS OF WEEK

5 DAYS OF WEEK

3-4 DAYS OF WEEK

1-2 DAYS OF WEEK

1-3 DAYS OF MONTHS

MORE RARELY

Figure 3.1.40: Distribution of the respondents by gender

Figure 3.1.42: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

When asked about their gender, 54% (160) of the respondents were women and 44% (132) were men, with 2% (6) giving no answer.

When asked how often they bike at the site, a majority of the respondents said that they use Vestergade Vest 5 days per week (33%) or 6-7 days per week (27%). 17% of the respondents used the site 3-4 days per week, 13% answered 1-2 days per week, 6% answered 1-3 days per month and only 1% rarely ride a bike at Vestergade Vest.

The figures highlight that the site is a place where people bike many days of the week.

HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE THE BIKE FOR THE PURPOSE

HOW OFTEN DO YOU GO ON VESTERGADE WITHOUT

IN THE PREVIUS QUESTION AFTER THE OPENING OF FREQUENCY OF TRIPS TO THE MAIN PURPOSE

WALKING AT VESTERGADE VEST BIKE?

VESTERGADE?

35%

3%

30%

8%

25%

2% 7%

6%

NO ANSWER

20%

MORE RARELY

15%

NOT AS OFTEN

10%

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE MORE OFTEN

5%

MUCH MORE OFTEN

74%

0% NO ANSWER 6-7 DAYS OF 5 DAYS OF 3-4 DAYS OF 1-2 DAYS OF 1-3 DAYS OF WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK MONTHS

MORE RARELY

Figure 3.1.43: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they walk at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.45: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bike in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44 after the intervention in the site.

Respondents were asked if they walk or stay at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs without bike. The three main groups of respondents answered 1-2 days of week (29%), 1-3 days of months (27%) or rarely without bike (19%).

11% answered 3-4 days a week, 7% answered 5 days a week, 5% 6-7 days of week and 3% gave no answer. The results show that cyclists do also use Vestergade Vest and Mageløs for walking.

Respondents were asked, how often they used the bike for their main purpose as answered in the previous question after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

74% of respondents answered that they travel for that purpose just as often as before. 6% of respondents stated that they bike for that purpose more often and 8% said much more often. 7% answered that they traveled less often and 2% much less often. 3% gave no answer. This data indicates that the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs has had a very small impact on the amount of travelers. 14% in total traveling more often and 9% in total

MAIN TRIP PURPOSE WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE

SATISFACTION WITH VESTERGADE VEST HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH VESTERGADE?

2%

ON VESTERGADE?

3%

NO ANSWER

4%

8%

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM WORK

15%

9% NO ANSWER

RECREATION / LEISURE

39%

VERY DISSATISFIED

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS

32%

27%

PURCHASING / SHOPPING

34%

OTHERS

NEUTRAL SATISFIED VERY SATISFIED

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM SCHOOL

3% 3%

DISSATISFIED

21%

Figure 3.1.44: Distribution of the respondents according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.46: Distribution of the respondents by the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

When asked for what purpose the respondents use Vestergade. 39% answered that they use the infrastructure for commuting to and from work. 34% used Vestergade for shopping, 15% used it to commute to school, 3% answered to see friends or family, 3% for recreation, 4% said other and 2% gave no answer. This figure shows that Vestergade Vest and Mageløs mainly is an urban space used for commuting and shopping.

When asked how satisfied the respondents were with Vestergade Vest and Mageløs 32% said they were satisfied and 27% were very satisfied. 21% were neutral, 8% were dissatisfied and 9% very dissatisfied. 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that only a little more than half (59%) of the respondents are satisfied with urban space and 17% of the users have issues with the design. Therefore there are issues that need to be improved to get a higher level of satisfied people.

63

VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS’ DESIGN SAFETY AND SAFETY

VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS’ DESIGN AND AESTHETICS / BEAUTY AESTHETICS

35%

40%

30%

35%

25%

30%

20%

25% 20%

15%

15%

10%

10%

5%

5%

0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.1.47: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Figure 3.1.49: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs’ design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Users were asked about the quality regarding the safety needs of the infrastructure. The largest amount of respondents (31%) thought the design did a bad job and 18% stated that it did a very bad job. 20% were neutral on the issue, and only 6%% answered it did a very good job and 21% that it did a good job. 3% gave no answer. This result thereby shows that there are great problems with the perception of cyclists in regards safety at safety Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

The respondents were asked about the aesthetics of the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, and the majority of respondents stated that it either did very good (36%) or a very good (9%) job. A great part of the respondents were neutral (96) in regards to beauty and aesthetics.

14% said it did a bad job and 5% said a very bad job.

3% were giving no answer. The figure shows that there is room for improving the aesthetics of the space even though the largest amount people are satisfied.

VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS’ DESIGN AND FAST CONNECTIVITY FAST CONNECTION

ILLEGALLY PARKED BICYCLES ILLEGALLY PARKED BICYCLES

35%

3% 3%

30%

5%

25%

8%

NO ANSWER

20%

NOT PROBLEMATIC A BIT PROBLEMATIC

15%

46% 10%

PROBLEMATIC QUITE PROBLEMATIC

35% 5%

MAJOR PROLEM

0% NO ANSWER

64

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.1.48: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs` design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Figure 3.1.50: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Respondents were asked if they thought the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs was facilitating fast connections. The majority responded said it did a good job (31%) or were neutral (28%). 7% thought it did a very good job, 20% said it did a bad job, and 11% said a very bad job. 3% respondents gave no answer. From this figure, it is clear that Vestergade Vest and Mageløs can be improved in regards to the speed of the bikers.

Users were asked if they thought that illegally parked bicycles were a problem on the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs. 46% of the responses said that they were not a problem, 35% said it was a small problem, 8% said it was problematic, 5% said it was quite problematic, and 3% said it was a major problem. 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that illegally parked bicycles are a problem at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs for the main part of the users.

EXCEEDING THE BOUNDARIES OF BICYCLE PATHS, CONFLICT BETWEEN DIFFERENT TRANSPORT SIDEWALKS AND LANES MODES

PAVEMENT PROBLEMS PAVEMENT

PROBLEMS

3%

5%

9% NO ANSWER

25%

4% 4%

6%

NO ANSWER

NOT PROBLEMATIC

26%

PROBLEMATIC QUITE PROBLEMATIC

19%

NOT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC PROBLEMATIC

26% 55%

MAJOR PROLEM

QUITE PROBLEMATIC MAJOR PROLEM

18%

Figure 3.1.51: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.53: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic the pavement is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Respondents having conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers. Only 18% saying it was not a problem. 26% stated that is was a bit of a problem, 18% claimed it was problematic, 19% said it was quite a problem, and 25% responded that said it was a major problem. 3% gave no answer on whether passing space was an issue. A large amount of 25% saying that the boundaries of the bike lanes are a major problem clearly indicates that this is an area where the design can be improved.

When asked whether they thought surface issues like potholes were a problem on Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, 55% of the responses said it was not a problem. 26% stated that it was a small problem, 6% claimed it was problematic, 5% it was quite problematic and 4% is was a major problem. 4% gave no answer. This figure shows Vestergade Vest and Mageløs has been maintained, and therefore has a great percentage of satisfied users in this area compared with the other problems the site is facing.

OBSTACLES

CRACKS IN RAMPS AND INTERSECTIONS CRACKS AND RAMPS ON INTERSECTIONS

OBSTACLES

3%

3%

6% 21%

19%

7% NO ANSWER

NO ANSWER NOT PROBLEMATIC

NOT PROBLEMATIC

12%

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

45%

PROBLEMATIC

19%

23%

PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

MAJOR PROLEM

MAJOR PROLEM

27%

15%

Figure 3.1.52: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic the existence of obstacles is against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.54: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Respondents were asked whether they thought obstacles at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs were an issue.

Only 19% of the respondent stated that obstacles were not a problem. 23% stated that is was a small problem, 15% claimed it was problematic, 19% quite problematic and 21% saying it is a major problem. 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that the majority of users also see obstacles as being an issue at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Users were asked whether they thought cracks were a problem on ramps and intersections. 45% of the responses said it was not a problem. 27% thought that it was a small problem, 12% claimed it was problematic, 7% said it was quite a problem and 6% said it was major problem.

3% gave no answer. These results show that cracks in ramps and intersections are a small problem, one that could be fixed with maintenance.

65

AWARENESS OF PEDESTRIANS AND MOTORIZED LACK OF AWARENESS THE SURROUNDING PEOPLE VEHICLE DRIVERS FORFOR CYCLISTS

SCENIC

POOR GREENERY

3% 6%

10% 26%

5% 4% NO ANSWER

NO ANSWER NOT PROBLEMATIC

24%

12%

NOT PROBLEMATIC A BIT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC

49%

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

17%

MAJOR PROLEM

24%

QUITE PROBLEMATIC MAJOR PROLEM

20%

Figure 3.1.55: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers is for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.57: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic scenic and greenery is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Respondents were asked whether they thought lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for cyclists was an issue. For the greatest part of the respondents (26%) the lack of awareness for cyclists was a major problem. 24% said it was a small problem, 20% stated it was problematic and 17% said it was quite a problem. Only 10% of the respondents said it is not a problem. And 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that cyclists perceive a problem in regards the awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for cyclists.

When asked whether they thought poor greenery and scenic landscaping was an issue at Vestergade Vest, 49% of the responses said it was not a problem, 24% said it was a small problem, 12% stated it was problematic, 6% said it was quite a problem, and 4% responded that this was a major problem. 4% gave no answer. This figure shows that greenery can be a problem and that the lack of it is noticed by some users but also that almost 50% of the users are satisfied with the situation as it is.

SIGNPOSTING AND ITS INTERPRETATION POOR SIGNPOSTING AND INTERPRETATION

ARE YOU BIKING MORE OFTEN AFTER THE OPENING OF BIKING MORE OFTEN AFTER VESTERGADE VESTERGADE?

2%

VEST AND MAGELØS’ INTERVENTION 3%

17%

6% NO ANSWER

37%

10%

13%

NOT PROBLEMATIC A BIT PROBLEMATIC

NO ANSWER

PROBLEMATIC

YES

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

NO

MAJOR PROLEM

21%

66

91%

Figure 3.1.56: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic signposting and its interpretation is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.58: Distribution of the respondents based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

When asked whether poor signage was an issue, 37% of the responses said it was not a problem, 21% said it was a small problem, 13% stated it was problematic, 10% said it was quite a problem and 17% said it was a major problem. 2% gave no answer. This figure shows that signage is also a problem for the bikers at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, which thereby could be made more clearly to the user.

When asked whether they bike more often after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, 91% said they have not biked more while only 6% said that they where biking more often that before. 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs has not change the use of bikes in the area. The reasons of this can be the problems showed in the previous questions that indicate that there are issues such as insensitivity, poor maintaining and problems with the design that is dissatisfying for the bikers.

QUALITIES INFLUENCING TO RIDE A BIKE

STREET INFLUENCING H O WDESIGN IMP O R T A N T I S S T R E E T D E S ITO G N (RIDE G R E E NAA RBIKE EAS, L I G H T I N G , E T C .) F O R Y O U R DE C I S I O N T O T A K E T H E B IK E ?

IF Y E S , WH AT QU AL IT IE S AB OU T V E S T E R G ADE H AS IN F L U E N C E D Y O U R C H O IC E O F B IK IN G MO R E O F T E N ?

30%

30%

25%

25%

20% 15%

20%

10%

15%

5% 0%

G IN

ES

R PA E IK

N

0% NO ANSWER

NOT AT ALL

A

IN

TE

B

C

E

O

IK

F

E

B

K

IK

PS

G

A M

ST N

5%

NOT IMPORTANT IMPROTANT

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT IMPORTANT

VERY IMPORTANT IMPROTANT

M

B

ET

TE

TI

R

V

N A

E

SI

G

B

D N LA

PO

SC

A

ED

IN

PE

E G

ES N EE R G

EC R AT T

IK B ER

ST

N

E

W

R A ER N

EE FA

R

LA

N

EA

S

ES

N E IK B ER ID W

G

N O C ER

ST FA

LA

TI

N N

PE

R

EC

IE

FE SA

EX D O O G A

O

C

TY

E

10%

Figure 3.1.59: Among the respondents that said yes in the previous question (Figure 3.1.58), what qualities has influenced their choice to ride a bike more often after the intervention in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs. The respondents could choice more than one option.

Figure 3.1.60: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Respondents were asked what aspect of the intervention make them ride their bike more often, the largest portion of users stated that faster connections (25%) made the largest impact. 16% responded saying bike parking was a good experience and influenced bikeability. 15% stated wider bike lanes made an impact for them and 7% said faster bike lanes made the difference for them. Important factors that influenced the amount users rode were therefore a faster connection and the space for bike parking.

The good experience and the width of the lanes was also some of the factors that played a key role for the choice of biking.

Users were asked, how important is street design in your decision to ride your bicycle. The largest portion (25%) of respondents answered saying that they were neutral to the question. 19% said it was important and 7% said it was very important. 22% said it was not important, and 23% said it was not important at all. 4% did not answer.

This figure shows that the majority of respondents do not think that the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs is a very important factor for the bikeability of the site.

W HDESIGN A T DO Y O U T H I N K O F T H EAT D E SVESTERGADE IG N S OL U T IONS STREET SOLUTIONS H A TMAGELØS A R E A P P L I E D T O V E S T E R G A D E (G R E E N A R E A S , VEST TND L I G H T I N G , E T C .)?

50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.1.61 Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

When asked for their opinion on the design solution applied to Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, most respondents replied that they were neutral (44%) in that question. 28% said it is a good solution and 3% believed it was a very good design solution. 17% thought it was poor, 5% responded very poor, and 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that many of the respondents were neutral in their opinion of the design. This could reflect that the design is not very noticeable and that they take it for granted.

There is also a great part that think the design is good which also reflects that there are only small problems with the design.

67

RELATIONS BETWEEN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND WEB-SURVEY ANSWERS The Chi2 test was applied to identify possible relations between the socio-demographics (independent variables) of the sample and their answers from the web survey (dependable variables). Considering the nature of the studied variables – the majority of them are nominal – the Chi2 test was selected to this analysis.

The Chi2 test is about finding out if there is a connection between the variables. It is about testing the nul hypothesis.

H0 says that the variables are statistic independent and HA says the variables are statistic dependent. To the test we set a α-level at 0,05. In the case of the p-value is under that, we can not reject the nul hypothesis.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND RIDING A BIKE AT VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

33 47 80

43 55 98

29 22 51

16 22 38

8 10 18

1 3 4

TOTAL 130 159 289

Table 3.1.2: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.2, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 4,182 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

7 6 16 7 24 20 80

3 17 11 13 31 22 97

3 3 8 5 22 11 52

2 2 4 2 22 6 38

2 3 1 2 5 4 18

1 1 0 1 1 0 4

TOTAL 19 32 40 30 105 63 289

Table 3.1.3: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest.

Out of the Table 3.1.3, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 32,170 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

8 34 7 15 13 2 79

3 30 12 18 23 9 95

4 21 11 4 4 7 51

0 15 6 3 6 7 37

0 5 4 4 2 2 17

1 0 0 1 2 0 4

TOTAL 16 105 40 45 50 27 283

Table 3.1.4 Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.4, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 41,188 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 15. P is between 0,025 and 0,010. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

68

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND WALKING AT VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

7 8 15

8 13 21

19 14 33

38 48 86

32 47 79

25 30 55

TOTAL 129 160 289

Table 3.1.5: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they walk at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.5, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,192 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

1 1 1 0 6 6 15

4 3 5 2 3 4 21

0 2 8 6 10 7 33

4 8 12 10 33 19 86

4 10 7 7 27 23 78

6 8 7 6 25 4 56

TOTAL 19 32 40 31 104 63 289

Table 3.1.6: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they walk at Vestergede Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.6, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 35,657 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

0 5 4 3 3 0 15

2 10 1 3 4 1 21

3 14 6 5 2 3 33

6 37 11 8 14 7 83

4 30 9 15 14 5 77

1 9 10 11 13 10 54

TOTAL 16 105 41 45 50 26 283

Table 3.1.7: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they walk at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.7, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 31,565 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 15. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND MAIN TRIP PURPOSE

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 47 73 117

RECREATION / LEISURE 7 2 9

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS 7 3 10

PURCHASING / SHOPPING 45 55 100

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 50 23 43

OTHERS

TOTAL

6 5 11

130 130 290

Table 3.1.8: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.8, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 8,901 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 8. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

69

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 4 15 13 16 43 25 116

RECREATION / LEISURE 2 0 2 2 2 1 9

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS 1 0 2 0 2 5 10

PURCHASING / SHOPPING 7 11 9 11 41 21 100

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 4 4 13 1 11 10 43

OTHERS

TOTAL

1 2 1 1 6 1 12

19 32 40 31 105 63 290

Table 3.1.9: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.9, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 35,608 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 8. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 1 32 21 29 28 3 114

RECREATION / LEISURE 2 2 1 2 1 1 9

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS 2 6 0 2 0 0 10

PURCHASING / SHOPPING 3 30 18 9 18 18 96

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 7 31 1 0 2 2 43

OTHERS

TOTAL

1 4 0 3 1 3 12

16 105 41 45 50 27 284

Table 3.1.10: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.10, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 98,443 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 14. P is under 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND FREQUENCY OF TRIPS TO THE MAIN PURPOSE

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

1 4 5

5 15 20

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 97 123 220

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

13 6 19

14 11 14

130 159 289

Table 3.1.11: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44, after the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.11, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 10,002 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,050 and 0,025. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 9 23 23 24

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

1 1 0 1

0 2 5 1

1

8

88

1 5

4 20

53 220

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

2 2 7 4

7 4 5 1

19 32 40 31

3

5

105

1 19

3 25

62 289

Table 3.1.12: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44, after the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.12, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 42,290 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,005 and 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

70

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

0 2 0 3 0 0 5

1 8 4 3 3 1 20

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 9 78 30 35 52 23 217

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

3 13 1 1 0 0 18

3 3 6 3 5 3 23

16 104 41 45 50 27 283

Table 3.1.13: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44, after the intervention at

Out of the Table 3.1.13, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 36,728 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 15. P is between 0,025 and 0,010. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND SATISFACTION WITH VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED 13 13 26

DISSATISFIED

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

25 56 81

31 31 62

43 54 97

18 5 23

130 159 289

Table 3.1.14: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.14, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,729 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is close to 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED 3 2 3 3 10 6 27

DISSATISFIED 4 8 8 10 28 22 80

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

5 13 9 4 20 11 62

3 8 15 10 40 20 97

4 1 5 3 7 4 23

19 32 40 30 105 63 289

Table 3.1.15: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.15, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 18,036 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED 0 10 6 2 7 2 27

DISSATISFIED

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

2 25 12 16 17 7 79

4 17 7 9 14 8 59

6 46 14 12 9 8 98

4 7 2 5 3 2 23

16 105 41 44 50 27 283

Table 3.1.16: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.16, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 27,435 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 15. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

71

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS` DESIGN ON SAFETY

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

14 40 54

38 54 92

28 33 61

39 24 63

11 7 18

130 158 288

Table 3.1.17: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs` design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Out of the Table 3.1.17, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,616 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is close to 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

1 5 6 9 21 13 55

7 15 12 10 29 18 91

3 6 9 5 24 14 61

5 4 11 6 25 12 63

3 2 2 1 5 5 18

19 32 40 31 104 62 288

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

Table 3.1.18: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs` design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Out of the Table 3.1.18, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 14,899 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 17 11 10 12 4 54

5 28 13 11 22 10 89

5 22 5 10 11 5 58

5 30 9 10 4 5 63

1 8 3 3 0 3 18

16 105 41 44 49 27 282

Table 3.1.19: Distribution of the respondents by age group according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs’ design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Out of the Table 3.1.19, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 24,422 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 16. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS` DESIGN ON FAST CONNECTIVITY

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

12 20 32

23 37 60

39 43 82

43 49 92

12 9 21

129 158 287

Table 3.1.20: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs’ design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the Table 3.1.20, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,386 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

72

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 5 4 8 9 7 33

2 8 10 7 16 17 60

6 9 15 5 32 15 82

8 5 8 10 39 21 91

1 5 3 1 9 2 21

17 32 40 31 105 62 287

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

Table 3.1.21: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs` design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the Table 3.1.21, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 18,694 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 12 4 7 6 3 32

5 22 10 5 13 3 58

7 29 10 13 13 7 79

1 36 16 14 15 9 91

3 6 1 4 3 4 21

16 105 41 43 50 26 281

Table 3.1.22: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the Table 3.1.22, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,432 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 17. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS AESTHETICS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

5 11 16

20 22 42

41 55 96

49 58 107

15 12 27

130 158 288

Table 3.1.23: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs’ design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table 3.1.23, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 2,781 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 4 2 2 7 1 16

3 3 4 8 18 7 43

5 10 14 10 31 25 95

8 12 16 11 38 22 107

2 3 4 0 11 7 27

18 32 40 31 105 62 288

Table 3.1.24: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs’ design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table 3.1.24, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 15,938 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

73

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 2 3 2 7 1 15

1 12 6 9 12 2 42

6 33 17 15 13 9 93

5 45 13 14 17 11 105

4 13 2 4 1 3 27

16 105 41 44 50 26 282

Table 3.1.25: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs’ design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table 3.1.25, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 29,745 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 16. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT ILLEGALLY PARKED BICYCLES

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 71 65 136

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 38 66 104

PROBLEMATIC 11 13 24

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 6 9 15

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

4 5 9

130 158 288

Table 3.1.26: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.26, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 6,016 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

9 15 21 13 43 36 137

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 7 11 11 8 45 21 103

PROBLEMATIC 2 2 3 6 9 2 24

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 4 4 1 3 2 15

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 0 1 3 3 2 9

19 32 40 31 103 63 288

Table 3.1.27: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.27, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 25,507 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 9 60 19 30 17 8 133

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 5 37 12 17 19 12 102

PROBLEMATIC 1 4 4 4 8 3 24

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 2 5 1 2 3 14

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 2 1 3 2 1 9

TOTAL 16 105 41 45 48 27 282

Table 3.1.28: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.28, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 26,125 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 16. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

74

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT CONFLICT BETWEEN DIFFERENT TRANSPORT MODES

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 15 13 28

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 37 39 76

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 21 35 56

PROBLEMATIC 27 26 53

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

28 46 74

128 159 287

Table 3.1.29: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.29, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 4,800 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

4 3 4 2 6 9 28

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 7 11 12 7 28 11 76

PROBLEMATIC 4 5 8 5 23 8 53

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 6 6 3 19 21 55

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

4 7 9 14 27 14 75

19 32 39 31 103 62 287

Table 3.1.30: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.30, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 29,319 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 11. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 2 13 2 3 2 6 28

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 5 25 9 12 11 10 72

PROBLEMATIC 4 17 8 8 11 5 53

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 2 22 9 9 9 3 54

MAJOR PROBLEM 3 26 13 13 16 3 74

TOTAL 16 103 41 45 49 27 281

Table 3.1.31: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.31, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,042 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 17. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT OBSTACLES AGAINST CYCLISTS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 30 26 56

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 38 30 68

PROBLEMATIC 18 28 46

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 19 38 57

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

24 38 62

129 160 289

Table 3.1.32: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.32, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 9,682 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,050 and 0,025, but close to 0,050. The variables are independent. But with errors in the sample is p-value is so close that they may well be dependent.

75

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

4 6 4 5 24 13 56

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 6 13 6 8 21 14 68

PROBLEMATIC 5 2 11 2 19 7 46

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 2 5 9 4 19 17 56

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

2 5 10 12 22 12 63

19 31 40 31 105 63 289

Table 3.1.33: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.33, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 28,844 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 3 18 5 12 5 12 55

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 23 13 9 10 8 64

PROBLEMATIC 8 20 6 5 6 1 46

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 2 27 7 7 11 2 56

MAJOR PROBLEM 2 17 10 11 18 4 62

TOTAL 16 105 41 44 50 24 283

Table 3.1.34: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.34, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 46,279 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 15. P is smaller than 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE PAVEMENT

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 79 86 165

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 29 47 76

PROBLEMATIC 8 11 19

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 11 3 14

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

3 8 11

130 155 286

Table 3.1.35: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.35, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 9,760 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 13. P is between 0,050 and 0,025, but close to 0,050. The variables are independent. But with errors in the sample is p-value is so close that they may well be dependent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

11 16 27 18 59 34 165

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 5 12 8 6 29 16 76

PROBLEMATIC 2 2 1 1 8 4 18

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 1 3 2 4 4 14

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 1 1 1 5 3 11

18 32 40 28 105 61 284

Table 3.1.36 : Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.36, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 9,739 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 14. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

76

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 13 61 25 24 25 13 160

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 30 8 11 15 8 75

PROBLEMATIC 0 7 1 5 4 2 19

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 5 4 1 1 1 13

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 1 3 3 4 0 11

TOTAL 16 104 41 44 49 24 278

Table 3.1.37: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.37, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 19,106 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 20. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT CRACKS IN RAMPS AND INTERSECTIONS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 67 67 137

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 39 42 81

PROBLEMATIC 11 22 33

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 6 16 22

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

6 12 18

129 159 288

Table 3.1.38: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.38, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 7,277 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,250 and 0,100, but very close to 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

12 13 21 16 42 30 134

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 4 12 10 7 31 17 81

PROBLEMATIC 2 3 4 3 15 6 33

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 4 3 2 8 5 22

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

1 0 2 2 8 5 18

19 32 40 30 104 63 288

Table 3.1.39: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.39, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 11,216 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 11 51 19 18 21 10 130

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 28 14 14 11 10 80

PROBLEMATIC 0 15 1 3 8 6 33

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 6 4 5 4 1 21

MAJOR PROBLEM 1 4 3 5 5 0 18

TOTAL 16 104 41 245 49 27 282

Table 3.1.40: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.40, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 23,000 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 16. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

77

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT AWARENESS OF PEDESTRIANS AND MOTORIZED VEHICLE DRIVERS FOR CYCLISTS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 18 11 38

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 36 36 72

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 22 30 52

PROBLEMATIC 25 35 60

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

29 46 75

130 158 288

Table 3.1.41: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.41, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,773 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

1 3 3 1 14 7 27

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 8 11 7 6 27 13 72

PROBLEMATIC 3 5 11 8 23 10 60

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 3 6 9 6 15 13 52

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

4 7 10 9 25 20 75

19 32 40 30 104 63 288

Table 3.1.42: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.42, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 14,302 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 2 12 5 4 3 3 29

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 23 11 12 12 10 70

PROBLEMATIC 4 22 8 10 11 4 59

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 7 18 4 8 9 4 50

MAJOR PROBLEM 1 30 13 11 13 6 74

TOTAL 16 105 41 45 48 27 282

Table 3.1.43: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.43, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 16,197 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 16. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT SIGNPOSTING AND ITS INTERPRETATION

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 64 46 110

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 21 40 61

PROBLEMATIC 14 25 38

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 12 18 30

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

19 31 50

130 160 290

Table 3.1.44: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.44, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 13,083 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 8. P is very close to på 0,010. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

78

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

9 6 15 10 42 28 110

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 5 12 9 6 22 7 61

PROBLEMATIC 2 4 4 2 17 10 39

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 2 5 1 6 10 6 30

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

1 5 11 7 14 12 50

19 32 40 31 105 63 290

Table 3.1.45: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.45, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 25,951 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 8 47 15 14 14 9 107

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 18 5 8 5 9 58

PROBLEMATIC 2 12 7 10 3 5 39

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 12 3 4 8 2 30

MAJOR PROBLEM 2 16 11 9 10 2 50

TOTAL 16 105 41 45 50 27 284

Table 3.1.46: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.46, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 23,288 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 14. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT SCENIC

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 72 74 146

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 26 44 70

PROBLEMATIC 13 22 35

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 8 11 19

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

10 6 16

129 157 286

Table 3.1.47: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.47, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 8,164 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

12 16 24 15 46 34 147

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 4 8 11 4 30 12 67

PROBLEMATIC 1 2 2 7 18 5 35

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 2 3 1 1 7 5 19

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 3 2 3 4 4 16

19 32 40 30 105 60 286

Table 3.1.48: Distribution of the respondents by educational level gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.48, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 13,169 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

79

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 11 57 20 25 20 12 146

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 4 25 12 9 9 10 69

PROBLEMATIC 1 8 3 6 13 3 34

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 8 1 3 4 1 17

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 5 5 2 3 0 15

TOTAL 16 103 41 45 49 26 280

Table 3.1.49: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.49, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,015 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND BIKING MORE OFTEN AFTER VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS` OPENING

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

14 5 19

115 155 270

129 160 289

Table 3.1.50: Distribution of the respondents by gender based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.50, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 6,944 with a degree of freedom (df) 1 and the missing values are 9. P is very close to 0,010. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

3 2 9 1 3 1 19

16 30 31 30 101 62 270

19 32 40 31 104 63 289

Table 3.1.51: Distribution of the respondents by educational level based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.51, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 24,571 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 9. P is smaller than 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

5 9 2 1 2 0 19

11 96 38 44 48 27 264

16 105 40 45 50 27 283

Table 3.1.52: Distribution of the respondents by age groups based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.52, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,127 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,005 and 0,001, but very close to 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

80

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT STREET DESIGN AS INFLUENTIAL FACTOR TO RIDE A BIKE

MAN FEMALE TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 38 31 69

NOT IMPORTANT 20 45 65

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

37 37 74

26 31 57

VERY IMPORTANT 7 13 20

TOTAL 128 157 285

Table 3.1.53: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.1.53, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 9,714 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 13. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. But very close to 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 6 7 15 6 22 13 13

NOT IMPORTANT 4 7 4 10 22 19 19

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

4 5 7 9 34 14 14

3 9 11 4 22 8 8

VERY IMPORTANT 2 3 3 2 5 5 5

TOTAL 19 31 40 31 105 59 285

Table 3.1.54: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.1.54, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,295 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 13. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 2 0 4 4 3 13

2 11 9 11 14 3 50

5 51 18 18 21 14 127

8 34 14 10 10 7 83

1 6 0 2 0 0 9

16 104 41 45 49 27 282

Table 3.1.55: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.1.55, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 32,059 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 16. P is between 0,050 and 0,025. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS DESIGN SOLUTION

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

3 10 13

19 32 51

60 72 132

43 40 83

4 5 9

129 159 288

Table 3.1.56: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.56, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,326 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

81

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

1 3 1 3 3 3 14

4 5 6 8 19 9 51

8 15 16 12 48 32 131

4 9 17 8 30 15 83

2 0 0 0 5 2 9

19 32 40 31 105 61 288

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

Table 3.1.57: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.57, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 18,201 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 8 23 13 12 8 4 68

NOT IMPORTANT 1 20 13 9 13 7 63

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

3 26 9 13 14 8 73

3 28 3 7 10 5 56

VERY IMPORTANT 1 7 3 3 3 3 20

TOTAL 16 104 41 44 48 27 280

Table 3.1.58: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Out of the Table 3.1.58, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,451 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 18. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

82

Figure 3.1.62: Vestergade Vest streetscape.

83

3.2 CASE2 BICYCLE TRACK HANS BROGES GADE

3.2.1 AARHUS Aarhus is the second largest Danish municipality and had a population of 307.119 inhabitants in 2010 (Statistikbanken, 2010). The municipality is located in the east side of the peninsula named Jutland and it is part of the Central Jutland Region.

ÅRHUS

Figure 3.2.1: Geographical location of Aarhus.

MUNICIPALITY VISION In the Municipal Plan 2009, Aarhus municipality announced its new vision as an environmental and energy sustainable city. Within its vision, there is a goal to become carbon neutral by the year 2030 (Aarhus Municipality, 2009b).

In order to achieve this goal, the Aarhus Traffic Plan aims to offer in the year 2030 this scenario: “Aarhus Municipality`s infrastructure offers optimal conditions for both cyclists and the public transportation. Moreover, Aarhus municipality is known internationally as a bicycle city” ”(Aarhus Municipality, 2009b).

At the Aarhus Bicycle Action Plan 2007, six main focus areas for development of bike infrastructures are described.

The major one is the development of a coherent bicycle network, making this network more permeable. Other focus areas are: to make road intersections more bike friendly, to improve safety conditions, to create more and

84

better bicycle parking facilities, to optimize the combined use of cycling and public transport in order to expand the bicycle outreach and to improve dialog between cyclists and municipality (Aarhus Municipality, 2010a).

Differently from the municipalities of Copenhagen and Odense, Aarhus does not have a determined rate of cyclists to be achieved. According to the interview with Pablo Celis a civil engineer at Aarhus municipality, the Aarhus vision is to focus on a carbon neutral city and one of the main strategies for that is the increasing of the bike as transportation mode.

Aarhus Bicycle City functions as an umbrella for all the municipality initiatives in regards cycling – e.g. city bikes, campaigns and events to promote a bicycle culture. The Aarhus Bicycle City webpage – www.aarhuscykelby.dk – includes news about new bicycle projects, campaign s and a forum where people can make suggestions and proposals related to the Aarhus bike infrastructure.

On the 10th of April 2010, the Aarhus Bicycle City transformed the City Hall square in a “bicycle`s Mecca” where people could have diverse experiences with their bikes and also see different ways of experiencing cycling (Aarhus Cykelby, 2010a).

Inspired by the postal number of Aarhus – 8000 – another campaign launched by Aarhus municipality was the “8000 benefits of cycling”. Where 8000 citizens were asked about the benefits cycling brought to them. The results of the campaign are posted on the Aarhus Bicycle City webpage and there is also a movie in the internet about the campaign. Aarhus municipality has also implemented bicycle countings in the main bike corridors. The automatic cyclist counters and monitors are very informative and they are also used as an active element that inspires the population.

At the latest campaign, Aarhus Bicycle City promoted a competition between every street – with an automatic bicycle count installed with the winner being the one that increased the number of cyclists. The counting was made based on existing counts over a period of two weeks. Using already installed automated counters in the different neighbourhoods it was possible to register which of the neighbourhoods had the highest increase. The winning street was Hans Broges Gade. The street won the competition with an increase of 41% in the number of bicycle rides during the two weeks of the competition (Aarhus Stiftstidende, 2010).

Figure 3.2.2: Screen print of Aarhus Bicycle City webpage - www.aarhuscykelby.dk.

Figure 3.2.3: Automatic cyclist count at Hans Broges.

Figure 3.2.4: Aarhus City Hall square transformed in a “bicycle`s Mecca”. Event promoted by the Aarhus Bicycle City on the 10th of April 2010.

Source: Aarhus Municipality.

Figure 3.2.5: Aarhus City Hall square transformed in a the “bicycle`s Mecca”. Event promoted by the Aarhus Bicycle City on the 10th of April 2010.

Source: Aarhus Municipality.

85

BICYCLE NETWORK Aarhus municipality has approximately 450 kilometres of bicycle tracks and lanes. Considering its 307.119 inhabitants (Danske Kommuner, 2009), Aarhus municipality has 1,46 metres of bicycle lanes and tracks per inhabitant.

The Aarhus` rate of bicycle tracks and lanes per inhabitant is the double from Copenhagen and slightly smaller than Odense.

Aarhus has a coherent bicycle network plan which consists of seven bicycle routes linking the core of the city to the suburbs. The main focus has been to improve permeability and improvement of safety. It is expected to cost 100 million Danish krones to implement the plan (Aarhus Municipality, 2010a). From this amount, seventy million Danish crowns have been granted (Aarhus Municipality, 2010a).

Hans Broges Gade – our case study – is part of the Holme bicycle corridor which connects the suburbs of Holme to the core of Aarhus city. The entire improvement of the Holme corridor has a budget of 14 million Danish krones.

Figure 3.2.6: The seven main bicycle connections between the core of Aarhus and suburbs. Source: Cykelhandlingsplan – En plan for fremtidens cyklist forhold i Århus Kommune. Source: Aahus Municipality

Figure 3.2.7: The bicycle network of Aarhus municipality.

Source: Aahus Municipality

86

HANS BROGES GADE

N

Figure 3.2.8: Ortophoto of Hans Broges Gade. Modified from original picture from Google Earth

87

3.2.2 HANS BROGES GADE Hans Broges Gade is located in the Aarhus` inner city ring, in a dense neighbourhood composed by block structures up to five stories high from the early 20th century.

The neighbourhood is on outskirts of the city and the majority of its buildings has residential use. However some buildings have mixed use where shops and offices are located in the ground floor.

In this scenario, the street functions as an important link between the suburbs and the core of the city. Moreover there is a pedestrian life from mostly local residents that use the local commerce.

The purpose of the intervention at Hans Broges Gade was to improve a bicycle route connecting southern suburbs of Holme to the centre of the city to become one of seven main bicycle corridors of the bicycle network plan.

BEFORE AND AFTER Hans Broges Gade used to be a street with broad lanes for motorized vehicles and car parking facilities in both directions just next to the sidewalks. There were only bicycle tracks at the beginning of the street in the side facing Marcelis Boulevard for the first 100 meters. Along the rest of the street, cyclists had to ride their bikes on the outside of the rows of parked cars together motorized vehicles, especially busses.

With long blocks of up to 150 metres, cyclists with their bikes parked in the sidewalk had difficulty to access the road because of the row of parked cars. During the field observation several elderly residents mentioned it to be unsafe to walk on the sidewalks because cyclists preferred to ride their bikes on them, and consequently becoming unsafe for the pedestrians.

In order to give space to implement bicycle tracks in both directions of the street, one of the car parking rows was removed.

88

THE COSTS OF HANS BROGES GADE The construction work of Hans Broges Gade was conducted between the 1st of December 2009 and the 15th of July 2010. The construction was delayed for several months due to a harsh winter and from road construction diggings for reinstalling main cables.

Aarhus municipality hired the counting firm for Grontmij Cal Bro to develop the project and manage the construction, consulting engineers for project design and construction management.

The overall cost of the project was 2,8 million Danish krones. At the project end maintenance became part of regular municipality maintenances with no costs specified.

After the opening, the maintenance costs of the infrastructure were estimated by the municipalities assumption costs and there is no information about specific costs.

Figure 3.2.9: Hans Broges Gade view before the intervention, in September 2009. Source: Google street view

Figure 3.2.10: Hans Broges Gade view after the intervention, in September 2010

89

DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS AND STREETSCAPE DESIGN CONCEPT Han Broges Gade is part of the Holme corridor which links the city core to the Holme suburbs. The infrastructure aimed to improve biking conditions in the corridors.

(Figure 3.2.11 and 3.2.12). The area is predominantly residential with some commercial buildings. The sidewalk has been divided into a shared space between bike parking, a pedestrian path, bike path and a grassed area which separates the bike path from the road where cars are parked. The street is around 430 metres long, and contains a garden square with some shops and residential apartments.

Figure 3.2.11 Hans Bro Gade bike path

Figure 3.2.12 Traffic calming at crossing.

90

TECHNICAL DRAWINGS

Figure 3.2.13 Technical drawings from Hans Bro Gade. Source: COWI.

91

SURFACE AND FLOW STRUCTURE The flow of cyclists and pedestrians at Han Broges Gade is going in both directions on either side of the road. Looking south down the streetscape the sidewalk is divided into three spaces. Beginning from the building across there is a space for bike parking and shop signs. The pedestrian path lies directly next to the bike path divided by a small drainage gutter. The grass area separates cyclists from the parked cars and the street. On the opposite side of the street there is no car parking and no grass area dividing the cars from the cyclists (Figure 3.2.14 and 3.2.15).

PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK

CAR PARKING BIKE PATH

BIKE PARKING/ SIGNS

DRAINAGE GUTTER

Figure 3.2.14: Hans Broges Gade section.

Figure 3.2.15: Hans Broges Gade plan.

92

GRASS AREA

The flow of traffic in the morning is quite busy as people are heading into the city for work or school. Cyclists are very eager to get to their destinations and understand how to navigate the bike path with other cyclists and on coming pedestians in the sidewalk next to them. The pedestrians walking on the sidewalk do not disturb the flow of cyclists. The cyclists have to navigate around the curved bend in the bike path which slows them down and makes them aware to look for cars passing over the bike path, however cars must give way to the flow of cyclists crossing the road. Complications can arise when the cars do not give way to the flow of cyclists therefore possibly

STREET

BIKE PATH

PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK

Hans Broges Gade

Figure 3.2.16: Crossing at Hans Broges Gade

93

PAVEMENT

HIERARCHY OF USERS

The sidewalk and bike path is a combination of concrete tiles, stone tiles and asphalt. The sidewalks are a lighter colour in contrast to the dark bike path creating a clear division between the spaces. The sidewalks are divided by stone tiles separating pedestrians from each other.

The car needs to go up to the level of the cyclist to cross the cyclist path. The cyclist has priority for crossing the road therefore the car must give way to the in coming flow of cyclists and pedestrians (Figure 3.2.19).

To guide the cyclists in the correct lane a white symbol of a bike has been painted at the road crossings, which also alerts car drivers that this is a lane dedicated to cyclists (Figure 3.2.17 and 3.2.18). A small asphalt ramp has been applied to the gutter so the cars and cyclists can drive over the bike path and pedestrian sidewalk.

Figure 3.2.19: Hierarchy of transport modes

Figure 3.2.17: Bike path and sidewalk.

PEDESTRIAN PATH

BIKE PATH CAR MUST GIVE WAY TO CYCLISTS

Figure 3.2.18 Crossing section

94

BIKE PATH CURVE HUMP

VELOCITIES Since the bike path is solely dedicated to cyclists they can go quite fast, they are also able to ride comfortably next to each other while having a conversation see Figure 3.2.23. Hans Broges Gade has high and low peaks of traffic during the day. Peak hours where the bike path is most populated is in the morning from 7am to 10am when people are on their way to work or school. Other peak hours are in the afternoon/evening from 4pm till 7pm when people are on their way home from work and school. During these times it is more difficult for cyclists to go very fast as the bike path is more crowded. However during off peak times cyclists can go faster as there are less cyclists, these times are from 10am till 3pm, 7pm till 7am and on the weekends.

Cyclists can ride consistent speeds along the bike path however they must slow down at the curves in the path where they cross the side street (Figure 3.2.21 and 3.2.22). Walkers do not present any problems to the infrastructure as they are moving so slowly but they do have to pay a lot of attention to fast moving cyclists and cars at the intersections. Conflicts can arise when people are riding slowly or cyclists with kids that are riding slowly, this can become unsafe with fast riding cyclists that try to ride around them into the pedestrian path.

Figure 3.2.21: Cyclist riding down while entering the bike lane.

Figure 3.2.22: Cyclist slowing down at the crossing.

Figure 3.2.20: Individual riding his bike at a high speed

Figure 3.2.23: Two individuals riding their bikes next to each other and talking.

95

PARKING

TREES AND LANDSCAPING DESIGN

Hans Broges Gade includes parking for bikes and cars.

People tend to park their bikes along the front of residential buildings and shops. While cars have designated parks cut out of the greenery areas keeping them well organised into the streetscape (Figures 3.2.24 and 3.2.25).

There is no car parking on the other side of the road.

The area along Hans Broges Gade is sprinkled with two small areas of garden landscape. The first is a triangular garden that sits above a car park servicing a block of apartments (Figure 3.2.28). The second is a pretty garden square that houses rows of trees in a concrete paved landscape (Figure 3.2.27 and 3.2.29). Bordering the bike path and the street is a strip of grassed area separating the cyclists from the street. However on the opposite side of the street there is no grass strip.

SEATING SEATING

GRASS STRIP

Figure 3.2.24: Car parking at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.27: Greenery at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.25: Bike and car parking.

Figure 3.2.28: Front garden at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.26: Hans Broges Gade plan.

96

Figure 3.2.29: Tietgens Square.

GARDEN SQUARE

SEATING

STREET FURNITURE There are a few pieces of street furniture in the area.

They are all chairs and reside in front of and in the garden square (Figure 3.2.30).

MISSING Figure 3.2.30: Bench at Tietgens Square.

STREET LIGHTS Lamps hang above the middle of the road (Figure 3.2.31).

Figure 3.2.31: Street lamp.

PUBLIC ART At the Tietgens Square stands a statue in honor to Hans Broge. Hans Broges Gade was opened in 1901 and named after the renowned merchant and city counciler Hans Broge (1822-1908) (Figure 3.2.32).

Figure 3.2.32: Statue in honor to Han Broge.

97

SIGNAGE Signage includes the counting meter which calculates the amount of cyclists that travel on the bike path (Figure 3.2.33). There are a few car parking signs indicating when and where you can park your car.

Other signage includes the bike symbol on the bike path itself and at the areas where cyclists can cross the road (Figure 3.2.34). However the bike symbol is visually not evident enough as you see below in Figure 3.2.35 and 3.2.36 a car has parked over the bike symbol and at the same time blocking the bike ramp where cyclists can cross. The bike symbol is also located at the curved crossing as you can see in Figure 3.2.37.

98

Figure 3.2.33: Cyclist counting meter

Figure 3.2.35: Car covering bike signage

Figure 3.2.34: Bike signage.

Figure 3.2.36: Car covering bike signage

Figure 3.2.37: Bike symbol located on the bike path curve and intersection

99

CROSSINGS, INTERSECTIONS There are a few crossings and intersections that cyclists must navigate to ensure a safe ride. These include the main entrance where the path begins and the curved intersections which act as a bridge over the side streets.

Also the small bike ramps which enable cyclists to leave the path and cross the road.

As previously discussed cyclists must be weary of cars passing through the bike path even though the cyclist has priority when crossing the path. A big problem as discussed in signage is when cars park over the bike symbol making it difficult for the cyclist to cross the road as he can not see the bike ramp or the bike symbol (Figure 3.2.38). Also sometimes there are no ramps for cyclists to cross therefore they are not even able to cross the road, this leads to cyclists riding up the wrong side of the road.

The Figure 3.2.39 highlights a few problems where there is either no signage or the signage and ramp has been covered by parked cars.

Other problems include locating the ramp on the curved path only in the middle, as cyclists then have to always ride back into the half circle to enter the bike path and turn left. This leads to cyclists taking short cuts and riding up the road instead (see Figure 3.2.40).

Figure 3.2.38: Bike signage and ramp covered and cyclist crossing in an alternative way

100

Figure 3.2.39: Sequency of images of a cyclist crossing the street in an inappropriate way.

Figure 3.2.40 Cyclist riding his bike in the car lane

Figure 3.2.41: Cyclist riding his bike in the sidewalk.

101

ACCESSIBILITY To access the new bike path coming from the suburbs you must cross a main road at the southern end of Hans Broges Gade then enter the bike path (Figure 3.2.42). The bike path also has multiple access points via side streets horizontally conversing over the bike path. At the end of Hans Broges Gade in the direction of the city, the bike path is at the northern end where it dissovles into the road (FIgure 3.2.43).

Figure 3.2.42: Cyclists entering from the suburbs.

Figure 3.2.43: Entrance form the city centre

102

BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND USE The street was constructed with a light curve which was one of the major ideas under the concept of creating a more diverse streetscape and living experience. The plan of the street thereby rejects the monotony that was part of the landscape at that time The surrounding area around Hans Broges Gade mostly consists of residential apartments with some commercial business centers with some parks and gardens scattered in between them. Hans Broges Gade acts as a main traffic corridor filtering a flow of cars, cyclists and pedestrians into the core of the city.

(Figure 3.2.44).

The planned effect of greater diversity becomes visible when passing through the street. The curved facade line limits the visibility, but when moving through the street new perspectives gradually open up to new experiences.

The majority of the buildings at Hans Broges Gade is four stores and which were erected between 1900 and 1910.

Most of the buildings are designed with facade detailsincorporating bay windows together with corner towers and spines.

Figure 3.2.44: Built environment at Hans Broges Gade.

103

Total number of cyclists in a day in September from 2006 to 2010 1500

1000

500

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

CYCLIST COUNTINGS NUMBER OF CYCLISTS 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 6-7

7-8

9-10

10-11

11-12

6-7

8-9

11-12

30 Bikes

130 Bikes

60 Bikes

Figure 3.2.45: Cyclist countings at Hans Broges Gade Source: Aarhus municipality

104

8-9

12-1

13

Total number of cyclists per hour in a day in September from 2006 to 2010 2006 2007

160

2008 2009

140

2010

120 100 80 60 40 20

6-7

13-14

14-15

7-8

15-16

8-9

9-10

10-11

11-12

12-13

16-17

16-17

18-19

140 Bikes:

70 Bikes

13-14

14-15

15-16

16-17

17-18

17-18

18-19

18-19

HOURS

105

THE WEB SURVEY The web survey analysis is divided in four sections. Firstly, main findings are presented. The second section describes the spatial distribution of the residential location of the respondents. Thirdly, it is presented a descriptive statistic to analyze all the answers. In search of finding relationships between socio-demographic variables and the web survey answers, the last section presents a statistical analysis using the Chi2 test.

A total of 163 individuals that were riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade on September 2 answered the questionnaire in the period between September 2 and October 1.

Based on the Aarhus municipality count done in September 2009, on average there are 15 out of 1251 bicycle trips at Hans Broges Gade from 7am until 7pm â&#x20AC;&#x201C; including both directions â&#x20AC;&#x201C; on weekdays. Estimating that 35% of these cyclists ride their bikes at least once per day in the infrastructure, it was stipulated a total of 813 individuals ride a bike at Hans Broges Gade per day.

A total of 605 flyers were distributed to individuals riding their bikes in the infrastructure from 7am until 7pm and from these total 163 answered the questionnaire.

Based on these figures, the respondents represent 20,04% of the total of individuals riding a bike per day in the infrastructure and 26,94% of individuals that collected the flyer while riding a bike in the infrastructure on the 2nd of September 2010.

106

MAIN FINDINGS

RESIDENTIAL LOCATION OF USERS

The data from the survey reveals a picture of Hans Broges Gade as a piece of infrastructure used by the majority of the cyclists for commuting (45%). However, the main purpose of the trips from the other 55% of cyclists is very diverse (19% shopping, 13% educational institutions 6% recreational, 4% visiting family and friends and 13% others). The figures are directly connected to the built environment were the infrastructure is located – and main streets in a residential based neighborhood next to the city core.

The residential addresses of the respondents – individuals riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade on September 2 – were registered and geo-referenced in order to produce a map (see Figure 3.2.46 and 3.2.47). According to the Table xx, the majority of the respondents (68,1%) live within a radius of 1 kilometer and 91,9% of them living within 5 kilometers distance from the infrastructure.

After the Chi2 test was applied, the results highlight that most of the answers do not have a relationship with sociodemographic conditions. However, some representative relations between the independent variables – gender, age and educational level – and the questionnaire answers were identified.

Respondents living more than 5 kilometers from the infrastructure correspond to 8,1% of the total and from this amount only 15% are living more than 10 kilometers away of the infrastructure.

There is a relationship between the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade including both age and educational level. Moreover, the opinion about how the design solution of the infrastructure impacted fast connectivity also has a relationship with both age and educational level.

Regarding the satisfaction with the design solution for Hans Broges Gade, it seems to have a relationship between the answers and educational level.

Finally, gender has a relationship with both the opinion about the awareness of pedestrians for cyclists and their opinion about the scenic and greenery quality of Hans Broges Gade.

The following section provides the actual data for each of the questions asked.

NO. DWELLINGS % DWELLINGS

0-1 KM

1-2 KM

2-3 KM

3-4 KM

4-5 KM

111 68,1%

11 6,7%

7 4,3%

16 9,8%

4 2,5%

5-10 KM 10 6,1%

10-15 KM 2 1,2%

15-20 KM 0 0,0%

20 KM< 2 1,2%

Table 3.1.1: Absolute and percentage distribution of respondents according to the distance of their residential location from Hans Broges Gade.

107

10 km

5 km

4 km

3 km

2 km

1 km

N Figure 3.2.46: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 5km

108

30 km

20 km

15 km

10 km

5 km

N Figure 3.2.47: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location - 20km

109

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AGE

AGE

EDUCATION LEVEL

E DU C A T I O N L E V E L

40%

35%

35%

30%

30%

25%

25%

20% 20%

15%

15%

10%

10%

5%

5% 0%

0% NO 00 - 10 ANSWER YEARS

11 - 20 YEARS

21 - 30 YEARS

31 - 40 YEARS

41 - 50 YEARS

51 - 60 YEARS

61 - 70 YEARS

71 - 80 YEARS

NO ANSWER

81 - 90 YEARS

PUBLIC SCHOOL

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

HIGH SCHOOL

SHORT HIGHER

MEDIUM HIGHER

LONG HIGHER

EDUCATION

EDUCATION

EDUCATION

Figure 3.2.48: Distribution of the respondents by age groups.

Figure 3.2.50: Distribution of the respondents by educational level.

The majority of the respondents at Hans Broges Gade are between 21-30 years (30%), followed by respondents aged 31-40 (19%) and aged 41-50 (15%). Older respondents range from aged from 51-60 (12%), age 61-70 (9%) and age 71-80 (2%). Younger respondents were in the aged 11-20 (6%) and age 0-10 (1%). No answer 3%. This shows that Hans Broges Gade is used mostly by younger people but also that the site is use by a wide ranges of ages.

The large majority of respondents answered that they have a long higher education (34%), or a medium long, higher education (32%). 7% respondents answered that they had attended higher education for a short amount of time, and another 7% respondents answered a vocational education. 12% of the respondents had a gymnasium education, 6% had receiving a public school education, and 2% giving no answer. It can thereby be concluded that the users of Hans Broges Gade overall have a high education level.

GENDER

RIDING A BIKE AT HANS BROGES GADE HOW OFTEN DO YOU BIKE ON HANS BROGES

G E N DE R

GADE?

35%

4%

30% 25%

NO ANSWER

52%

44%

MAN WOMEN

20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

110

NO ANSWER 6-7 DAYS OF 5 DAYS OF 3-4 DAYS OF 1-2 DAYS OF 1-3 DAYS OF WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK MONTHS

MORE RARELY

Figure 3.2.49: Distribution of the respondents by gender.

Figure 3.2.51: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

When asked about their gender, 52% of the respondents were women and 44% were men, with 4% giving no answer.

When asked how often they bike at the site, the majority 50% of the respondents said that they use the bridge 5 days per week (22%) or 6-7 days per week (31%). 20% of the respondents used the site 3-4 days per week, 12% said 1-2 days per week, 10% said 1-3 days per month and only 4% said that they rarely ride a bike that. The figures highlight that the site is a place where young people bike many days of the week.

H O W O F T E N DO Y O U U S E T H E B I K E F O R T H E P U R P O S E IN T H E PR E V IU S QU E S T ION AF T E R T H E OPE NING OF FREQUENCY OF TRIPS TO THE MAIN PURPOSE H A N S B R O G E S G A DE ?

HOW OFTEN DO YOU GO ON HANS BROGES GADE

WALKING AT HANS BROGES GADE WITHOUT BIKE? 30%

1% 1% 2%

25%

7% NO ANSWER

20%

16%

15%

MORE RARELY NOT AS OFTEN

10%

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE MORE OFTEN

5%

MUCH MORE OFTEN

73%

0% NO ANSWER 6-7 DAYS OF 5 DAYS OF 3-4 DAYS OF 1-2 DAYS OF 1-3 DAYS OF WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK MONTHS

MORE RARELY

Figure 3.2.52: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.54: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53 after the intervention in the site.

Respondents were asked if they walk at Hans Broges Gade without bike. A majority responded traveled rarely without bike (26%). However, 21% answered to walk in the site 6-7 days a week (21%). 13% said 1-3 days a month, 17% said 1-2 days a week, 13% said 3-4 days a week, 7% stated 5 days a week and 2% gave no answer.

This data shows that individuals that ride their bikes at Hans Broes Gade also walk in the site without their bikes.

Respondents were asked, how often they use the bike for their main purposed as answered in previous question after the opening of Hans Broges Gade. 73% of respondents answered that they travel for that purpose just as often as before. 16% of respondents stated that they bike for that purpose more often and 7% said much more often. Only 2 % in total answered that they traveled less often and 1 % much less often. 1 % gave no answer. This data indicates that the opening of Hans Broges Gade have had an small impact on the amount of travelers, The opening have therefore had a impact on the bikeability of the city.

MAINWHAT TRIPISPURPOSE YOUR PURPOSE

SATISFACTION H O W S A T I S F I E D WITH A R E Y O HANS U W I T H BROGES H A N S B R O GGADE E S G A DE ?

ON HANS BROGES GADE?

2%

3%

NO ANSWER

11%

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM WORK RECREATION / LEISURE

13% 45%

14% 33%

NO ANSWER VERY DISSATISFIED

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS

11%

DISSATISFIED NEUTRAL

PURCHASING / SHOPPING

19%

1%

SATISFIED

4%

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM SCHOOL

6%

OTHERS

VERY SATISFIED

38%

Figure 3.2.53: Distribution of the respondents by main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.55: Distribution of the respondents by the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade

When asked for what purpose the respondents use Hans Broges Gade, 45% answered that they use the infrastructure for commuting to and from work. A great percentage 19% also used Hans Broges Gade for shopping, 13% used it to commute to school, 4% answered to see friends or family, 6% for recreation, 11% said other purpose and 2% gave no answer. This figure shows that Hans Broges Gade is as infrastructural element used for commuting but the street also has other infrastructural purposes.

When asked how satisfied the respondent were with Hans Broges Gade 71% in total of them where satisfied (38%) or very satisfied (33%) with the new infrastructure. 11% were neutral, 1% were dissatisfied and 15% were very dissatisfied. 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that the majority likes the urban space wail a small majority of 15% that have issues with Hans Broges Gade.

111

HANS BROGES GADE’S DESIGN AND SAFETY

HANS BROGES GADE`S DESIGN AND AESTHETICS

SAF ETY

AE S T H E T ICS / B E AU T Y

60%

60%

50%

50%

40%

40%

30% 30%

20% 20%

10% 10%

0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

-10%

0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.2.56: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Figure 3.2.58: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Users were asked about the quality of the safety needs of the infrastructure. The largest portion of respondents thought the design did a good job. 32% answered it did a very good job and 47% that it did a good job. 13% were neutral on the issue, only 5% said that they thought it did a bad job and 1% a very bad job. 2% gave no answer.

These responses are therefore very satisfied with the safety issues at Hans Broges Gade.

The respondents where asked about the aesthetics of the design of Hans Broges Gade, the majority of respondents stated that it either did a good (53%) or a very good (23%) job. A smaller part of the respondents were neutral (18%) in regards to beauty and aesthetics. A few said it did poorly (2%), or gave no answer (4%). This figure shows that people are satisfied with the aesthetics of the site.

HANS BROGES GADE’S DESIGN AND FAST F AS T CONNE CT ION CONNECTIVITY

ILLEGALLY PARKED BICYCLES IL L E G AL L Y PAR K E D B ICY CL E S 1%

60%

1%

1%

4%

50%

13%

40%

NO ANSWER NOT PROBLEMATIC

30%

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

20%

PROBLEMATIC QUITE PROBLEMATIC

10%

MAJOR PROLEM

80%

0% NO ANSWER

112

NEUTRAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.2.57: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Figure 3.2.59: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Respondents were asked if they thought the design of Hans Broges Gade was facilitating as a fast connections, and the majority responded that it did a good job (51%) or a very good job (29%). 15% respondents were neutral on the issue and very few stated that it did poorly (2%). 3% respondents gave no answer. From this figure, it is clear that Hans Broges Gade does a very good job of facilitating fast connections.

Users were asked if they thought that illegally parked bicycles were a problem on the Hans Broges Gade. 80% of the responses said that they were not a problem, 13% said it was a small problem, 4% said it was problematic, 1% said it was quite problematic, and 1% said it was very problematic. 1% gave no answer. This figure shows that illegally parked bicycles are not a big problem at the site.

CONFLICT BETWEEN DIFFERENT TRANSPORT E X C E E DI N G T H E B O U N DA R I E S O F B I C Y C L E P A T H S , MODES S I DE W A L K S A N D L A N E S 3%

PAVEMENT PROBLEMS 0%

2% 2%

3%

P A V E ME N T P R O B L E MS 0%

1%

11%

9%

NO ANSWER

51%

33%

NO ANSWER

NOT PROBLEMATIC

NOT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC QUITE PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

MAJOR PROLEM

MAJOR PROLEM

85%

Figure 3.2.60: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.62: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gade.

Respondents were if there were issues with boundaries of bicycle paths, sidewalks and lanes. A little over half of the respondents 51% said it was not a problem. 33% stated that is was a bit of the problem, 9% claimed it was problematic, 3% said it was quite a problem, and 2% responded that it was a major problem. 2% gave no answer on whether passing space was an issue. This range shows that sidewalks can be a confusing space, and that almost half of the respondent saw it as problematic.

When asked whether they thought surface issues like potholes were a problem on Hans Broges Gade, 85% of the responses said it was not a problem. 11% stated that it was a small problem, 3% claimed it was problematic. 1% gave no answer. This figure shows Hans Broges Gade has been well maintained, and therefore has a great percentage of satisfaction.

OBSTACLES

CRACKS IN RAMPS AND INTERSECTIONS 0% 2%

C R A C K S A N D R A MP S O N IN T E R S E C T IO N S

OB STACL ES 3%

2%

2%

0%

2%

4% NO ANSWER

22%

19%

NO ANSWER

NOT PROBLEMATIC

NOT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC QUITE PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

69%

MAJOR PROLEM

75%

MAJOR PROLEM

Figure 3.2.61: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.63: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Hans Broges Gade.

Respondents were asked whether they thought obstacles at Hans Broges Gade were an issue. The majority of the respondent stated that obstacles were not a problem 69%. 22% stated that is was a small problem, 4% claimed it was problematic, 2% quite problematic, 3% gave no answer. This figure shows that only a small majority of users see obstacles as being an issue in using the Hans Broges Gade.

Users were asked whether they thought cracks were a problem in ramps and intersections. 75% of the responses said it was not a problem. 19% thought that it was a small problem, 2% claimed it was problematic, 2% said it was quite a problem. 2% gave no answer. These results show that cracks in ramps and intersections can be a small problem, one that could be fixed with maintenance.

113

AWARENESS OF PEDESTRIANS AND MOTORIZED VEHICLE DRIVERS FOR CYCLISTS

SCENIC

L A C K O F A W A R E N E S S F O R T H E S U R R O U N DI N G P E O P L E 2%

POOR S CE NIC AND G R E E NE R Y

1% 2%

2%

2% 1%

7% 10%

NO ANSWER

NO ANSWER

NOT PROBLEMATIC

26%

NOT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC PROBLEMATIC

62%

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

25%

PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

60%

MAJOR PROLEM

QUITE PROBLEMATIC MAJOR PROLEM

Figure 3.2.64: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.66: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is scenic and greenery at Hans Broges Gade.

Respondents were asked whether they thought lack of awareness of pedestrians for cyclists was an issue. Most users 62% thought it was not a problem or a small problem 26%. 7% stated it was problematic, 2% said it was quite a problem, and 1% responded that this was a major problem. 2% gave no answer. This figure shows that cyclists perceive a problem in regards the awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for cyclists.

When asked whether they thought poor greenery and scenic landscaping was an issue at Hans Broges Gade, 60% of the responses said it was not a problem, 25% said it was a small problem, 10% stated it was problematic, 2% said it was quite a problem, and 2% responded that this was a major problem. 1% gave no answer. This figure shows that greenery can be a problem and that the lack of it is noticed by some users.

SIGNPOSTING ITS P O O R AND S IG NPO S T I NINTERPRETATION G AND INT E R PR E T A T ION

BIKING MORE OFTEN HANS BROGES GADE H A N S B AFTER R OGES GA DE ?

INTERVENTION

2%

1% 0%

2%

A R E Y O U B IK IN G MO R E O F T E N A F T E R T H E O P E N IN G O F

1%

13%

15%

NO ANSWER NOT PROBLEMATIC

NO ANSWER

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

YES

PROBLEMATIC

NO

QUITE PROBLEMATIC MAJOR PROLEM

80%

114

86%

Figure 3.2.65: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.67: Distribution of the respondents based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the intervention at Hans Broges Gade.

When asked whether poor signage was an issue, 80% of the responses said it was not a problem, 15% said it was a small problem, 2% stated it was problematic, 1% said it was quite a problem. 2% gave no answer. This figure shows that signage is not a major issue and that the design conveys how it should be used clearly to the user.

When asked whether they bike more often after the opening of Hans Broges Gade, 86% said they have not biked more while 13% said yes. 1% gave no answer. A small amount of the respondents are biking more often after the opening of Hans Broges Gade, which thereby states that the new design have improved that bikeability of the site and the amount of bikers.

QUALITIES INFLUENCING TO RIDE A BIKE

HOW I M P O R T A INFLUENCING N T I S S T R E E T D E S TO I G N RIDE ( G R E E NAABIKE R EAS, STREET DESIGN L I G H T I N G , E T C .) F O R Y O U R DE C I S I O N T O T A K E T H E B IK E ?

I F Y E S , W H A T Q U A L I T I E S A B O U T H A N S B R O G E S G A DE H A S IN F L U E N C E D Y O U R C H O IC E O F B IK IN G MO R E O F T E N ?

30%

30% 25%

25%

20% 15%

20%

10% 5%

15% A PE G N PO ST IN M G A B IN IK TE E M N A A N PS C E O F B IK ES B IK E PA R K IN G

G E

SC

ED

N D

N E

SI

LA

EE R

R

V

G

B

ET

TE

TI EC R AT T

IK E B ER

W

LA

EA

S

N ES

N ES

A

R

LA G

ST FA

R

EE

N ER

IK E

TI O N ID

ER

B

O N N EC W

ST FA

A

G

O

O

ER

D

C

EX

PE

R

SA

FE T

IE N C

Y

E

0%

Figure 3.2.68: Among the respondents that said yes in the previous question (Figure 3.2.67), what qualities has influenced their choice to ride a bike more often after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade. The respondents could choose more than one option.

Respondents were asked what aspect of the intervention make them ride their bike more often, the largest portion of users stated that safety (24%) was an important factor. 20% responded saying wide bicycle lanes made them ride more, and 13% stated that maintenance made an impact for them. 11% stated they rode more because Hans Broges Gade was a nice experience, and because faster bike lanes made the difference for them. The most important factors for the bikeability at Hans Broges Gade is therefore safety issues and the conditions of the bike lanes such as the proportions of the lane and the maintenance of it.

10% 5% 0% NO ANSWER

NOT AT ALL

NOT IMPORTANT IMPROTANT

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT IMPORTANT

VERY IMPORTANT IMPROTANT

Figure 3.2.69: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Users were asked, how important street design is in your decision to ride your bicycle. 25% of the respondents were neutral on the issue, 25% said it was not important, and 23% said it was important. 20% respondents stated that it was not important at all and 7% that is was very important factor for them. This figure shows that while streetscape is not a critical factor in bicycle use, they are still important and noticed by users.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE DESIGN SOLUTIONS

STREET DESIGN SOLUTIONS AT HANS BROGES THAT ARE APPLIED TO HANS BROGES GADE (GREEN GADE AREAS, LIGHTING, ETC.)?

50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.2.70: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in the intervention at Hans Broges Gade.

When asked for their opinion on the design solution applied to Hans Broges Gade, most respondents replied that it was a good solution (47%) or that they were neutral on the issue (28%). 21% believed it was a very good design solution, only 2% thought it was bad, and 2% gave no answer. This figure shows that many believe that lighting and green scape at Hans Broges Gade is very well done.

115

RELATIONS BETWEEN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND WEBSURVEY ANSWERS The Chi2 test was applied to identify possible relations between the socio-demographics (independent variables) of the sample and their answers from the web survey (dependable variables). Considering the nature of the studied variables – the majority of them are nominal – the Chi2 test was selected to this analysis.

The Chi2 test is about finding out if there is a connection between the variables. It is about testing the nul hypothesis.

H0 says that the variables are statistic independent and HA says the variables are statistic dependent. To the test we set a α-level at 0,05. In the case of the p-value is under that, we can’t reject the nul hypothesis.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND RIDING A BIKE AT HANS BROGES GADE

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

20 29 49

19 17 36

15 15 30

7 11 18

7 9 16

3 3 6

TOTAL 71 84 155

Table 3.2.2: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.2, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 1,826 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

1 4 5 6 14 20 50

3 4 5 3 10 11 36

1 2 5 2 10 12 32

1 1 4 0 6 6 18

2 1 0 1 9 3 16

1 0 1 0 2 2 6

TOTAL 9 12 20 12 51 54 158

Table 3.2.3: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.3, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 18,265 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

4 13 7 7 11 7 49

2 11 7 9 3 3 35

2 16 8 3 1 2 32

4 3 2 3 3 3 18

1 3 5 2 2 2 15

0 3 1 0 0 1 5

TOTAL 13 49 30 24 20 18 154

Table 3.2.4: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.4, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 28,519 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

116

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND WALKING AT HAND BROGES GADE

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

15 20 35

5 5 10

9 11 20

13 15 28

8 14 22

21 19 40

TOTAL 71 84 155

Table 3.2.5: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.5, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 1,715 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

0 1 3 3 12 166 35

2 1 0 1 2 5 11

0 2 4 1 10 5 22

2 5 6 2 4 9 28

2 1 4 3 6 6 22

3 2 3 2 17 13 40

TOTAL 9 12 20 12 51 54 158

Table 3.2.6: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.6, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 29,062 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

1 13 6 6 4 4 34

0 5 1 2 1 1 10

2 12 4 2 1 1 22

5 6 6 5 1 3 26

3 4 5 3 4 3 22

2 8 9 6 9 6 40

TOTAL 13 48 31 24 20 18 154

Table 3.2.7: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.7, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 25,515 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND MAIN TRIP PURPOSE

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 31 41 72

RECREATION/ LEISURE 6 4 10

VISIT FAMILY/ FRIENDS 4 3 7

PURCHASING/ SHOPPING 11 18 29

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 9 11 20

OTHERS

TOTAL

9 8 17

70 85 155

Table 3.2.8: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.8, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 2,452 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

117

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 1 7 7 7 19 32 73

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

RECREATION/ LEISURE 1 0 0 0 5 4 10

VISIT FAMILY/ FRIENDS 1 0 1 0 2 3 7

PURCHASING/ SHOPPING 2 1 4 3 14 7 31

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 2 1 6 1 5 5 20

OTHERS

TOTAL

2 2 2 1 6 4 17

9 11 20 21 51 55 158

Table 3.2.9: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.9, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 25,573 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 2 16 15 18 12 6 69

VISIT FAMILY/ FRIENDS 0 2 2 1 1 1 7

RECREATION/ LEISURE 0 6 2 0 1 1 10

PURCHA-SING /SHOPPING 1 11 7 1 6 5 31

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 7 12 1 0 0 0 20

OTHERS

TOTAL

3 2 4 4 0 4 17

13 49 31 24 20 17 154

Table 3.2.10: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.10, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 63,503 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 9. P is less than 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND FREQUENCY OF TRIPS TO THE MAIN PURPOSE

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

0 2 2

2 1 3

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 52 62 114

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

10 15 25

7 5 12

71 85 156

Table 3.2.11: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53, after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.11, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,314 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

0 0 0 0 1 1 2

2 0 0 0 1 0 3

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 5 8 14 8 40 41 116

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

0 2 6 3 7 8 26

2 2 0 1 2 5 12

9 12 20 12 51 55 159

Table 3.2.12: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53, after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.12, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 34,451 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 4. P is between 0,025 and 0,010. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

118

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

0 0 0 1 1 0 2

1 2 0 0 0 0 3

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 8 33 24 20 11 16 112

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

4 12 4 2 4 0 26

0 2 3 1 4 2 12

13 49 31 24 20 18 155

Table 3.2.13: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53, after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.13, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 26,945 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND SATISFACTION WITH HANS BROGES GADE

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED 13 10 23

DISSATISFIED

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 1 1

6 11 17

29 31 60

21 31 52

69 84 153

Table 3.2.14: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.14, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,414 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED

DISSATISFIED

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

4 3 4 1 6 5 23

0 0 0 0 0 1 1

3 0 2 1 3 8 17

1 3 13 5 19 21 62

1 5 1 5 21 20 53

9 11 20 12 49 55 156

Table 3.2.15: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.15, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 31,388 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 7. P is between 0,050 and 0,025 but close to 0,050. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED 2 9 3 5 2 1 22

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

4 3 4 3 2 1 17

6 20 16 7 5 6 60

1 17 8 8 11 8 53

13 49 31 23 20 16 153

Table 3.2.16: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the table 3.2.16, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 18,723 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 11. P is between 0,250 and 0,100, but close to 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

119

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF HANS BROGES GADE`S DESIGN ON SAFETY

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 1 1

4 4 8

8 11 19

39 37 76

19 31 50

70 84 154

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

Table 3.2.17: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Out of the table 3.2.17, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,160 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 0 1 0 0 0 1

1 0 3 0 1 3 8

2 0 2 3 6 7 20

2 4 11 5 24 31 77

4 8 2 4 19 14 51

9 12 19 12 50 55 157

Table 3.2.18: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Out of the table 3.2.18, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 29,831 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 6. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 0 1 0 0 0 1

1 0 1 3 1 1 7

4 7 3 2 2 1 19

6 26 20 9 5 9 75

2 15 6 10 11 7 51

13 48 31 24 19 18 153

Table 3.2.19: Distribution of the respondents by age group according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Out of the table 3.2.19, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 26,529 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF HANS BROGES GADE`S DESIGN ON FAST CONNECTIVITY

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

2 1 3

9 14 23

37 45 82

21 24 45

69 84 153

Table 3.2.20: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the table 3.2.20, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 0,939 with a degree of freedom (df) 3 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

120

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

2 0 0 1 0 1 4

0 1 3 1 6 12 23

5 3 11 6 31 27 83

1 8 5 4 13 15 46

8 12 19 12 50 55 156

Table 3.2.21: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the table 3.2.21, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 33,203 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 7. P is between 0,005 and 0,001. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

1 1 0 0 0 1 3

1 4 7 5 2 4 23

9 30 18 13 5 6 81

2 12 6 6 12 7 45

13 47 31 24 19 18 152

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

Table 3.2.22: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the table 3.2.22, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 24,992 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 11. P is between 0,100 and 0,050, but very close to 0,050. The variables are independent, but are very close to be dependent. If there is a bit of uncertainty the variables could be dependent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT HANS BROGES GADE`S AESTHETICS

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

2 2 4

15 13 28

37 47 84

14 22 36

68 84 152

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

Table 3.2.23: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the table 3.2.23, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 1,443 with a degree of freedom (df) 3 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 0 2 0 1 1 4

2 1 5 0 8 13 29

3 5 9 7 29 32 85

3 6 3 5 11 9 37

8 12 19 12 49 55 155

Table 3.2.24: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table 3.2.24, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 19,034 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 8. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

121

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

1 1 2 0 0 0 4

3 11 5 1 3 5 28

7 29 18 14 7 9 84

2 6 6 9 9 3 35

13 47 31 24 19 17 151

Table 2.3.25: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table 2.3.25, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,745 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 12. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT ILLEGALLY PARKED BICYCLES

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 56 71 127

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 10 11 21

PROBLEMATIC 4 1 5

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 1 2

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 1 1

TOTAL 71 85 156

Table 2.3.26: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 2.3.26, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,390 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

8 7 18 9 39 49 130

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 4 2 2 8 4 21

PROBLEMATIC 0 0 0 1 3 1 5

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 0 0 1 1 2

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 1 0 0 0 0 1

9 12 20 12 51 55 159

Table 2.3.27: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 2.3.27, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 24,403 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 4. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 12 37 26 22 17 12 126

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 8 5 2 1 4 21

PROBLEMATIC 0 3 0 0 0 2 5

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 1 0 0 1 0 2

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 0 0 0 1 0 1

TOTAL 13 49 31 24 20 18 155

Table 2.3.28: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 2.3.28, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 22,356 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

122

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT CONFLICT BETWEEN DIFFERENT TRANSPORT MODES

NOT PROBLEMATIC 32 48 80

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 28 25 53

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 4 1 5

PROBLEMATIC 5 9 14

MAJOR PROBLEM 1 2 3

TOTAL 70 85 155

Table 3.2.29: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.29, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,243 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

5 7 5 5 33 27 82

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 2 11 5 14 19 54

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 1 2 0 0 2 5

PROBLEMATIC 1 2 1 2 3 5 14

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 0 1 0 1 1 3

9 12 20 12 51 54 158

Table 3.2.30: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.30, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 19,796 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 5 28 10 15 12 11 81

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 5 14 16 7 4 5 51

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 1 1 0 2 0 5

PROBLEMATIC 2 5 2 2 2 1 14

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 1 2 0 0 0 3

TOTAL 13 49 31 24 20 17 154

Table 3.2.31: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.31, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,016 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT OBSTACLES AGAINST CYCLISTS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 49 60 109

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 16 19 35

PROBLEMATIC 3 4 7

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 2 3

TOTAL 69 85 154

Table 3.2.32: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.32, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 0,183 with a degree of freedom (df) 3 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

123

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 6 7 15 7 38 39 112

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 5 2 4 9 13 35

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 2 0 0 1 3

PROBLE-MATIC 0 0 1 1 4 1 7

TOTAL 8 12 20 12 51 54 157

Table 3.2.33: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.33, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,207 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 6. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 9 30 24 20 15 10 108

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 12 5 3 5 7 35

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 1 1 0 0 0 3

PROBLEMATIC 0 5 1 1 0 0 7

TOTAL 13 48 31 24 20 17 153

Table 3.2.34: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.34, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 15,594 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE PAVEMENT

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 63 71 134

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 6 11 17

PROBLEMATIC

Total

2 3 5

71 85 156

Table 3.2.35: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.35, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 0,899 with a degree of freedom (df) 2 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 7 9 16 11 41 53 167

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 3 4 0 8 0 17

PROBLE-MATIC

TOTAL

0 0 0 1 2 2 5

9 12 20 12 51 55 159

Table 3.2.36: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.36, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,086 with a degree of freedom (df) 10 and the missing values are 4. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

124

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 10 41 26 23 18 15 133

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 5 5 1 2 2 17

PROBLEMATIC

TOTAL

1 8 0 0 0 1 5

13 49 31 24 20 18 155

Table 3.2.37: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.37, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 7,335 with a degree of freedom (df) 10 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT CRACKS IN RAMPS AND INTERSECTIONS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 57 61 118

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 9 21 30

PROBLEMATIC 3 1 4

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 2 1 3

TOTAL 71 84 155

Table 3.2.38: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.38, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,215 with a degree of freedom (df) 3 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 7 9 16 10 36 43 121

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 2 2 2 13 9 30

PROBLE-MATIC 0 0 1 0 1 2 4

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 1 0 1 1 3

TOTAL 9 11 20 12 51 55 158

Table 3.2.39: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.39, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,920 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 12 31 25 22 15 13 118

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 13 5 2 4 4 29

PROBLEMATIC 0 4 0 0 0 0 4

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 1 1 0 0 1 3

TOTAL 13 49 31 24 19 18 154

Table 3.2.40: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.40, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,602 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

125

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT AWARENESS OF PEDESTRIANS AND MOTORIZED VEHICLE DRIVERS FOR CYCLISTS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 43 54 97

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 15 27 42

PROBLEMATIC 8 3 11

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 3 0 3

MAJOR PROBLEM 2 0 2

TOTAL 71 84 155

Table 3.2.41: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.41, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 10,935 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 8. P is between 0,050 and 0,025. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

6 7 12 5 35 35 100

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 4 5 7 11 14 42

PROBLEMATIC 2 1 2 0 4 2 11

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 1 0 0 2 3

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 0 0 0 1 1 2

9 12 20 12 51 54 158

Table 3.2.42: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.42, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 16,880 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 8 33 19 13 13 11 97

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 4 9 7 11 5 5 41

PROBLEMATIC 1 5 2 0 1 2 11

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 1 1 0 1 0 3

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 0 2 0 0 0 2

TOTAL 13 48 31 24 20 18 154

Table 3.2.43: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.43, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 18,552 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,250 and 0,100, but close to 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT SIGNPOSTING AND ITS INTERPRETATION

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 43 54 97

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 15 27 42

PROBLEMATIC 8 3 11

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 3 0 3

MAJOR PROBLEM 2 0 2

TOTAL 71 84 155

Table 3.2.44: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.44, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 2,254 with a degree of freedom (df) 3 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

126

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 7 10 15 10 40 46 128

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 2 4 2 10 6 25

PROBLE-MATIC 1 0 1 0 1 1 4

QUITE PROBLE-MATIC 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

TOTAL 9 12 20 12 51 54 158

Table 3.2.45: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.45, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 7,668 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC 9 38 24 22 17 15 125

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 4 7 6 2 3 3 25

PROBLEMATIC

TOTAL

0 3 1 0 0 0 4

13 48 31 24 20 18 154

Table 3.2.46: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.46, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 8,041 with a degree of freedom (df) 10 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT SCENIC

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 33 61 94

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 23 16 39

PROBLEMATIC 11 5 16

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 3 1 4

MAJOR PROBLEM 1 2 3

TOTAL 71 85 156

Table 3.2.47: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.47, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 23,782 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 4. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

9 9 14 12 31 28 97

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 3 3 0 15 14 39

PROBLEMATIC 1 0 2 0 4 9 16

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 0 0 0 1 2 4

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 0 1 0 0 2 3

9 12 20 12 51 55 159

Table 3.2.48: Distribution of the respondents by educational level gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.48, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 23,782 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 4. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

127

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 8 26 13 17 18 11 93

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 15 11 6 1 3 39

PROBLEMATIC 1 4 5 1 1 4 16

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 2 1 0 0 0 4

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 2 1 0 0 0 3

TOTAL 13 49 31 24 20 18 155

Table 3.2.49: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.49, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 22,717 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND BIKING MORE OFTEN AFTER HANS BROGES GADE`S OPENING

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

11 9 20

60 76 136

71 85 156

Table 3.2.50: Distribution of the respondents by gender based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.50, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 0,833 with a degree of freedom (df) 1 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

2 2 4 2 5 6 21

7 10 16 10 46 49 138

9 12 20 12 51 55 159

Table 3.2.51: Distribution of the respondents by educational level based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.51, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 2,462 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 4. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

2 9 4 1 2 2 20

11 40 27 23 18 16 135

13 49 31 24 20 18 155

Table 3.2.52: Distribution of the respondents by age groups based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.52, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,204 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

128

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT STREET DESIGN AS INFLUENTIAL FACTOR TO RIDE A BIKE

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 11 21 32

MAN FEMALE TOTAL

NOT IMPORTANT 18 20 38

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

17 21 38

21 16 37

VERY IMPORTANT 4 7 11

TOTAL 71 85 156

Table 3.2.53: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.2.53, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,920 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 1 2 4 2

NOT IMPORTANT 1 2 8 5

11

12

12 32

11 39

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

1 5 4 2

5 1 4 1

VERY IMPORTANT 1 2 0 2

15

11

2

51

12 39

16 38

4 11

55 159

TOTAL 9 12 20 12

Table 3.2.54: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.2.54, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,349 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 4. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 1 10 5 7 6 2 31

NOT IMPORTANT 4 12 6 9 2 3 36

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

5 9 9 4 5 7 39

3 15 8 2 4 6 38

VERY IMPORTANT 0 3 3 2 3 0 11

TOTAL 13 49 31 24 20 18 155

Table 3.2.55: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.2.55, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,916 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT HANS BROGES GADE`S DESIGN SOLUTION

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

2 1 3

15 28 43

39 34 73

13 22 35

69 85 154

Table 3.2.56: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.56, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,315 with a degree of freedom (df) 3 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

129

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

1 0 0 0 1 1 3

1 1 8 2 16 15 43

7 7 10 6 21 25 76

0 4 2 4 12 13 35

9 12 20 12 50 54 157

Table 3.2.57: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.57, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 16,504 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 6. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 2 0 0 0 1 3

5 16 10 3 4 5 43

7 20 14 13 10 9 73

1 11 7 8 5 2 34

13 49 31 24 19 17 153

Table 3.2.58: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.

Out of the Table 3.2.58, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 12,224 with a degree of freedom (df) 15 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

130

Figure 3.2.71: Cyclist meter at Hans Broges Gade.

131

3.3 CASE3 BICYCLE BRIDGE BRYGGEBRO

3.3.1 COPENHAGEN Copenhagen is the Danish national capital and the largest municipality of Denmark with a population of 503.699 inhabitants. The Copenhagen metropolitan area has a population of 1.901.789 inhabitants (Statistikbanken, 2010).

The municipality is located in the islands of Zealand and Amager.

Moreover, the amount of serious injuries against cyclists has now gone from 118 in year 2005 to 121 in year 2008.

Finally, 51% of the cyclists were feeling confident and safe while riding their bikes in year 2008 (Copenhagen Municipality, 2009b).

According to a traffic behaviour study conducted by Danish Technical University, 30% of all trips in Copenhagen are travelled on bike, 17% on foot, 16% in public transport and 30% in private cars (figure 3.3.2).

DISTRIBUTION OF THE TRIPS BASED ON TRANSPORTATION MODES 100%

1%

1%

1%

1%

1%

2%

22%

22%

18%

17%

17%

16%

25%

31%

37%

28%

31%

30%

30%

26%

27%

29%

30%

30%

22%

20%

22%

25%

21%

22%

2000

2002

80%

60% COPENHAGEN

40%

20%

0%

Figure 3.3.1: Geographical location of Copenhagen.

MUNICIPALITY VISION Copenhagen has a vision to become World`s Eco-metropolis in year 2015 (Copenhagen Municipality, 2009b) and a list of thirteen goals has been set up to achieve this objective.

There are two goals directly related to cycling: to reduce carbon emissions by 20% from the amount emitted in 2005 and to become the world`s best city for cyclists.

In order to become the world`s best city for cyclists, the Copenhagen municipality defined three main objectives to be achieved before 2050: to have more than 50% of its population riding their bikes to go to work or to study, to improve the cyclists perception of safeness in the traffic and to decrease the number of injuries by half of the amount from 2007 (Copenhagen Municipality, 2009b).

Currently, 37% of Copenhageners that are working or studying commute riding a bike (Copenhagen Municipality, 2010b).

132

1998 OTHER

PUBLIC TRANSPORT

2004 CAR

2006 BICYCLE

2008 PEDESTIAN

Figure 3.3.2: Distribution of trips according to transportation mode within Copenhagen municipality from 1998 until 2008. Source: Copenhagen Municipality

Figure 3.3.3: Cover of the publication â&#x20AC;&#x153;city of cyclistsâ&#x20AC;? with general information about cycling in Copenhagen, history and targets for the future.

Source: Copenhagen Municipality.

133

To improve the overall air quality of Copenhagen, a new law established Copenhagen as Environmental Zone. In 2008, the first step was took when the core of the city of Copenhagen and the municipality of Frederiksberg were defined as an Environmental Zone. In 2009, the Environmental Zone was extended to the entire Copenhagen municipality.

The Bike Secretary coordinates all the bicycle campaigns developed by Copenhagen Municipality. The Bike Secretary is part of the Centre for Traffic which is under the Technical and Environmental Department of Copenhagen Municipality.

To improve the discussions between the government and cyclists, there is a virtual community – www.ibikecph.dk – that functions as an arena to debate cycling in Copenhagen. Moreover, cyclists are asked to report any problems related to bike infrastructures – holes, cracks, etc. – and also to bring up suggestions about how to improve cycling conditions in Copenhagen.

Figure 3.3.4: Logo of the campaign Ibikecph.

Source: Copenhagen Municipality

134

23,966 residents of Copenhagen municipality participated in the national campaign “We bike to work”. Copenhagen municipality was the one with most participants and most cycled average kilometres per participant.

In both Summer 2009 and Spring 2010, a campaign against bike robbery took place in Copenhagen municipality. 5300 tracking chips were handed out, making possible to track stolen bicycles. Parking guards equipped with special scanners had registered 250 chipped bicycles of which two had been reported stolen.

Copenhagen Municipality has also recently created a board of two hundred children from six different schools named Children´s Traffic Council. The board has been created to hear bicycle ideas and problems from children’s perspective. The board had their first top meeting on September 22nd 2010 where major problems were discussed and ideas were proposed for the Technical and Environmental Secretary of Copenhagen.

In a study conducted by Copenhagen Municipality about safety when riding a bike, 43% of the respondents reported to feel unsafe because of other cyclists. In that context, Copenhagen Municipality and the Danish Cyclists Society made a campaign to address this problematic in September 2010. The campaign was based in two ideas: “to improve karma among cyclists” and “to think more about others when cycling”. A series of events took place from September 6th till September 12th 2010 – open-air theatre, lounge music in the streets, free apples and water for cyclists and guided cycle-trip.

Figure 3.3.5: Cyclists and pedestrians crossing Bryggebro bike bridge.

135

BICYCLE NETWORK

The University corridor links the two sides of the Copenhagen harbour. It provides a shortcut for students travelling from Vesterbro to Amager where Copenhagen University campuses and the IT University in Ørestad are located. It also provides a fast connection for Amager residents to shopping facilities and the S-trains and for residents from Vesterbro to access green areas like Amager Park and Islands Brygge waterfront (CPHX 2009).

Copenhagen municipality has 340 kilometres of bicycle tracks, 20 kilometres of bicycle lanes and 40 kilometres of green bicycle routes. At total of 503.699 inhabitants, Copenhagen has 0,8 meters of bicycle track, lane or trail per inhabitant.

Bryggebro is part of the University corridor – Universitetsruten – which is one of main corridors of the Copenhagen network of bicycles and footpaths.

S

S

realiserede ruter og ruter under anlÊg cykelmulighed langs S erne

Ve st vo ldr ut en

Ha res kov ru

ten

Fr ed er iks be rg ru te n

cykelforbindelser til Regionen

N

S

ten ru als nd ø r

S

S

S

r vhn nsa

tia

ris

en rut lev ers Vig

Ch

S

ut

S en ut er n av S H

S Carlsbergruten

S

Va lby ru te n

Un iver site t

S

S

sru ten

S

S

en rrut age Am

S

n Kastrup Fort rute

Ka lve bo dr ut

en

en rut vre ido v H

Figure 3.3.6: Copenhagen Bicycle Network. Source: Copenhagen Municipality.

Lu

ft

ha

vn

sr

ut

en

Ørestadsru ten

S

en

S

S

S

0

TEKNIK- OG MILJÿFO RVALTNINGEN D. 20.05.10

en rut ale fsh Re

G

ruter udenfor kommunen

S en orut rebr Nør

S

alternativ linief ring

kommunegrÊnse

S S

planlagte ruter

S

Sø ru ten

S

S

en rut ølle nem Sva

S

S

S

136

Det gr nne cykelrutenet 2009 Realiserede og planlagte ruter

Ryvangsruten

Utterslevruten

500m

1.000m

LANGEBRO

KNIPPELSBRO

BRYGGEBRO

SJĂ&#x2020;LLANDSBRO

N

Figure 3.3.7: The four bridges of Copenhagen Harbour. Modified from original picture from Google Earth

137

3.3.1 BRYGGEBRO In 2006, it was inaugurated the first exclusively dedicated pedestrian and cyclist bridge of Copenhagen: Bryggebro.

Bryggebro is a 190 meter long, six and a half meters wide, swing bridge connecting Kalvebod Brygge over Havneholmen to Islands Brygge (CPHX, 2009 and GrontmijCarlbro, 2010).

bridge were present until 2009 (Copenhagen Municipality, 2010c).

Bryggebro links the two sides of Copenhagen Harbor and complements the other three connections across the Copenhagen harbour. Differently from the other connections, Bryggebro is exclusively dedicated for cyclists and pedestrians. On the north direction, there is Langebro – 1 kilometer from Bryggebro – and Knippelsbro – 2 kilometers from Bryggebro. On the south direction, there is Sjællandsbroen which is 3 kilometers distant from Bryggebro (Figure 3.3.7).

THE COSTS OF BRYGGEBRO

When inaugurating Bryggebro, the politician Klaus Bondam mentioned: “To bridge the gap between the two wharfs is much more than the tangible construction, we use the term “to bridge the gap between” in many connections. To bridge a gap equals cooperation and dialogue, it equals overcoming gaps and obstacles – it is often about creating closeness and understanding between people…. It is my hope, that this new connection will give rise to new initiatives and that cooperation will occur – that this will also be a symbolic bridge between the two areas.”

In 2000, Carl Bro and Sjælsø Group presented to the Copenhagen municipality a proposal to build up a bike bridge – named Bryggebro – at the Copenhagen harbour.

Copenhagen municipality accepted the proposal and the project was then developed (Grontmij- Carlbro, 2010).

Bryggebro was designed by the architect office DISSING+WEITLING which won for this project the ”Foreningen til hovedstadens forskønnelse” award 2006 (Dissing+Weitling, 2010).

Carl Bro functioned as consulting engineer for Copenhagen municipality and developed the technical drawings and carried the management and supervision of the construction (Grontmij- Carlbro, 2010).

The construction started in 2005 and was completed in September 2006. Bryggebro was officially opened on the 14th of September 2006. However, construction sites in the bridge surroundings and temporary accesses to the

138

BEFORE AND AFTER The construction of Bryggebro improved the accessibility between the two sides of Copenhagen Harbor.

The total amount spent with the construction of Bryggebro was 47.600.000 Danish krones.

The maintenance costs are expected to be 1.5% of the construction costs after 25 years of the opening. Until 2031, the maintenance costs are expected to rise every year 1/25 of 1,5% of the total cost of the bridge.

In addition, the operational costs of lighting, cleaning, anti graffiti, inspection of machinery are estimated to be 300.000 Danish crowns per year (COWI, 2010 and CPHX 2009).

Figure 3.3.8: Bryggebro opening on the 14th of September. Source: Copenhagen Municipality.

Figure 3.3.9: Image of Bryggebro from Islands Brygge side of the harbor.

139

DESIGN CHARACTERISTIC AND STREETSCAPE DESIGN CONCEPT Bryggebroen has an iconic character and functions as a landmark in the landscape. It is a 190 meter long by six and a half meters wide swing bridge connecting Kalvebod Brygge over Havneholmen to Islands Brygge (CPHX 2010, Grontmij- Carlbro, 2010). It is the first bridge built in Copenhagen Harbour in 50 years and the first bridge ever built in Copenhagen reserved solely for cyclists and pedestrians.

The bridge is divided equally between cyclists and pedestrians connecting workers and students travelling from the west part of the city to the Amager based side of Copenhagen. It has now made a statement in the area and has become an iconic bridge within the neighbourhood.

140

Figure 3.310: View of Havneholmen from Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.12: View of Bryggebro from Island Brygge to the Havneholmen side.

Figure 3.3.11: Access to Bryggebro from Havneholmen.

Figure 3.3.13: Havneholmen and Bryggebro in the background.

Figure 3.3.14: Bryggebro in the foreground and Islands Brygge in the background.

141

TECHNICAL DRAWINGS

Figure 3.3.15: Plan and Section of Bryggebro. Source: Copenhagen Municipality.

142

189448

Figure 3.3.16: Elevation of the bridge seen from the side and cross section of the bridge. The pedestrian side on the left and cyclist on the right separated by a 60cm high 1.2 metres wide girder. Source: Copenhagen Municipality.

143

SURFACE AND FLOW STRUCTURE

PAVEMENT

The flow of cyclists and pedestrians at Bryggebro is going in both directions on either side of the bridge and at either ends of the bridge. Looking at a section of the bridge it is divided into three spaces. Beginning from the left there is a two way pedestrian path going in both directions, alongside this is an 80 centimetre high concrete girder that separates the two-directional cycling path from the walking path without obstructing eye contact between passing pedestrians and cyclists (Figures 3.3.17 and 3.3.18).

The bridge itself is a combination of concrete, steel and asphalt. The colour of the cyclist and walking path is black asphalt which appears to be a light grey colour. The middle concrete girder and steel handrails are a very similar shade of grey. At one end of the exits the asphalt path meets a large granite paved rectangular area (Figure 3.3.19 and 3.3.20). At the other end the bridge meets a large granite paved footpath (Figure 3.3.22 and 3.3.23).

To guide the cyclists in the correct lane a white dashed line has been placed down the centre of the path. Upon entering the bridge there are some metal path guides screwed into the concrete paving directing cyclists into the correct path.

PEDESTRIAN PATH

BIKE PATH

Along the Islands Brygge side of the bridge there is a cobble stone road where everyone tends to ride along the smooth paved lanes to avoid the slow and rough ride along the cobblestones. This creates and defines a good separation between the walkers and the cyclists (Figure 3.3.21).

The surface on the bridge and on the entry and exits is in a good condition and there is no cracks or potholes which means that it is safe for cyclists and pedestrians to use.

However when it rains the cobblestones and plastic path guides would become slippery for cyclists and possibly cause accidents.

CONCRETE GIRDER

HAND RAIL

Figure 3.3.17: Bryggebro section.

N

HAVNEHOLMEN

CONCRETE GIRDER

6.5 m

WALKING PATH CYCLIST PATH

190 m

Figure 3.3.18: Bryggebro plan.

144

HAND RAIL

ISLANDS BRYGGE

Figure 3.3.22: Access to Bryggebro from Havenholmen

Figure 3.3.19: Access to Bryggebro from Islands Brygge.

N

ISLANDS BRYGGE

RECTANGULAR GRANITE AREA

WALKNG PATH CYCLIST PATH

SMOOTH PAVED LINES COBBLE STONES

Figure 3.3.20: Access to Bryggebro from Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.21: Islands Brygge promenade

145

HIERARCHY OF USERS The users on the bridge have equal priority for crossing the bridge. However the cyclists have slightly more space which they require to ride comfortably opposite each other (Figure 3.3.24).

The cyclists also demand more space at each end of the bridge as they are consistently swooping in and out of the bridge at high speeds whilst navigating around pedestrians. This can cause some conflicts and clashing between pedestrians and cyclists (Figure 3.3.25).

PEDESTRIANS

CYCLISTS

Figure 3.3.24: Hierarchy between transport modes.

HAVNEHOLMEN

ISLANDS BRYGGE

N

CLASHING AREA BETWEEN CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS

Figure 3.3.25: Bryggebro plan and representation of transport mode conflicts.

146

EVEN AREA

CLASHING AREA BETWEEN CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS

VELOCITIES The bridge has high and low peaks of traffic during the day. Peak hours where the bridge is most populated is in the morning from 7am to 10am when people are on their way to work or school (Figure 3.3.26). Other peak hour times are in the afternoon/evening from 4pm till 7pm when people are on their way home from work and school. During these times it is more difficult for the cyclists to go very fast as the bridge is crowded. However during off peak times cyclists can go faster as there is less traffic, these times are from 10am till 3pm, 7pm till 7am and on the weekends (Figure 3.3.27).

Some problems can arise when exiting the bridge onto the Islands Brygge side. The bridge becomes quite steep allowing cyclists to gain a lot of speed making exiting the bridge somewhat unsafe. This becomes a problem as they then have to make a sharp turn left or right into an on coming traffic of pedestrians and cyclists entering the bridge. Pedestrians walking do not present any problems to the infrastructure as they are moving slowly but they do have to pay a lot of attention of fast moving cyclists at each exit as do pedestrians running (Figure 3.3.28).

Figure 3.3.26: Joggers and cyclists crossing.

Figure 3.3.27: Cyclists riding fast out of the exit of the bridge.

Figure 3.3.28: Walkers have to pay attention from fast moving cyclists exiting.

147

PARKING There is no illegally parked bikes at Bryggebro. However, they can be found in the surrounding area (Figures 3.3.29 and 3.3.30).

Figure 3.3.29: A stray bike parked nearby the bridge.

Figure 3.3.30: Bikes parked under stairs.

148

STREET FURNITURE There are no benches or planters on the bridge. Close to the exits of the bridge bins can be found.

STREET LIGHTS To avoid people feeling unsafe when crossing the bridge at night the bridge is lit up on the paths of the bridge as well as on the bottom of the bridge, guiding cyclists and pedestrians across the bridge in the safest manner possible (Figure 3.3.31 and 3.3.32). The bridges central spine, the girder down the middle, is illuminated by light fixtures incorporated into each of the hand railings. The built in

light in the handrail was chosen as opposed to light poles or posts in order to provide an unobtrusive, hidden illumination source. Besides the white light illuminating the top of the bridge there is a coloured light scheme beneath the bridge.

In the lead up to the bridge along the side of the cobblestone road there are also lamp posts guiding you to the bridge (Figure 3.3.33). Lighting up the bridge not only creates a safe environment for users but also looks pretty glowing and reflecting across the water. The bridge is not lit up at the exits, which could prove to be dangerous for some night users (Figure 3.3.34).

Figure 3.3.31: Bryggebro illumination.

Figure 3.3.33: Lamp posts.

Figure 3.3.32: Bryggebro illumination.

Figure 3.3.34: Bridge exit in the night.

149

SIGNAGE There is signage on both sides of the bridge indicating where the walkers path entrance is and where the cyclists entrance path is, although both utilise good and bad approaches to this communication.

On the Islands Brygge side there is one sign in the middle indicating that cyclists enter to the left of the sign (Figure 3.3.35). On the same side of the bridge to the right there is a sign indicating that walkerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s enter the bridge to the left of the sign (Figure 3.3.36). This can appear somewhat confusing to some pedestrians and cyclists as you can see in Figure 3.3.35, where a cyclist has taken the wrong path and has had to turn backwards to the correct path.

However the Havneholmen side of the bridge utilises a good example of signage, placing the cyclist and walker signs either side of the bridge clearly indicating and defining the entrances. (Figure 3.3.37). These signs also require maintenance, as they are often damaged through graffiti as you can see in Figure 3.3.38 where the arrow has been sprayed over.

Figure 3.3.36: Access from Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.37: Bryggebro access from Havneholmen.

Figure 3.3.35: Cyclist has wrongly entered into the pedestrian lane.

150

Figure 3.3.38: Damaged sign.

PUBLIC ART OR OTHER UNIQUE FEATURES Graffiti can also be found along the bridge, however it seems to be more of an eye sore than adding character to the bridge (Figure 3.3.39 and 3.3.40).

Figure 3.3.39: Graffiti at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.40: Graffiti at Bryggebro.

151

Love padlocks are a custom by which sweethearts affix padlocks to a fence or similar public fixture to symbolise their love. The most common place of love padlocks are on the railings of the bridges. It is suggested that the custom of 'locking a padlock and throwing away the key' probably originated in China. Many can be seen along Bryggebro giving the bridge some cultural and artistic character.

152

Figure 3.3.41: Love padlocks

Figure 3.3.43: Love padlocks

Figure 3.3.42: Love padlocks

Figure 3.3.44: Love padlocks

Figure 3.3.45: Love padlocks.

153

CROSSINGS, INTERSECTIONS The main intersections and crossings occur at the either end of the bridge where the bridge meets the rectangular granite landing which borders a cobblestone road or a granite tiled surface. The intersections function as shared-use spaces. The solution brings conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians. The conflicts are mostly caused by the higher speed of cyclists when approaching the shared -use area.

Figure 3.3.46: Intersection at Islands Brygge.

Figure 3.3.47: Intersection at Havneholmen

154

ACCESSIBILITY The majority of the problems experienced were in the accessibility of driving to the bridge and entering it. As slow moving pedestrians mixed with fast moving cyclists could create conflicts at the entry and exits (Figure 3.3.48, 3.3.49, 3.3.50).

The entry point of the bridge on both sides is made as a shared space. The shared spaces include multiple directions for cyclists and pedestrians (figures from file). The bridge has been built to let small boats, canoes and the harbour ferries pass underneath it. This creates a need for free height underneath the bridge and this has been resolved by creating a rise from both sides towards the middle of the bridges. This makes people exiting the bridge in both directions drive in high speeds from a dedicated bike lane into the shared spaces at the end of both sides of the bridge.

Figure 3.3.48: Bryggebro’s access at Islands Brygge side.

This creates situations where cyclists have to react quite quickly to avoid collisions with other drivers, and makes pedestrians vunerable to enter and exit the bridge.

The landing on the Amager side is a shared space on a field of approximately 7x14 meters paved with granite tiles. Because of its relatively small size people makes their turn towards their new direction within the field. Two directions of dedicated bicycle path on the bridge spreads to four directions on the small shared space landing. This creates crossing of cyclists with no indication of where to drive. On top of that there is a layer of pedestrians entering and leaving the bridge and strolling along the recreational grounds of Islands Brygge.

Figure 3.3.49: Bryggebro’s access at Islands Brygge side.

Further than avoiding collisions with other cyclists and pedestrians, the cyclists also have to read the sign of where to drive. The signs are not oriented towards the cyclists from their entrance paths on the Amager side. They are oriented out in direction of the shared space. When cyclists has to do a 90 degree turn in only a few meters while still observing other cyclists, it can be hard to read the signs at the same time. For most it was not a problem, probably as a result of having used the facility before, but for some it resulted in choosing the wrong side of the bridge and having to drive back.

Figure 3.3.50: Bryggebro’s acces at Islands Brygge side.

155

There is a connection between the shared space landing at the end of the bridge and surrounding bicycle network in the promenade paved with cobblestone. Two narrow paths has been inserted into the cobble stone to make it more accessible for cyclists, but these paths were probably not designed to handle the amount of flow over bridge.

The cobble stone pavement limits cycling to the two paved lanes. These two tracks are shared between cyclists, people with crafts, woman in high heels, disabled people and the elderly with walkers. Furthermore they are placed very close to one another making it difficult to share a path together (Figure 3.3.51).

Figure 3.3.51: Cyclists on the smooth paved lanes.

Cyclists trying to overtake other cyclists on these paths are forced onto the cobblestones, this creates a bumpy ride and whilst observing quite a few chains fell off bikes.

When leaving the two narrow paths to enter the connected bicycle networks, the most commonly used route is to cross a privately owned parking lot. The parking lot is paved with gravel stone (Figure 3.3.53). A temporary asphalt path has been constructed in the middle of the parking lot to increase the accessibility. People tend to drive the shortest way across the gravel stone parking lot when they are leaving from the bridge, while people approaching the bridge tend to use the asphalt path. That makes good sense, as the asphalt path is connected to the bicycle tracks in the facing street.

Figure 3.3.52: Pavement detail fron Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.53: Privately owned parking lot.

156

When entering the side of Havneholmen there is a choice of two routes to go on from (Figure 3.3.54 and 3.3.55). A route around Fisketorvet shopping center on a municipal road and a route passing by in front of it in private land. A lot of people are using the road in front of Fisketorvet as a shortcut through the site even though the path brings a series of obstacles. The shortcut is paved with stones and shared with pedestrians. On the way it has two 90-degree turns. With no directions or marked roadways, the cyclists have to be careful not to collide with other cyclists or pedestrians.

Figure 3.3.54: Bike route linking to the staircases.

The shortcut ends in a staircase connecting Havneholmen to Dybbølsbro (Figure 3.3.54). In a counting conducted on the municipality of Copenhagen on Monday September 7th of September 2009 they found that 3208 would drag their bicycles up and down the stairs. The study does not include how many of these people actually travel over the bridge, but we assume that this was the purpose for the majority of the bikers based on our observations.

The other route around Fisketorvet is around 800 metres long compared to the shortcuts around 300 metres (Figure 3.3.55). That is approximately 2 minutes extra when travelling at 16km/h, but this is relative as the cyclist has to ride up a 250 metre slope to reach same destination as you would reach when using the stairs. This physical challenge could be the reason why so many are willing to step off their bikes and drag them up the stairs (Figure 3.3.54 and 3.3.55).

Figure 3.3.55: Longer bike route avoiding staircases.

For people traveling in southern direction this route easy to use, but for people traveling the same destinations that the shortcut is fitted for it makes. The route is on proper road with asphalt pavement. It has green grass and trees under way and great view conditions. The road is constructed to be a distribution road for buildings in Havneholmen. Cargo bikes are forced to take this route, as they are not suited for dragging up and down stairs (Figure 3.3.57 and 3.3.58).

157

On the Havneholmen side of the bridge there is a granite tiled area in front of a cooperate headquarters. The area is privately owned with the entrance to the bridge being privately funded (Figure 3.3.56). This solution could indicate that a higher emphasis has been set on aesthetics for its own headquarter than on creating good bicycle conditions.

The bicycle path indicates that there is only one way out of the area one leading to the commercial co financer of the bridge and the shopping center Fisketorvet. People driving to the road around Fisketorvet has to cross this main flow with no indication of direction marked or entrance points.

Figure 3.3.56: Bryggebro entering from the Havneholmen side.

Figure 3.3.57: Foot bridge to make the trip shorter.

Figure 3.3.58: Cyclists pushing their bikes up the stairs.

158

BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND USES The surrounding areas of Bryggebro includes a mixture of residential and commercial buildings. The Islands Brygge mostly residential side comprises of mostly urban living with some commercial buildings. However the Havneholmen side is residential and commercial comprising of mostly commercial buildings and Dybbølsbro which is one of the main train stations in the core of the city (Figure 3.3.59).

Figure 3.3.59: Built environment surrounding Bryggebro on the Islands Brygge side.

159

Total number of cyclists in a day in September from 2006 to 2010 8000

6000

4000

2000

CYCLIST COUNTINGS NUMBER OF CYCLISTS

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

7-8

8-9

7-8

700 bikes

Figure 3.3.60: Cyclist countings. Source: Copenhagen Municipality.

160

9-10

8-9

1190 bikes

10-11

11-12

13-14

350 bikes

12-1

13

Total number of cyclists per hour in a day in September from 2006 to 2010 2006 2007

1200

2008 2009 2010

1000

800

600

400

200

6-7

13-14

14-15

16-17

1150 bikes

15-16

7-8

8-9

16-17

9-10

10-11

11-12

12-13

13-14

17-18

14-15

15-16

16-17

17-18

18-19

18-19

HOURS

18-19

500 bikes

161

THE WEB SURVEY The web survey analysis is divided in four sections. Firstly, main findings are presented. The second section describes the spatial distribution of the residential location of the respondents. Thirdly, a descriptive statistic to analyze all the answers. In search of finding relationships between socio-demographic variables and the web survey answers, the last section presents a statistical analysis using the Chi2 test.

A total of 290 individuals that were riding a bike at Bryggebro on the 1st of September answered the questionnaire in the period between September 1st and October 31st.

Based on the count done in Copenhagen municipality in September 2009, there are an average of 7352 bicycle trips at Bryggebro from 7am until 7pm from both directions on weekdays. Estimating that 35% of these cyclists ride their bikes at least once per day in the infrastructure, it was stipulated that a total of 4778 individuals ride a bike at Bryggebro per day.

A total of 3020 flyers were distributed to individuals riding their bikes in the infrastructure from 7am until 7pm and from these a total of 290 answered the questionnaire.

Based on these figures, the respondents represents 6,06% of the total of individuals riding a bike per day in the infrastructure and 9,60% of individuals that collected the flyer on September 1st whilst riding a bike in the infrastructure.

162

MAIN FINDINGS

RESIDENTIAL LOCATION OF RESPONDENTS

In conclusion the data from the survey reveals a picture of Bryggebro as a piece of infrastructure used by the majority of the cyclists for commuting to work (69%) and to study (8%). However, the main purpose of the trips from the left 23% is very diverse (19% shopping, 3% recreational, 6% visiting family and friends and 4% others). The figures are directly connected to the built environment were the infrastructure is located – a main streets in a residential based neighborhood next to the city core.

The residential addresses of the respondents – individuals riding a bike at Bryggebro on September 1 – were registered and geo-referenced in order to produce a map (see Figures 3.3.60 and 3.3.61). According to the Table 3.3.1, the majority of the respondents (59,7%) live within a radius of 2 kilometres and 90% of them living within 5 kilometres distance from the infrastructure.

After the Chi2 test was applied, the results highlight that most of the answers do not have a relation with socio-demographic conditions. However, some representative relations between the independent variables – gender, age and educational level – and the questionnaire answers were identified.

Respondents living more than 5 kilometers from the infrastructure correspond to 10% of the total and from this amount 30% are living more than 10 kilometres away of the infrastructure.

There is a relation between the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Bryggebro and age and educational level.

The impact of the opening of Bryggebro in the individuals decision to ride a bike more often has also a relation educational level. Finally, educational level also seems to have a relation with the individuals` answers on regards their opinion about conflicts between the different transportation modes in the infrastructure.

Finally, there is a relation between gender and individuals`s opinion about the lack of awareness of pedestrians for cyclists in the infrastructure.

The following section provides the actual data for each of the questions asked.

NO. DWELLINGS % DWELLINGS

0-1 KM

1-2 KM

2-3 KM

3-4 KM

4-5 KM

95 32,8%

78 26,9%

43 14,8%

29 10,0%

16 5,5%

5-10 KM 19 6,6%

10-15 KM 5 1,7%

15-20 KM 4 1,4%

20 KM< 1 0,3%

Table 3.3.1: Absolute and percentage distribution of respondents according to the distance of their residential location from Bryggebro.

163

10 km

5 km

4 km

3 km

2 km

1 km

N Figure 3.3.61: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 5km map.

164

30 km

20 km

15 km

10 km

5 km

N Figure 3.3.62: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 20km

165

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AGE

EDUCATION LEVEL EDUCATION

AGE

LEVEL

50%

35%

45%

30%

40%

25%

35% 30%

20%

25%

15%

20% 15%

10%

10%

5%

5% 0%

0% NO ANSWER

00 - 10 YEARS

11 - 20 YEARS

21 - 30 YEARS

31 - 40 YEARS

41 - 50 YEARS

51 - 60 YEARS

NO ANSWER

61 - 70 YEARS

PUBLIC SCHOOL

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

HIGH SCHOOL

SHORT HIGHER

MEDIUM HIGHER

LONG HIGHER

EDUCATION

EDUCATION

EDUCATION

Figure 3.3.63: Distribution of the respondents by age groups.

Figure 3.3.65: Distribution of the respondents by educational level.

The majority of the respondents at Bryggebro are between 31-40 years old (32%), followed closely by respondents aged 21-30 (24%) and aged 41-50 (21%). Older respondents ranged from 51-60 years old (14%) and 61-70 years old (5%). Younger respondents were aged between 11-20 (2%). There were no respondents aged between 0-10 years old. 2% of the respondents gave no answer.

A large majority of respondents answered that they have attended a high education, for either a long high education (46%) or medium high education (31%). 8% of the respondents answered that they had attended a higher education for a short amount of time, and another 7% of respondents answered they had a vocational education.

3% had receiving a public school education. 1% of the respondents gave no answer. Bryggebroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; cyclists therefore seems to be commuting to jobs that require a high level of education.

GENDER

RIDING HOW A BIKE ATDO BRYGGEBRO OFTEN YOU BIKE ON BRYGGEBROEN?

G E N DE R

45%

1%

40% 35% 30% 25%

50%

49%

NO ANSWER

20%

MAN

15%

WOMEN

10% 5% 0% NO ANSWER 6-7 DAYS OF 5 DAYS OF 3-4 DAYS OF 1-2 DAYS OF 1-3 DAYS OF WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK MONTHS

166

MORE RARELY

Figure 3.3.64: Distribution of the respondents by gender.

Figure 3.3.66: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bicycle at

Bryggebro.

When asked about their gender, 50% of the respondents were women and 49% were men, with 1% giving no answer.

When asked how often they ride a bike at the site, a majority of the respondents said that they use the bridge 5 days per week (39%). 19% used the site 6-7 days per week, 18% said 3-4 days per week, 10% said 1-2 days per week and 8% said 1-3 days per month. Finally, 4% answered that they ride a bike at the site less than once per month. 2% of the respondents did not answers.

HOW OFTEN DO YOU GO ON BRYGGEBROEN WITHOUT BIKE? WALKING AT BRYGGEBRO

HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE THE BIKE FOR THE PURPOSE IN THE PREVIUS QUESTION AFTER THE OPENING OF FREQUENCY OFBRYGGEBROEN? TRIPS TO THE MAIN PURPOSE 1%

70%

1%

1%

60% 50%

No answer

28%

More rarely

40%

Not as often

30%

Just as often as before 20%

56%

13%

10%

More often Much more often

0% NO ANSWER 6-7 DAYS OF 5 DAYS OF 3-4 DAYS OF 1-2 DAYS OF 1-3 DAYS OF WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK MONTHS

MORE RARELY

Figure 3.3.67: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they walk at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.69: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68 after Bryggebro’s opening.

Respondents were asked how often they walk at Bryggebro without bike. A majority of respondents answered less than once per month (59%). 22% walked on Bryggebro 1-3 days a month, 9% answered 1-2 days a week, 7% answered 3-4 days a week. Finally, 2% stated that they walked across the bridge 6-7 days a week. This data highlights that most of Bryggebro’s cyclists do not use the site for walking.

Respondents were asked how often they use their bikes for the purpose in the previous question after Bryggebro’s opening. 56 % of the respondents answered just as often as before. Notably 29% of respondents stated that they bike for that purpose much more often than before and 13% said more often than before. Only 2 % answered to travel less often or much less often 1 % of the respondents gave no answer. This data indicates that Bryggebro has had an impact on the amount of travelers, and has generated more bike trips, proving the latent demand of the bridge. .

WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE MAIN TRIP PURPOSE

SATISFACTION WITH BRYGGEBRO

1% 8%

ON BRYGGEBROEN?

HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH BRYGGEBROEN? 2%

NO ANSWER

4%

8%

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM WORK

9%

1%

4% NO ANSWER

RECREATION / LEISURE

VERY DISSATISFIED DISSATISFIED

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS

6% 3%

PURCHASING / SHOPPING

69%

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM SCHOOL

56%

29%

NEUTRAL SATISFIED VERY SATISFIED

OTHERS

Figure 3.3.68: Distribution of the respondents by main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.70: Distribution of the respondents by the level of satisfaction with Bryggebro’s design.

When asked for what purpose the respondents use Bryggebro, 69% answered they use the infrastructure for commuting to and from work. 9% use Bryggebro for shopping, 8% use it to commute to school, 6% answered to see friends or family, 3% for recreation, 4% said other purposes. 1% of the respondents gave no answer. This figure again solidifies Bryggebro’s purpose as infrastructure mostly used for commuting.

When asked how satisfied they were with Bryggebro, 56% responded to be very satisfied with the infrastructure. 29% stated to be satisfied, and 4% were neutral.

Of the rest, 1% said they were dissatisfied and 8% said they were very dissatisfied. 2% of the respondents gave no answer. This figure shows that most cyclists appreciate Bryggebro, but there are a few users who have major concerns with the design.

167

BRYGGEBRO`S DESIGN SAFETY AND SAFETY

BRYGGEBRO`S DESIGN AND/ AESTHETICS AESTHETICS BEAUTY

70%

70%

60%

60%

50%

50%

40%

40%

30%

30%

20%

20% 10%

10%

0%

0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

-10%

NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.3.71: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Figure 3.3.73: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Users were asked about the quality regarding the safety needs of the infrastructure. A majority of respondents answered that the design did a good job (49%) and 23% thought it did a very good job. 16% were neutral on the issue. 10% stated that it did a bad job and only 1% said the safety was very bad. 1% of the respondents gave no answer. These responses appear to say that while users are satisfied with the design of Bryggebro, the safety could only be better to a small degree.

When asked about the beauty of Bryggebroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s design, the majority of respondents stated that it either did a very good (36%) or a good job (46%). 13% answered they were neutral on the design. Few of the respondents said it did poorly (2%), very poorly (1%). And 1% of the respondents gave no answer in regards to beauty. This figure indicates that users do notice the design of the bridge, and believe it adds to the cityscape.

BRYGGEBRO`S DESIGN AND FAST CONNECTIVITY FAST CONNECTION

ILLEGALLY PARKED BICYCLES

IL L E G AL L Y PAR K E D B ICY CL E S

70%

3%

1%

1%

2%

60%

7%

50%

NO ANSWER 40%

NOT PROBLEMATIC A BIT PROBLEMATIC

30%

PROBLEMATIC

20%

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

10%

MAJOR PROLEM

86%

0% NO ANSWER

168

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.3.72: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Figure 3.3.74: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Respondents were asked if they thought the design of Bryggebro was facilitating as a fast connections, and the majority responded that it did a very good (59%) or a good job (32%). 4% respondents were neutral on the issue.

Very few stated that it did a bad job (3%) or a very bad (1%). 1% of the respondents gave no answer. From this figure, it is clear that Bryggebro does a good job of facilitating fast connections across the harbour.

Users were asked if they thought that illegally parked bicycles were a problem at Bryggebro. A majority of respondents (86%) said that they were not a problem. On the other hand, 7% said it was a small problem, 3% said it was problematic, 1% said it was quite problematic, and 1% said it was very problematic. 2% of the respondents gave no answer. This figure shows that the design mitigate the problems with illegally parked bicycles.

E X C E E D I N G BETWEEN T H E B O U N DDIFFERENT A R I E S O F B I CTRANSPORT Y CL E PATHS, CONFLICT S I DE W A L K S A N D L A N E S MODES

PAVEMENT PROBLEMS

P A V E ME N T P R O B L E MS

1%

2%

9%

7% NO ANSWER

12%

4% NO ANSWER

9%

NOT PROBLEMATIC

35%

NOT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC

15%

PROBLEMATIC

16%

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

62%

MAJOR PROLEM

MAJOR PROLEM

28% Figure 3.3.75: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s accesses.

Figure 3.3.77: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

The responses covered a wide range. 35% of the respondents answered that it was not a problematic. However, 28% stated it was a bit problematic, 15% claimed it was problematic, 12% said it was quite a problem, and 9% responded that it was a major problem. 1% of the respondents gave no answer. This range shows that the shared sidewalks can be a confusing space, and the majority of respondents see it as somewhat problematic.

When asked whether they thought surface issues like potholes were a problem at Bryggebro, 62% of the responses said it was not a problem. 16% stated that it was a small problem, 9% claimed it was problematic, 7% said it was quite a problem, and 4% responded that it was a major problem. 2% of the respondents gave no answer. This figure shows that cyclists are satisfied with the pavement material from Bryggebro and the infrastructure has been well maintained, but conditions will have to be monitored as the structure ages.

OBSTACLES

C R A C K S A N D R A MP S O N IN T E R S E C T IO N S CRACKS IN RAMPS AND INTERSECTIONS

OB STACL ES

2%

2% 5%

11%

10% NO ANSWER NOT PROBLEMATIC

10%

39%

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

49% 24%

NO ANSWER

11%

PROBLEMATIC

NOT PROBLEMATIC A BIT PROBLEMATIC PROBLEMATIC

12%

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

MAJOR PROLEM

MAJOR PROLEM

25% Figure 3.3.76: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against cyclists at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.78: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.

Respondents were asked whether they thought obstacles at Bryggebro were an issue. The responses again covered a wide range, with the largest percentage of respondents (49%) saying it was not a problem. 24% stated that is was a small problem, 10% claimed it was problematic, 10% said it was quite a problem, and 5% responded that it was a major problem. 2% of the respondents gave no answer. This figure shows that 48% of users see obstacles as being an issue to some degree at Bryggebro.

Users were asked whether they thought cracks were a problem in ramps and intersections. 39% of the responses said it was not a problem at Bryggebro. 25% thought that it was a small problem, 12% claimed it was problematic, 11% said it was quite a problem, and another 11% responded that this was a major problem. 2% of the respondents gave no answer. These results show that cracks in ramps and intersections are a concern for the majority of users of Bryggebro, one that could be fixed with maintenance.

169

AWARENESS OF PEDESTRIANS FOR PEOPLE L A C K O F A W A R E N E S S F O R T H E S U R R O U N DI N G P E O P L E RIDING A BIKE

SCENIC

POOR GR EENER Y 3% 2%

3%

5%

5% 8%

8%

NO ANSWER

NO ANSWER

NOT PROBLEMATIC

NOT PROBLEMATIC

13% 41%

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

PROBLEMATIC

23%

PROBLEMATIC

59%

QUITE PROBLEMATIC

QUITE PROBLEMATIC MAJOR PROLEM

MAJOR PROLEM

30%

Figure 3.3.79: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.81: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Bryggebro.

Respondents were asked whether they thought lack of awareness of pedestrians for cyclists was an issue. A majority of respondents thought it was not a problem (41%) or it was a small problem (30%). 13% stated it was problematic, 8% said it was quite a problem, and 5% responded that this was a major problem. 3% of the respondents gave no answer. This figure shows that for the majority of users lack of awareness by other users was somewhat of an issue.

When asked whether they thought poor scenic landscaping was an issue at Bryggebro, 59% of the responses said it was not a problem. However, 23% said it was a small problem, 8% stated it was problematic, 5% said it was quite a problem, and 3% responded that this was a major problem. 2% of the respondents gave no answer.

The figure shows a great coherence with previous question of poor signposting and interpretation.

SIGNPOSTING AND ITS INTERPRETATION POOR S IG NPOS T ING AND INT E R PR E T A T ION

A R E Y O U B IK IN G MO R E O F T E N A F T E R T H E O P E N IN G O F BIKING MORE OFTEN AFTER BRYGGEBRO INTERB R Y GGEB R OEN? VENTION 2%

3% 2% 5% 8%

NO ANSWER

30%

NOT PROBLEMATIC

NO ANSWER

A BIT PROBLEMATIC

23% 59%

170

YES

PROBLEMATIC

NO

QUITE PROBLEMATIC MAJOR PROLEM

68%

Figure 3.3.80: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.82: Distribution of the respondents based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

When asked whether poor signage was an issue at Bryggebro, 59% of the responses said it was not a problem. On the other hand, 23% said it was a small problem, 8% stated it was problematic, 5% said it was quite a problem, and 3% responded that this was a major problem.

2% of the respondents gave no answer.

When asked whether they bike more often after Bryggebro opened, 68% said they have not biked more often.

However, 30% of the respondents said that they were biking more often after the bridge opened. 2% of the respondents gave no answer. This figure shows that Bryggebro has increased ridership for a third of all users. This is evidence of a strong impact dedicated cycling facilities that enhance fast connectivity can have on trip generation.

H O W I MP O R T A N T I S S T R E E T DE S I G N (G R E E N A R E A S ,

I F Y E SINFLUENCING , W H A T Q U A L I T I E S ATO B O U TRIDE B R Y G GA E BBIKE R OEN HAS QUALITIES

STREET AE BIKE L I G DESIGN H T I N G , E T CINFLUENCING . ) F O R Y O U R D E C I STO I O N RIDE TO TAK THE

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

35%

I N F L U E N C E D Y O U R C H O I C E O F B I K I N G MO R E O F T E N ?

B IK E ?

30% 25% 20% 15%

IN G

ES

K PA

R

B

0%

E

F

IK

NO ANSWER

NOT AT ALL

NOT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPROTANT

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT IMPORTANT

VERY IMPORTANT IMPROTANT

TE

B

O E C N

5%

M

A

IN

R TE

IK

A

G

N A

G SI

E V TI

ET B

M E

IK B

ST N

N LA

PO

SC

A

IN

PE

E ED

D

W N EE

R G

EC AT T

R

IK B ER

ST

G

ES LA N

EA R

E

A ER

R

EE FA

B ER

N

IK G

ID

S

ES LA N E

O C ER W

ST FA

PS

N TI

N N

N

PE

R

EC

IE

FE SA

EX D O O G A

O

C

TY

E

10%

Figure 3.3.83: Among the respondents that said yes in the previous question (Figure 3.3.82), what qualities has influenced their choice to ride a bike more often after the opening of Bryggebro. The respondents could choice more than one option.

Figure 3.3.84: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Respondents were asked what aspect of the intervention make them ride their bike more often, the largest portion of users stated that faster connections (41%) made the largest impact. 13% responded saying fast bicycle lanes made them ride more often, and 9% stated attractive landscaping made an impact for them. 34 stated they ride more often at Bryggebro because the pleasant experience and 4% replied wide bike lanes made the difference for them. From this data the most important factors that influenced the amount users ride was the faster trips that resulted from the infrastructure.

Users were asked, how important is street design in your decision to ride your bicycle. The largest portion of respondents answered saying that street design was important (33%), 29% were neutral on the issue, 20% said it was not important, and 11% said it was not important at all. Only 17% respondents stated that it was a very important factor for them. This figure shows that while streetscapes are not a critical factor in bicycle use, they are still important and noticed by users.

H A T D O Y OSOLUTIONS U T H I N K O F T H EAT D E SBRYGGEBRO IG N S OL U T IONS STREETW DESIGN

T H A T A R E A P P L I E D T O B R Y G G E B R O E N (G R E E N A R E A S , L I G H T I N G , E T C .)?

45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% NO ANSWER

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

Figure 3.3.85: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

When asked for their opinion on the design solution applied to Bryggebro, most respondents replied that it was a good solution (42%) or that they were neutral on the issue (36%). 11% believed it was a very good design solution. On ther other hand, 7% thought it was poor and 4% responded very poor. 1% of the respondents gave no answer.

171

RELATIONS BETWEEN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND WEBSURVEY ANSWERS The Chi2 test was applied to identify possible relations between the socio-demographics (independent variables) of the sample and their answers from the web survey (dependable variables). Considering the nature of the studied variables – the majority of them are nominal – the Chi2 test was selected to this analysis.

The Chi2 test is about finding out if there is a connection between the variables. It is about testing the nul hypothesis.

H0 says that the variables are statistic independent and HA says the variables are statistic dependent. To the test we set a α-level at 0,05. In the case of the p-value is under that, we can’t reject the nul hypothesis.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND RIDING A BIKE AT BRYGGEBRO 6-7 DAYS/ WEEK 27 26 53

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

5 DAYS/ WEEK 53 57 110

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK 24 28 52

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK 15 14 29

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS 12 12 24

MORE RARELY 7 4 11

TOTAL 138 141 279

Table 3.3.2: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.2, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 1,293 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

3 6 4 4 16 21 54

1 8 3 11 36 51 110

1 3 3 4 13 28 52

1 2 1 1 8 16 29

1 1 0 0 12 10 24

1 0 1 3 5 1 11

TOTAL 8 20 12 23 90 127 280

Table 3.3.3: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.3, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 28,344 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

1 14 15 11 8 4 53

1 21 41 27 13 6 109

1 19 16 8 4 4 52

1 5 14 5 4 0 29

1 3 5 8 7 0 24

1 2 3 2 2 1 11

TOTAL 6 64 94 61 38 15 278

Table 3.3.4: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.4, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 28,288 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 12. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

172

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND WALKING AT BRYGGEBRO 6-7 DAYS/ WEEK 2 3 2

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

5 DAYS/ WEEK 1 0 1

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK 8 11 19

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK 12 14 26

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS 24 37 61

MORE RARELY 9 78 170

TOTAL 139 143 282

Table 3.3.5: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they walk at Bryggebro

Out of the Table 3.3.5, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,695 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 8. The P value is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

6-7 DAYS/WEEK

5 DAYS/WEEK

3-4 DAYS /WEEK

1-2 DAYS /WEEK

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS

MORE RARELY

TOTAL

0 1 0 0 2 2 5

0 0 0 0 0 1 1

2 1 2 2 2 10 19

2 1 1 3 10 9 26

2 7 1 5 18 28 61

2 10 8 13 58 80 171

8 20 12 23 90 130 283

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

Table 3.3.6: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they walk at Bryggebro

Out of the Table 3.3.6, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,379 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

6-7 DAYS/ WEEK

5 DAYS/ WEEK

3-4 DAYS/ WEEK

1-2 DAYS/ WEEK

0 2 2 1 0 0 5

0 0 0 1 0 0 1

1 5 5 3 3 2 19

1 4 11 3 5 2 26

1-3 DAYS/ MONTHS 1 16 24 11 2 5 59

MORE RARELY

TOTAL

3 40 51 43 29 5 171

6 67 93 62 39 14 281

Table 3.3.7: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they walk at Bryggebro

Out of the Table 3.3.7, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 23,805 with a degree of freedom (df) 25 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND MAIN TRIP PURPOSE

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 104 92 196

RECREATION / LEISURE 4 5 9

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS 4 14 18

PURCHASING / SHOPPING 13 13 26

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 7 16 23

OTHERS

TOTAL

7 4 11

139 144 283

Table 3.3.8: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.8, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 10,656 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 7. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

173

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 4 17 6 19 58 92 196

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

RECREATION/ LEISURE 1 2 1 0 4 1 9

VISIT FAMILY/ FRIENDS 0 0 0 1 6 11 18

PURCHASING/ SHOPPING 2 0 1 3 13 8 27

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 0 0 4 0 4 15 23

OTHERS

TOTAL

1 1 0 0 5 4 11

8 20 12 23 90 131 284

Table 3.3.9: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.9, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 10,656 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 7. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

TRANS. TO AND FROM WORK 0 39 70 53 27 5 194

RECREATION/ LEISURE 1 1 2 1 2 2 9

VISIT FAMILY/ FRIENDS 0 8 4 3 2 1 18

PURCHASING/ SHOPPING 1 3 12 2 5 4 27

TRANS. TO AND FROM SCHOOL 3 15 4 0 1 0 23

OTHERS

TOTAL

1 0 2 3 2 3 11

6 66 94 62 39 15 282

Table 3.3.10: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro

Out of the Table 3.3.10, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 91,975 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is less than 0,001. Therefore, the variables are very dependent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND FREQUENCY OF TRIPS TO THE MAIN PURPOSE

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

2 1 3

1 1 2

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 85 75 160

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

19 17 36

32 50 82

139 144 283

Table 3.3.11: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Table 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.11, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 4,934 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

1 0 0 1 0 1 3

0 0 0 0 1 1 2

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 4 9 5 18 48 76 160

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

0 1 2 1 13 19 36

3 9 5 3 29 34 83

8 19 12 23 91 131 284

Table 3.3.12: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Table 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.12, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 26,838 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 6. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

174

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

1 0 0 1 1 0 3

0 1 1 0 0 0 2

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 4 39 53 35 19 9 159

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

0 12 8 5 8 3 36

1 15 31 21 11 3 82

6 67 93 62 39 15 282

Table 3.3.13: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Table 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.13, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 28,606 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. is between 0,100 and 0,050, but very close to 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND SATISFACTION WITH BRYGGEBRO

MORE RARELY

NOT AS OFTEN

2 1 3

1 1 2

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

JUST AS OFTEN AS BEFORE 85 75 160

MORE OFTEN

MUCH MORE OFTEN

TOTAL

19 17 36

32 50 82

139 144 283

Table 3.3.14: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.14, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,259 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED 0 2 3 0 8 9 22

DISSATISFIED 0 1 0 0 1 2 4

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 0 0 2 3 5 10

0 5 2 8 30 38 83

8 11 7 12 48 77 163

8 19 12 22 90 131 282

Table 3.3.15: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.15, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,081 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY DISSATISFIED 0 5 10 3 2 2 22

DISSATISFIED

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 1 1 2 0 0 4

0 3 1 3 3 0 10

0 25 28 17 10 3 83

6 32 54 36 24 9 161

6 66 94 61 39 14 280

Table 3.3.16: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.16, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,233 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

175

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF BRYGGEBRO`S DESIGN ON SAFETY VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

3 0 3

14 14 28

18 29 47

69 69 138

36 31 67

140 143 283

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

Table 3.3.17: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the cyclist safety aspect.

Out of the Table 3.3.17, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,916 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 7. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 0 0 1 1 1 3

0 3 1 2 12 10 28

1 5 2 5 17 17 47

3 7 5 11 42 71 139

4 4 4 4 19 32 67

8 19 12 23 91 131 284

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

Table 3.3.18: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the cyclist safety aspect.

Out of the Table 3.3.18, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 14,293 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 6. P is bigger than 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 1 1 1 0 0 3

0 8 10 4 3 3 28

0 10 15 13 7 2 47

4 30 48 29 22 6 139

2 18 20 14 7 4 65

6 67 94 61 39 15 282

Table 3.3.19: Distribution of the respondents by age group according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the cyclist safety aspect.

Out of the Table 3.3.19, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 9,124 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF BRYGGEBRO`S DESIGN ON FAST CONNECTIVITY

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 3 3

4 4 8

4 8 12

45 48 93

87 80 167

140 143 283

Table 3.3.20: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the Table 3.3.20, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 4,692 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

176

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 2 0 0 0 1 3

0 0 1 0 2 5 8

0 0 1 1 5 5 12

1 4 3 10 28 48 94

7 13 7 12 56 72 167

8 19 12 23 91 131 284

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

Table 3.3.21: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the Table 3.3.21, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 28,493 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 6. P is between 0,100 and 0,050, but very close to 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 1 2 0 0 0 3

0 3 2 1 2 0 8

0 5 4 2 1 0 12

2 21 33 25 10 2 93

4 37 53 33 26 13 166

6 67 94 61 39 15 282

Table 3.3.22: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Out of the Table 3.3.22, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 14,424 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT BRYGGEBRO`S AESTHETICS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

1 1 2

3 3 6

22 15 37

63 70 133

50 54 104

139 143 282

Table 3.3.23: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table3.3.23, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 1,790 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 0 1 0 0 1 2

0 0 0 1 3 2 6

3 3 2 1 13 16 38

3 9 4 14 44 59 133

2 7 5 7 30 53 104

8 19 12 23 90 131 283

Table 3.3.24: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table 3.3.24, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,483 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

177

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 2 0 0 0 0 2

0 0 1 2 3 0 6

2 6 20 5 4 1 38

2 31 45 34 14 7 133

2 28 28 20 18 6 102

6 67 94 61 39 14 281

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

Table 3.3.25: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Out of the Table 3.3.25, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 29,093 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT ILLEGALLY PARKED BICYCLES

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 123 124 247

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 12 8 20

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 1 2

PROBLEMATIC 2 6 8

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

1 3 4

139 142 281

Table 3.3.26: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.26, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,772 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

7 15 10 21 77 177 247

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 0 3 2 1 9 5 20

PROBLEMATIC 1 1 0 0 4 2 8

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 0 0 1 2 3

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 0 0 1 0 3 4

8 19 12 23 91 129 282

Table 3.3.27: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.27, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 18,216 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 5 57 87 55 29 12 245

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 6 2 5 6 0 20

PROBLEMATIC 0 2 2 1 2 1 8

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 1 1 0 1 3

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 2 1 0 1 0 4

TOTAL 6 67 93 62 38 14 280

Table 3.3.28: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.28, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,664 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

178

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT CONFLICT BETWEEN DIFFERENT TRANSPORT MODES

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 56 44 100

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 37 44 81

PROBLEMATIC 20 21 41

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 12 23 35

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

13 12 25

138 144 282

Table 3.3.29: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.29, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 5,441 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 8. P is between 0,250 and 0,100, but very close to 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

2 7 4 8 37 43 101

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 6 4 2 6 24 39 81

PROBLEMATIC 0 5 5 1 13 17 41

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 1 1 6 6 21 35

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 1 0 2 11 11 25

8 18 12 23 91 131 283

Table 3.3.30: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.30, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 32,020 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 7. P is between 0,050 and 0,025. Therefore, the variables are dependent

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 3 20 38 23 9 7 100

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 23 27 17 11 1 81

PROBLEMATIC 1 9 8 14 5 3 40

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 8 14 3 10 0 35

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 7 6 5 4 3 25

TOTAL 6 67 93 62 39 14 281

Table 3.3.31: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.31, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 23,805 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,250 and 0,100, but very close to 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT OBSTACLES AGAINST CYCLISTS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 74 66 140

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 28 42 70

PROBLEMATIC 16 11 27

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 14 14 28

MAJOR PROBLEM 7 9 16

TOTAL 139 142 281

Table 3.3.32: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.32, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 4,402 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

179

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

4 8 7 12 43 67 141

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 4 5 4 3 27 27 70

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 0 2 11 15 28

PROBLEMATIC 0 4 1 2 6 14 27

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 2 0 3 3 8 16

8 19 12 22 90 131 282

Table 3.3.33: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.33, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,378 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 3 25 52 35 19 5 139

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 17 17 16 13 4 70

PROBLEMATIC 0 10 10 4 2 1 27

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 10 10 3 3 2 28

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 5 4 3 2 2 16

TOTAL 6 67 93 61 39 14 280

Table 3.3.34: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.34, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 19,842 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT THE PAVEMENT

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 88 89 177

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 21 23 44

PROBLEMATIC 13 14 27

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 11 8 19

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

6 6 12

139 140 279

Table 3.3.35: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.35, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 0,604 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

5 14 9 12 56 82 178

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 2 1 4 14 21 44

PROBLEMATIC 1 3 1 3 8 11 27

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 0 1 0 7 11 19

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 0 0 3 3 6 12

8 19 12 22 88 131 280

Table 3.3.36: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.36, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 13,957 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

180

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 3 38 68 39 21 7 176

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 12 8 11 9 2 44

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 7 4 3 3 2 19

PROBLEMATIC 1 6 9 7 2 2 27

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 3 3 2 3 1 12

TOTAL 6 66 92 62 38 14 278

Table 3.3.37 Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.37, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 16,722 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 12. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT CRACKS IN RAMPS AND INTERSECTIONS

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 56 57 113

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 37 33 70

PROBLEMATIC 16 18 34

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 14 17 31

MAJOR PROBLEM 14 19 33

TOTAL 137 144 281

Table 3.3.38: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersectios is at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.38, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 1,229 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

A BIT QUITE PROBLEMAJOR TOTAL PROBLEPROBLEMATIC PROBLEM MATIC MATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL 4 3 1 0 0 8 VOCATIONAL EDUC. 4 7 5 3 0 19 HIGH SCHOOL 6 4 1 0 1 12 SHORT HIGHER EDUC. 8 3 4 4 4 23 MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. 42 17 12 9 11 91 LONG HIGHER EDUC. 49 37 11 15 17 129 TOTAL 113 71 34 31 33 282 Table 3.3.39: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.

NOT PROBLEMATIC

Out of the Table 3.3.39, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,754 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 2 20 48 25 13 4 112

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 4 20 14 17 12 3 70

PROBLEMATIC 0 5 15 7 6 1 34

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 10 8 8 2 3 31

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 10 9 5 5 4 33

TOTAL 6 65 94 62 38 15 280

Table 3.3.40: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.40, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 29,037 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

181

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT AWARENESS OF PEDESTRIANS FOR PEOPLE RIDING A BIKE

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 56 57 113

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 37 33 70

PROBLEMATIC 16 18 34

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 14 17 31

MAJOR PROBLEM 14 19 33

TOTAL 137 144 281

Table 3.3.41: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.41, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 11,754 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 13. P is between 0,025 and 0,010. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

5 5 5 8 39 56 118

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 2 7 4 9 25 38 85

PROBLEMATIC 0 1 2 2 14 18 37

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 4 1 2 6 9 22

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

1 1 0 2 6 6 16

8 18 12 23 90 127 278

Table 3.3.42: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.42, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 13,796 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 12. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 4 21 45 30 13 5 118

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 0 26 31 13 10 4 84

PROBLEMATIC 1 8 11 8 6 2 36

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 7 3 6 5 1 22

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 4 3 4 3 2 16

TOTAL 5 66 93 61 37 14 276

Table 3.3.43: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.43, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 20,198 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 14. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT SIGNPOSTING AND ITS INTERPRETATION

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 89 80 169

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 30 36 66

PROBLEMATIC 8 15 23

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 7 6 13

MAJOR PROBLEM 3 5 8

TOTAL 137 142 279

Table 3.3.44: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.44, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,644 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

182

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

4 9 6 11 57 83 170

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 8 4 6 18 27 66

PROBLEMATIC 0 0 1 4 10 8 23

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 1 0 1 3 7 13

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 1 0 1 2 4 8

8 19 11 23 90 129 280

Table 3.3.45: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.45, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 16,409 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 3 40 54 38 23 10 168

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 3 9 24 17 11 2 66

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 0 6 5 0 2 0 13

PROBLEMATIC 0 11 6 4 1 1 23

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 1 3 2 1 1 8

TOTAL 6 67 92 61 38 14 278

Table 3.3.46: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.46, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 22,884 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 12. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT SCENIC

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 75 93 168

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 39 28 66

PROBLEMATIC 16 7 23

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 5 9 14

MAJOR PROBLEM 4 5 9

TOTAL 138 142 280

Table 3.3.47: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.47, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 8,164 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is between 0,100 and 0,050. Therefore, the variables are independent.

NOT PROBLEMATIC PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

6 13 9 14 47 79 168

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 4 1 3 25 32 66

PROBLEMATIC 0 1 1 4 8 9 23

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 0 1 1 5 7 15

MAJOR PROBLEM

TOTAL

0 1 0 0 4 4 9

8 19 12 22 89 131 281

Table 3.3.48: Distribution of the respondents by educational level gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.48, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 13,169 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 9. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

183

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT PROBLEMATIC 3 40 53 41 23 6 166

A BIT PROBLEMATIC 1 19 24 12 8 2 66

PROBLEMATIC 1 1 8 7 4 2 23

QUITE PROBLEMATIC 1 4 4 1 3 2 15

MAJOR PROBLEM 0 2 3 1 1 2 9

TOTAL 6 66 92 62 39 14 279

Table 3.3.49: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.49, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,015 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 11. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND BIKING MORE OFTEN AFTER BRYGGEBRO`S OPENING

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

41 45 86

97 97 194

138 142 280

Table 3.3.50: Distribution of the respondents by gender based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.50, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 0,129 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

5 10 4 3 24 40 86

3 10 7 20 64 91 195

8 20 11 23 88 131 281

Table 3.3.51: Distribution of the respondents by educational level based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.51, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 11,346 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 9. P is between 0,050 and 0,025, but close to 0,050. Therefore, the variables are dependent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

YES

NO

TOTAL

4 15 26 23 12 5 85

2 52 66 39 27 8 194

6 67 92 62 39 13 279

Table 3.3.52: Distribution of the respondents by age groups based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.52, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 7,667 with a degree of freedom (df) 5 and the missing values are 11. P is between 0,250 and 0,100. Therefore, the variables are independent.

184

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT STREET DESIGN AS INFLUENTIAL FACTOR TO RIDE A BIKE

MAN FEMALE TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 18 13 31

NOT IMPORTANT 25 32 57

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

44 39 83

47 48 95

VERY IMPORTANT 6 11 17

TOTAL 140 143 283

Table 3.3.53: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.3.53, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 3,417 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 7. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 0 0 3 4

NOT IMPORTANT 0 3 2 6

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

4 9 4 5

3 8 2 6

VERY IMPORTANT 0 0 1 2

12 12 31

24

23

27

5

91

22 57

38 83

50 96

9 17

131 284

TOTAL 7 20 12 23

Table 3.3.54: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.3.54, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,286 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 6. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

NOT AT ALL IMPORTANT 0 12 12 2 3 2 31

NOT IMPORTANT 0 14 19 16 5 3 57

NEUTRAL

IMPORTANT

3 18 20 23 14 4 82

2 19 39 16 15 4 95

VERY IMPORTANT 1 4 4 5 2 1 17

TOTAL 6 67 94 62 39 14 282

Table 3.3.55: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Out of the Table 3.3.55, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 21,908 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 8. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND OPINION ABOUT BRYGGEBRO`S DESIGN SOLUTION

MALE FEMALE TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

7 3 10

10 10 20

56 49 102

53 68 121

14 17 31

140 144 284

Table 3.3.56: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.56, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 4,675 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 6. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

185

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 0 0 2 4 5 11

1 1 0 3 7 8 20

2 10 6 8 38 38 102

3 6 5 9 32 66 121

2 3 1 1 10 14 31

8 20 12 23 91 131 285

PUBLIC SCHOOL VOCATIONAL EDUC. HIGH SCHOOL SHORT HIGHER EDUC. MEDIUM HIGHER EDUC. LONG HIGHER EDUC. TOTAL

Table 3.3.57: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.57, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 17,047 with a degree of freedom (df) 20 and the missing values are 5. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

01-20 YEARS 21-30 YEARS 31-40 YEARS 41-50 YEARS 51-60 YEARS 61-90 YEARS TOTAL

VERY BAD

BAD

NEUTRAL

GOOD

VERY GOOD

TOTAL

0 3 3 3 0 2 11

1 3 8 2 3 3 20

2 27 33 22 13 4 101

1 26 44 28 16 6 121

2 8 6 7 7 0 30

6 67 94 62 39 15 283

Table 3.3.58: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

Out of the Table 3.3.58, the SPSS calculated the Chi2 to be 0,129 with a degree of freedom (df) 4 and the missing values are 10. P is bigger than 0,250. Therefore, the variables are independent.

186

187

4.0 GENERAL COMPARISON

AGE

AGE

40% 35% 30% 25% BRYGGEBROEN

20%

HANS BROGES GADE

15%

VESTERGADE

10% 5% 0% NO 00 - 10 ANSWER YEARS

11 - 20 YEARS

21 - 30 YEARS

31 - 40 YEARS

41 - 50 YEARS

51 - 60 YEARS

61 - 70 YEARS

71 - 80 YEARS

81 - 90 YEARS

Figure 4.1: Distribution of the respondents by age

In comparison to Hans Broges Gade and Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, respondents from Bryggebro have the highest average age with 32% of them between 31 and 40 years old.

The average age from the respondents can be related to their educational level. Respondents with the highest average age at Bryggebro also have a higher educational level – 77% of them have a medium or longer high education.

GENDER The distribution of respondents by gender is very balanced in Bryggebro where 50% of the respondents are males and 49% are females. The other two infrastructures present a larger difference between males and females.

In Hans Broges Gade, 52% of the respondents are male and 44% are female. Finally, 54% of the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs` respondents are male and 44% are female.

There are several studies about gender and cycling behavior developed outside Denmark and the results highlight that gender has a predominant role over the individual decision to ride a bike (Moudona et al, 2005).

However, the results from the three web surveys developed in this research indicate that there is not a significant relationship between gender and how often an individual ride a bike. One of the reasons that gender is not a predominant factor in Denmark could be that bike culture is so wide spread across the country.

188

MAIN PURPOSE FOR BIKING 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

Bryggebroen

30%

Hans Broges Gade

20%

Vestergade

10% 0% NO ANSWER

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM WORK

RECREATION / LEISURE

VISIT FAMILY / FRIENDS

PURCHASING / SHOPPING

TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM SCHOOL

OTHERS

Figure 4.2: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at the infrastructure.

MAIN PURPOSE FOR BIKING

WALKING WITHOUT BIKE

Bryggebro has the largest amount of respondents riding their bikes for commuting purposes. Among Bryggebro`s respondents, 70% ride their bikes at Bryggebro to go to work and 8% to go to study.

In regards to the frequency that respondents walk in the studied infrastructures, the results from Figure 4.3 highlights that Bryggebro has a different profile in comparison to Hans Broges Gade and Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

In contrast to Bryggebro, respondents from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs and Hans Broges Gade present a more balanced distribution of trip purpose when riding a bike at the infrastructures.

The built environment and uses where the infrastructures are located seems to have an influence in the use of them. Hans Broges Gade has the largest percentage of respondents (68%) living in a radius of 2 kilometres and the local residents both use the infrastructure for cycling and walking. On the other hand,

39% of the respondents from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs have said they ride a bike mostly to go to work and 13% going to study. It is still a high percentage of commuters, but the infrastructure also has another representative amount of respondents (33%) riding their bikes to go to shopping.

Bryggebro is mainly used for commuting and the majority of the respondents live more than 2 kilometres from the infrastructure. Therefore, it seems that most of individuals that ride a bike in Bryggebro do not use the infrastructure for walking.

189

WAL K ING WIT H OU T B IK E 70% 60% 50% 40%

Bryggebroen

30%

Hans Broges Gade

20%

Vestergade

10% 0% NO ANSWER 6-7 DAYS OF 5 DAYS OF 3-4 DAYS OF 1-2 DAYS OF 1-3 DAYS OF WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK MONTHS

MORE RARELY

Figure 4.3: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to how often they ride a bike in the infrastructure.

CYCLING MORE OFTEN AND QUALITY INFLUENCING TO BIKE MORE OFTEN Comparing the results from the three web surveys, the implementation of Bryggebro influenced the most quantity of respondents (30%) to start to ride a bike more often. In this context, it is important to take in consideration that the opening of Bryggebro created a new link between the two sides of Copenhagen harbor.

When respondents who started to bike more often after the intervention were asked for their motivations, there was a different pattern of answers in the three infrastructures.

45% of Bryggebros’ respondents said that fast connectivity was the main reason that made them to start to ride a bike more often. Moreover, 91% of Bryggebros respondents said to be satisfied with the design solution of the infrastructure in regards fast connectivity. However, only 38% of respondents from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs were satisfied with it.

Enhancing fast connectivity, Bryggebro has a dedicated high speed lane connecting the two sides of the harbor.

On the other hand, Vestergade Vest and Mageløs function as a shared-used space where cyclists need to negotiate the space with other transport modes during most of the day.

190

Despite the challenges faced by cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, the majority of respondents that started to ride a bike more often after the intervention have mentioned fast connectivity as a main factor. And 33% of respondents were satisfied with the design solution in regards to fast connectivity.

In the case of Hans Broges Gade, respondents that started to bike more often after the intervention had mentioned safety as the main reason.

SATISFACTION WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE While the rate of respondents from Bryggebro and Hans Broges Gade who were dissatisfied with the infrastructures was respectively 1% and 8%, the rate of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs respondents dissatisfied was much higher (14%).

The different infrastructure typologies might have an influence in the result. Bryggebro and Hans Broges Gade design solutions segregated the different transport modes and present dedicated lanes for cyclists.

The intervention in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs is based on the concept of shared-use space where there are no dedicated bike lanes and the cyclists need to ne-

SATISFACTION WITH THE SITE

S AT IS F ACT ION WIT H T H E S IT E

60% 50% 40% Bryggebroen

30%

Hans Broges Gade

20%

Vestergade 10% 0% NO ANSWER

VERY DISSATISFIED DISSATISFIED

NEUTRAL

SATISFIED

VERY SATISFIED

Figure 4.4: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to their satisfaction with the infrastructure design solution.

gotiate the space with pedestrians. The data collected from the count, local observation and newspapers articles indicate that Vestergade Vest and Mageløs function as a more challenging space, especially between 3pm and 5pm were the there is a large amount of both cyclists and pedestrians sharing the same space.

space. Vestergade Vest and Mageløs were not designed with dedicated bike lanes. It is a space where cyclists and pedestrians need to negotiate the space.

A shared-use space challenges the cyclists to learn how to negotiate their space with pedestrians and induces the cyclists to ride their bikes at a lower speed.

According to 87% of respondents from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, the lack of awareness of pedestrians for cyclists is problematic.

In general, the satisfaction of the respondents about the design solution of the infrastructures in regards to safety, conflict between travel modes, aesthetics and parking are similar to their satisfaction with the overall design.

There is also a problem presented among Bryggebro`s respondents. 56 % of the respondents pointed out the lack of awareness of pedestrians for cyclists as a problem. Considering the design of the infrastructure and the field observation, the main problem might be the bridges gates that function as shared-use spaces.

SATISFACTION WITH DESIGN SOLUTION AS REGARDS SAFETY The majority of the respondents from Bryggebro and Hans Broges Gade were satisfied with the infrastructures design in regards to safety. However, 11% and 7% of the respondents respectively from Bryggebro and Hans Broges Gade were very unsatisfied with the infrastructures.

At Vestergade Vest and Mageløs, half of the respondents were not satisfied with the infrastructure design in regards to safety. The negative response could be partially influenced by the profile of the infrastructure as a shared-use

LACK OF AWARENESS FOR THE SURROUNDING CYCLISTS

There is an abrupt rupture between the dedicated bike lanes at the bridge and the gates functioning as shareduse spaces. The cyclists ride their bikes faster at the dedicated lanes. But when they enter the shared-use space, they are forced to slow down the speed.

191

BIKING MORE OFTEN AFTER B IK ING M O R E O FTHE T E N INTERVENTION? AF T E R T H E INT E R V E NT ION? 100% 90% 80% 70% 60%

Bryggebroen

50%

Hans Broges Gade

40%

Vestergade

30% 20% 10% 0% NO ANSWER

YES

NO

Figure 4.5: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to biking more often after the opening of the infrastructure.

CONFLICTS BETWEEN TRAVEL MODES

SATISFACTION WITH AESTHETICS

78% of the respondents from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs have also mention to be unsatisfied with conflicts between travel modes.

82% of the respondents considered the design of Bryggebro to be good or very good. The infrastructure is iconic and it functions as a landmark in the harborscape. These characteristics probably make cyclists more aware of the aesthetic quality of the infrastructure. Being an icon in the habourscape, the aesthetic of the infrastructure is probably recognized by cyclists and assumed as part of the city identity.

Vestergade Vest and Mageløs attract both cyclists and pedestrians who often have conflicting needs. At the shared-used space, cyclists need to slow down the velocity and be more aware of the surroundings. On the other hand, pedestrians are also affected by cyclists, who travel at higher speed and they also need to be more aware of the surroundings.

However, the conflicts on shared-use spaces are especially significant for people who cannot react quickly to hazards, such as elderly cyclists or cyclists with children.

To improve the shared-use spaces experience for all users, designers must be aware of potential conflicts and implement innovative design solutions.

According to McMillen (2001), potential conflicts in shared-used spaces can be reduced by: providing information, especially signage, that clearly indicates permitted users and activities and ensuring that the space has sufficient width and an appropriate surface for everyone.

192

ILLEGALLY PARKED BIKES More than half of the respondents (51%) from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs are dissatisfied with illegally parked bikes.

The infrastructure concentrates a large amount of commercial establishments and the current amount of bike racks are not enough.

In the case of Hans Broges Gade, 19% of the respondents were dissatisfied with illegally parked bikes. The infrastructure does not have bike racks and all the bikes are just parked next to the facades. There is not a large concentration of bikes, but during the field observation there were several local residents complaining about bikes parked next to their facades.

RESIDENTIAL LOCATION OF BIKERS OF RESIDENTIAL LOCATION

RESPONDENTS

80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

Byggebro

30%

Hans Broges Gade

20%

Vestergade Vest

10% 0% 0 km - 1 km

1 km - 2 km

2 km - 3 km

3 km - 4 km

4 km - 5 5 km - 10 km km

10 km 15 km

Figure 4.6: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to the distance from their residence to the infrastructure.

The spatial distribution of the residential location of the respondents suggests how far cyclists ride their bikes on their daily trips. In all the three cases, more than 80% of the respondents live less than 4 kilometres from the infrastructure where they were riding a bike. On the other hand, less than 5% of the respondents live more than 5 kilometres away from the infrastructure where they were riding a bike.

Hans Broges Gade has the highest concentration of respondents living within a 1 km radius (68%), while Bryggebro has the lowest (33%). These figures could be related to the profile of the infrastructures and their location.

Bryggebro is a strategic commuting link in Copenhagen harbor and it could be seen as an in-between zone infrastructure â&#x20AC;&#x201C; not having a neighborhood based character.

Being part of the bike Holme corridor, Hans Broges Gade also functions as a commuting infrastructure. However, it has a much stronger neighborhood based character than Bryggebro.

15 km 20 km

20 km <

RELATION BETWEEN SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS AND THE WEB-SURVEY ANSWERS At the three infrastructures, the findings highlight a relationship between socio-demographics and trip purpose when riding a bicycle.

Despite distinct typologies and surroundings, the statistical treatment of the collected data using the Chi2 presented a strong similarity. The majority of the Chi2 test results indicated that socio-demographic factors would not be related to the individuals answers in regards to the design characteristics and satisfaction.

Neither was it possible to establish a relationship between socio-demographic variables and the relevance of design characteristics nor the satisfaction with the infrastructures.

One of the possible motives to the independency between socio-demographic factors and the respondents answers is the high level of subjectivity of the questions which deals with satisfaction and perception.

193

5.0 CONCLUSION

The decision to use a web survey and flyers as main method to collect data had both advantages and disadvantages. The data was efficiently transferred to the data basis and the distribution of flyers was an efficient mode to contact cyclists without interrupting the flow of traffic.

On the other hand, the web survey based questionnaire did not allow for a very comprehensive questionnaire.

Therefore, we had a limited number of questions.

The study aimed to give an overview in regards to what design characteristics would be relevant to individualsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; decision to ride a bike. The quantitative analysis â&#x20AC;&#x201C; mainly used in this study â&#x20AC;&#x201C; provided indications of possible relevant design factors and also relations between sociodemographic factors and how design characteristics influence the individual decision to ride a bike.

The findings highlight important factors as such the relevance of fast connectivity and safety for cyclists. The results suggest that both fast connectivity and safety are strategic dimensions of a design solution that must be taken in consideration by architects, planners and engineers.

Based on the comparison between the three case studies, the shared-used space seems to present more challenges for the cyclists who need to ride their bikes and, at the same time, negotiate their space with pedestrians.

Shared-use spaces are not common in Denmark, but they can be an alternative way to create more lively cities enhancing a variety of experiences.

The findings indicate that purpose-built bicycle-only facilities are perceived by cyclists as safer environments to ride a bike.

The three studied typologies have both advantages and disadvantages and there is not one better than another.

When deciding to implement or improve a bike infrastructure, the particular qualities and potentials of each typology should be analyzed in order to decide what kind of bike infrastructure would be appropriate to be implemented.

194

In the three case studies, the majority of respondents answered that they ride a bike in their respectively infrastructures with the main purpose to go to work. The result indicates that different typologies or a conjugation of typologies can be efficiently used for commuting. What seems to be important is how fast the infrastructure connects the cyclists and how safe it is to ride a bike in the infrastructure.

Figure 5.1: Cyclists and pedestrians at Vestergade Vest.

195

REFERENCES

Aarhus Cykelby (2010a) 8000 fordele ved at cykle. In: http://www.aarhuscykelby.dk/StandardPage.asp?PgID=71 Aarhus Municipality (2010a) Cykelhandlingsplan – En plan for fremtidens cyklist forhold i Århus Kommune. In: http:// www.aarhuskommune.dk/borger/trafik/Trafik--og-anlaegsplaner/Cykelhandlingsplan.aspx Aarhus Municipality (2009b) Kommuneplan 2009 Hovedstruktur Aarhus Stiftstidende (2010) Det cykler for Hans Broges Gade. In: http://stiften.dk/article/20101012/AAS/710129950 Boogaard, H.; Borgman, F.; Kamminga, J.; Hoek, G. (2009) Exposure to ultrafine and fine particles and noise during cycling and driving in 11 Dutch cities. Atmosphere and Environment Bovy, P.; Stern, E. (1990) Route Choice: Way Finding in Transport Networks, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

Cavill, N.; Kahlmeier, S.; Rutter, H.; Racioppi, F.; Oja P. (2008) Economic analyses of transport infrastructure and policies including health effects related to cycling and walking: A systematic review. In: Transporty Policy.

Copenhagen Municipality (1996) På cykel til og fra arbejde. In: Arbejdspladsundersøgelsen. Vejafdelingen.

Copenhagen Municipality (2009a) Samfundsøkonomiske analyser af cykeltiltag - metode og cases.

Copenhagen Municipality (2009b) COPENHAGEN’S GREEN ACCOUNTS. Copenhagen Municipality (2010a) Grønne cykelruter. In: http://kk.dk/Borger/ByOgTrafik/CyklernesBy/KonkreteProjekter/OevrigeProjekter/GroenneCykelruter.aspx Copenhagen Municipality (2010b) Cykeltal. In: http://kk.dk/Borger/ByOgTrafik/CyklernesBy/VidenOgTal/Cykeltal.aspx Copenhagen Municipality (2010c) Målsætning. In: http://kk.dk/Borger/ByOgTrafik/CyklernesBy/PolitikOgStrategi/Maalsaetning.aspx) Copenhagen Municipality (2010d) Bryggebroen. In: http://www.kk.dk/Borger/ByOgTrafik/Anlaegsprojekter/UdfoerteProjekter/Bryggebroen.aspx Copenhagen Municipality (2010e) Indvielse. In: http://www.kk.dk/Borger/ByOgTrafik/Anlaegsprojekter/UdfoerteProjekter/Bryggebroen/Indvielse.aspx COWI, Copenhagen Municipality (2009) Samfundsøkonomiske analyser afcykeltiltag - metode og cases.

COWI (2010) Brygge Bridge, swing bridge in the harbour of Copenhagen.

CPHX (2009) FIRST BRIDGE IN 50 YEARS. In: http://www.cphx.dk/index.php?language=uk#/29190/ Danske kommuner (2009) Danske kommuner nyhedsmagasinet. In: http://www.danskekommuner.dk/

196

Denzin, N. (1978) The Research Act, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw Dissing+Weitling (2010) Bryggebroen. In: http://www.dw.dk/dk/projekter/bryggebroen.aspx Fyens stiftstidende (2010a) 200 busser forsvinder søndag fra centrum – Karsten Hüttel – Fyens Stiftstidende 30.07.2010 Fyens Stiftstidende (2010b) Kaos plager ny gågade – Rune H. Blickfeldt – Fyens Stiftstidende 13.09.2010 Fyens Stiftstidende (2010c) Cyklerne Skal ud af gågaden – Esben Seerup - Fyens Stiftstidende 15.09.2010 Gonzalez-Bañales, D.; Adam, M. (2007) Web Survey Design and Implementation: Best Practices for Empirical Research. In: Proceedings of European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems 2007 (EMCIS2007), Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain.

Gordon-Larsen, P.; Boone-Heinonen, J.; Sidney, S., Sternfeld, B.; Jacobs, R.; Lewis, C. (2009) Active commuting and cardiovascular disease risk. In: Arch Intern Med Grontmij- Carlbro (2010) BRYGGEBRO OVER SYDHAVNEN KLAR TIL BRUG. In: http://www.grontmij-carlbro.com/da/Menu/Aktuelt/Nyheder/BryggebroSydhavnen.htm Landis, B.; Vattikuti, V.; Brannick, M. (1997) Real Time Human Perceptions: Towards a Bicycle Level of Service. Transportation Research Record, Washington DC. Lindström, M. (2008) Means of transportation to work and overweight and obesity. A population-based study in southern Sweden. In: Prev Med. Lozar, K. (2001) Web survey errors. Ph.D. dissertation. Ljubljana : Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana.

Manfreda, K.; Batagelj, Z.; Vehovar, V. (2002) Design of Web Survey Questionnaires: Three Basic Experiments. In: Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication.

McMillen; B. (2001) Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access. Best Practices Design Guide.

Noël, N.; Leclerc, C.; Lee-Gosselin, M. (2003) CRC INDEX: Compatibility of Roads for Cyclists in Rural and Urban Fringe Areas. Compendium of Papers CD-ROM of the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC. Odense Municipality (2010a) Cyklisternes By - Cykelstier. In: http://www.odense.dk/web4/cyklisternesby/service/cykelstier.aspx Odense Municipality (2010b) Odense modtager Vejprisen 2010. In: http://www.odense.dk/home/Presse/Pressemeddelelser/Pressemeddelelser/Pressemeddelelser%202010/ Odense%20modtager%20Vejprisen%202010.aspx Odense Municipality (2010c) Cyklisternes By – Odense. In: http://www.odense.dk/web4/cyklisternesby/~/media/BKF/Bymiljø/Cykelby/Strategi%20maj.ashx Odense Municipality (2010d) City of Odense at EXPO 2010 in Shanghai. In:

197

http://www.odense.dk/web4/cyklisternesby/cycle%20city%20odense/expo%202010.aspx Odense Municipality (2010e) Flere cykeltællere i Odense. In: http://www.odense.dk/WEB4/CyklisternesBy/Det%20sker/NyhederNy/Flere%20cykeltaellere%20i%20Odense.aspx Odense Municipality (2010f) Cyklisternes By - Mål for Cylisternes By. In: http://www.odense.dk/web4/cyklisternesby/vision%20og%20maal.aspx Odense Municipality (2010g) Cyklisternes By – Klummer. In: http://www.odense.dk/home/WEB4/CyklisternesBy/Det%20sker/Klummer.aspx Odense Municipality (2010h) EXPO 2010. In: http://www.odense.dk/home/Topmenu/Borger/ByMiljoe/EXPO%202010.aspx Odense Municipality (2009i) Trafik og mobilitetsplan. In: http://www.odense.dk/Topmenu/Borger/ByMiljoe/Planlaegning/Trafikplan.aspx Pastore, M. (2001) Online consumers now the average consumer. The Cyber Atlas newsletter. In: http://cyberatlas. internet.com/big_picture/demographics/article/0,5901_800201,00.html.

Pikora, T.; Giles-Corti, B.; Bull, F.; Jamrozik, K,; Donovan R. (2003) Developing a framework for assessment of the environmental determinants of walking and cycling. In: Social Science & Medicine, No. 56 Poindexter, G.; Krizek, K.; Barnes, G.; Thompson, K. (2007) Guidelines for Benefit Cost Analysis of Bicycle Facilities.

Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C. Räsänen, M.; Koivisto, I.; Summala, H. (1999) Car Drivers and Bicyclist Behavior at Bicycle Crossings under Different Priority Regulations. In: Journal of Safety Research Regeringen (2009) Aftale mellem regeringen (Venstre og De Konservative), Socialdemokraterne, Dansk Folkeparti, Socialistisk Folkeparti, Det Radikale Venstre og Liberal Alliance om: En grøn transportpolitik.

Reynolds, C.; Harris, M.; Teschke, K.; Cripton, P.; Winters, M. (2009) The impact of transportation infrastructure on bicycling injuries and crashes: a review of the literature. In: Environmental Health..

Saelensminde, K. (2004) Cost-benefit analyses of walking and cycling track networks taking into account insecurity, health effects and external costs of motorized traffic, Transporty Policy Statistikbanken (2010) Folketal pr. 1. januar fordelt på byer. In: http://www.statistikbanken.dk/BEF44 Trafikministeriet, København (2000) Trafik 2005: Problemstillinger, mål og strategier. København Vejdirektoratet (2004) Trafiktællinger Planlægning, udførelse og efterbehandling Vejledning. Rapport nr. 289 Woodcock, J.; Banister, D.; Edwards, P.; Prentice, A.; Roberts, I. (2007) Energy and health 3: energy and transport.

Youtube (2010) Aarhus by Bike. In: http://www.youtube.com/user/aarhuscykelby

198

199

LIST OF figures

1.0 INTRODUCTION Figure 1.1: Cyclist riding his bike at Bryggebro.

2.0 METHODOLOGY Figure 2.1: Location of the cities from the three case studies Figure 2.2: Print scream view from the Vestergade Vest`s questionnaire Figure 2.3: Flyer distributed to individuals who were riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs on 2nd of September 2010.

Figure 2.4: Member of research team delivering flyers to cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs on September 14th 2010.

3.1 VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS Figure 3.1.1: Geographical location of Odense.

Figure 3.1.2: Distribution of the trips by transport modes within Odense Municipality from 1998 until 2008.

Figure 3.1.3: Map of the main bike tracks and lanes in Odense`s inner city.

Figure 3.1.4: Ortophoto of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.5: Article with the title “Bicycles must be out of pedestrian streets”, published on 15th of September in the newspaper Fyens Stiftstidende.

Figure 3.1.6: Article with the title “Chaos in the pedestrian streets”, published on 15th of September in the newspaper Fyens Stiftstidende (Fyens Stiftstidende, 2010b).

Figure 3.1.7: View of Vestergade Vest from the 10th of May 2010.

Figure 3.1.8: View of Vestergade Vest from the 2nd of September 2010.

Figure 3.1.9: Draft of the design concept of Vestegade Vest and Mogeløs.

Figure 3.1.10: Section and plan of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.11: Pavement material Figure 3.1.12: Speed hump at Vestergade Vest.

Figure 3.1.13: Cyclist avoiding speed hump.

Figure 3.1.14: Blue plastic guides at Vestergade Vest.

Figure 3.1.15: Speed hump.

Figure 3.1.16: Cargo trucks.

Figure 3.1.17: Bikes and moterized vehicles.

Figure 3.1.18: Bike parking racks.

Figure 3.1.19: Bike parking racks.

Figure 3.1.20: Parked bikes in front of shops.

Figure 3.1.21: Parked bikes in front of shops.

Figure 3.1.22: Trees and landscaping design.

Figure 3.1.23: Trees and landscaping design.

Figure 3.1.24: Street games painted in the pavement.

Figure 3.1.25: Layout of the streetscape.

Figure 3.1.26: Street furniture.

Figure 3.1.27: Street lights.

Figure 3.1.28: Shop signs.

Figure 3.1.29: Signage dictating rules about how to use this space.

Figure 3.1.30: Playful sign informing transportation modes allowed .

Figure 3.1.31: Signage designed to look old.

Figure 3.1.32: Painted words in the pavement.

Figure 3.1.33: Crossing point paved with cobblestones.

Figure 3.1.34: Intersection between Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.35: Built environment around Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.36: Cyclists counting and traffic flow at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.37: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location – 5km map.

Figure 3.1.38: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location – 20km map.

200

7 8 11 11 13 16 17 18 19 21 21 23 23 24 25 26 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 28 28 28 29 29 30 30 30 31 32 32 32 33 34 34 34 35 36 37 41

Figure 3.1.39: Distribution of the respondents by age groups.

Figure 3.1.40: Distribution of the respondents by gender.

Figure 3.1.41: Distribution of the respondents by educational level.

Figure 3.1.42: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.43: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they walk at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.44: Distribution of the respondents according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.45:Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bike in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44 after the intervention in the site.

Figure 3.1.46:Distribution of the respondents by the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.47: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Figure 3.1.48: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s design fulfilled the fast conectivity.

Figure 3.1.49: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Figure 3.1.50: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.51: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.52: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.53: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.54: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.55: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers is for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.56: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic signposting and its interpretation is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.57: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic scenic and greenery is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.58: Distribution of the respondents based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.59: Among the respondents that said yes in the previous question (Figure 3.1.58), what qualities has influenced their choice to ride a bike more often after the intervention in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs. The respondents could choice more than one option.

Figure 3.1.60: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Figure 3.1.61: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Figure 3.1.62: Vestergade Vest streetscape.

42 42 42 42 43 43 43 43 44 44 44 44 45 45 45 45 46 46 46 46 47 47 47 63

201

3.2 HANS BROGES GADE Figure 3.2.1: Geographical location of Aarhus.

Figure 3.2.2: Print screen of Aarhus Bicycle City webpage - ww.aarhuscykelby.dk Figure 3.2.3: Automatic cyclist count at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.4: Aarhus City Hall square transformed in a the “bicycle`s Mecca”. Event promoted by the Aarhus Bicycle City on the 10th of April 2010.

Figure 3.2.5: Aarhus City Hall square transformed in a the “bicycle`s Mecca”. Event promoted by the Aarhus Bicycle City on the 10th of April 2010.

Figure 3.2.6: The seven main bicycle connections between the core of Aarhus and suburbs. Source: Cykelhandlingsplan – En plan for fremtidens cyklist forhold i Århus Kommune Figure 3.2.7: The bicycle network of Aarhus municipality.

Figure 3.2.8: Ortophoto of Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.9: Hans Broges Gade view before intervention in September 2009.

Figure 3.2.10: Hans Broges Gade view after the intervention in September 2010.

Figure 3.2.11: Hans Broges Gade bike path Figure 3.2.12: Traffic calming at crossing Figure 3.2.13: Technical drawings from Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.14: Hans Broges Gade section Figure 3.2.15: Hans Broges Gade plan Figure 3.2.16: Crossing at Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.17: Bike path and sidewalk.

Figure 3.2.18: Crossing section Figure 3.2.19: Hierarchy of transport modes Figure 3.2.20: Individual riding his bike at a high speed Figure 3.2.21: Cyclist riding down road while entering the bike lane Figure 3.2.22: Cyclist slowing down at the crossing Figure 3.2.23: Two individuals riding their bikes next to each other and talking Figure 3.2.24: Car parking at Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.25: Biking and car parking Figure 3.2.26: Hans Broges Gade plan Figure 3.2.27: Greenery at Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.28: Front garden at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.29: Tietgens Square Figure 3.2.30: Bench at Tietgens Square Figure 3.2.31: Street lamp Figure 3.2.32: Statue in honor to Hans Broge Figure 3.2.33: Cyclist counting meter Figure 3.2.34: Bike signage Figure 3.2.35: Car covering bike signage Figure 3.2.36: Car covering bike signage Figure 3.2.37: Bike symbol located on the bike path curve and intersection Figure 3.2.38: Bike signage and ramp covered and cyclist crossing in an alternative way Figure 3.2.39: Sequency of images of a cyclist crossing the street in an inappropriate way Figure 3.2.40: Cyclist riding his bike in the car lane Figure 3.2.41: Cyclist riding his bike in the sidewalk.

Figure 3.2.42: Cyclists entering from the suburbs Figure 3.2.43: Entrance from the city centre Figure 3.2.44: Built environment at Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.45: Cyclist counting at Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.46: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location – 5km map Figure 3.2.47: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location - 20km map Figure 3.2.48: Distribution of the respondents by age groups.

202

64 65 65 65 65 66 66 67 69 69 70 70 71 72 72 73 74 74 74 75 75 75 75 76 76 76 76 76 76 77 77 77 78 78 78 78 79 80 80 81 81 82 82 83 84 88 89 90

Figure 3.2.49: Distribution of the respondents by gender Figure 3.2.50: Distribution of the respondents by educational level.

Figure 3.2.51: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.52: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.53: Distribution of the respondents by main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.54: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53, after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.55: Distribution of the respondents by the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.56: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Figure 3.2.57: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Figure 3.2.58: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Figure 3.2.59: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.60: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.61: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.62: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.63: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.64: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade Figure 3.2.65: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is scenic and greenery at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.66: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.67: Distribution of the respondents based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the intervention at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.68: Among the respondents that said yes in the previous question (Figure 3.2.67), what qualities has influenced their choice to ride a bike more often after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade. The respondents could choose more than one option.

Figure 3.2.69: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Figure 3.2.70: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in the intervention at Hans Broges Gade.

Figure 3.2.71: Cyclists meter at Hans Broges Gade 3.3 BRYGGEBRO Figure 3.3.1: Geographical location of Copenhagen.

Figure 3.3.2: Distribution of trips according to transportation mode within Copenhagen municipality from 1998 until 2008.

Figure 3.3.3: Publication with general information about bicycling in Copenhagen, history and targets for the future.

Figure 3.3.4: Logo of the campaign Ibikecph Figure 3.3.5: Cyclists and pedestrians crossing Bryggebro bike bridge

90 90 90 91 91 91 91 92 92 92 92 93 93 93 93 94 94 94 94 94 95 95 111 112 112 113 114 115 203

Figure 3.3.6: Copenhagen Bicycle Network Figure 3.3.7: The four bridges of Copenhagen Harbour.

Figure 3.3.8: Bryggebro opening on the 14th of September.

Figure 3.3.9: Image of Bryggebro from Islands Brygge side of the harbour.

Figure 3.3.10: View of Havneholmen from Bryggebro Figure 3.3.11: Access to Bryggebro from Havneholmen Figure 3.3.12: View of Bryggerbro from Island Brygge the Havneholmen side Figure 3.3.13: Havneholmen and Bryggebro in the background Figure 3.3.14: Bryggebro in the foreground and Islands Brygge in the background Figure 3.3.15: Plan and Section of Bryggebro Figure 3.3.16: Elevation of the bridge seen from the side and Cross section of the bridge. The pedestrian side on the left and cyclist on the right separated by a 60cm high 1.2 metres wide girder.

Figure 3.3.17: Bryggebro section Figure 3.3.18: Bryggebro plan Figure 3.3.19: Access to Bryggebro from Islands Brygge Figure 3.3.20: Access to Bryggebro from Islands Brygge side Figure 3.3.21: Islands Brygge promenade Figure 3.3.22: Access to Bryggebro Havneholmen Figure 3.3.23: Access to Bryggebro from Havneholmen side Figure 3.3.24: Hierarchy between transport modes Figure 3.3.25: Bryggebro plan and representation of transport mode conflicts Figure 3.3.26: Joggers and cyclists crossing Figure 3.3.27: Cyclists riding fast out of the exit of the bridge Figure 3.3.28: Walkers have to pay attention from fast moving cyclists exiting Figure 3.3.29: A stray bike parked nearby the bridge Figure 3.3.30: Bikes parked under stairs Figure 3.3.31: Bryggebro illumination Figure 3.3.32: Bryggebro illumination Figure 3.3.33: Lamp post Figure 3.3.34: Bridge exit the night Figure 3.3.35: Cyclist has wrongly entered into the pedestrian lane.

Figure 3.3.36: Access from Islands Brygge side Figure 3.3.37: Bryggebro access from Havneholmen Figure 3.3.38: Damaged sign Figure 3.3.39: Graffiti at Bryggebro Figure 3.3.40: Graffiti at Bryggebro Figure 3.3.41: Love padlocks Figure 3.3.42: Love padlocks Figure 3.3.43: Love padlocks Figure 3.3.44: Love padlocks Figure 3.3.45: Love padlocks Figure 3.3.46: Intersection at Islands Brygge.

Figure 3.3.47: Intersection at Havneholmen.

Figure 3.3.48: Bryggebro’s access at Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.49: Bryggebro’s access at Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.50: Bryggebro’s access at Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.51: Cyclists on the smooth paved lanes.

Figure 3.3.52: Pavement detail fron Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.53: Privately owned parking lot.

Figure 3.3.54: Bike route linking to the staircases.

Figure 3.3.55: Longer bike route avoiding staircases.

204

116 117 119 119 120 120 120 120 121 122 123 124 124 125 125 125 125 125 126 126 127 127 127 128 128 129 129 129 129 130 130 130 130 131 131 132 132 132 132 133 134 134 135 135 135 136 136 136 137 137

Figure 3.3.56: Bryggebro entering from the Havneholmen si Figure 3.3.57: Foot bridge to make the trip shorter.

Figure 3.3.58: Cyclists pushing their bikes up the stairs.

Figure 3.3.59: Built environment surrounding Bryggebro on the Islands Brygge side.

Figure 3.3.60: Cyclist countings.

Figure 3.3.61: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location – 5km map.

Figure 3.3.62: Spatial distribution of the respondents according to their residential location – 20km Figure 3.3.63: Distribution of the respondents by age groups.

Figure 3.3.64: Distribution of the respondents by gender.

Figure 3.3.65: Distribution of the respondents by educational level.

Figure 3.3.66: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bicycle at Bryggebro Figure 3.3.67: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they walk at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.68: Distribution of the respondents by main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.69: Distribution of the respondents by the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68 after Bryggebro’s opening.

Figure 3.3.70: Distribution of the respondents by the level of satisfaction with Bryggebro’s design.

Figure 3.3.71: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Figure 3.3.72: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Figure 3.3.73: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro`s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Figure 3.3.74: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.75: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro’s accesses.

Figure 3.3.76: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against cyclists at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.77: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.78: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.79: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.80: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.81: Distribution of the respondents according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.82: Distribution of the respondents based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

Figure 3.3.83: Among the respondents that said yes in the previous question (Figure 3.3.82), what qualities has influenced their choice to ride a bike more often after the opening of Bryggebro. The respondents could choice more than one option.

Figure 3.3.84: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Figure 3.3.85: Distribution of respondents according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

138 138 138 139 140 144 145 146 146 146 146 147 147 147 147 148 148 148 148 149 149 149 149 150 150 150 150 151 151 151

205

4.0 GENERAL COMPARISON Figure 4.1: Distribution of the respondents by age.

Figure 4.2: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at the infrastructure.

Figure 4.3: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to how often they ride a bike in the infrastructure.

Figure 4.4: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to their satisfaction with the infrastructure design solution.

Figure 4.5: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to biking more often after the opening of the infrastructure.

Figure 4.6: Distribution of the respondents in accordance to the distance from their residence to the infrastructure.

5.0 CONCLUSION Figure 5.1: Cyclists and pedestrians at Vestergade Vest.

206

168 169 170 171 172 173

175

LIST OF tables

2.0 METHODOLOGY Table 2.1: Date of flyers distribution, web survey opening and web survey closing for the three case studies.

Table 2.2: Number of bike trips, cyclists, web flyers handed and a number of respondents for the three case studies 3.1 VESTERGADE VEST AND MAGELØS Table 3.1.1: Absolute and percentage distribution of respondents according to the distance of their residential location from Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.2: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.3: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.4 Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.5: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they walk at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.6: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they walk at Vestergede Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.7: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they walk at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.8: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.9: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.10: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.11: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bike at Vestergade Vest for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44, after the intervention at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.12: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bike at Vestergade Vest for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44, after the intervention at Vestergade Vest.

Table 3.1.13: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bike at Vestergade Vest for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.1.44, after the intervention at Vestergade Vest.

Table 3.1.14: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.15: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.16: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.17: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s and Mageløs design fulfilled the cyclists safety aspect.

Table 3.1.18: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s and Mageløs design fulfilled the cyclists safety aspect.

Table 3.1.19: Distribution of the respondents by age group according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s and Mageløs design fulfilled the cyclists safety aspect.

Table 3.1.20: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest`s and Mageløs design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

11 11

39 48 48 48 49 49 49 49 50 50 50 50 51 51 51 51 52 52 52 52

207

Table 3.1.21: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.1.22: Distribution of the respondents by age according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.1.23: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect Table 3.1.24: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Table 3.1.25: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Vestergade Vest and Mageløs design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Table 3.1.26: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.27: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.28: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.29: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.30: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.31: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.32: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.33: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.34: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.35: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.36: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.37: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.38: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and interesections at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.39: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersecitons at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.40: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.41: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.42: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.43: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

208

53 53 53 53 54 54 54 54 55 55 55 55 56 56 56 56 57 57 57 57 58 58 58

Table 3.1.44: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.45: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.46: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.47: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs. able 3.1.48: Distribution of the respondents by educational level gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.49: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.50: Distribution of the respondents by gender based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.51: Distribution of the respondents by educational level based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.52: Distribution of the respondents by age groups based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.53: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.1.54: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.1.55: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.1.56: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.57: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

Table 3.1.58: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Vestergade Vest and Mageløs.

3.2 HANS BROGES GADE Table 3.2.1: Absolute and percentage distribution of respondents according to the distance of their residential location from Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.2: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.3: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.4 Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.5: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.6: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.7: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they walk at Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.8: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.9: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

58 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 62 62

87 96 96 96 97 97 97 97 98

209

Table 3.2.10: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.11: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53, after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.12: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53, after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.13: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bike in Hans Broges Gade for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.2.53, after the intervention in Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.14: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.15: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.16: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.17: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Table 3.2.18: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Table 3.2.19: Distribution of the respondents by age group according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Table 3.2.20: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.2.21: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.2.22: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.2.23: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Table 3.2.24: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Table 3.2.25: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Hans Broges Gade’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect Table 3.2.26: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.27: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.28: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.29: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.30: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.3.31: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.3.32: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

210

98 98 98 99 99 99 99 100 100 100 100 101 101 101 101 102 102 102 102 103 103 103 103

Table 3.2.33: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.34: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.35: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.36: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.37: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Hans Broges Gadet.

Table 3.2.38: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections at Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.39: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.40: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.41: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.42: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.43: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians and motorized vehicle drivers for people riding a bike at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.44: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.45: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.46: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.47: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.48: Distribution of the respondents by educational level gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.49: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.50: Distribution of the respondents by gender based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.51: Distribution of the respondents by educational level based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.52: Distribution of the respondents by age groups based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Hans Broges Gade Table 3.2.53: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.2.54 Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.2.55: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.2.56: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.

104 104 104 104 105 105 105 105 106 106 106 106 107 107 107 107 108 108 108 108 109 109 109 109

211

Table 3.2.57: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.

Table 3.2.58: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.

110 110

3.3 BRYGGEBRO Table 3.3.1: Absolute and percentage distribution of respondents according to the distance of their residential location from Bryggebro.

Table 3.2.2: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.3: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.4 Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.5: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they walk at Bryggebro Table 3.3.6: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they walk at Bryggebro Table 3.3.7: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they walk at Bryggebro Table 3.3.8: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.9: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.10: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the main trip purpose when riding a bike in Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.11: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.12: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro Table 3.3.13: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.14: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.15: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.16: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the level of satisfaction with the design of Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.17: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Table 3.3.18: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Table 3.3.19: Distribution of the respondents by age group according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.

Table 3.3.20: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.3.21: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.3.22: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the

212

143 152 152 152 153 153 153 153 153 154 154 154 154 155 155 155 156 156 156 156 157 157

Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.

Table 3.3.23: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Table 3.3.24: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Table 3.3.25: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.

Table 3.3.26: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.27: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.28: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.29: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.30: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.31: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.32: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.33: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.34: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.35: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.36: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.37: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.38: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks and ramps at Bryggebro Table 3.3.39: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.40: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.41: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.42: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.43: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.44: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.45: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.46: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.47: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problem-

157 157 158 158 158 158 159 159 159 159 160 160 160 160 161 161 161 161 162 162 162 162 163 163 163

213

Table 3.3.48: Distribution of the respondents by educational level gender according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Bryggebro Table 3.3.49: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how problematic is the scenic at Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.50: Distribution of the respondents by gender based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.51: Distribution of the respondents by educational level based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.52: Distribution of the respondents by age groups based on starting to ride a bike more often, or not, after the opening of Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.53: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.3.54: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.3.55: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the importance of street design (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) in the decision to ride a bike.

Table 3.3.56: Distribution of respondents by gender according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.57: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

Table 3.3.58: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the street design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Bryggebro.

214

163 164 164 164 164 165 165 165 165 166 166

215

ANNEX

216

FLYER DELIVERED TO CYCLISTS SVAR PÅ SPØRGSMÅLENE

VIND EN NY CYKEL

ØNSKER DU EN BEDRE CYKELBY? VI ER MIDT I ET FORSKNINGSPROJEKT OM CYKELBYEN OG MANGLER NETOP DIN HJÆLP TIL AT FORBEDRE DEN. DET GØR DU VED AT SVARE PÅ FÅ SPØRGSMÅL PÅ:

www.detmangfoldigebyrum.dk/hansbrogesgade/ For yderligere information om projektet: vsil@create.aau.dk

SVAR PÅ SPØRGSMÅLENE

VIND EN NY CYKEL

ØNSKER DU EN BED-

VI ER MIDT I ET FORSKNINGSPROJEKT OM CYKELBYEN OG MANGLER NETOP DIN HJÆLP TIL AT FORBEDRE DEN. DET GØR DU VED AT SVARE PÅ FÅ SPØRGSMÅL PÅ:

WWW.SURVEY-CYKEL.DK For yderligere information om projektet:

BRYGGEBROEN SVAR PÅ SPØRGSMÅLENE

VIND EN NY CYKEL

ØNSKER DU EN BEDRE CYKELBY? VI ER MIDT I ET FORSKNINGSPROJEKT OM CYKELBYEN OG MANGLER NETOP DIN HJÆLP TIL AT FORBEDRE DEN. DET GØR DU VED AT SVARE PÅ FÅ SPØRGSMÅL PÅ:

www.detmangfoldigebyrum.dk/vestergade/ For yderligere information om projektet: vsil@create.aau.dk

VESTERGADE VEST & MAGELØS 217

SURVEY ACCESSED ON THE WEBSITE

DO YOU WISH A BETTER CITY FOR CYCLING? We are in the middle of a research project about cycling in the city and need your help.

The only thing you have to do is answer a few questions. Answer now and you have the chance to win a new bike valued at 3500 DKK. The entries will be drawn on the 31th of October 2010 with the winner contacted by e-mail.

For further information about the project you can contract vsil@create.aau.dk

01 Home address 02 Email address 03 Age 04 Gender Male Female

05 Level of education Primary school  Vocational

education

High school Short high education 218

Medium high education Long high education

06 How often do you ride a bicycle at Hans Broges Gade?

6-7 days of week 5 days of week 3-4 days of week 1-2 days of week 1-3 days of months More rarely

07 How often do you walk at Hans Broges Gade?

6-7 days of week 5 days of week 3-4 days of week 1-2 days of week 1-3 days of months More rarely

08 What is your main purpose at Hans Broges Gade?

Transportation to and from work Recreation / leisure Visiting family / friends Purchasing / shopping Transportation to and from school Others

219

09 How often do you use the bike for the purpose in question 08 after the opening of Hans Broges Gade?

More rarely Not as often Just as often as before More often Much more often

10 How satisfied are you with Hans Broges Gade?

Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very satisfied

11 How do you think the design solution has fulfilled the following parameters of the infrastructure?

Safety

Very bad

Bad

Neutral

Good

Very good

Fast connection

Very bad

Bad

Neutral

Good

Very good

Aesthetics / beauty

Very bad

Bad

Neutral

Good

Very good

12 Evaluate how problematic the following situations are when cycling at Hans Broges Gade?

Illegally parked bicycles

220

Not problematic

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

Conflicts between bicycle Not paths, sidewalks and problematic traffic lane

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

Obstacles

Not problematic

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

Holes in the pavement

Not problematic

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

Cracks in ramps and Not where different path and problematic roads meet

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

Lack of awareness from other biking people biking

Not problematic

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

Poor signposting and interpretation

Not problematic

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

Lack of scenic and greenery

Not problematic

A bit problematic

Quite Problematic problematic

Major problem

13 Are you biking more often after the opening of Hans Broges Gade?

Yes No

14 If yes, what are the main qualities about Hans Broges Gade that have affected your choice to bike more often?

Safety A good experience Faster connection Wider bike lanes Greener areas Faster bike lanes Green wedge Attractive landscape 221

Better signposting Bike maps Maintenance of bike lanes Bike parking

15 How important is street design (greenery, lightning, pavement etc.) for your decision to ride here?

Not at all important Not important Neutral Important Very important

16 What is your opinion about Hans Broges Gade design solution (greenery, lightning, pavement etc.)?

Very bad bad Neutral Good Very good

17 Would you like to add any comments to this questionnaire?

222

Thank you for answering this questionnaire.

Please, push the bottom below to end. Â

223

224

THE DUTCH REFERENCE STUDY CASES OF INTERVENTIONS IN BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE REVIEWED IN THE FRAMEWORK OF BIKEABILITY Kees van Goeverden Tom Godefrooij

225

CONTENTS

1.0 2.0

3.0

INTRODUCTION DEVELOPMENTS IN CYCLING IN THE NETERLANDS

3.1

POLITICAL CONTEXT

3.2

THE ROUTE DESIGNS

THE DEMOSTRATION PROJECTS IN TILBURG AND THE HAGUE

3.2.1 TILBURG 3.2.2 THE HAGUE 3.3 ORGANISATION AND IMPLEMENTATION 3.3.1 TILBURG 3.3.2

THE HAGUE

3.4

THE COSTS

3.5

SET-UP OF THE EVALUATIONSTUDIES

3.6

THE IMPACTS

3.6.1

BICYCLE USE

3.6.2

ROAD SAFETY

3.6.3

PERCEPTION OF CYCLING QUALITY

3.6.4

DESIGN ASPECTS

3.6.5 ECONOMY 3.7 DISCUSSION

4.0

THE DELF BICYCLE PLAN

4.1

POLITICAL CONTEXT

4.2 DESIGN 4.2.1

THE NETWORK

4.2.2

THE PROJECTS

4.3

ORGANISATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

4.4

THE COSTS

4.5

ONE SINGLE PROJECT: THE PLANTAGEBRUG

4.6

SET-UP OF THE EVALUATION STUDIES

4.7

THE IMPACTS OF THE UPGRADING THE NETWORK

4.7.1

TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR

4.7.2 SAFETY 4.7.3

PERCEPTION OF CYCLING QUALITY

4.7.4 ECONOMY 4.8

THE IMPACTS OF BUILDING THE PLANTAGEBRUG

4.8.1

POTENTIAL OF THE BRIDGE

4.8.2

BEFORE AND AFTER STUDIES

4.9 DISCUSSION

226

5

SHARED SPACE IN HAREN

5.1

DESIGN

5.2

Organisation and implementation

5.3 Evaluation 5.3.1

Use of shared space

5.3.2 Safety 5.3.3

Perception of shared space

5.3.4 Economy 5.3.5 Conclusion

6

Bicycle street in Haarlem

6.1 Design 6.2 Evaluation

7

Interurban highway for cyclists

7.1 Context 7.2 Design 7.3

Organisation and implementation

7.4

The costs

7.5 Evaluation

8

Synthesis of Dutch findings and implementation in other countries

8.1 Conclusions 8.2 Recommendations

227

228

1 INTRODUCTION

Increased transition of person transport from automobiles to bicycles is generally regarded as gain for society, most profoundly in terms of reduced emission and enhanced public health. However, in Denmark a decrease in mode-share of cycling has been observed, leading to the conclusion by the Danish Government that the conditions for cycling must be enhanced to increase the use of the bicycle for transportation. She launched the Bikeability research project that departs from this conclusion and focuses on the preconditions for cycling; the possible effects of changes of the urban environment and cycling infrastructure; and methodologies for assessment of changes to existing bicycling infrastructure based on micro-level spatially explicit data. This way the strategic focus of the project is how to enhance bike-ability of urban areas.

It is the overall objective of the project to increase the level of knowledge in relation to bicycle based transport and thereby to contribute to more efficient and qualified urban planning and management. The project activities are divided into 5 interrelated workpackages (WP’s): WP1: Cycling behaviour and its preconditions will analyse the determinants for cycling behaviour of individuals, such as motives, lifestyles, opportunities and constraints.

WP2: Environmental determinants for bike-ability will link GIS data with objective and subjective measures of cycling in relation to the conditions of selected neighbourhoods to develop a validated bike-ability index tailored to the Danish urban context, but applicable in other regions.

This report describes the Dutch cases that are studied in the context of WP4. The Netherlands have a long tradition of high bicycle usage, bicycle promotion by policy makers, and research in the field of cycling. Cycling experience, evaluated policy interventions, and other research created a wealth of knowledge. A substantial part of the knowledge is not accessible for non-Dutch speaking persons and it is valuable to report the findings from a number of Dutch evaluated cases in the framework of the Bikeability-project.

The structure of the report is as follows. First, in Chapter 2, a brief overview of cycling, bicycle policy, and research on cycling in the Netherlands will be given. Then, in the next five chapters seven case studies are described.

Chapters 3 and 4 discuss the three ‘classical’ cases of large scale improvements in bicycle infrastructure that were implemented and evaluated some decades ago: the construction of high quality urban bicycle routes and the upgrade of the bicycle network in one city. Chapter 4 deals in addition with a single project that is part of the network upgrade and that has been evaluated separately.

Chapters 5 to 7 describe the evaluations of the application of three recently developed typologies of infrastructure design: shared space, bicycle streets, and bicycle ‘highways’. Finally, Chapter 8 summarises the results and provides recommendations.

WP3: Choice modelling for simulation of bicyclist behaviour develops an agent based modelling approach to simulate the flow of individual bicyclists in urban areas as a response to changes to the urban environment and the level of and attitude to bicycle transport.

WP4: Interventions to the bicycling infrastructure will analyze bicycle infrastructure cases in the Danish municipalities and the Netherlands; their implementation and significance in terms of contribution to the promotion of cycling, and finally identify infrastructure and elements of interventions that can help promote cycling significantly.

WP5: Planning Guidance and Dissemination serves the purpose of presenting the project’s methodological advances, tools, and conclusions to policy-makers, planners and traffic engineers, as well as maintaining the dialog and interaction with end-users from the municipalities.

229

230

2 DEVELOPMENTS IN CYCLING IN THE NETHERLANDS

In the Netherlands and in many other countries bicycle usage increased continuously in the first half of the 20th century and reached a maximum in about 1950. Then bicycle usage started to decline due to the increasing competition of the car. In some countries, like England, the bicycle nearly disappeared, in other countries, like the Netherlands and Denmark, the bicycle survived as a frequently used mode. Figure 2.1 depicts the development of cycling in the Netherlands since 1950.

torised traffic. Upon that the report of the Club of Rome on the limits to growth in 1972 had a major impact on the public debate in the Netherlands, and triggered a more critical thinking about environmental aspects of the ongoing motorisation. Additionally, the oil crises of 1973 demonstrated the vulnerability of motorised transport. In 1975 the Fietsersbond (Dutch Cyclists’ Union) came into existence. Municipal officials in Delft invented the ‘woonerf’ concept: residential areas in which cars had to slow down to a walking pace so as to accommodate other uses of the public space than only traffic.

(sources: Figure 2.1: Development of bicycle kilometres per person per day in the Netherlands in the period 1950-2009 Ministry of Transport and Public Works, 1993, and national travel survey data 1980-2009) After 1950, bicycle use fell from nearly 5 km per person per day to less than 2 km in the mid 1970’s. Then it increased again to 2.5 km, and this level has been retained until today.

The 1970’s marked a paradigm shift in the Dutch thinking about traffic. Whereas in the 1950’s and 1960’s traffic and transport policies were characterised by straightforward attempts to make room for the rapidly increasing motorisation, in the 1970’s people started to see the downsides of mass motorisation. The number of fatal road casualties peaked in 1972 and raised a lot of public dissatisfaction.

The foundation in 1973 of the civil society group called ‘Stop de Kindermoord’ (Stop the Murder of Children) was a protest against the high number of road accidents with young children and the priority generally given to mo-

Bicycle promotion became permanently an issue in policy, and research on the effectiveness of measures for improving cycling conditions started as well. In the late 1970’s two ‘demonstration bicycle routes’ were implemented in The Hague and Tilburg. In the 1980’s the bicycle network in the medium-sized city of Delft was upgraded in order to create a comprehensive and integral network that meets certain standards of quality. These three projects were evaluated extensively and got the status of classical case studies in bicycle interventions; the studies are discussed in Chapters 3 and 4.

231

In the 1990’s the central government initiated a large number of projects and studies in the framework of the “Masterplan Fiets”. Research and active policy continued in the new century. New concepts were developed that aimed at humanizing traffic and utilising the potential of active modes as cycling, like ‘bicycle streets’, ‘shared space’, ‘driving slowly goes faster’ and ‘bicycle highways’. These concepts did not change the city overnight, but helped to improve the urban transport system and to sustain the existing levels of cycling.

The figure demonstrates that a) the bicycle share is by far highest for teenagers (about 60%!), and b) the developments of the shares are highly stable. The stability is remarkable because the average trip distance increased, inducing a relative decrease of trips where the bicycle is a feasible mode. The Ministry of Transport and Public Works (1998) argued that the competitiveness of the bicycle has increased. Other studies show that the cycling culture in the Netherlands has gained strength and acceptation in all parts of the population compared to three decades ago (DHV et al, 1980, Goudappel en Coffeng and Rijkswaterstaat, 1980, Mobycon et al, 2009).

Figure 2.2: Share of the bicycle for regular trips by age class (source: national travel survey data 1979-2008) Corresponding to the growth in bicycle use, the market share of use of the bicycle increased since the mid 1970’s until the level of 28% in the early 1980’s. Since then this level has been remarkably constant. Figure 2.2 shows the development of market shares of bicycle use for regular trips, separately for three age classes: young children < 12 years old, teenagers from 12-18, and adults >= 18 years old. Regular trips exclude bicycle use for just go for a ride and feeder trips to and from public transport. Data for young children are available only from 1994.

232

Figures collected by the Fietsersbond (2010) show that the most important purposes for bicycle use are shopping (22% of all bicycle trips), education (18%), work (16%), leisure (14%, excluding just go for a ride that has a share of 6%), and visit family or friends (11%). The number of bicycle trips is comparable for men and women except for ages from 30-60 where women make significantly more trips. Non-natives make considerably less bicycle trips than natives. The difference is most striking for nonnatives from Mediterranean countries.

In contrast to the stability of bicycle use for regular trips, usage of the bicycle for access and egress to and from public transport increased spectacular. The number of this kind of trips increased from about 0.02 in the early 1980â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s to about 0.05 today. Most of these trips are feeder trips for the train. The increase can partly be explained by a general increase in train use and party by an increase of the bicycle share in the access and egress modes.

233

234

3 The demonstration projects in Tilburg and The Hague

3.1 Political context In chapter 2 we shortly described the paradigm shift of the 1970’s in the thinking about traffic, resulting in more attention for (the safety of) cycling and walking. In this atmosphere of growing awareness a budget line for subsidizing cycling facilities in urban areas was introduced for the first time in the Multi Annual Plan for Persons Transport 1976-1980 of the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management. Such facilities were meant to stimulate bicycle use. Municipal projects to improve cyclists’ safety were eligible for a 80% subsidy.

As the construction of such facilities – in those days – appeared to be not that simple, the minister took up the plan to implement two so called ‘demonstration bicycle routes’ in The Hague and Tilburg as an example for other municipalities to follow suit. These demonstration routes would be funded 100% by the national government.

Both Tilburg and The Hague were chosen because these municipalities had formulated policies to improve cycling conditions in line with the aims of the government. These cycling policies were meant to slow down the increase of motorised traffic and to strengthen the (at that time deteriorating) position of cycling (and also public transport).

As the available budget was supposed to be spent in 1976 there was little time for preparation and design. The ministry was keen on making the demonstration route available as soon as possible in order to stimulate other municipalities to follow the given example.

And at the same time there was an ambiguity in the character of these projects: on the one hand they should show the feasibility of dedicated bicycle routes, and on the other hand these projects had to contribute to an increased knowledge and understanding of the effects of certain interventions, which implied systematic before and after studies. Thus the routes included some (at that time) experimental solutions which effectiveness had to be assessed. The result of this ambiguity was (amongst other things) that the implementation of the routes took a bit more time than anticipated, and also resulted in an extensive research to the effects of the implemented facilities on bicycle use, road safety, the appropriateness of certain designs and the experiences of the users.

235

3.2 The route designs 3.2.1 TILBURG

? No image yet page 25 word doc

Figure 3.1: Tilburg is located in the southern part of the Netherlands.

Tilburg is a city in the south of the Netherlands. After the industrial revolution it became a centre for textile industries, and because of the increase of the population Tilburg absorbed the adjacent villages. Thus Tilburg is an agglomeration rahter than a mono centric city. In the 1960â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the textile industry lost its prominent position and many industrial sites were redeveloped. At that time Tilburg had a population of about 150.000 inhabitants. (In 2010 this number has increased to 204.000 inhabitants.)

Tilburg is also a university city with an emphasis on social and economic sciences. Although Tilburg is the sixth city of the Netherlands, its urban form reflects a rather recent development of its urban status.

The design The demonstration bicycle route was designed as one stretched route connecting the outskirts of the built-up area in the west and the east with the city centre.

236

Â

Figure 3.2: Bicyle route in Tilburg.

In the eastbound direction the route was extended to neighbouring villages Berkel-Enschot and Oisterwijk.

Thus this route has also a rural section. At relevant points (mainly in the city centre) the project included some (relatively short) transverse connections to open up the area.

And the connection with the villages in the east looks like an ongoing alignment to Oisterwijk with two transverse connections to Berkel-Enschot.

Figure 3.3: Main route (above) and transverse connections (below) inside the city of Tilburg.

Â

237

Figure 3.4: Extension of the bicycle route to the villages of Oisterwijk and Berkel-Enschot.

Main features of the project (Gemeente Tilburg 1975; Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat 1977):

• Segregated cycling facilities, mostly a two directional path at one side of the main carriageway; • Redesigned narrow streets in the city centre with restricted access for cars, and related to that a number of changes in the circulation in the inner-city, such as changes of direction in one way streets; • Intersection redesign so as to give priority to cyclists on the bicycle route as much as possible; • Much effort is put into showing the continuity of the bicycle route across the intersections by using red coloured road surface for the bicycle route.

• ‘Humps and bumps’ in the road pavement were used as an experimental feature at intersections to influence the manoeuvring of car drivers.

238

The design

3.2.2 The Hague

Just as in Tilburg the demonstration route in The Hague was intended to be one stretched route (through the urban fabric parallel between two main arterials for motorised traffic) connecting the south-west of the city (Waldeck) and the north east part (Mariahoeve) via the city centre.

? No image yet page 25 word doc

Figure 3.5: The Hague is located in the west of the Netherlands and part of the metropolitan conurbation called ‘Randstad’.

The Hague is the residence city of the Netherlands government (Amsterdam being the capital). Government has been residing in The Hague since the 16th century.

The Hague is the third city in the Netherlands with about 500.000 inhabitants. As the The Hague territory is fully utilised, the number of inhabitants is now smaller than 30 years ago, but the increase of population is absorbed by neighbouring municipalities. The agglomeration Haaglanden, consisting of The Hague and its neighbour municipalities has over 1 million inhabitants. And again this agglomeration is part of the larger Randstad, the metropolitan area in the west of the Netherlands including also Amsterdam, Rotterdam and Utrecht.

The Hague is situated at the North Sea and well connected with the other parts of the country by highways and rail connections. The Hague is also called the capital of international justice, being the residence of the International Court and International Criminal Court.

Figure 3.6: Bicycle route in The Hague But the planned route through the city centre and the east part met so much opposition that the city centre part was only decided upon after the evaluation study, and the east part of the route was cancelled altogether. So the bicycle route that was subject of the evaluation study is only connecting Waldeck, a neighbourhood in the SouthWest part of The Hague in North East direction with the city centre. The urban density in The Hague is somewhat higher than in Tilburg. Most parts of the route were designed as a one sided two directional cycle path, with priority of the cycle route at most of the intersections.

Some parts are one way streets with cyclists mixing with motorised traffic and a contra flow cycling path in the other direction. Main feature in The Hague is the design of intersections with right of way for cyclists on the demonstration route. As in Tilburg the continuity of the route was made visible by the use of (red) coloured pavement.

The experimental feature in The Hague was the design of ‘priority intersections’ that provided right of way to cyclists on the demonstration bicycle route. The bicycle route is aligned over a road hump so as to make sure that crossing car drivers are slowing down when approaching the bicycle route. (Dienst der Gemeentewerken ’s-Gravenhage, 1978).

239

projects. (See also the organization chart below.) The decision making on the project implementation was at the municipal level.

3.3.1 Tilburg In reality the (urban part of the) bicycle route in Tilburg was implemented between March 1976 and November 1977 (Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, 1977) after approval of the plans by the municipal council on 1 December 1975. The extensions to the neighbouring municipalities Berkel-Enschot and Oisterwijk were only decided in 1977, and these parts of the route are outside the scope of the evaluation studies.

Given the pressure of time there was limited room for information to and consultation of the population. Information and consultations sessions were organised per neighbourhood and with some stakeholder groups like the Chamber of Commerce and the association of shop owners. Comments made could only be taken into account as far as they were within the boundary conditions of the project. This wasn’t always to the satisfaction of the people involved in this consultation process.

The technical preparation and supervision on the implementation was commissioned to some consultancies, with the final responsibility at Tilburg Public Works department.

3.3 Organisation and

3.3.2 The Hague

implementation

In The Hague the implementation process was less straight forward than in Tilburg. The original idea was that the municipal council would approve the plans for the entire bicycle route in one decision. But because of the opposition (mainly coming from shop keepers) the council decided to take separate decisions for 5 different route sections. For each route section ‘information evenings’ were organised, and the plans for some sections raised substantial opposition, which resulted in serious delays for these sections. The route section in the historic city centre got only approved in 1983 after the evaluation studies were finished, and the north east section was ultimately cancelled altogether.

Both demonstration projects stem from the desire of the government to demonstrate the feasibility of well national designed urban cycling infrastructure. As explained in paragraph 3.1 the Multi Annual Plan for Persons Transport 1976-1980 had (for the first time) a budget line to subsidize urban cycling facilities. But as municipalities obviously found it difficult to qualify for these subsidies, these demonstration routes had to show them the way.

Because of the time frame of the multi-annual plan the ministry wanted the projects to be implemented rather quickly. The original idea was that the implementation of both routes would be finalized in 1976.

For both projects there was a steering group of municipal officials and the (national) Department of Waterways and Public Works. Thereupon there was a ‘plenary study group’ with 5 subgroups for a proper evaluation of the

240

The technical preparation was in the hands of the Department of Public Works of The Hague whereas the political management of the project was a shared responsibility of the town clerk’s office and the department of Public Works.

Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management

Municipality of The Hague Municipality of Tilburg

Project implementation

Project group design The Hague Project group design Tilburg

Bicycle use

Accompanying research

Steering group The Hague Steering group Tilburg

Cyclists’ perceptions

Plenary Research Group

Road safety

Design aspects

Shop sales

5 thematic research groups

Figure 3.8: Chart of organisation and implementation of the two projects (Van den Broecke and Rijkswaterstaat, 1981)

3.4 The costs It doesn’t seem very worthwhile to go very deep into the costs of projects that were implemented more than 30 years ago. The reporting on this issue (Instituut voor Zintuigfysiologie, TNO and Rijkswaterstaat 1982) concludes that cost estimates were reasonably in line with the real costs, that it was difficult to establish a general applicable unit price for sections and intersections, that larger constructions such as bridges and underpasses do have a large impact on the total costs of such a project, and that costs are relatively low when the bicycle facilities can be implemented between the existing curbs of the carriageway. Reconstruction of the cross section ‘from façade to façade’ is obviously and understandably more expensive.

This was also the main explanation why the bicycle route

in The Hague was cheaper than the route in Tilburg: the route in The Hague could be implemented between the existing curbs, whereas in Tilburg the entire cross section was reconstructed. In the case of the two projects preparation and supervision of the construction of the bicycle routes took a substantial part of the budget.

3.5

Set-up of the

evaluation studies The demonstration projects were not only intended to show the feasibility of the implementation of cycling facilities, but also to get a better understanding of the effects of such facilities. For this reason the project was accompanied by a number of studies to evaluate the bicycle routes

241

and to conclude whether the goals and objectives of the projects were achieved. The research was organised in 5 thematic sub researches researching the impacts or effects of the bicycle routes on (1) bicycle use, (2) perceptions (appreciation) of the quality of the route and its elements, (3) road safety, (4) design aspects, and (5) shop sales.

These groups were supervised by a plenary research group as shown in the organization chart in par. 3.3.

As for the information and consultation process also the determination of the research questions was done rather quick and dirty. As a consequence the research questions of the 5 research groups didn’t fit in optimally to policy issues. Also the researches weren’t optimally geared to one another, which hampered the drawing of integral conclusions. An integral evaluation was done on the technical aspects (building on the results of the 5 sub groups) and on the process aspects of the project (evaluating project organisation, implementation and demonstration). The next paragraphs will shortly explain the research questions, used methods and results of all evaluation studies.

3.6 The impacts 3.6.1 Bicycle use With regard to bicycle use the research questions were: • Did the construction of the bicycle route result into additional trips?

• Did the construction of the bicycle route result into a modal shift?

• Is the bicycle route attracting cyclists from parallel routes?

• What is the size of the area of influence of the bicycle route?

• Do cyclists using the bicycle route judge differently about time losses as a consequence of detours than cyclists using other routes? (Or to phrase it differently: are cyclists prepared to accept longer detours because of a high quality bicycle route?)

•How do cyclists experience certain design aspects?

(DHV et al,1980) These questions were answered on the basis of counts of volumes of cyclists on the demonstration routes and parallel routes before (October 1975) and after (October 1977, April 1978, October 1978 and October 1979) the implementation of the bicycle routes, and on the basis of a survey (after implementation) amongst cyclists on the

242

bicycle routes and in the vicinity of these routes.

The counts and surveys have been identically executed in The Hague and Tilburg. Also moped users were surveyed, but as the number of moped users decreased substantially between 1975 and 1977 (15% in The Hague and 30% in Tilburg) the analyses of the surveys was only done with the cyclists’ responses. It is good to note here that the majority of cyclists surveyed (75% in Tilburg and 81% in The Hague) had no car available for their trips. (It is likely that today – 2011 – much higher percentages of cyclists have a car available.)

The counts in both cities have been done on two corridor cross sections, including the bicycle route and the parallel routes on both sides. In both cities the volume of cyclists on the newly implemented route increased dramatically at the cost of the volumes of the parallel routes. The increase of volumes on the bicycle routes were highest in Tilburg (146% in 1978 and 140% in 1979 – both compared with the volumes as counted in 1975) but also in The Hague they were considerable (54% in 1978 and 76% in 1979).

40% of the users in The Hague and 67% of the users in Tilburg are coming from parallel routes.

At the same time cyclists don’t appear to be prepared to make detours. The average detour distance (defined as the difference between ‘the distance as the crow flies’ and ‘the distance over the road’) is on the bicycle route in The Hague only 90 m longer than on the parallel routes; and in Tilburg the bicycle route is the shortest route anyway for most cyclists. The latter fact can be an explanation of the larger increase in use of the bicycle route in Tilburg: the shift in route choice in Tilburg can be explained because of an improved directness offered by the bicycle route. In case of a similar directness (no or minor detours compared to other routes) the shift in route choice can be explained by the better cycling quality of the route.

Obviously cyclists in The Hague are prepared to accept an average additional detour of only 90 m to use the better quality bicycle route. (DHV et al, 1980) Goudappel en Coffeng and Rijkswaterstaat (1981, 1) suggest that travel time could be an explaining factor for this. The perception study revealed that cyclists appreciate the feeling of being able to get on smoothly, and that the absence of traffic lights on the demonstration route could result in a shorter travel time even if the distance is a bit larger.

The total volume of cyclists in the corridor had increased as well. The increase was larger on the bicycle routes than on the parallel routes. In the survey cyclists indicated that they made more cycling trips for so called ‘non obligatory’ (or ‘voluntary’) trips (as opposed to ‘obligatory’ or

‘non voluntary’ trips like commuting to school or to work, which were not expected to increase). Cyclists stated to make more cycling trips to shops, family visits and recreational purposes than before the implementation of the bicycle route.

On the other hand the implementation of the demonstration bicycle routes had only a modest impact on modal choice. In 1977 cyclists (on the demonstration routes and on parallel routes) were asked what mode of transport they used in 1975. Most cyclists (90%) already cycled before (as most of them had no car available for their trip) and there was no difference in this respect between cyclists on the demonstration routes and on parallel routes.

There is hardly any impact on public transport use in both cities (that had very different levels of service). There is a small shift from car to bicycle (5-8% of the cyclists that own a car – which is only 20-25% of all cyclists – indicated that they used to use their car in 1975), and it can be concluded very cautiously that the (autonomous) shift from bicycle to other modes (i.e. modal shift as a consequence of changes in a person’s personal situation) is smaller for cyclists using the demonstration route than for those using parallel routes. (Goudappel en Coffeng and Rijkswaterstaat 1980, DHV et al, 1980) With regard to the area of influence of the demonstration route an analysis was made of the origins and destinations of the surveyed cyclists. It appeared that those having their origin and/or destination within 250 m of the route will use the route rather frequently, but when origin and destination are further away, the use of the route becomes rapidly very small. It could not be shown that the area of influence of these demonstration routes was larger than the area of influence of other routes. However, if trip distances are more or less equal (i.e. no detour as a consequence of using the route) cyclists do choose the demonstration route more often.

In general the users of the demonstration bicycle routes are positive about the routes. Satisfaction was larger in Tilburg than in The Hague, although some design aspects also raised some criticism. (See also 3.6.3 Perception of cycling quality.)

3.6.2 Road safety With regard to road safety the researchers made a distinction between ‘objective’ road safety which can be measured by the number of personal injury accidents and facilities, and the ‘perceived’ or ‘subjective’ road safety:

how safe do cyclists feel to be. This paragraph is mainly dealing with the objective road safety effects of the demonstration routes: in how far has the implementation of these routes resulted in a decrease of personal injury or fatal accidents. The perceived or subjective road safety is dealt with in the next paragraph about the perceived quality of the bicycle route.

The main research questions with regard to road safety effects of the demonstration routes were: • What is the influence of the implemented demonstration routes on the (objective) road safety within the area of influence of the routes?

• What is the influence of geometric design and traffic light adjustments of the newly implemented facilities on the road safety on the routes?

The first question was elaborated in a number of subquestions so as to compare road safety for motorised and non motorised road users in the area of influence at large with a control area, and subsequently to compare the cycle route road sections and intersections with other road sections and intersections within the area of influence.

The second question was also elaborated in a number of more detailed research questions but eventually handed over to the research group looking into design aspects. As the number of accidents per location (fortunately) are too rare to enable good conclusions on the basis of accident data, other methods of analysis had to be applied. See for design related road safety conclusions also paragraph 3.6.4.

The road safety impacts in this paragraph are based on an analysis of accident data before and after the implementation of the bicycle route. (Goudappel en Coffeng and Rijkswaterstaat, 1981, 3 and 4).

With regard to the development of road safety for all road users there appeared to be no difference in the areas of influence of the bicycle routes in comparison with the control areas.

Different results were found when looking at the accidents at sections and intersections of the bicycle route compared to other road sections and intersections within the influence areas. On the road sections and intersections of the bicycle routes single personal injury accidents and personal injury accidents with only cyclists involved are more frequent, and on intersections this is also true for cyclist x motorist personal injury accidents. However, 243

that the risk of personal injury on the bicycle route is lowest on the bicycle route. This can be explained by the absence of cyclist x motorists accidents on the bicycle route because of the segregated facilities. One could say that there was a shift from cyclist x motorist accidents to cyclist x cyclist accidents, cyclists x pedestrian accidents and single cycling accidents. The latter types of accidents are on average of course less serious than the cyclist x motorist accidents.

In general the researchers concluded that the demonstration bicycle routes had no measurable impact on the number of accidents with personal injury, and this was a disappointing conclusion. There was no clear positive effect of the bicycle routes on (objective) road safety (Dienst der Gemeentewerken ’s-Gravenhage, 1984).

3.6.3 Perception of cycling quality One of the researches was meant to determine how cyclists and other road users perceive (and experience) the bicycle routes and the various applied design elements, and to which extent the perception (and experience) of cycling in the city is being improved by the construction of a dedicated bicycle route. The character of this research was mainly qualitative.

Research questions were: • How do the various groups of road users appreciate/ assess the current (implemented) bicycle route, and what are the reasons for a positive or a negative assessment?

• How do bicycle and moped users perceive the use of the bicycle route in comparison with cycling in the before situation?

• What can be said on a qualitative level about the effects of the bicycle route on the level of bicycle use and on route choice?

• How are the various design elements (design components) of the bicycle routes being perceived by the users?

• How do motorists (i.e. car drivers) perceive the priority intersections in the bicycle route as they have been designed and implemented?

To answer these questions a survey was executed before and after the implementation of the bicycle routes

244

amongst three important target groups within the (expected) areas of influence of both demonstration routes.

These target groups were: • Employees from adjacent residential areas having their jobs in the city centre, who don’t need a car for their job and could or do use the bicycle for their commuting; •Housewives from the same residential areas who could or do cycle; •Students of schools in the vicinity of the bicycle route.

There were also surveys amongst control groups, consisting out of similar employees and housewives from similar neighbourhoods but outside the areas of influence of the bicycle routes. It appeared necessary to replenish the panels that had been surveyed in the before study for the after study, especially in The Hague: because of the delays in implementation the existing panels appeared to be depleted substantially at the time of the after study.

Even more so because a considerable part of the demonstration route in The Hague (the north-east section) had not been implemented, and as a consequence the concerning part of the before study panel wasn’t relevant for the after study.

The surveys consisted out of an extensive list of questions, and the results of the before study were also used for drafting the questions for the after study.

In general the respondents (both users and non-users of the routes) assessed the implementation of the bicycle routes positively. Non-users included both cyclists from other areas and non-cyclists, and also the majority of noncyclists were positive. The positive judgements (in 1978) were more frequent in Tilburg (82%) than in The Hague (62%). Main reasons for the positive appreciation were improved perceived (!) road safety and more room for cycling because of the provision of segregated road space.

Additionally the cyclists in Tilburg mentioned that the bicycle route made the city centre better (faster) accessible by bicycle. Those in The Hague who were negative in their assessment of the bicycle route mentioned mainly insufficient road safety or even called the route dangerous. In Tilburg the negative assessments were mainly explained by the nuisance that the bicycle route created for other road users.

Striking is that with regard to the positive expectations in the before study in 1976 it was just the other way around: cyclists in The Hague were more positive about the plans

(83%) than cyclists in Tilburg (68%). Also more cyclists in The Hague were (in 1978) positive about the suggestion for more bicycle routes than cyclists in Tilburg (68%). Explanation for this could be that firstly the need for improvement of cycling conditions was perceived as more urgent in The Hague than in Tilburg, and secondly that higher expectations can be easier disappointed.

ees and 7% of the housewives in The Hague, and 9% of the employees and 13 % of the housewives in Tilburg.

Changes in modal choice for commuting are minor, for other motives slightly higher but still very modest: 5%. In line with the results of the research to travel behaviour is that cyclists indicate only to use the route if it provides a direct connection between origin and destination.

The next research question was how cyclists compare the use of the bicycle route with the before situation without the bicycle route. Generally they feel safer than before, they can cycle more undisturbed and they can get on more smoothly.

When it comes to the appreciation of certain design aspects of the bicycle routes the following observations can be made:

Spontaneously mentioned elements as being ‘well thought of’ were the (redish) coloured pavement of the bicycle route, the segregation from the motor traffic and the right of way at intersections. On the question what they disliked cyclists mentioned dangerous (priority) intersections, some narrow sections, mopeds on the bicycle route and a number of very diverse other objections.

When directly asked to assess certain quality aspects as being improved or deteriorated these were the results: The most striking difference between the two cities is the relative larger improvement of the directness in Tilburg.

The effect of the bicycle routes on bicycle use and route choice were already studied in another research (see 3.6.1), and the results in this study to the perceptions of cyclists are in line with those results. Only small percentages of the cyclist respondents indicate to cycle more often because of the bicycle routes: 2% of the employ-

Quality aspect More pleasant cycling Safer cycling Getting on more smoothly (i.e. improved directness) More attractive route

• A positive appreciation of the design correlates with the extent of segregation and the width of the facilities. Cyclists are obviously less positive when facilities are not segregated and/or too narrow.

• There is also a correlation between the perception of safety and the enjoyability of cycling, although the perception of safety is systematically more positive than the perception of enjoyability. One could conclude that perceived safety is a precondition for enjoyable cycling, but obviously there is more to it.

• Intersections are perceived as less safe than road sections, and a bit more so in case of intersections without traffic lights.

• The two grade separated crossings in Tilburg are in general appreciated, although the (specific) design of one underpass had also some critical remarks.

• The bumps in the road surface at some intersections in Tilburg to steer the manoeuvres of car drivers are mainly

improved The Hague Tilburg 71% 82% 66% 78%

deteriorated The Hague Tilburg 10% 1% 12% 4%

57%

79%

5%

4%

43%

56%

7%

4%

Table 3.1: Perceived changes in quality

245

• Coloured pavement to visually distinguish the space for cycling and to underline the coherence and continuity of the route are generally appreciated.

• Cyclists prefer an asphalt pavement above tile paving.

3.6.4 Design aspects An important question is how the results of the researches in the previous paragraphs cohere with specific designs applied in the bicycle routes. Upon that it is important to know to which extent the behaviour of road users is in accordance with the intentions of the designers. To a certain extent these questions have been answered in the research on the perceptions of road users. A specific research was done to evaluate the design of intersections, and more particularly the intersections without traffic lights where cyclists have the right of way.

At these intersections and a number of control intersections observations were done to the behaviour of the various road users with regard to their speed, manoeuvres and interaction with other road users. Behaviour was registered and subsequently analysed. The gravity of interactions or conflicts was assessed by calculating the ‘time to collision’ (i.e. the collision that would happen if road users continue their course with unchanged speed; van der Horst and Sijmonsma, 1978).

This observation method was also applied to complement the road safety analysis based on accident data.

On each individual location the number of accidents was too rare to draw any specific conclusion with regard to the safety of the location in relation to the applied design.

As near misses happen much more frequently than real accidents, observations of those near misses can provide a data base that is considered to a good proxy for road accident data bases as basis for an in depth road safety analysis.

Conclusions at route level: • Given the fact that cyclists are hardly prepared to make detours, the design of bicycle routes should offer as direct as possible connections between origin and destination.

And combined with the preference of cyclists for segregated facilities the implication is that if a heavily used arterial is providing the shortest connection for cyclists, these arterials should have segregated cycle tracks.

246

• However, routes along arterials have some disadvantages, such as the experience of noise and emissions, traffic lights that often aren’t well adjusted to the needs of cyclists, and the risk of collisions with turning motor traffic. So if direct connections can be made through traffic calmed areas, this is the preferred option.

• Another finding of the research was the importance of a logical tracing of the various links of the bicycle route. If the tracing of the route is unclear, cyclists get ‘lost’. Thus is coherence an important requirement for cycling infrastructure.

Findings and conclusions with regard to road sections: • In both bicycle routes the bicycle facilities were as much as possible segregated from the carriageway for motor traffic, and cyclists appear to appreciate this.

• The route in Tilburg was better appreciated than the route in The Hague. In The Hague the emphasis was on creating safety, whereas in Tilburg the emphasis was on getting on more smoothly (improving directness) through traffic restrained streets.

• In case of a lack of space to apply the desired width, in some streets the designers chose for compromised solutions. Narrowing down the width for all road users with only visual separation between the lanes was appreciated by none of the categories of road users: the design wasn’t comfortable for any of them. A better option seems to design the concerning street as a habitat street with limited access for motor traffic and a mixed profile. Yet this is not ideal for a main bicycle route.

• Both in The Hague and in Tilburg one sided two directional bicycle tracks were predominantly applied. The research showed that for the level of use this hardly makes any difference compared with two sided one directional tracks. These one sided two directional bicycle tracks have a big advantage with regard to road management: overall these one sided facilities are cheaper and require less space than two sided one directional tracks. For cyclists they have only advantages when most origins and destinations are on the same side of the road, as in those cases there is less need for cyclists to cross the main carriageway. But there are also serious disadvantages: the perception of safety by cyclists is less for those riding in the ‘wrong’ direction (which is understandable as they are closest to the head on motor traffic).

And at intersections on this one sided facilities there are more conflicts and accidents, again with these cyclists in the ‘wrong’ direction being the ‘unexpected direction’ for other road users. Also the overtaking by mopeds on these two-directional tracks is perceived as less safe and comfortable. The overall conclusion is that in urban environments two sided one directional tracks are in general the most preferred bicycle facilities. One sided two directional tracks should only be applied if it is clear that the advantages of a decreased need for crossing the main carriageway exceed the described disadvantages.

• The interaction with crossing pedestrians is asking for attention as well. As this often happens unexpectedly and all along the route, this requires some extra width for avoiding manoeuvres. An additional width of 0.50 m of the bicycle track is recommended at locations where many crossing pedestrians can be expected (Instituut voor Zintuigfysiologie 1981). In general and particularly at dedicated pedestrian crossings it is important that pedestrians can see where and from which directions they can .expect cyclists. The coloured pavement enhancing the recognisability of the bicycle track contributes to this.

with a smaller turning radius and to cross the bicycle track in a right angle) whereas larger vehicle (needing more space) still could make their manoeuvres across the intersection using the area with the uneven pavement. Find below a few examples of intersection designs applied in The Hague.

• The observation study systematically distinguished all possible interactions between one or two directional bicycle tracks on the one hand and one or two directional crossing motor traffic on the other hand. A further distinction was made to situations in which motor traffic would only cross the bicycle route; would cross the bicycle route and subsequently the main carriageway; or would first cross the main carriageway and then the bicycle route.

By systematic zoning of the intersection the behaviour of road users in each zone could be analysed. In an ideal situation before and after studies would have been done, but this wasn’t possible as the research method was only developed after the bicycle routes had been implemented. Therefore some control intersections have been selected in order to determine the effects of the applied design elements.

Findings and conclusions with regard to the intersection designs: The research into the design aspects of ‘unregulated priority crossings’, i.e. intersections without traffic lights providing right of way to the cyclists on the bicycle route, is probably the most significant research about design aspects of cycling facilities of these projects. Therefore we will go into a bit more detail on the aspects of intersection design.

• In both bicycle routes intersection designs were implemented that intended to have an impact on the speed, manoeuvring and interaction by the road users. Main purpose was to accomplish that car drivers would approach the bicycle route with low speeds and that they would be alerted to the presence of cyclists so as to give them right of way. For this purpose bumps and road humps were applied as well as road narrowings of the side streets just before the crossing with the bicycle route. Also the designers applied at some intersections areas with more or less uneven cobble stones to influence the manoeuvring of (personal) cars. The idea was that the discomfort of driving over the cobble stones would make that car drivers would avoid riding over these cobblestones (thus forced to make the intended manoeuvre across the intersection

247

Figure 3.9: Four examples of intersection designs Next behavioural elements to analyse were identified: • Speed behaviour upon approaching the bicycle route (mainly in zone 1; • The lining up behaviour in case of traffic on the main carriageway parallel to the bicycle route (mainly in zone 2 and 3);

fore the edge of the bicycle route had significant better effects than having the ramp just at the edge of the bicycle route. So the effect of the humps was that car drivers will slow down more and earlier.

• Manoeuvre behaviour and interactions with cyclists on the bicycle route.

• Speed behaviour: The application of road humps (or table crossings) over which the bicycle route was aligned in combination with narrowings of the side streets just before the crossing appeared to work quite well. As car drivers would slow down anyway when approaching the main carriageway, the deceleration was larger in case of the hump or table crossing. But the most significant effect was the location of the deceleration. Without a speed hump the cars would slow down just before the main carriageway, whereas in the case of the road hump or table crossing with the bicycle route they would slow down before crossing the bicycle route. Having the ramp 5 m be-

248

Figure 3.10: Zoning categories: in zone 1 (or zone 7) traffic from the side way is approaching the bicycle route

• Manoeuvre behaviour: The intended effect of the applied areas with cobblestones did only occur when they were paved very uneven. Visually marked areas with a smooth surface were less effective to enforce the intended manoeuvre behaviour. The project in Tilburg showed that extreme bumps to steer manoeuvre behaviour can also be counterproductive: if the intended manoeuvre appears too difficult or uncomfortable car drivers might try to avoid these bumps in other ways, sometimes by invading the bicycle track.

Figure 3.11: An intersection with 5m distance between ramps and the edge of the bicycle track

The speed behaviour of drivers coming from zone 7 or 4, i.e. the cars approaching the bicycle route from the other direction, was observed as well. Although the minimum speeds measured were higher than the speeds of cars coming from zone 1, the speed was still significant lower than in cases without speed humps. The difference was least for cars making a right turn to cross the bicycle route.

• Lining up behaviour: Also the lining up behaviour was positively influenced by the presence of the road humps.

In case of humps or table crossings cars coming from zone 1 have clearly their minimum speed before the bicycle route when there are cyclists, whereas in cases without humps the minimum speed is on or even beyond the bicycle route. The lining up in this direction, however, hasn’t been analysed explicitly. The lining up in zone 2 and 3 is looked at in case they hadn’t to give way to cyclists but had to wait for cars on the main carriageway.

The desired lining up would be in zone 3 without blocking the bicycle route in zone 2. Here the position of the ramp of the road hump in combination with the available width of zone 3 appears to make a significant difference. Zone 3 has to be wide enough to position the car, but even if this is the case it makes a difference whether the ramp is at the edge of the bicycle route or 5 m from the edge of the bicycle route (at the edge of the main carriageway).

In the latter case cars are making significantly less stops blocking the bicycle route over 1 m or more. The reason for this is that in case the ramp is at 5 m from the edge of the bicycle route, they don’t have to worry about their rear wheels being at the ramp

Figure

3.12 and figure 3.13: Cobble stone area and bump to steer manoeuvre behaviour.

• Conflicts: the observation study also revealed that conflicts between cars and cyclists on a two directional bicycle track tend to be more serious between the car and the first stream of cyclists the car driver is crossing. And also that the number of serious conflicts is influenced by the most frequently occurring (directions of the) manoeuvres across the intersection. Clarity about the manoeuvres that can be expected helps, and intersections at the bicycle routes had less serious conflicts than the control intersections.

249

• With regard to intersections with traffic lights it appears that cyclists hardly noticed any difference between traffic light adjustments on the bicycle route and at other intersections. What they liked most was that the number of intersections with traffic lights was diminished at the bicycle route and for that reason they had less delay. Again this underlines the importance of the requirement of directness.

3.6.5 Economy With the implementation of the bicycle routes the position of shops was a big issue. Especially in The Hague shop keepers weren’t very happy with the implementation of the route (which was one of the first projects in their kind).

The implementation of several parts of the route got seriously delayed because of the opposition of shop keepers and in the end some parts that had been planned were never implemented. The fear for loosing volume of business is only too understandable. Therefore a research was done on the impact of the bicycle route and its implementation on shop sales along the route.

The research in The Hague compared the developments in the turnover of the shops along the bicycle route with the country wide average turnover developments and the development of a similar control group of comparable shops. For the shops in Tilburg it appeared impossible to compose a proper control group and thus only the comparison was made with the country wide trends.

Nevertheless the findings in both cities were consistent with each other.

In both cities the volume of business of shops along the bicycle routes was negatively affected in the construction phase: their turn over was below the country wide average for similar shops, although this effect was much lower for shops in the food sector that attracted their clients from the neighbourhood. After the construction the shops in the food sector very quickly caught up and performed actually better than the country wide average. Quite different was the turnover development of shops in the sector of durable consumer goods (that often attract their clients from a wider area): they performed far below the country wide trends, and also the number of shops closing down in this sector was relatively high. It should be noted though that there are large differences between sub-sectors and also that a number of these shops (especially in The Hague) were already marginal before the bicycle route was implemented.

250

In conclusion one can say that the construction phase of public works will very likely cause some negative impacts on the development of turnovers of shops. Generally shops will catch up later and compensate for the losses in volume of business during the construction. But this is not true for all sectors. Especially shops in durable consumer goods seemed (at that time) to be more vulnerable for changes in the quality of their accessibility (e.g. because of the reduction parking space) than shops in the food sector. Explaining factor for this was the difference in catchment area for the different sectors: when clients come from the neighbourhood there was hardly any negative effect, whereas shops that got their clients from a wider area had more problems with their recovery. One could even say: there might be winners and their might be losers. In any case it is good to pay attention to specific issues that might have impact on the accessibility of shops for their existing clients (e.g. with regard to parking space, loading and unloading facilities etc) in order to minimise the disturbance of businesses.

3.7 Discussion The ‘demonstration bicycle routes’ implemented in the late 1970’s in The Hague and Tilburg was the first well documented case study on the impact of cycling infrastructure. These projects can be seen as the first serious attempt to provide high quality infrastructure for cycling and to study the impacts extensively. Although the projects suffered from some ambiguity in their set up (trying to combine a demonstration of feasibility with experimental designs), the findings of the accompanying researches contain already many elements which were reflected in ‘Sign up for the bike, design manual for cycle-friendly infrastructure’, published later in 1993 and updated in 2006 under the title ‘Design manual for bicycle traffic’.

The projects showed a number of things: • Cyclists do appreciate dedicated facilities for cycling.

What they liked specifically in the two projects was the (perceived!) improvement of road safety, the experience of undisturbed cycling, improvements of directness (without detours and delays), and – with regard to design – the ‘furnishing’ of the route: the red coloured pavement and other design elements that underlined the tracing, recognisability and continuity of the route.

• Apart from providing the shortest connection between origin and destination the directness of a route can be

improved by minimising delays: giving right of way to cyclists at intersections and minimise the number of traffic lights on the route.

• However cyclists liked the design of the route, they were only to a very limited extent prepared to make detours to take full advantage of the improved cycling conditions. Although the demonstration routes attracted a great deal of cyclists from parallel routes, these new routes had more or less the same length as the earlier used routes or were shorter.

that the municipality of Tilburg after the project started with the implementation of a comprehensive bicycle network (which was locally known as Tilburg’s ‘star network’) with a strong emphasis on radial connections with the city centre, whereas the municipality of The Hague did not continue its efforts to substantially improve the cycling conditions. Continuing complaints of shop keepers eventually even resulted in the dismantling of large parts of the bicycle route in The Hague.

• Although road safety is considered to be vital by both bicycle users and policy makers, there was a remarkable contrast between the impacts of the facilities on the factual and the perceived road safety: road safety data showed no or very minor impacts, whereas the perceived road safety improved substantially. Policy makers were disappointed about the marginal impact of the facilities on the ‘objective’ road safety figures.

• The research also suggested that one should be careful with applying one-sided two directional bicycle tracks: this type of facility can have a negative impact on both factual (objective) and perceived (subjective) road safety of cyclists. Two sided one-directional bicycle tracks are on average experienced as more safe than one sided twodirectional cycle tracks. Thus one sided two-directional tracks should only be applied if there are clear advantages such as diminishing the need for crossing busy roads.

• With regard to experimental design features the project provided better understanding of effective design of priority intersections for cyclists. Very instructive were the observations of road users’ behaviour at those intersections.

• Furthermore the researchers did some theoretical analyses so as to shed light on what would be the ideal mesh width in a network of cycle routes. This provided the basis for the next demonstration project in this overview of case studies: the Delft bicycle network, implemented in the 1980’s.

In general the bicycle route in Tilburg was better appreciated than the bicycle route in The Hague and this difference in appreciation appears to be reciprocal correlated with differences in expectations. Yet the The Hague cyclists were more in favour of extensions of the bicycle route than those in Tilburg. But also the opposition in The Hague appeared to be much stronger. It is a kind of irony

251

252

4 The Delft Bicycle Plan

Delft is a medium-sized city in the highly urbanised western part of the Netherlands. It is located between the conurbations of Rotterdam and The Hague and on cycling distance to these two cities (Figure 4.1).

The main infrastructure routes (railway, canal, and motorway) run north-south through or along the city. In the Middle Ages Delft was one of the largest cities in Holland.

It has still a large medieval inner city. The city houses a technical university and a large technical research institute (TNO). It promotes itself as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;knowledge cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

The historic city centre with a low accessibility for cars as well as the large share of student population gives Delft a high potential for the bicycle. In 1979 the Delft Bicycle Plan was launched that aimed at realising a coherent bicycle network all over the city. At that time, the city had 85,000 inhabitants. The plan was implemented in the 1980s and evaluated elaborately. The evaluation regarded both the whole network and some larger single projects. In the next sections the plan and the evaluation of both the network and one single project (the Plantagebrug) will be discussed.

4.1 Political context In Section 2 is described that in the 1970s the Dutch national policy started to give high priority to promote cycling and improve cycling conditions. Besides, there was need for more knowledge on the impacts of interventions in bicycle infrastructure.

The demonstration projects in Tilburg and The Hague were results of this policy. After these projects were finished, the national policy continued to promote cycling by providing subsidies for specific projects, and there was still demand for more knowledge. The demonstration projects proved that investments in single bicycle routes could enhance (the perception of) safety, but that the impacts on bicycle use are rather small. One assumed that improvement of a complete network would have a more significant impact on bicycle use (Ministry of Transport and Public Works, 1987; Wilmink, 1987).

Figure 4.1: Location of Delft

253

In the late 1970s, the medium-sized city of Delft developed a plan for a coherent bicycle network in the whole city and requested the central government for a significant subsidy. The subsidy was granted under the condition that the implementation would be evaluated elaborately. The Delft Bicycle Plan was included in the Dutch second Programme for Person Transport for the period 1980-1984 as an evaluation project (Ministry of Transport and Public Works, 1986).

ties like primary schools and shops are connected to the network.

The neighbourhood network connects the individual houses to the other networks. It comprises the remaining streets and shortcuts for the bicycle. The link spacing is about 100 m.

The European Economic Community was interested in the evaluation results and contributed in financing a substantial part of the costs of the evaluation studies. The regional authority, the province of South-Holland, played a minor role in the project. It provided some subsidy for the implementation. So, four levels of authority were to a smaller or larger extent involved in the project: local, regional, national and supranational (Diepens en Okkema, 1994).

Plantagebrug Inner city Old districts (before WWII) Motorway Railway Canal

4.2 Design 4.2.1 The network In the Delft Bicycle Plan, three networks on three hierarchical levels were defined: an urban network, a district network and a neighbourhood network. The networks have different functions, service qualities and densities.

All networks have basically a grid-pattern. The existing infrastructure was basic in the network definition. The objective of the plan was to upgrade and extend the existing network in order to achieve a network that satisfies the requirements of the three defined sub-networks (Ministry of Transport and Public Works, 1987; Hartman, 1987).

The defined urban network consists of the most important routes that traverse the entire town and connect to the regional bicycle system. The function is to accommodate the larger inter-district bicycle trips as well as the regional trips that go into or outside the city. It has high standards for capacity, velocity and convenience. Important barriers like canals, railways and main roads are crossed at a separate level. The link spacing is 400-600 m. Frequented facilities that serve the whole city like railway stations, secondary schools, and main shopping centres are directly connected to the network.

The defined district network has two functions. It provides adequate infrastructure for bicycle trips inside districts and collects and distributes bicycle traffic to and from the urban network. The links are spaced 200-300 m. Facili-

254

University campus New districts (after WWII)

Figure 4.2: The defined bicycle network In the before situation, 75% of the defined network already existed according to the Ministry of Transport and Public Works (1987). We assume that this figure relates only to the urban network; for the whole network the figure is likely to be in the order of 90%. For completion of the defined network a large number of different projects had to be executed. Not all defined projects were implemented, and others were implemented outside the framework of the bicycle plan. Some projects would only have been realised if planned new residential quarters had been developed, a few other expensive projects were subsidised separately and not considered to be part of the plan any more (Ten Grotenhuis, 1987). Diepens en Okkema (1994) assume that some projects were not implemented because of the high investment costs.

4.2.2 The projects Table 4.1 gives an overview of the numbers of implemented projects and the length of the infrastructure involved by project type and sub-network (Diepens en Okkema,

1993). The table demonstrates that a large number of projects with quite varying natures are executed. Most effort is made for realising the urban and district networks, in particular the urban network that is highest in the hierarchy. The project investments covered the period 1979 to 1991, but most of them were made between 1982 and 1987.

4.3 Organisation and implementation One of the lessons of the demonstration projects in Tilburg and The Hague was that good communication with

building new bicycle path reconstructing bicycle path making short cut defining bicycle lane, widening road abolish one way traffic for bikes phasing traffic lights installing traffic lights permitting cyclists a free right turn at traffic lights reconstructing intersections providing crossover building bridge reconstructing bridge building tunnel providing bicycle stands at transit stops total

the residents is important for a successful project. In the Delft case this lesson has been taken to heart. Communication with interest groups and residents was essential in the project.

Communication has been done at two levels. First, the bicycle plan was discussed with a number of general interest groups, like the Cyclistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Union, the Traffic Safety Association, the Pedestrian Association, the Chamber of Commerce, the Shopkeepers Federation, schools, and homes for the elderly. These groups could comment on the plan and suggest adaptations. They had a positive attitude towards the plan, being bicycle improvements generally in their favour (ten Grotenhuis, 1987).

urban network

district network

# of proj.

length (km)

# of proj.

length (km)

# of proj.

length # of (km) proj.

length (km)

1

1.8

4 3

0.2 1.9

10 2

0.75 1.7

2

0.15

1

0.05

4

1.8

10

1.55

12

1.65

1 3 1

0 0 0

2 2 3

0 0 0

4 4 3

0 0 0

6

0

1

0

6

0

4 3 1 1 2

0 0.15 0.05 0.1 0

3 4

0 0.2

1

0

1

0.05

53

16.5

42

5.55

14

1.7

19

10.5

4

1.3

intersections neighbourhood urban/district network network

19

0.15

Table 4.1: Number of projects and infrastructure length by type of project and network.

255

Second, for the individual projects a discussion was organised with the residents living in the neighbourhood of a project. A positive attitude was less natural for them than for the interest groups. In communication with the residents, the strategy was not to start with informing them about the plan, but to ask what traffic-relating problems they were faced with. Starting from the problems mentioned, solutions were proposed that regarded bicycle infrastructure and that were in accordance with the bicycle plan. The discussions gave also cause for some adaptations of the plan. This strategy contributed to a general support of the citizens towards the plan: existing problems were solved (according to interviews conducted in the framework of Transecon, 2003).

urban network building new bicycle path reconstructing bicycle path making short cut defining bicycle lane, widening road abolish one way traffic for bikes phasing traffic lights installing traffic lights permitting cyclists a free right turn at traffic lights reconstructing intersections providing crossover building bridge reconstructing bridge building tunnel providing bicycle stands at transit stops total attached to projects employment unknown total

3.802

4.4 The costs The estimated costs of the original plan were 70 million HFL (Dutch guilders). This amount was in the early 1980â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s equal to 25 million ECU (European Currency Unit, the precursor of the Euro). As mentioned in Section 4.2.1, some expensive projects were not realised, or not realised in the framework of the bicycle plan. For that reason, the actual investments that were connected to the plan were considerably lower: nearly 30 million HFL (12 million ECU). Table 4.2 gives an overview of these costs by type of project and sub-network (Diepens en Okkema, 1993). For about 1 million HFL, 3% of the expenditures, the employment could not be found out afterwards.

district network 1.464

intersections urban/district network

neighbourhood network

109

0

1.018 258 20

888 25

40

105

0 50 25

0 0 213

6 0 62

711

0

1941

213 4129 0 9496 138

407 298

19900

89

7

2796 6196

978 29288

Table 4.2: Investment costs in 1000 HFL by type of project and network.

256

2118

96

The municipality of Delft received subsidies of about 19 million HFL. The sources of the subsidies could be found out for only a part of this amount: the national government paid 10 million HFL, the development company of Delft paid 4 million HFL, and the province of South-Holland paid 1 million HFL. The remaining 4 million HFL is likely to be paid mainly by the national government (Diepens en Okkema, 1994).

4.5 One single project: the Plantagebrug

In addition to the implementation of the project, costs have been paid for the evaluation. A large number of evaluation studies have been carried out that together cost 3.46 million HFL (1.39 million ECU). About 50% of these costs were financed by the national government, 40% by the European Community, and the remaining 10% by the municipality of Delft (Diepens en Okkema, 1994).

Figure 4.2 indicates the location of the Plantagebrug within the city. The bridge is part of the urban bicycle network (network corridor II) and links the quarters in the northeastern part of the town with the inner city. The bridge spans the Rijn-Schiekanaal that encloses the inner city at the east and south sides. It is built halfway two other bridges, the Reineveldbrug and the Koepoortbrug, that have a mutual distance of about 1.2 km. Figure 4.3 shows the locations of the three bridges.

One of the most expensive single projects is the Plantagebrug, the largest of the newly built bridges. This bridge is dedicated to cyclists and pedestrians. The Plantagebrug was evaluated separately and will be discussed in this report.

Reineveldbrug

Plantagebrug

Koepoortbrug

Market and main shopping area

Figure 4.3: Location of the bridges spanning the Rijn-Schiekanaal 257

The Reineveldbrug is part of the main access road to Delft from the north. The bridge comprises four car lanes, a tramway, two bicycle lanes and one sidewalk. There is no physical separation between the car lanes or between the car and bicycle lanes. Car volumes are high (about 17,000 in a 12 hours period in the time of the project) and cars move at rather high speeds. The bridge is high; the headroom is about 4 m. It was opened 15-20 times per day.

The Koepoortbrug has a more local function. It links the eastern districts with the city centre. It was at the time a narrow bridge for mixed traffic and rather high car volumes: 6,000 in a 12 hours period. It is a low bridge; the headroom is about 2.5 m. The bridge was opened about 30 times per day.

The Plantagebrug is built in order to: • adding a missing link to the urban network; • reduce the severance of the canal; • offer a more comfortable and safe connection for cyclists between the eastern districts and the centre. The Plantagebrug is more comfortable than the Reineveldbrug because there is no need to overcome long and steep slopes, and it is safer than the other bridges because car traffic is absent.

The Plantagebrug is built exclusively for cyclists and pedestrians. The headroom is about 2.5 m, just like the Koepoortbrug. The width of the bicycle path on the bridge is about 4.5 m., and there are two sidewalks of about 1.5 m. each. The length of the bridge is about 50 m. Opening and closing of the bridge are operated from the Koepoortbrug with the help of video equipment. The bridge was built from spring 1985 to summer 1986. The investment costs were 3,790,535 HFL (about 1.6 million ECU).

In addition to building the bridge and access roads to the bridge, some measures for improving the network for cyclists that cross the bridge are implemented. These include a reconstruction of two crossovers east of the bridge, one at the Insulindeweg and the other at the van Miereveltlaan, and building a new route for cyclists west of the bridge, along the Kantoorgracht.

4.6 Set-up of the evaluation studies The national government subsidised part of the project

258

under the condition that the project would be evaluated elaborately. The evaluation should generate knowledge on the use and experience of urban bicycle networks that can be used for policy development by local governments.

The studies should give answers on next questions: • Does the implementation of a comprehensive bicycle network lead to an increase in bicycle traffic?

• Does the implementation of a bicycle network increase road safety?

• In which way do cyclists use a comprehensive and integral bicycle network which is perceived as such, and what are their behavioural responses?

The principal hypothesis was that a comprehensive and integral bicycle network affects bicycle use and its quality more than a number of single bicycle routes (Ministry of Transport and Public Works, 1987).

The project evaluation has been done both for the network as a whole and in-depth for two separate parts of the network: the accessibility of the main railway station and the newly built Plantagebrug. In this report we discuss the set-up and results of evaluations of the whole network and the Plantagebrug.

The evaluation of the whole network includes the impacts on travel behaviour (bicycle use, modal choice, origindestination pattern, and route choice), traffic safety for cyclists, and the perception of safety and comfort for cyclists. The evaluation of the Plantagebrug focuses on the impact on canal crossing cycling and the accessibility of the city centre.

The impacts are investigated by before and after studies. For a number of impacts of the whole network, both a short-term and a long-term after study have been performed. The latter should give evidence to what extent initial impacts continue to be valid in the long run. The before studies were carried out between 1982 and 1983, the short-term after studies between 1985 and 1986, and the long-term after studies in the early 1990’s.

For estimating the short-term network impacts on travel behaviour, two experimental areas and one control area are defined (Figure 4.4). The experimental areas are the Noordwest district, an older district west of the city centre, and the Tanthof district, a new residential area at the far southwest of the city. The control area is the Wippolder

district, an older district southeast of the city centre. The Tanthof-district differs from the two other districts by a significant larger distance to the city centre (“centrum”) and by a significant younger population. The Tanthof residents were mainly young households with young children.

departure times and speeds. Both dimensions together explain volumes by network link, mode and time. The evaluation studies for the Delft bicycle project focus on the impacts on the spatial dimension of travel behaviour, in particular mode choice and route choice.

Mode choice The impacts of the bicycle plan on modal choice have been investigated on both the short term and the long term. First the short-term analysis will be described. A short description of the long-term analysis is included at the end of the section.

Figure 4.3: Location of the bridges spanning the Rijn-Schiekanaal.

In the two experimental areas the measures of the bicycle plan were implemented in the few years between the data collections for the before and after studies (1983-1985); data collection for the after studies started a half year after the implementation finished. In the control district implementation of the measures started after the data for the after studies had been collected (Katteler et al, 1984, 1987).

For the results on city level, the other medium-sized cities in the Netherlands functioned as control cities. These included all municipalities with 50,000 to 200,000 inhabitants (47 cities).

The short-term impacts of modal choice have been examined by descriptive surveys on travel behaviour and by in-depth interviews on the motivation why the bicycle or an alternative mode was chosen. The descriptive surveys were conducted before and shortly after the measures were implemented. For the before survey a sample of households from the two experimental areas and the control area was addressed. A number of households from the sample was selected for the in-depth interviews that were conducted in the before period as well. In the short-term after period, the selected households were addressed again for detailed questions about their changes in modal choice and changes in the perception of the quality of the bicycle network (see Section 4.7.3). Not all of them responded, partly because they had moved between the two periods. Those who did respond are indicated as the “panel”. For the descriptive after survey, a new sample was drawn. This sample included the panel as well as households that were not addressed in the before survey.

4.7 The impacts of upgrading the network 4.7.1 Travel behaviour Travel behaviour has a spatial and a temporal dimension.

The spatial dimension regards the origin-destination pattern by mode and route. This is the result of choices regarding trip frequency, destinations, modes, and routes.

The temporal dimension adds the time component to the spatial movements and is the result of choices regarding

259

Table 4.3 shows the gross and net samples of the descriptive before and after surveys in the three study areas. The sample was larger in the before period than in the after period.

The samples of households that were selected for the indepth interviews and those that participated in the panel are displayed in Table 4.4.

to two weeks might have had just a minor effect on the results because it relates to only 5-10% of the response.

The surveys produced results on person level and trip level. Table 4.5 shows general characteristics of person travel before and after by residents of the three study areas.

The descriptive surveys aimed to give a description of travel behaviour on working days in the before and shortterm after periods. The sample unit was the household.

Household members were asked about personal characteristics and characteristics of the household. Those aged 10 or older were additionally asked about activities outdoors and connected trips on a selected day. The questionnaires in the before and after periods were identical.

The figures show some small differences between the three districts regarding travelling of their residents and differences between the before and after periods. Residents of the Tanthof have a slightly higher level of travelling (in frequency, duration and distance) than those of the other districts, while residents of Wippolder make the lowest trip numbers and trip kilometres. Changes between the before and after periods tend to reduce the differences between the districts. Trip frequency, duration and distance of Tanthof residents decrease somewhat, travelled distance of Wippolder residents increased.

The surveys were conducted in the autumns of 1982 (before period) and 1985 (after period). Both surveys cover a two weeks period from late October to early November with a continuation up to the end of November for late responses. The weather conditions were comparable in the first three to four weeks of both periods but diverged in late November, when in the after period the temperature became significant lower than in the before period (0 versus 10 degrees Celsius). The difference in the last one

The study reports give no evidence about significance of the results. Assuming that the observed changes in Tanthof and Wippolder are significant, they might or might not be induced by the improved bicycle network. The reduced travel distance of Tanthof residents could be attributed to shortening bicycle routes to the city centre; the reduced travel speed could be due to modal shift from car to bicycle. However, other explanations can be given as well.

Possibly, the orientation of the new suburb of the Tan-

Descriptive analysis

Noordwest Tanthof Wippolder total

before period gross sample 2800 950 950 4700

net sample 1937 716 602 3255

short-term after period gross sample net sample 1190 798 369 267 396 231 1955 1296

Table 4.3: Sample sizes of the descriptive surveys (number of households)

Noordwest Tanthof Wippolder total

interview before period 398 100 100 598

panel (before and after) 232 50 59 341

Table 4.4: Sample sizes of the households that were interviewed in-depth

260

persons going outside* trips per person per day travel time pppd (minutes) travel distance pppd (km) average speed (km/h)

Noordwest 1982 1985 87.7% 88.6% 3.89 3.86 62 63

Tanthof 1982 91.8% 4.04 71

1985 91.0% 3.92 69

Wippolder 1982 1985 82.9% 81.7% 3.43 3.43 59 62

19.8 19.2

25.4 21.5

23.0 20.0

16.6 16.9

20.6 19.6

18.9 18.3

Table 4.5: Travel characteristics of persons >= 10 years old on working days *Persons that leave their home at least one time on the enquiry day

persons going outside trips per person per day travel time pppd (minutes) travel distance pppd (km) average speed (km/h)

1981 90.2% 3.22 58 23.7 24.4

1982 90.0% 3.20 58 24.2 25.0

1983 90.2% 3.18 57 23.2 24.6

1984 90.7% 3.30 58 23.8 24.6

Table 4.6: Travel characteristics of Dutch residents of medium-sized cities >= 12 years old on working days thof shifted somewhat from the distant city centre to the own district, lowering the level of travelling. In the case of Wippolder that was deprived of infrastructural improvements in both the before the after periods, the increased distance could be attributed to the fact that the residents benefited from the improvements elsewhere in the town.

However, there may be other factors that raise the initially low number of travel kilometres to a more normal level.

The general travel figures give no clear evidence of impacts of the improved bicycle network. Focussing on the role of the bicycle might give more information. Table 4.7 presents figures on bicycle use. The figures regard only the use of the bicycle as the main mode of a trip.

The increased travel distance in the control region cannot be observed in national figures. Table 4.6 gives corresponding figures for travelling of Dutch residents of medium-sized cities (50,000 to 200,000 inhabitants) in the period 1981 to 1984. The source is the Dutch national travel survey (OVG). We selected 1981-1984 because in 1985 the survey set-up changed considerably making the outcomes of 1985 not comparable to those of former years. The national figures demonstrate a high stability of travel behaviour in the early 1980â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s.

261

persons using a bike* trips per person per day travel time pppd (minutes) travel distance pppd (km) average speed (km/h)

Noordwest 1982 1985 49.5% 50.0% 1.80 1.86 23 23

Tanthof 1982 49.7% 1.57 24

1985 50.8% 1.67 25

Wippolder 1982 1985 46.0% 44.4% 1.70 1.70 24 25

4.1 10.7

4.7 11.8

5.3 12.7

4.2 10.5

4.5 11.7

5.2 12.5

Table 4.7: Characteristics of bicycle travel by persons >= 10 years old on working days *Persons that use at least one time a bicycle on the enquiry day

persons using a bike trips per person per day travel time pppd (minutes) travel distance pppd (km) average speed (km/h)

1981 36.8% 1.03 14 2.9 12.1

1982 36.9% 1.03 14 2.9 12.4

1983 37.8% 1.04 14 2.9 12.1

1984 40.0% 1.15 16 3.2 11.9

Table 4.8: Characteristics of bicycle travel by Dutch residents of medium-sized cities >= 12 years old on working days.

walk bicycle moped, motorcycle car driver car passenger public transport other

Noordwest 1982 1985 25.8% 25.7% 40.5% 42.6% 1.8% 1.4%

Tanthof 1982 17.6% 35.7% 1.9%

1985 17.3% 39.0% 2.6%

Wippolder 1982 1985 23.0% 23.7% 41.0% 40.4% 2.0% 1.0%

21.0% 4.5% 6.3% 0.1%

31.9% 5.4% 7.3% 0.2%

28.5% 6.3% 6.3% 0.0%

21.3% 5.2% 7.4% 0.1%

21.1% 4.9% 4.3% 0.0%

23.8% 6.2% 4.9% 0.0%

Table 4.9: Modal split (main modes) of trips of persons >= 10 years old on working days Comparing Tables 4.7 and 4.8, one could conclude that bicycle use in Delft was relatively high, even in the before period. However, one should be cautious. Both tables are based on travel surveys with different designs, and history learned that changes in the design of the Dutch national travel survey affected the outcomes regarding travel behaviour significantly. Bovy and Den Adel (1987) found that the number of bicycle trips per person per day by Delft residents reported in the national survey was close to the national average for medium-sized cities.

262

Another indication for a possible impact of the bicycle network improvements is the development in the modal split.

Table 4.9 shows an increase of bicycle share in the two experimental areas and no increase in the control area.

This result suggests that the improvements encouraged bicycle use. The increase in bicycle use was at the expense of public transport use and (only in Tanthof) car use as a driver. Decrease of public transport patronage is also observed in the control area and might be independent of the bicycle improvements. In that case the bicycle network might have affected that not the car but the bicycle benefited from decreasing transit use.

walk bicycle moped, motorcycle car driver car passenger public transport other

1981 20.1% 32.1% 1.9% 29.1% 10.7% 5.6% 0.4%

1982 20.6% 32.3% 2.0% 28.7% 10.2% 5.8% 0.5%

1983 20.4% 32.1% 1.8% 30.2% 10.2% 5.0% 0.3%

1984 20.3% 34.3% 1.4% 28.4% 10.4% 4.8% 0.4%

Table 4.10: Modal split (main modes) of trips of Dutch residents of medium-sized cities >= 12 years old on working days.

National figures support the finding of decreasing transit use by residents of medium-sized cities (Table 4.10).

The figures are somewhat fuzzy regarding the modes that benefited from the lower transit share. The figures from 1983 suggest an increase in car use as a driver while those from 1984 indicate that the bicycle is the only benefiter. Bovy and den Adel (1987) compared modal shares in the Dutch medium-sized cities and found significant negative correlations between transit use and car use on the one hand and transit use and bike use on the other hand. The correlation with bike use is a little stronger than that with car use. Therefore, it is likely that bicycle use in medium-sized cities increased in the period concerned.

As a consequence, the increase in the two Delft experimental districts might partly be explained by other factors than the bicycle improvements.

National figures support the finding of decreasing transit use by residents of medium-sized cities (Table 4.10).

The figures are somewhat fuzzy regarding the modes that benefited from the lower transit share. The figures from 1983 suggest an increase in car use as a driver while those from 1984 indicate that the bicycle is the only benefiter. Bovy and den Adel (1987) compared modal shares in the Dutch medium-sized cities and found significant negative correlations between transit use and car use on the one hand and transit use and bike use on the other hand. The correlation with bike use is a little stronger than that with car use. Therefore, it is likely that bicycle use in medium-sized cities increased in the period concerned.

As a consequence, the increase in the two Delft experimental districts might partly be explained by other factors than the bicycle improvements.

When modal splits in the Delft survey are compared for different person characteristics, the increase in the share of the bicycle in the two experimental areas is particularly

large for men, middle-aged persons, retired persons, and employees. Regarding ownership of a driversâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; license the results differ in both districts. In Noordwest bicycle use increased substantially by non-owners of a license, while in Tanthof just the owners of a license used the bicycle more frequently. At trip level, the increase in the share of the bicycle is observed mainly in commuting trips to work or school and, only in Tanthof, in transporting/escorting persons.

In-depth analysis A selection of the households that responded to the before survey was approached for an in-depth interview in the before period and, as far as they responded again, for the short-term after period as well. The before interviews should explain why people use or use not a bicycle for actually made trips and estimate the potential for increasing bicycle use. The after interviews should register changes in motives for bicycle use and its potential, and give information about modal shifts.

The interview periods were September and October 1983 (before period) and late 1985 + early 1986 (after period).

The interviews were conducted with the household members aged 10 years or older in one setting. The interviewers were attentive to spontaneous responses and tried to generate these by encouraging interaction between the interviewed persons. The average duration of the interviews was 1.5 hours in the before period and 1.25 hours in the after period. The variation was large, partly dependent on the number of trips that were discussed and the number of participants.

One of the results from the interviews is knowledge about hindrances for bicycle use. Starting from the trips that were not made by bicycle, a large number of reasons for

263

not using the bicycle was reported. The reasons were classified into six categories: no opportunity for using a bike (for instance no bicycle was available, distance is too long); practical matters that hamper bicycle use (e.g. luggage transport) or force to use an alternative mode (e.g. one should have the car available at the destination); (perception of) travel time; (perception of) insufficient infrastructure and traffic situation; (perception of) inconvenience and insecurity of cycling; and personal preferences regarding use of the bicycle or other modes. There is a remaining seventh category consisting of non-bicycle trips with no hindrance for bicycle use.

Table 4.11 shows the magnitude of the different hindrances in the before and after periods, starting from the most objective hindrances and going to the most subjective ones. The latest category shown is the category without any hindrance, indicated as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;freedom of choiceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Two kinds of hindrances are distinguished: general hindrances that always are valid for a certain trip (for instance the distance is too large) and incidental hindrances that are valid only on the enquiry day (e.g. unlike on other days, the traveller was accompanied by grandmother who doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t cycle any more).

Practical matters and travel time are the most important reasons for not using a bicycle. The magnitude of both hindrances decreased slightly between the before and after periods. A larger decrease is observed for each of the other hindrances. Especially infrastructure and traffic exhibit a relatively large decrease. This is not surprising because the bicycle plan aims predominantly to improve the infrastructural and traffic situation. However, in the before

hindrance bicycle no option practical matters travel time infrastructure and traffic inconvenience, insecurity personal preferences freedom of choice

situation, this hindrance was marginal. Looking at Table 4.11, other kinds of measures might be more efficient for increasing bicycle use.

The large increase of the freedom of choice category for non-bicycle trips is mainly valid for trips where walking or car is the actual mode. For walking trips, the general freedom to choose the bicycle increased from 14% of all walking trips to 32%, for car trips the increase was from 13% to 34%. A much smaller increase was observed for trips by public transport: from 29% to 36%.

In addition to the freedom to choose the bike when actually another mode is used, there can be a freedom to choose another mode when actually the bicycle is used.

Where the former are relevant for the potential for bicycle use, the latter indicate the vulnerability of bicycle use.

Table 4.12 shows the hindrances for walking, car use, or public transport patronage for trips that actually are made by bicycle. The presented figures are the general hindrances; figures about the actual hindrances on the enquiry day (that have a lower freedom of choice) are not available. Divergent from Table 4.11, the accumulative impact of the hindrances on the bicycle trips that remain free of choice is displayed. In 1982, for 3% of the bicycle trips walking is no option, leaving 97% free of choice.

Next, practical matters generate hindrances for a part of the remaining bicycle trips, which part equals 11% of all bicycle trips. Then 86% is still free of choice. After skinning the trips for all hindrances in this way, 17% remain where no hindrance is applicable in general (but might still be applicable on the enquiry day).

before general 12.1% 35.6% 45.4% 0.8%

incidental 1.6% 10.6% 5.2% -

total 13.7% 46.2% 50.6% 0.8%

after general 6.7% 23.8% 34.4% -

incidental 1.1% 21.2% 9.4% 0.3%

total 7.7% 44.9% 43.8% 0.3%

16.8%

4.8%

21.6%

7.9%

5.2%

13.0%

17.4% 15.7%

-

17.4% 3.0%

12.3% 33%

-

12.3% 7%

Table 4.11: Hindrances for bicycle use in percents of non-bicycle trips.

264

hindrance all bicycle trips mode no option practical matters travel time infrastructure and traffic inconvenience, insecurity personal preferences freedom of choice

walk 1982 100% -3% -11% -49% -0% -3%

1985 100% -0% -15% -42% -0% -2%

car 1982 100% -44% -5% -8% -2% -4%

1985 100% -42% -12% -8% -1% -6%

public transport 1982 1985 100% 100% -24% -13% -2% -4% -23% -31% -3% -2% -17% -21%

-17% 17%

-11% 30%

-11% 25%

-4% 27%

-21% 10%

-13% 16%

Table 4.12: Accumulative impact of general hindrances for other modes in percents of bicycle trips

The main hindrance for walking is travel time; the main hindrance for car use is the unavailability of a car. For using public transport there are a number of larger hindrances: mode availability, travel time, inconvenience, and personal preferences. The freedom to shift from the bicycle to walking or public transport increased substantially. The (initially large) freedom to shift to the car is nearly unaffected.

Figure 4.5 gives an overview of the potentials for shifting between bicycle, walk, car and transit in 1985. The modal percentages are percents of all trips made by the mode; the numbers in the arrows between the modes are percentages of all trips. For instance, 34% of car trips are vulnerable for shifting to the bicycle; this number is equal to 10% of all trips. The other way around, 27% of the bicycle trips are vulnerable for shifting to the car; these equal 11% of all trips. Again, the figures represent the general freedom of choice, not the freedom of choice on the enquiry day.

Next examined question is which modal shifts really took place as a result of the bicycle network improvements.

The panel participants were asked about their modal use in both the before and after situations to activities that they continued to visit in the two periods. The distinguished activities were work, school, shopping, service, leisure.

About 20% of the activities performed in 1982 were not continued in 1985 by the same respondents. These 20% are left out of the analysis.

Figure 4.5: General intermodal potentials in 1985 (source: Katteler et al, 1987)

Â

265

Tables 4.13 and 4.14 show the modal shifts between 1982 and 1985 in trips for unchanged activities for the two experimental districts. Corresponding figures for the control area Wippolder are not available.

Respondents that changed a mode were asked why they did so. The most frequent reported reason was destination change. The main reason for the large shift from walk to bicycle in particularly the Tanthof-district is the switch from primary school to the more distant secondary school.

The shift from bicycle to moped in Tanthof might be explained by the increasing age of the panel respondents; some pupils that were too young for driving a moped were allowed to do so in 1985.

Still, the figures for Noordwest hint that the improved bicycle network had a modest positive influence on bicycle

mode in 1985 walk bicycle moped car driver car passenger public transport other share in 1982

use. Except for walking, the shifts from each alternative mode to the bicycle are larger than the other way around.

The differences between the opposite shifts are especially large for the car, both car drivers and car passengers.

The improved network seems to have tempted car users to shift to the bicycle.

Long-term impacts The short-term analyses make plausible that the improvements in the bicycle network raised bicycle use somewhat. The question is whether the higher level of bicycle use is retained in the long run or possibly raised even further. Three kinds of descriptive analyses have been done for examining the long-term impacts (MuConsult, 1993).

The first is a comparison between Delft and the other medium-sized cities in the Netherlands regarding the de-

mode in 1982 walk bicycle moped car car driver pass.

23.1% 0.5% 1.9% 39.3% 0.2% 0.6% 0.8% 0.4% 1.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 20.0% 0.1% 0.1% 3.5% 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3%

public transp.

0.1% 0.3% 0.5% 0.2% 5.2%

other -

share in 1985 23.7% 43.1% 1.8% 20.9% 3.9% 6.5%

25.9% 40.3%

6.3%

0.4% 0.4%

0.4% 100%

1.8%

21.0% 4.6%

Table 4.13: Modal shifts in travelling for unchanged activities by residents of the Noordwest district.

mode in 1985 walk bicycle moped car driver car passenger public transport other share in 1982

mode in 1982 walk bicycle moped car car driver pass.

11.6% 5.9% 33.6% 0.2% 0.6% 2.0% 0.9% 30.2% 0.2% 5.5% 1.1% 0.5% -

public transp.

0.6% 6.6%

other -

share in 1985 11.6% 39.7% 3.5% 30.8% 5.7% 8.2%

17.5% 35.5%

7.2%

0.6% 0.6%

0.6% 100%

2.0%

31.8% 5.5%

Table 4.14: Modal shifts in travelling for unchanged activities by residents of the Tanthof district.

266

velopment in bicycle use in the period 1979-1991, based on the national travel surveys. The second is executing a new survey in the whole city of Delft in 1993 and comparing the results with those of the short-term after survey in 1985 that was executed in the two experimental areas and one control area. The third regards counts of passing cyclists at cordons around Noordwest and Wippolder in 1993 and comparing these with counts in 1985. In the two analyses that are based on travel surveys, the impacts of several explanatory socio-economic variables on bicycle use are estimated in order to find out whether a significant impact of the bicycle plan remains after eliminating the impacts of the other factors. Unlike the short-term after studies, the analyses include both the impacts on bicycle trip numbers and bicycle kilometres.

The analysis of bicycle use in Delft compared to that in other medium-sized cities gave no firm results regarding the long-term impact of the bicycle plan. There were two problems: a) the samples of Delft residents in the national travel surveys are too small for a good trend analysis of travel behaviour (100-150 persons annually), and b) in the period considered, investments in bicycle infrastructure were implemented in several other cities, partly encouraged by the success of the Delft bicycle plan. The improvements in other cities were not included in the analysis of the impacts of other socio-economic factors.

districts. The survey was organised in May and June 1993. The sample was 785 households. The questionnaires were similar to those of the short-term after survey.

However, the survey periods were different: May/June in the long-term after survey versus October/November in the short-term after survey. The impact of the different seasons is estimated using data of the national travel surveys. A significant impact was observed for the whole Dutch population but no impact could be found for the Delft residents. A complication in analysing the results of this survey is that the Wippolder district doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t function as control area in the long run. After the short-term after survey was organised, improvements in bicycle infrastructure were implemented in this district as well.

The bicycle counts are carried out on a large number of spots on a Wednesday in May between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Again, the season differs from the short-term after counts that were executed on a Wednesday in September.

The main results are presented in Table 4.15 in a qualitative way. Presentation in this way is induced by the low reliability of most of the results. The table summarises the results of the three kinds of analysis, and includes the assumed impacts of the bicycle plan on both trips and trip kilometres made by bicycle, car as a driver, and car as a passenger.

The long-term after survey in Delft should give information on differences between developments in different

mode

indicator

National surveys, development 1979-1991.

Delft compared to:

other mediumsized cities bicycle trip numbers 0 kilometres (+) car driver trip numbers (-) kilometres (-) car trip numbers (-) passenger kilometres 0

remaining country

Delft survey, dev. 1985-1993.

Noordwest compared to: WipTanthof polder

cycle counts, 1985-1993.

Noordwest compared to: Wippolder

0 (+) 0 (-) 0 0

0 + 0 0 0 0

(+) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 4.15: Long-term comparisons in developments of modal use

267

The symbols ‘0’, ‘+’, and ‘-’ indicate no change, increase, and decrease respectively. Observed changes that are not statistically significant are put within brackets. The table shows only one statistically significant change: bicycle kilometres of Noordwest-residents increased significantly compared to those of Wippolder-residents. This result suggests a long-term impact of the bicycle plan on bicycle kilometres in addition to the short-term impact.

However, interpretation of this result is complicated by the fact that the improvements in Noordwest were implemented before 1985 and those in Wippolder after 1985, in which period the growth is observed. The increasing difference between Noordwest and Wippolder could be either an additional long-term increase in Noordwest that exceeds a possible short-term increase in Wippolder, or a decrease in Wippolder (due to the implemented measures?). A policy-induced decrease in Wippolder is not plausible, because the analysis of Delft compared to the other medium-sized cities suggest a positive influence of infrastructural improvements on bicycle kilometres.

The analyses give no evidence on impacts on bicycle trip numbers, except from a relative increase of counts of cyclists entering or leaving Noordwest compared to those entering or leaving Wippolder. Assuming that trip numbers increased somewhat in Wippolder after 1985 due to the implemented improvements, the increase before 1985 that was observed in the other districts seems not to be followed by a decrease and might even be followed by a further increase. Therefore, it is likely that the initial short-term increase in bicycle trips has been retained in the long term. There might even have been an additional increase in the long run. However, this can only be small assuming the fact that the analysis with the national travel surveys that describes the development in the whole project period (1979-1991) gives no indication of any impact on bicycle trip numbers.

counts entering Noordwest counts leaving Noordwest on-street interview questionnaire response

Looking at the car, negative effects on car use are observed for the whole period 1979-1991 when Delft is compared to other medium-sized cities. These include both the short-term and the long-term effects. The large fluctuations in the annual results regarding car use of inhabitants of Delft due to the small Delft samples, give not the opportunity to do separate statements on short-term and additional long-term developments. Apart from that, the effects in the whole period are not statistically significant.

Route choice In addition to the modal choice analysis, the short-term impacts on route choice are estimated. The route choice studies are performed in the experimental Noordwestarea. Both before (1982) and after (1985) the measures in Noordwest were implemented the number of cyclists that entered or left Noordwest were counted at a large number of spots at a cordon around this district. In addition, in 1982 a number of cyclists that left the Noordwestdistrict were interviewed about some personal and trip characteristics; registered variables were age, gender, origin and destination addresses, trip purpose, and time of the interview. To some of them questionnaires were handed out where they were asked to draw their route on a map. In 1985, the on-street interviews were skipped but again questionnaires including questions on personal and trip characteristics and the route were distributed among leaving cyclists. The decision to skip the on-street interviews is motivated by the high response on the distributed questionnaires in 1982 and hence a low added value of the on-street interviews. The counts, interviews and distribution of questionnaires were done on the latest Wednesdays in September between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Questionnaires were handed out only to persons whose assumed age was at least 12. Table 4.16 shows the number of counted cyclists and cyclists that were interviewed or responded to the questionnaire.

1982 24912 25291 4100 2200

1985 26032 27969 3000

Table 4.16: Number of counted and approached cyclists at the Noordwest-cordon

268

For analysing the collected data, a data bank of link characteristics of the bicycle networks in the before and after periods was created. These data include coordinates of nodes, type of pavement, type of cycling infrastructure (mixed traffic, bicycle lane, bicycle path), slope, one/two way traffic, traffic lights, and other objects for delay (a bridge that can be opened, crossing with a railway line).

Length and average travel time per link are calculated from these data.

After the before data were collected, several analyses on route choice and utilisation of the bicycle network were executed (Bovy, 1984). In contrast to the studies on the demonstration projects in Tilburg and The Hague, both the impacts of travel distance and travel time on route choice are analysed. Regarding utilisation of the bicycle network, it is examined whether and to which extent cyclists are willing to travel longer distances if then they can make a shift from travelling on low level networks to the more comfortable high level networks.

The analyses are partly based on detour factors. Two kinds of detour factors are defined: detour on link level and detour on route level. The detour on link level of an observed trip is defined as the ratio of the trip distance if the shortest route was chosen and the distance between origin and destination as the crow flies. The average detour on link level is 1.21 and is dependent on distance.

The detour is highest for distances between 1000 and 1500 meter (1.25). It decreases slowly at increasing distances, to an average value of 1.18. It decreases at

class of detour 1.0 1.01-1.05 1.06-1.10 1.11-1.15 1.16-1.20 1.21-1.25 1.26-1.30 1.31-1.35 >1.36 average median

length frequency 9% 35% 27% 13% 6% 4% 2% 1% 3%

decreasing distances too, first slowly, but at increasing speed at the very short distances.

The detour on route level is calculated for both length and duration of trips. This factor equals the ratio of the actual trip length/duration and the length/duration of the shortest route (shortest in distance or time). Table 4.17 presents the frequency distribution of the two detour factors on route level and the average and median values.

One may conclude from the table that cyclists mainly choose the shortest route or a route with only a small detour. Moreover, they are more inclined to choose the shortest route in time than the shortest route in distance.

The latter observation is supported by a statistical analysis of factors influencing the route choice. Travel time proves to give a significant better explanation of the observed route choices than travel distance.

In addition to route choice, the data gave information about network use. An analysis of the extent the actual routes overlap the shortest routes, demonstrated that cyclists prefer cycling on higher level roads. The average overlap of all trips is 56%. However, the overlap differs substantially by road type. The overlap is only 27% for residential roads, 39% for neighbourhood roads, 47% for district roads, and 64% for urban roads. Apparently cyclists are inclined to minimize the distance travelled on the lower level roads.

cumulative freq.

9% 44% 71% 84% 90% 94% 96% 97% 100% 1.09 1.06

duration frequency 21% 30% 21% 10% 7% 4% 2% 1% 4%

cumulative freq.

21% 51% 72% 82% 89% 93% 95% 96% 100% 1.08 1.05

Table 4.17: Characteristics of detour factors on route level.

269

The outcomes of the route analyses presented so far are just based on the before study. The after study (Gommers and Bovy, 1987) analysed to which extent the bicycle interventions influenced route choices. Comparing the routes of complete trips in the before and after periods was not possible because only very few trips had the same origin and destination. Therefore, the analysis was done for trip sections. A number of pairs of locations were selected that are passed by a lot of cyclists. The route choices before and after between these pairs were studied for all trips that passed both locations. The routes between 60 pairs of locations were analysed. Significant changes in the chosen routes were observed. New network links tempted a lot of cyclists to reroute their trips via these links. New bicycle paths along roads proved to be very attractive as well. The volume of cyclists on bicycle paths increased significantly while the volume on bicycle lanes (not physically separated from the road) and on roads with mixed traffic decreased. There was no change in the division of bicycle kilometres over the three networks: neighbourhood, district and urban. Absence of a change is not surprising because the measures were implemented at all networks. Route choice changes seem to take some time. A new bridge appeared to attract only a small part of the cyclists who could shorten their route by using this bridge. The reason could be that the bridge was brought into use just one week before the data for the route choice analysis were collected.

Finally, the route choice studies suggest a large increase in bicycle use between the before and after periods (see the cycle counts in Table 4.16). Analysing the origins and destinations, the increase is mainly due to a huge increase (28%) in cyclists that traverse the Noordwestdistrict. Trip numbers of Noordwest-residents seem to have decreased somewhat, those of Noordwest-visitors increased a little. The decrease of trips by Noordwestresidents can be explained by demographic changes and one major change in land use: a secondary school moved from outside to inside the Noordwest-district. The large increase of traversing cyclists might suggest that the bicycle plan is particularly beneficial for the longer distances. Though it is likely that this happened, an alternative explanation is that cyclists shifted their routes from fully outside the Noordwest-district to partly crossing the district. The route shift could be induced either by the bicycle measures and is then still an indication of the attractiveness of the measures, or by other factors like traffic diversions due to maintenance works.

270

4.7.2 Safety The impacts of the bicycle plan on traffic safety have been studied for both the short and the long run. Bovy and Gommers (1988) assume a priori that the measures will have two kinds of opposite impacts. Firstly, the measures increased use of the vulnerable bicycle mode that will have affected traffic safety negatively. Vulnerability of cyclists is apparent from Dutch statistics concerning casualties per million person kilometres (CBS, 1994, 1 and CBS, 1994, 2). Both the number of fatalities and the number of injured persons among cyclists were in the early 1990â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s about three times the average for all modes. Secondly, the measures made cycling safer and so affected safety positively. Nearly all accidents result from conflicts between road users. The measures reduced the number of conflicts due to building new bicycle paths that separate cyclists from motorized traffic, and installing traffic lights at some intersections that should make crossing safer.

The vulnerability of cyclists compared to other road users is subject for debate. Certainly, the number of accidents and casualties per km are high for cyclists. However, related to travel time, the numbers are comparable for the different modes. Based on the finding in fundamental research that people tend to spend a constant part of their time budget on travelling (see for instance Schafer, 1998), accidents and casualties per minute might be a better measure for vulnerability than numbers per km. In that case interventions that increase bicycle use will not directly increase the risk of accidents.

Short-term impacts Between 1980 and 1986 the total number of accidents in Delft was stable. These were about 1500 annually, according to the (incomplete) registration by the police. The number of casualties decreased in the same period from about 310 to 260, a reduction of about 20% (Bovy and Gommers, 1988). The national figures show a similar decrease of annual casualties in this period despite a substantial increase in traffic volume: the number of fatalities decreased by 24%, the number of injured casulaties by 21%. At first sight, the bicycle plan did not contribute to traffic safety on balance. However, a more detailed analysis of the figures gives different conclusions.

The short-term decrease of traffic casualties in Delft can fully be attributed to the bicycle and moped modes. The number of cycle casualties decreased from about 100 in

1980 to about 70 in 1986, that of the moped casualties from about 80 to about 60. The number of casualties by other modes remained stable. The decrease of about 30% for cyclists and moped riders is larger than the national decrease of 20% for these modes. The national decrease for the car and most other modes is not observed in Delft. The relatively large decrease in casualties among cyclists and moped riders in Delft, both users of the bicycle infrastructure, is an indication of increased safety by the bicycle measures. One problem in the analysis is that the Delft numbers are too low for an accurate estimation of developments in a few-years period. The numbers by mode display rather large annual fluctuations. Still, the decrease in casualties of both cyclists and moped riders is statistically significant.

The probability for cyclists to be involved in an accident depends on gender and age. The probability is particularly high for teenagers. No change of the relative probabilities is observed between the before and after periods.

The relative decrease of bicycle casualties was similar for all gender and age classes.

Most bicycle accidents happen by collision of vehicles.

In most cases the collision ‘partner’ of a bicycle is a motor vehicle. The number of collisions with motor vehicles decreased somewhat from about 70% of all bicycle accidents to about 65%. The number of other kinds of bicycle accidents remained stable. One should note here that bicycle use increased and use of motorized modes (mainly car) did not change.

The number of accidents where a bicycle is involved decreased in Delft by about 10%. This reduction is smaller than the relative decrease of cycle casualties, which can be explained by the relatively large decrease of collisions with motor vehicles. The decrease of bicycle accidents is fully due to a decrease of accidents at intersections. The number of bicycle accidents at intersections decreased by 25%, lowering its share in all bicycle accidents from 55-60% to 45-50%. Still, intersections remain relatively unsafe for cyclists. For other modes the share of accidents at intersections is smaller, on average 35%.

Considering type of road, the decrease of bicycle accidents is observed only on bicycle lanes. There was no change in accident numbers on bicycle paths and roads with mixed traffic. However, because of the large changes in bicycle traffic volumes on the different kind of roads, one could better compare the risk of involvement in an accident per million km. This risk decreased significantly on bicycle paths and bicycle lanes and increased a little on

roads with mixed traffic. Bicycle paths, that were already the safest kinds of road, strengthened their position as safest road for cyclists, and bicycle lanes, that were by far the most unsafe kinds of road came close to the roads with mixed traffic but remained the most unsafe kind of road. The relatively high probability to be involved in an accident when cycling on bicycle lanes can be explained by the fact that bicycle lanes generally are designed along busy roads where dedicated bicycle infrastructure is desirable but room for separated bicycle paths is lacking.

The observations mentioned before suggest that the bicycle plan had a positive influence on safety. Safety increased particularly for the cyclists, and the increase in safety is connected to infrastructural elements (relatively large on bicycle paths and lanes, and on intersections).

An interesting additional observation for answering the question whether the improvements enlarged traffic safety is the development of safety in different districts, including the experimental and control areas. Figure 4.6 shows the probability of involvement in an accident per million kilometres in the experimental area Noordwest, the southwest area of the city including the experimental Tanthof district, the control area Wippolder, the city centre, and the remaining city. In Noordwest the probability decreased significantly by 35-40%. This area lost its position as the most unsafe district of Delft for cyclists.

In southwest only a small decrease is observed (about 10%). In the control area Wippolder and the city centre the decrease is slightly larger (about 15%), and in remaining Delft, where the measures of the bicycle plan were partly implemented the decrease is comparable to that of Noordwest (about 35%).

Figure 4.6: Probability of involvement in accidents by cyclists in different districts

271

The relatively strong decrease in Noordwest suggests again an influence of the bicycle plan. The low decrease in Southwest that benefited from the measures as well suggests the opposite. A possible explanation of the deviant development in Southwest is that an increase in safety due to the measures is partly annulled by demographic factors. The southwest districts are new districts where many households had young children. The children got a few years older between the before and after situation and changed from walking to the primary school to cycling to the secondary school or from accompanied cycling by the parents to unaccompanied cycling.

A statistical test on the differences in developments between the experimental Noordwest district and the control area Wippolder produced no significant results. Assuming a Poisson distribution of the probability to be involved in an accident, the observed decrease in number of accidents in Noordwest does not differ significantly from the smaller decrease in Wippolder. The main problem for the analysis is the small number of observations. Though there are strong indications that the bicycle plan increased safety, it can not be proved.

Long-term impacts Statistics on traffic accidents and casualties in the period 1985-1992 are analysed in order to gain knowledge about impacts of the bicycle plan in the long run (AGV, 1994).

The long-term developments in Delft are compared to the national developments, developments in the province of Zuid-Holland where Delft is located, and developments in the other medium-sized cities. Additionally, some characteristics of the developments within Delft are discussed.

In both The Netherlands and Zuid-Holland, the numbers of accidents and casualties per million person km decreased significantly between 1985 and 1992. The reductions are 15-20% for accidents with injured persons and 30-35% for fatalities. In Delft no significant development can be observed. The main problem is the low numbers.

The statistics suggest a small decrease of accidents in Delft as well, possibly between 0 and 10%. Regarding the number of fatalities nothing can be said. These fluctuate between 1 and 9 annually. Safety seems to have been developed in Delft less beneficial than in the whole province or the whole country. A possible explanation is that the safety increase was relatively small in medium-sized cities. It would be interesting to compare the development in Delft with that in other medium-sized cities. This has not

272

been done in the evaluation study, except for the observation that the number of fatalities in the medium-sized cities increased a little between the periods 1983-1985 and 1989-1992. This is an indication that the general increase in safety occurred mainly in the countryside and possibly in the large cities, too. This observation deprives us of the possibility to draw conclusions about the long-term influence of the bicycle measures on overall traffic safety.

The evaluation pays additionally attention to developments of the safety of cyclists, but limits it to the short period 1990-1992. In this period both in the whole country and in the province of Zuid-Holland the numbers of bicycle accidents and casualties decreased. The decrease of accidents and casulaties per million km is at the same pace as the decrease for all modes. Safety in Delft seems to have been unchanged. However, the observed numbers are too low for a firm conclusion regarding the development in Delft. Comparison with the development in other medium-sized cities is limited to fatalities. The number of cyclists that died in the Netherlands due to an accident in medium-sized cities decreased between 1983-1985 and 1989-1992. For Delft, the numbers are far too low for any conclusion on the development.

Looking at the developments within Delft, some significant changes that were observed in the short run are partly cancelled out. The share of accidents at intersections that decreased significantly in the short run, increased in the long run to a level that is still somewhat lower than in the before period. The number of bicycle casualties in the experimental area Noordwest increases again, but remains in the long run significantly lower than in the before situation. There is one district where the decrease of casulaties continued: the city centre. The continuing decrease should probably be explained by implementing measures that limit car traffic in this district.

The overall conclusion is that it is very difficult to say something about the long-term impact of the bicycle plan on traffic safety. There are indications that travelling has become safer in both the short and the long run, but that the long-term impact is smaller than the short-term impact.

4.7.3 Perception of cycling quality Participants of the panel that was convened for the indepth analysis of modal choice (Section 4.7.1) were asked in 1985, shortly after implementation of the mea-

safety velocity survey ability space for cyclists convenience not specified total

network specified spots network specified spots network specified spots network specified spots network specified spots network specified spots

Noordwest positive assessment 16% 75%

negative assessment 4% 73%*

Tanthof positive assessment 32% 46%

negative assessment 0% 38%*

10% 37%

2% 8%

30% 38%

2% 4%

1% 1%

0% 22%*

6%

0% 16%

1% 3%

2% 14%

4%

4% 8%

12% 27%

3% 10%

22% 28%

0% 8%

5% 15%

1% 22%

8% 2%

4% 10%

203%

161%

216%

94%

Table 4.18: Assessment of network changes due to the bicycle project on household level * most relate to one intersection of major roads (Hugo de Grootstraat and Westplantsoen) sures, how they assessed the changes in the bicycle network. The assessment was asked both on household level, person level and trip level. Table 4.18 presents the results on household level for the two experimental areas. The households were asked to report improvements or deteriorations of the network for a number of quality aspects. The questions included both an assessment of the bicycle network as a whole and an assessment of individual spots where measures were implemented.

The measures were assessed predominantly positively, in particular regarding safety, velocity and convenience.

The positive assessment is generally larger for Tanthofhouseholds than for Noordwest-households. Interestingly, some measures of the bicycle project were assessed negatively. Outstanding was one intersection that was experienced to be worse after reconstruction. Based on the result of the interviews the municipality reconstructed this intersection again.

The panel respondents were at least ten years old at the start of the panel and the figures presented so far exclude younger persons. An interesting question is to which extent the network raised the cycling quality for younger children, in particular safety. Therefore, households with children from 6-9 were asked whether cycling became safer for them on the route to school. From those house-

holds that answered that one or more measures were implemented on the route (72%), 54% answered that the implemented measures did not increase safety, and 46% answered that cycling on the route to school had become safer.

The assessment on person level gave similar results in the sense that the assessment was predominantly positive and was significantly higher for Tanthof-residents than for Noordwest-residents. In contrast to the assessment on household level, the personal assessment is rather similar for the different quality aspects.

On trip level, Noordwest-respondents reported that the quality was enlarged for 28% of the bicycle trips and reduced for 23% of the trips. For Tanthof-respondents the figures are 43% and 11%. The number of positive changes per trip was 0.39 and 0.81 for Noordwest- and Tanthof-residents respectively, and the number of negative changes per trip 0.25 and 0.11. The share of bicycle trips where one or more problems were encountered reduced from 45% to 34% for Noordwest-residents and from 51% to 30% for Tanthof-residents. The relatively bad results for Noordwest can partly be explained by the intersection mentioned in the note of Table 4.18. If problems with this intersection are left out of consideration, the share of trips where problems were encountered would be reduced from 45% to 28% in Noordwest.

273

The general conclusion is that the measures gave a better perception of the quality of the bicycle network. The increase in perception is substantially higher for Tanthof, a new residential area some kilometres from the city centre, than for Noordwest, an old district close to the city centre.

Another conclusion is that measures that are aimed to improve the bicycle network sometimes lower the perception of the quality of the network.

4.7.4 Economy

A number of key actors were interviewed about the socio-economic impacts of the bicycle plan. The interviews gave qualitative information about the impacts. Some results of the interviews:

Economic impacts of the bicycle plan were not included in the evaluation studies. However, in the framework of the Transecon-project that analyses the socio-economic impacts of investments in urban infrastructure, afterwards an attempt to estimate the economic impacts of the Delft bicycle plan has been made (Transecon, 2003). The analyses include a quantitative estimation of the regional added value and opinions of key actors about socio-economic impacts.

• A state agent had the opinion that the measures of the bicycle plan “certainly” did not affect housing prices.

The estimation of the added value includes three indicators. The first is the regional GDP indicating production of goods and services in the region, the second is the regional income reflecting wealth of the people, and the third is the regional employment. The estimated values are limited to the construction phase of the project. These are estimated with an econometric model that use global and economic conditions and demographic factors as input, together with the investment cost of the project per economic sector and year (Schneider et al, 1988). The estimated added values per annum for the Delft project are:

• A number of the interviewed persons had the opinion that the economic position of the city centre was strengthened and that the economic decline of the centre that was observed in the period before the measures were implemented was reversed. In the time of the project old buildings in the inner city and at the edges of the inner city were redesigned and reconstructed as luxurious apartments. New apartments were built as well. The improved bicycle infrastructure could have played a role in this development.

• GDP: 2.3 million ECU; • income: 1.5 million ECU; • employment: 29 persons.

The construction phase covers the period 1979-1991.

The average annual investment in this period on both the implementation of the measures and the evaluation studies was 1.02 million ECU. All mentioned ECU amounts are at current prices. As mentioned before, the calculated added values relate only to the construction phase. In the operating phase that follows the construction phase the improved infrastructure makes a city more attractive and may be beneficial for economic activities. Added values in the operating phase are on average about 3 times the values in the construction phase (Transecon, 2003). The factor 3 is argued for large infrastructural investments like

274

a metro line that have significant impacts on land use and economic activity. It is doubtful whether it can be used for bicycle investments as well. According to the opinions of key actors, to be discussed next, the bicycle plan had no large long term economic impacts.

• A bicycle mender assumed that the plan increased the demand for bicycles. He sold significantly more bicycles after implementation of the measures. However, there is an alternative reason for the increase. In the same period a number of other bicycle shops closed, raising the business of the remaining shops.

• The plan improved the perception of the city by its residents; it increased civic pride.

The measures sometimes were beneficial for undesired economic activities, too. In a neighbourhood that is fully surrounded by water and that was accessible via just one bridge in the before situation, a second bridge for cyclists was built in the framework of the bicycle plan. Afterwards theft proved to increase. The assumed reason is that the new bridge created better opportunities to housebreakers for fleeing.

4.8 The impacts of building the Plantagebrug In Section 4.5 the building of the Plantagebrug has been described. This bridge is built halfway between the Reineveldbrug and the Koepoortbrug (Figure 4.3). It is

assumed that the Plantagebrug will attract many cyclists that otherwise would have used one of the two neighbouring bridges. Additionally, lowering the severance of the canal for cyclists might generate new trips and affect shifts of destination and mode. These impacts are examined with three studies. One study explores the potential of the Plantagebrug before it was actually built. This study is based on a household survey and interviews (Kropman and Neeskens, 1986). The two other studies collect data from bicycle counts at bridges and enquiries among passing cyclists in both the before and after situations in order to examine several kinds of impacts of the Plantagebrug (Gommers et al, 1985, and Veeke and Jansen, 1987).

4.8.1 Potential of the bridge Before the Plantagebrug was built possible impacts on travel behaviour were investigated. The research questions were how the bridge would affect destination choice, modal choice, and route choice; and whether the bridge should contribute to perceived safety and comfort.

The analysis is based on a travel survey and interviews about why observed travel choices are made. A sample of households was selected for both the travel survey and the interviews. Only households living in the residential districts at the east side of the canal and the bridges were approached. Therefore, the study is limited to the potential of the Plantagebrug for those who live in these districts. These are only part of all potential users. From 161 addressed households 81 gave a full response. Interviews were conducted with 157 members of these households, only members that were 10 years or older.

The travel survey and interviews were organised in June 1984. First, household members were asked to report their trips on a certain working day, and a few days later they were interviewed.

The travel survey gave the same kind of figures as the travel surveys in the three study areas (in particular the Tables 4.5 and 4.9). The results differ in a few respects.

First, in the Plantagebrug survey nearly all respondents went outside on the enquiry day (99%). The shares in the other surveys range from 83% to 92% in the before situation. The explanation could be a possible selective sampling and the small sample size of the Plantagebrug survey. A related difference is the number of trips pppd: 4.9 compared to 3.4 to 4.0 in the other surveys. The modal split was differenent as well. The high share of the bicycle is relatively high (46% versus 36% to 41% in the other

surveys), that of car users as a passenger is high as well (9% versus 5%), and the share of car users as a driver is relatively low (16% versus 21-32%).

The interviews aimed to give information about how people assess the new bridge, which hindrances they encounter when cycling to the inner city (crossing the canal), to which extent the hindrances could be removed by building the Plantagebrug; and which impacts can be expected on travel choices regarding destination, mode, and route.

Assessment of the Plantagebrug A majority of the respondents has the opinion that building the new bridge is a good thing; 54% report only advantages, 25% report both advantages and disadvantages, 14% report only disadvantages, and the remaining 8% report nothing. The most reported advantages are better accessibility of the inner city, higher safety, and nicer and more varied routes. The most reported disadvantages are superfluity of the bridge, a waste of money if used for building, and hindrance for shipping and rowing. Based on the predominant opinions, 74% of the respondents can be indicated as supporters of the bridge and 23% as opponents.

The respondents were asked to put forward measures that should accompany building the new bridge. They mentioned in total 270 different measures that mainly aimed to enlarge safety on the routes to the bridge. There was a large match between the mentioned measures and accompanying measures that were planned by the municipality (the respondents were ignorant of these).

Hindrances for cycling to the inner city Starting from the reported trips in the travel survey, hindrances were encountered for 45% of the bicycle trips to the inner city. The most mentioned hindrances relate to safety, in particular traffic volume and speed, and problems when crossing roads. Interestingly, the two most frequently reported problematic spots are the two existing bridges, or more exactly: the Koepoortbrug and the road Vrijenbanselaan that leads over the Reineveldbrug. Addition of the Plantagebrug that is dedicated to cyclists and pedestrians

275

to the two other bridges with high car volumes has a large potential for reducing hindrances. The number of trips with hindrances would be reduced from 45% to 34%.

For trips that were not made by bicycle or not to the inner city, the respondents were asked why these were not made by bicycle to the inner city. The predominant reason (applicable for 40% of these trips) was that choosing the destination in the inner city is no option. The second most important reason is practical matters (22% of the trips), other reasons of some importance, all relating to 13-15% of the trips, are inconvenience, travel time, and ‘bicycle use no option’. Problems regarding the traffic situation were mentioned for only 2% of the trips. Freedom of choice for converting the trip into a bicycle trip to the inner city applies to 4% of the trips. These results assume a rather small potential of the Plantagebrug. The contribution of the Plantagebrug is mainly improvement of the traffic situation and reducing travel time. These kinds of hindrances are rather unimportant. Moreover, if these hindrances would be removed, or if the trips that were free of choice would be made by bicycle to the inner city, a

before mode walk public transport bicycle car (driver) public transport moped total

bridge no bridge* Koepoortbrug Reineveldbrug Reineveldbrug Koepoortbrug other bridge Reineveldbrug other bridge Koepoortbrug Reineveldbrug

limited number of the trips would use the Plantagebrug. In many cases routing via one of the other bridges is shorter.

One should note that the reason “travel time” is valid for a much smaller proportion of trips (14%) than in Table 4.11 that presents the reasons why the bicycle is not used for non-bicycle trips (51% in the before situation). Possibly, in the Plantagebrug survey the travel time hindrance relates mainly or only to trips to the inner city. For these trips the bicycle is generally competitive regarding travel time.

Impacts on travel choices In order to get understanding about the impacts on travel choices, the respondents were asked whether and how they would change their trips if the Plantagebrug was built. From 767 observed trips, in just one case another destination would have been chosen (in the inner city instead of outside the inner city). The impacts on modal choice and route choice are summarized in Table 4.19.

The figures concern numbers of round trips and share in all observed round trips (767). A round trip is the sequence of trips, starting at home, visiting one or more outdoors activities, and returning home.

after (via Plantagebrug) walk bicycle 2 (0.3%) 5 (0.7%) 1 (0.1%) 31 (4.0%) 32 (4.2%) 1 (0.1%) 5 (0.7%) 1 (0.1%) 2 (0.3%) 8 (1.0%)

Table 4.19: Changes in modal choice and route choice *possibly trips that use two different bridges in the after situation

276

72 (9.4%)

moped

4 (0.5%) 4 (0.5%)

Summarizing: the impact on destination choice is marginal (just one trip), the impact on modal choice is larger but still small (9 trips, about 1% of all trips), the impact on route choice is substantial (75 trips, 10% of all trips).

Modal shifts are mainly from car to bicycle, and to a lesser extent from public transport to both bicycle and walk.

Based on the reported number of 72 bicycle trips that will use the Plantagebrug, the total number of bicycle trips of residents of the districts at the east side of the canal that will use the bridge on a working day are estimated. The result is 1850 trips. This number regards single trips in two directions. Because it concerns only trips by residents that live east of the canal, the total number of cyclists using the Plantagebrug will probably be significantly higher.

A more complete estimation can be made with data of the second before study that will be discussed next.

4.8.2 Before and after studies For evaluation of the impacts of the Plantagebrug on use of the different bridges, accessibility, and safety a before and after study are performed. The after study pays in addition attention to familiarity with the new bridge. Data for the before study were collected by counts of cyclists at the Reineveldbrug and Koepoortbrug at a Wednesday in June 1984, and for the after study by counts at the same bridges as well as the Plantagebrug at a Wednesday in September 1986. The intention was to organize the after counts in June as well but a delay in building the bridge impelled to postpone these. The after counts were organized one month after the bridge was put into use. One of the complementary measures that should contribute to the attractiveness of the bridge, i.e. building a new route for cyclists along the Kantoorgracht west of the bridge, was not finished yet. Absence of this route and possible unfamiliarity of the new bridge due to the rather small period of operation will have made that the observed demand underspends the potential demand.

Both the before and after counts were executed between

Koepoortbrug Reineveldbrug Plantagebrug all bridges

7 a.m. and 7 p.m. In addition to the counts, questionnaires were handed out to a number of cyclists that travelled in the direction of the inner city (south or west). They were asked to report origin and destination addresses, travel purpose, residential municipality, normal use of the different bridges, possibility to use an alternative mode, and some personal characteristics. Moreover, they were asked to draw their route on a map. In the after enquiry, a question about familiarity of the Plantagebrug was asked to users of the two other bridges, and possible use of the alternative bridges was asked to users of the Plantagebrug.

In the before situation 7475 cyclists travelling in the direction of the inner city were counted on both bridges, 4350 questionnaires were handed out, and 1142 completed questionnaires were returned. The response was lower than expected and for that reason returned questionnaires without route information were used for the analysis as well (304 questionnaires). In the after situation 6253 cyclists entering the inner city were counted on the three bridges, 4372 questionnaires were handed out and 1417 completed questionnaires were returned. Now there was no need for using questionnaires without route information. The large difference in counted numbers can be explained by the difference in season. The before counts were on a hot day in June and included a lot of cyclists travelling to and from the recreation area Delftse Hout east of the city that is accessible via the Koepoortbrug. In the after counts only few cyclists travelled to or from the Delftse Hout.

Use of the different bridges Based on the questionnaires, the numbers of cyclists that use the bridges during the enquiry periods are estimated by using projection factors. Table 4.20 shows the estimated figures for the three bridges in the before and after periods per direction.

entering the inner leaving the inner city city before after before after 4950 3341 5047 3225 2495 1906 2815 2159 0 1006 0 831 7445 6253 7862 6215

both directions before 9997 5310 0 15307

after 6566 4065 1837 12468

Table 4.20: Cyclists crossing the bridges between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. on the enquiry days

277

The Koepoortbrug functions mainly for local traffic. In the before situation 89% of the passing bicycles made local trips: both origin and destination were inside Delft. The Plantagebrug seems to have strengthened the local function of the Koepoortbrug: In the after situation the share of local bicycle traffic on this bridge increased to 91%. The Reineveldbrug is more important for cyclists that travel longer distances. The shares of local traffic were 61% (before) and 65% (after). The local function of this bridge seems to have been strengthened a little as well. The function of the Plantagebrug is between that of the two other bridges. The share of local bicycle traffic was 79%.

Looking at travel purposes, two major differences were observed between the before and after enquiries. The number of leisure trips decreased significantly, that of school trips increased. For all bridges together, the share of leisure trips fell from 19% to 5%, and the share of school trips increased from 10% to 22%. The explanation for the fall in leisure trips has to do with the season and the weather. As mentioned before, the before enquiry was performed at a hot day in June, the after enquiry at a day in September. Why less pupils and students travelled to school during the before enquiry in June is not clear. If leisure and school trips are not considered, the distribution of purposes is similar in both periods, both for each of the two bridges that existed in the before period, and for the total of all bridges. The Koepoortbrug is mainly used for work and shopping and, in the before period, for leisure.

The Reineveldbrug is mainly used for mandatory activities (work and education). The most practised activity by cyclists crossing the Plantagebrug is work. The shares of work and shopping are between the shares observed for

familiar with Plantagebrug use of Plantagebrug alternative for Plantagebrug (1) alternative for Plantagebrug (2)

the two other bridges, the share of education is equal to the low share of the Koepoortbrug, and the shares of the other distinguished purposes (visit family/friends, leisure, other) are higher than those of the two alternative bridges in the after situation.

Familiarity with the Plantagebrug The after enquiry included questions about familiarity of the Plantagebrug and competition between the bridges.

Table 4.21 summarizes the results. The first row mentions the shares of Koepoortbrug and Reineveldbrug users that were familiar with the Plantagebrug. The Plantagebrug is better known for Koepoortbrug users than for Reineveldbrug users. The second row reports the shares of Koepoortbrug and Reineveldbrug users that already used the Plantagebrug. Again, the share is higher for Koepoortbrug users. The two lowest rows indicate which alternative bridge Plantagebrug users would have used if the Plantagebrug had not been built. A majority would have used the Koepoortbrug (third row). However, if the numbers of those indicating that they alternatively would have used the Koepoortbrug or Reineveldbrug are compared to the actual bicycle users of these two alternative bridges, the figures are similar (fourth row). This suggests that the attractiveness of the Plantegebrug is similar for users of the two other bridges. Possible explanations for the difference in familiarity are a) that a relatively large share of Reineveldbrug users do not live in Delft and might be less familiar with projects that are implemented in Delft, and b) that the Plantagebrug is visible from the Koepoortbrug and not from the Reineveldbrug.

Koepoortbrug 82% 51% 59% 18%

(1): share of all Plantagebrug users (2): percentage of the actual users of the alternative bridge

278

Reineveldbrug 62% 35% 40% 21%

other bridges 1% -

A general conclusion is that it can take some time before (nearly) all potential users of a new bridge or other infrastructural work are familiar with the project.

reduced from 1.36 to 1.27, for trips between 1400 m and 3600 m, the reduction was only from 1.23 to 1.22, and for longer trips no reduction was observed.

Expected and observed use

Comparing the predicted travel times in the after situation with the before situation, the Plantagebrug would have saved 0.2 minute (2%) on average for all canal crossing bicycle trips. For trips starting in the residential districts at the east side of the canal, the average savings are 0.3-0.4 minutes (3-4%). For trips that were predicted to use the Plantagebrug in the after situation, travel time would be reduced by 1.0 minute (8.5%).

After collection of the before data, the number of cyclists crossing the Plantagebrug was predicted. The enquiry gave a lot of information about origins and destinations of trips by bicycle, and route choice. Using the network data in the before and after situation that were recorded in the data bank described in the route choice part of Section 4.7.1 and the model that was calibrated on data regarding route choice of cyclists leaving the Noordwest district, 4100 cyclists were estimated to use the Plantagebrug at a working day. This number could be in accordance with the estimated number of 1850 for only bicycle trips of residents living in the districts east of the canal (Section 4.8.1). However, the observed number in the after study, about 1800 (Table 4.20), is considerably lower. Three reasons can be mentioned for the gap between predicted and observed numbers, though it is doubtful whether they can explain the whole difference. One reason is that in the before situation the overall number of cyclists was higher than in the after situation. This is mainly due to a large fall in leisure travel. The Plantagebrug proves to attract a relatively large part of leisure traffic and is likely to be more exposed to fluctuations in volume of this traffic than the other bridges. The second reason is the unfamiliarity of the Plantagebrug by a number of the potential users. The third reason is that, unlike it was assumed in the prediction, not all related projects that contribute to the attractiveness of the bridge were finished. This is particularly true for the bicycle route along the Kantoorgracht.

Accessibility The Plantagebrug reduced the detours that had to be made by the canal crossing cyclists. The average detour factor on link level decreased from 1.23 to 1.21. For those using the Koepoortbrug in both the before and after situation, the decrease is from 1.25 to 1.24, for those using the Reineveldbrug the detour is constant at 1.17. For cyclists that use the Plantagebrug in the after situation, the detour factor fell from 1.30 to 1.22. Not surprisingly, the Plantagebrug attracted particularly cyclists that had to make a large detour in the before situation where the Plantagebrug offers a more direct route. The reduction in detour factors is mainly observed for the shorter distances. For canal crossing trips less than 1400 m, the detour factor

The Plantagebrug does not contribute to the accessibility of the most important destination of those living east of the bridge: the market and surrounding shopping area.

The bridge connects with the less attractive northern side of the inner city while the market is in the southern part.

Likewise, the new bridge does not improve the accessibility of the central train station that is located south west of the inner city.

A third important destination is an industrial estate north of the inner city and about 1 km west of the Plantagebrug.

The Plantagebrug improves the accessibility of this estate for people living east of the canal substantially and is used frequently by them in the after situation. The relatively large numbers using the Plantagebrug for travelling to the industrial estate explain the high share of workrelated trips.

Safety Probably the Plantagebrug will have increased traffic safety for cyclists. Both the Koepoortbrug and the Reineveldbrug were experienced as unsafe because cyclists were not physically separated from the large numbers of cars crossing the bridges. A number of cyclists shifted their route from one of these unsafe bridges to the much safer Plantagebrug. This will have increased general safety. However, the impact on safety has not been studied. A study on differences in accidents would have been difficult because of the very low number of accidents in such a small area.

4.9 Discussion The Delft bicycle plan had two objectives: to improve the infrastructural facilities for cyclists and generating knowledge about the impact of the upgrade of a whole cycle

279

pality; the second mainly the objective of the national government. Regarding the second objective, next questions should be answered: â&#x20AC;˘ Does the implementation of a comprehensive bicycle network lead to an increase in bicycle traffic? The hypothesis was that providing a comprehensive and integral network affects bicycle use and its quality more than improving a number of single bicycle routes. â&#x20AC;˘ Does the implementation of a bicycle network increase road safety? â&#x20AC;˘ In which way do cyclists use a comprehensive and integral bicycle network which is perceived as such, and what are their behavioural responses?

Do the evaluation studies give answers on the questions?

In answering the questions one should consider that the upgrade of the Delft bicycle network concerned improvements of an existing network with initially a reasonably good quality in a city where the bicycle was already used frequently. The answers may not be valid for cities with initially a poor bicycle network and low bicycle use.

The studies demonstrate that the measures induced a short term moderate increase in the number of bicycle trips and probably a larger increase in the distance travelled by bicycle. They suggest that the increase is retained in the long term, but due to problems relating to small samples and the influences of other factors, a firm conclusion regarding the long term effects can not be drawn. In addition, a significant increase in the perceived quality of the network was observed, in particular regarding safety, directness and convenience. A similar result was found for the demonstration projects of single bicycle paths described in Section 3. The impact on the perceived quality is more pronounced than the impact on actual bicycle use.

Would the increase in bicycle use have been larger than in the case the same money was spent on improving a number of individual routes? The studies do not answer this question. We guess that the answer is negative, assuming that the alternative spending is in the most efficient way and that initially the network enables cyclists to move from each origin to each destination (as was the case in the studied Dutch cities). Considerations behind the guess are the rather small observed impacts of the Delft bicycle plan, and, for providing an integral grid net-

280

work with a homogeneous quality, the need to employ part of the money for relatively large investments on routes with relatively low bicycle volumes. The Plantagebrug is an example of an expensive project in one of the main corridors of the defined grid network but outside the most extensive used bicycle routes. One should note however that if the money that is actually spent on upgrading an a priori defined network, would alternatively have been spent on improving individual routes in the same city, these routes are likely to form a network as well. The latter network may not be identical to the defined network for the upgrade, though both networks will have a number of links in common.

The increase in the perception of safety is confirmed by an increase in safety itself. The studies give evidence of a clear increase of road safety in the short run, despite the growth of bicycle use, one of the more vulnerable modes.

The long-term impact is less clear and could be smaller than the short-term impact. The main ingredient for the safety increase was separation of cyclists from motorized traffic. The separation is partly spatial by building off-road bicycle paths and partly temporal by installing traffic lights.

Cyclists prove to assess the three sub networks on urban, district and neighbourhood level differently. They prefer use of higher order networks and are willing to make a detour if then a larger part of the route is travelled on a higher order network. Cyclists have a clear preference for off-road bicycle paths. The most important factor for route choice is travel time. New network links that shorten the distance (and duration) can be very attractive.

Apart from answers on the three research questions, other interesting things can be learned from the Delft project. Firstly, good communication with interest groups and residents in an early phase is important for a wide support of the project and a successful implementation of measures. Secondly, the bicycle has the potential to attract car users; improving bicycle infrastructure is a possible measure for a policy that is directed at lowering car use.

Thirdly, the most important reasons for not using the bicycle for a trip have to do with practical matters and travel time; infrastructural problems and the traffic situation are rarely reported reasons for not using the bicycle. These findings suggest that investing in bicycle infrastructure is not necessarily the most efficient way for enhancing bicycle use. Again, it should be noted that this result is valid for a city that had already a fairly good network. For other cities the result is likely to be different.

The studies investigated the impacts in the short and the long run. Could something be said about the impacts in the very long run? The Dutch Cyclists Union (Fietsersbond) developed a method for assessing local cycling conditions for a number of aspects and applied it to a large number of Dutch cities. This method, called the “Fietsbalans”, enables to compare the cycling conditions in the examined cities. Because Delft is one of these cities, the more recent quality of the Delft bicycle network can be compared to the network qualities in other cities. The examination in 2000 (Fietsersbond, 2001) demonstrated that Delft, compared to other medium-sized cities, • ranked high regarding traffic safety of cyclists, • above the average regarding directness (measured by detour factors, delays at traffic lights and other obstacles, and speed), • below the average regarding inconvenience caused by other traffic (this includes the need to ride behind each other and exposure to traffic noise), • and very low regarding pavement.

Generally, Delft takes a medium position between the cities. The bicycle plan gave Delft not an excellent position in the long run. One of the reasons is that in many other cities investments in bicycle infrastructure were made, partly encouraged by the positive results for Delft. The relatively good performance regarding directness in Delft may still be attributed to the bicycle plan. Possibly this is also true for the high score regarding safety. The very low score for pavement indicates that Delft did not maintain the bicycle infrastructure properly. The Delft soil conditions bring about a rather quick deterioration of the quality of the tile pavements and a good quality demands for rather extensive road maintenance.

281

282

5 Shared space in Haren

Shared space is defined as integrated use of public space by both motorized and non-motorized modes. It is evolved out of the ‘woonerf’ concept, which is a residential area with mixed use of traffic and other activities where cars have to slow down to a walking pace and so accommodate other usage of the public space. Shared space is the opposite of modal segregation. In the Netherlands, shared space is part of the concept of “duurzaam veilig” (sustainable safe) that aims to design traffic infrastructure such that it is inherently safe. Shared space impels drivers of motorized modes to take full account of the slow modes. This is assumed to lead to safer and socially responsible traffic behaviour.

The municipality of Haren, one of the more wealthy municipalities in the agglomeration of Groningen that is the largest city in the north of the Netherlands, implemented and evaluated shared space in the Rijksstraatweg in 2002. The Rijksstraatweg is the main road traversing the town and used to be the major road connecting Groningen to the south (“Rijksstraatweg” means national road).

However, since a parallel motorway has been built, the function of the road is mainly local and to some extent regional. Still, it is the most heavily used road in Haren.

In 2004 8,200 motor vehicles were counted on a working day. The road crosses the centre of Haren. Figure 5.1 shows the location of Haren in relation to Groningen. The Rijksstraatweg is indicated in the figure.

5.1 Design Starting point for the design was making the road an integral part of the centre. Before, the typical function of the road was facilitating through traffic and the road created severance inside the town. The measures to achieve the intended integration were: • Removing differences in height at the transverse section of the road.

• Making the road optically narrower.

• Installing street furniture that is typical for avenues.

• Reducing the maximum speed from 50 km/h to 30 km/h.

5.2 Organisation and implementation The municipality encouraged participation of citizens in developing the project. Experts and citizens together dis cussed about the new design. During the whole process from planning to completion interested parties were informed. This policy created a large support among the citizens for the project. The implementation of the project was in 2002.

5.3 Evaluation A few evaluation studies have been executed. These are summarized by van der Velde and Bos (2008). Evaluated topics are use of the road, the impact on safety, and the experience of users of shared space.

5.3.1 Use of shared space Initially, cars were assumed to use the main lane in the middle of the road, pedestrians should use primarily the cussed about the new design. During the whole process from planning to completion interested parties were informed. This policy created a large support among the citizens for the project. The implementation of the project was in 2002.

5.3 Evaluation

Figure 5.1: Location of Haren southeast of the city of Groningen.

A few evaluation studies have been executed. These are summarized by van der Velde and Bos (2008). Evaluated

283

topics are use of the road, the impact on safety, and the experience of users of shared space.

5.3.1 Use of shared space Initially, cars were assumed to use the main lane in the middle of the road, pedestrians should use primarily the side lanes, and cyclists had no instruction about which lanes to use. One of the evaluation results was that usage of both the lane in the middle and the side lanes by cyclists gave an unclear situation and increased the perception of unsafety. Based on this result, the room for cyclists was restricted to the lane in the middle that they use together with cars.

Regarding use of the shared space it was observed that: • Slow modes cross the road all over. These usually choose the most direct route to the destination at the other side of the road. Pedestrians frequently do not use the crosswalks, even if a crosswalk is close by.

• Cars drive slowly and anticipate crossing pedestrians.

They generally give priority to pedestrians that use the crosswalks, and sometimes to those that cross elsewhere. This implies a good social interaction.

• Cars take account of bicycles riding before them. They usually stay behind when there is no good possibility for overtaking.

• Car drivers generally give no priority to cyclists that enter from side streets, and the cyclists do not expect priority to be given. The reason might be different pavements that suggest that one road has priority to the other. This unintended result did not create conflicts.

• The volume of motor vehicles on the Rijksstraatweg did not change noticeably.

5.3.2 Safety Increasing safety is a main objective of shared space.

The impact on safety is examined by comparing the numbers of accidents and casualties in the periods before and after the implementation of shared space.

In the before period (1994-2001) the average number of annual accidents was nearly 11. The number fluctuated between 6 and 14. In the after period (2003-2007) the annual average was 5 with fluctuations from 3 to 9. The highest number of 9 accidents was observed in 2003, shortly after the implementation. Possibly users need time to become familiar with the new situation. Despite

Figure 5.2: Two sections of the road before (left) and after (right) implementing shared space (source: van der Velde and Bos, 2008) 284

the low absolute numbers, there is clear evidence that safety increased significantly.

An even stronger decrease is observed for the number of casualties. In the before period the annual average was about 2.5 and the number fluctuated between 1 and 5. In the after period only one casualty was registered in the whole 5-year period.

The nature of the accidents changed somewhat. In the before situation the most observed category of accidents were those related to insufficient distance to vehicles in front (26% of all accidents); rear-end collision was a typical accident. In the after situation the most observed accidents were those related to not giving priority, wrongly turning a corner, and driving too far to the right (for 20%, 12%, and 12% of the accidents respectively).

In both the before and after periods most accidents were due to collisions between cars. The numbers of collisions between cars and bicycles and collisions between bicycles were relatively small and remained to be relatively small. The change from segregated infrastructure with separated bicycle paths to shared space with mixed use of the main lane by cars and bicycles did not increase the relative unsafety of cyclists. In connection with the overall increase in safety, the absolute numbers of all types of collisions decreased.

5.3.3 Perception of shared space A number of residents were interviewed by phone about their opinion on changes due to the redesign of the Rijksstraatweg. Corresponding with the observed changes, the respondents have the opinion that vehicle speeds lowered, traffic volume is unchanged, and road users take more account of each other. In contrast with the observed statistics, the respondents felt a decrease of safety. This feeling was mainly due to the unclear position of the bicycle that was allowed to use both the main lane in the middle of the road and the side lanes. After adapting the rules the feeling of unsafety might have been reduced.

According to the respondents, the centre looks better and has become more attractive. The Rijksstraatweg is considered to be more integrated in the centre. The Rijksstraatweg used to be an important barrier inside the town and the centre, but after implementation of shared space the severance reduced substantially. Lowering of the severance was one of the main objectives of shared space.

Figure 5.3: Use of the shared space (source: van der Velde and Bos, 2008)

5.3.4 Economy One of the results reported in the preceding section was an increase of attractiveness of the city centre. Nevertheless, the respondents indicated not to visit the centre more frequently. Possibly, the centre benefits from more visits by people from outside Haren; however, this has not been studied.

5.3.5 Conclusion Shared space can be highly beneficial. It has the potential to increase safety significantly and lower the severance of a road. The increase in safety is remarkable, because modes that have quite different speeds in normal use are mixed. The main explanation for the increased safety is that the design tempts the faster vehicles to drive with low speeds. The example of Haren proves that shared space can be applied for roads with a rather high volume of motor vehicles.

However, it should be stressed that ‘shared space’ has its specific contextual conditions of application. The public space should have a substantial ‘habitat’ function. And the concept is likely to be more successful if adjusted driving behaviour is already part of the local traffic culture.

285

286

6 BICYCLE STREET IN HAARLEM

A bicycle street is a street for mixed traffic (bicycles and cars) where the bicycle is the main user and the car is guest. The concept of the bicycle street was first applied some decades ago in both a few German and Dutch cities. Recently, in the Netherlands it evolved to be a general frequently applied concept. The main function of bicycle streets in the Netherlands is provision of bicycle routes through residential areas that are part of the main bicycle network. Bicycle streets offer alternative routes for the main roads. The benefits for the cyclists are that they are not exposed to the polluting emissions of the cars, may have a more direct route, and can avoid traffic lights.

In the case that no bicycle paths are provided along the main roads, an additional benefit is avoidance of the inconvenient and unsafe mixed use of roads with high car volumes (Andriesse and Hansen, 1996).

Bicycle streets are links in the main bicycle networks and should meet high quality standards for cyclists. Hindrance by cars using the streets should be minimal. For that:

width of the later should not exceed 1.1 m. Cyclists are assumed to use only the comfortable roadway, the side lanes make that room for cars is sufficient.

Many bicycle streets have been recently built in the Netherlands, but only few are evaluated. One of these is the Venkelstraat in the city of Haarlem. Haarlem is a city of about 150,000 inhabitants located 20 km west of Amsterdam. The Venkelstraat is a street through a residential area and part of a main bicycle route to the city centre (Figure 6.1). The street is reconstructed as a bicycle street and became the first bicycle street in the city. Design and use of this street have been evaluated (Kho, 2006).

• Through car traffic should be inhibited; only local cars preferably use the streets.

• The number of cyclists should be large compared to the number of car users.

• Cyclists have priority; they don’t need to go aside in order to allow a car behind them to overtake.

• The design of the street clarifies that the street is a bicycle street and not a main road for cars. Bicycle streets should not be too wide. In the Netherlands, bicycle streets usually are paved with red asphalt that is typically used for bicycle paths.

The number of cyclists of a bicycle street should be high but not too high. If the number of cyclists exceeds 600 per hour and per direction, there is hardly room for car users.

In that case cars should be admitted only for a short road section, no longer than 300 m (Andriesse and Hansen, 1996).

Andriesse and Hansen recommend allowing cars to use a bicycle street in only one direction (unlike the bicycles).

The corresponding transverse section is 3.5 to 4 m (Andriesse and Ligtermoet, 2006). If cars are allowed to move in both directions, the proposed width is about 4.5 m. Generally, Dutch bicycle streets exist of a roadway in the middle paved with red asphalt and additional narrow lanes at each side that could be paved with bricks; the

Figure 6.1: Location of the bicycle street Venkelstraat.

6.1 Design The Venkelstraat has the typical design for Dutch bicycle streets. There is a wide lane with red asphalt in the middle of the road and there are two narrow side lanes at each side, paved with bricks. Cyclists are assumed to use the red lane in the middle, the side lanes give cars enough space to come across each other (Figure 6.2). The street is accessible in both directions to both cars and cyclists.

6.2 Evaluation The evaluation is restricted to the design and the way the

287

street is used by both car drivers and cyclists. Impacts on travel behaviour like modal choice are not studied. Questionnaires were distributed to people living at or near the Venkelstraat and to pupils and employees of the Rudolf Steinerschool, a school for both primary and secondary education. The school is located at the southern end of the Venkelstraat. The number of distributed questionnaires was 1500: 750 to residents of the street and surroundings, and another 750 to pupils and employees of the school. The number of returned questionnaires was 335, about 200 from the residents and about 130 from those connected to the school. Most questions in the questionnaire were multiple-choice, though there was room for additional remarks and suggestions.

The results demonstrate that people generally are satisfied with the bicycle street; 58% of the respondents reported that they were satisfied or very satisfied, 16% was dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. The remaining respondents had no clear opinion. An even higher share of respondents was satisfied with the look of the street (72%), where only 10% was dissatisfied. A majority had the opinion that noise nuisance was not affected, while more respondents that felt that noise nuisance decreased (21%) than increased (6%). According to most respondents current provisions regarding speed ramps and lighting are sufficient.

The respondents were asked whether they use the street as a car driver or as a cyclist. Something less than a half (42%) report using the street as a car driver, a large majority (91%) indicate that they use the street as a cyclist or moped rider. Both car drivers and cyclists were asked about the way they use the street.

Most car drivers (82%) are aware that cyclists have priority and need not to go aside for overtaking cars. Interestingly, a large share of cyclists (61%) answer that they actually go aside when a car approaches on the back.

Nearly half of the car drivers (44%) cannot conclude from the design of the street that cyclists have priority. Most of the car drivers (61%) use the street wrongly: they drive fully on the red lane in the middle. The share of cyclists that know that the red asphalt is dedicated for them is smaller, only 55%. These results indicate that many users do not know how the bicycle street should be used.

This can be explained by the fact that 67% of the respondents had not read information about the bicycle street.

Both communication and design of the street should be improved.

A number of respondents suggested that marking the middle of the street would increase clarity about function and usage. The street gets the look of a bicycle path and gives car drivers the feeling that they have to ride at the right side of the road. The municipality complied with this

Figure 6.2: Venkelstraat in Haarlem (source: Kho, 2006)

288

Â

suggestion and put road signs informing that the street is a bicycle street. Figure 6.3 displays the situation after marking and signposting.

General conclusions from the Venkelstraat evaluation are that a good communication with users is important; that users generally are satisfied with the street; that the way the street has to be used is not self-evident; and that marking the middle of the street and signposting increase clarity about how the street should be used.

With respect to marking the middle of the street, it should be added that a number of bicycle streets in the Netherlands are provided with a spherical median that can be driven over by vehicles.

Figure 6.3 Venkelstraat Haarlem after marking and signposting (source: Ligtermoet, 2006)

Â

289

290

7 Interurban highway for cyclists

7.1 Context

and using highway A13.

Rather recent are initiatives to promote interurban cycling as a means to relieve the congestion on motor highways.

In the Dutch pattern of urbanisation there is a large share of interurban commuting on distances below 20 km. If these commuters go by car they use the motor highway system, and congestion on these highways has been a growing problem for years. Regional car trips (on relatively short distances) appear to contribute substantially to the congestion problems. Now the idea is that by making high quality bicycle connections in some highway corridors a number of commuters would be prepared to shift to cycling to avoid the congestion on the highways. This type of projects is implemented within the framework of the project ‘Fiets filevrij’ (Cycle Congestion Free), and combines infrastructural improvements of interurban bicycle infrastructure with promotion activities to seduce ‘short distance’ car drivers to shift to cycling.

7.3 Organisation and implementation Fiets Filevrij is one of the 40 projects of the ministerial programme ‘File proof’ (Congestion proof). The project is coordinated by the Fietsersbond (Dutch Cyclists’ Union) and provides a framework for co-operation of road authorities that are relevant in the specific situation (municipalities, provinces, national government if applicable) and interested other organisations to jointly implement the interurban bicycle highway, including a dedicated marketing programme to seduce car drivers to shift to cycling for one or more times per week.

7.4 The costs In principle all road authorities will pay the costs of interventions on their own roads. The national government is prepared to pay 20% of the costs of the project.

7.5 Evaluation

Figure 7.1: Map showing in green the implemented bicycle highways, in blue the planned ones and in ochre those for which a feasibility study is going on.

7.2 Design

Figure 7.2: Bicycle highway Rotterdam – Delft We take as an example the route between Rotterdam and Delft. The route is a direct and ‘fast’ bicycle route. The 10 km route is for the most part implemented as an off road bicycle track, and it has only a few intersections and no traffic lights at all. So cyclists will have no delay, even more so because at the few remaining intersections the cyclist has right of way. The bicycle track is two directional and for most parts conveniently wide and paved with (smooth) asphalt. It provides an alternative (by bicycle) for motorists commuting between Rotterdam and Delft

In a recent model study Goudappel Coffeng (2011) calculated that investments in fast bicycle routes will have societal benefits with regard to mobility, economy, health and climate. The calculation was done for the 27 planned and implemented bicycle highway projects shown in Figure 7.1, covering 675 km in 8 provinces. These projects will create fast and undisturbed bicycle connections between (sometimes a chain of) towns and villages. The calculations are executed by Goudappel’s National Transport Model and based on the assumption that the average cycling speed increases from 15 km/h to 18 km/h. A summary of the most striking model outcomes suggests that the construction of these bicycle highways would result into: • 0.7% less trips by car and 1.3% more trips by bicycle in the Netherlands at large, suggestion and put road signs informing that the street is a bicycle street. Figure 6.3 displays the situation after marking and signposting.

• Decreased car use resulting in an annual reduction of 80 million kg CO2 emission.

• Improved public health resulting in yearly savings of € 100 million on health care and avoidance of premature deaths.

• A decrease of travel delay in rush hours of 15,000 h per day, which would result in savings of € 40 million per year.

Bicycle highways are very suitable for the relatively fast electric bicycles (type pedalec) which are becoming increasingly popular. The study calculates that if 50% of the bicycles would be pedalecs, the effects would have been two- to threefold, based on the assumption that the average speed of these pedalecs would increase from 20 km/h on regular bicycle tracks to 24 km/h on bicycle highways.

291

292

8 Synthesis of Dutch findings and implementation in other countries.

The Netherlands have a tradition of high bicycle usage and a long history of policies that promote cycling. Because the intention to promote the bicycle raised the demand for knowledge on the effectiveness of alternative policy measures, a large number of studies in the field of cycling have been undertaken. These created a wealth of knowledge that is partly inaccessible for non-Dutch speaking persons. It is valuable to transfer this experience and knowledge to other countries and to provide recommendations for a good cycling policy.

marginal role for the bicycle, might be explained by the fact that cycling became too risky due to the increasing car volumes or that at least the perception of the risk discouraged people to continue cycling.

Recommendations for good cycling policies that are based on the Dutch research are limited in one respect.

The bicycle research carried out in the Netherlands was conducted when adequate cycling facilities and networks as well as a bicycle ‘culture’ already existed all over the country. Consequently, studies on the effectiveness of policy measures give information that is valid in this situation and may not be (fully) applicable for countries where the bicycle is hardly used. Other differences between the contexts in other countries and the contexts in The Netherlands may reduce the transferability of the Dutch results.

Sometimes the bicycle benefits from restrictive policies applied to alternative modes. Most notably are car restraint policies in the centres of many Dutch cities, and a severe parking policy. We know little about the effects on bicycle use for urban trips, but these could exceed occasionally the impacts of bicycle-directed policy.

In the Netherlands, generally five main requirements for a good bicycle network are considered: coherence, directness, attractiveness, safety, and comfort. These are directly derived from findings of the extensively evaluated projects in The Hague, Tilburg, and Delft.

General conclusions are:

If there is a cycling culture, policy and culture will influence each other. Infrastructure design is both part of building a ‘traffic culture’ and the expression of that culture. The cycling culture has obviously many more elements to it than only the infrastructure: bicycle parking facilities, bicycle related services, good transfer facilities to accommodated cycling as a feeder mode to the rail system, cycling people on adds for very diverse products (showing the normality of cycling), the relative absence of ‘dressed up’ cyclists in lycra, etc. Yet the ‘Dutch school’ road design is clearly a substantial part of the Dutch ‘cycling-inclusive’ traffic culture. The provision of good quality bicycle infrastructure is partly because bicycle use is high, and bicycle use is high because there is a good cycling infrastructure.

1. Policies influence bicycle use and can be effective in sustaining high levels of cycling and strengthening cycling culture.

2. Investments in bicycle infrastructure have generally a larger impact on the qualitative perception than on measurable quantities.

The influence of policy measures is evident from many studies. One of the most influential of these studies is the benchmark study of the Dutch Cyclists’ Union that showed a positive correlation between bicycle use and the quality of cycling facilities in Dutch cities.

The interesting question what the preconditions are for a cycling culture as far as they are in the sphere of policy can not be answered fully by the reviewed studies. Certainly, the ‘technical’ requirements that a) the locations people visit generally are accessible by bicycle and b) there is an infrastructure for selling and repairing bicycles are preconditions. We assume that a proper level of safety is another one. The strong decline of bicycle usage in some countries after the increase in car usage, leaving a

This conclusion is valid for both safety and bicycle use.

Generally, the perceived improvement of safety was significant but was not (fully) reflected by the observed decrease in accidents and casualties. Correspondingly, the general appreciation of improved infrastructure is substantial (not in the least because of the improved perceived safety), while the observed increases of bicycle use are moderate.

This section gives an overview of the main conclusions that can be drawn from the Dutch experience and research and which recommendations can be given to other countries.

8.1 Conclusions

The main reason why the studies never show a large increase in bicycle use is that the investments brought about improvements of infrastructure that was already adequate. The improvements occur gradually, even in the case of a city-wide project like the Delft bicycle network.

293

Additionally, habitual behaviour may hamper behavioural changes, at least in the short run. It is general thought that habituated travel behaviour is reconsidered only after a significant change in relevant conditions, and the gradual improvements in bicycle conditions (that are often implemented step by step) individually might be too limited.

3. Involvement of citizens and interest groups in an early phase of a project creates civic support and enlarges the probability of successful implementation.

The demonstration projects in Tilburg and The Hague had to be completed in a short time frame due to political reasons and there was limited time for informing and consulting citizens and interest groups. Insufficient involvement of these was an important reason why the planned bicycle route in The Hague never has been completed and even completed parts of the route later were abolished. In the Delft project, a good example of early involvement, the project had a wide support and large a number of measures could be implemented without severe opposition.

4. Travel time is the most important explanatory variable for route choice.

Cyclists are strongly motivated to minimize travel times (for utilitarian trips). Travel time has a significantly larger impact on route choice than does travel distance. Consequently, cyclists will take a longer route if the travel time is (expected) to be shorted.

5. There is a positive relationship between the continuity and recognisability of bicycle facilities and the appreciation of these facilities by cyclists.

With regard to the demonstration bicycle routes in The Hague and Tilburg it were the elements underlining the recognisability and continuity (like the red coloured pavement) that were mentioned spontaneously by cyclists as ‘being a very good idea’.

6. Cyclists have a clear preference for undisturbed and convenient cycling conditions.

Also the possibility of safe and undisturbed cycling (by providing segregated facilities) was mentioned spontaneously by many respondents as a big advantage of the routes in The Hague and Tilburg.

7. Two sided one-directional bicycle tracks are on aver-

294

age experienced as more safe than one sided two-directional cycle tracks.

Cyclists on two directional tracks cycling closest to head on car traffic felt significantly less safe than cyclists cycling near the sidewalk. Upon that, at intersections car drivers tend to overlook cyclists coming from the ‘wrong’, i.e. unexpected direction.

References AGV (1994) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, thema verkeersveiligheid, Adviesgroep voor verkeer en vervoer, Nieuwegein.

Diepens en Okkema (1993) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, thema 1 en 2, rapport 93.158/221, Delft.

Diepens en Okkema (1994) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, eindrapportage, rapport 93.181/258-2, Delft.

Andriesse, H.C., I.A. Hansen (1996) De fietsstraat, Onderzoek naar fietsverbindingen door verblijfsgebieden, Technische Universiteit Delft, Delft.

Economisch Instituut voor het Midden- en Kleinbedrijf, Rijkswaterstaat (1981) Onderzoek winkelomzetten demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg, Eindrapport.

Andriesse, R., D. Ligtermoet (2006) Fietsstraten in hoofdfietsroutes, toepassingen in de praktijk, CROW-publicatie 216, Ede.

Fietsersbond (2001) Eindrapport Fietsbalans, Delft, Utrecht.

Boggelen, O. van, R. Becht (2001) De Fietsbalans, Gemeentelijk Fietsbeleid Vergeleken, Verkeerskunde 52 (9).

Bovy, P.H.L (1984) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Routekeuzegedrag en netwerkgebruik, vooronderzoek, Delft.

Fietsersbond (2010) Fietsen in cijfers, Utrecht.

Gemeente Tilburg (1975) Tilburgers op de fiets, een demonstratieproject deel 1, Tilburg.

Gemeente Tilburg (1977) Tilburgers op de fiets, een demonstratieproject deel 2, Tilburg.

Bovy, P.H.L., D.N. den Adel (1987) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Mobiliteit in middelgrote steden, Delft.

Goeverden, C.D. van, T. Godefrooij (2010) Ontwikkeling van het fietsbeleid en -gebruik in Nederland, Proceedings Colloquium Vervoersplanologisch Speurwerk, Delft.

Bovy, P.H.L., M.J.P.F. Gommers (1988) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Voor- en nastudie verkeersonveiligheid, Delft.

Gommers, M.J.P.F., P.H.L. Bovy (1987) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Routekeuzegedrag en netwerkgebruik, eindrapport, Delft.

CBS (1994, 1) De mobiliteit van de Nederlandse bevolking in 1993, Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek, Heerlen.

Goudappel en Coffeng, Rijkswaterstaat (1980) Gebruiksonderzoek demonstratie-fietsroute Tilburg.

CBS (1994, 2) Statistisch jaarboek 1994, SDU, ’s-Gravenhage.

CROW (1993) Sign Up for The Bike, Design manual for a cycle-friendly infrastructure, CROW, Ede.

Goudappel en Coffeng, Rijkswaterstaat (1981, 1) Technische evaluatiestudie demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg, Eindrapport.

CROW (2006) Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic, CROW, Ede.

Goudappel en Coffeng, Rijkswaterstaat (1981, 2) Technische evaluatiestudie demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg, Bijlagen.

DHV, Goudappel en Coffeng, Rijkswaterstaat (1980) Gebruiksonderzoek demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg, Samenvattend rapport.

Goudappel en Coffeng, Rijkswaterstaat (1981, 3) Onderzoek verkeersveiligheid demonstratie-fietsroute Tilburg, Eindrapport.

Dienst der Gemeentewerken ’s-Gravenhage (1978) Voorlichtingsbrochure ‘Demonstratie-fietsroute Den Haag 1975-1979’, Den Haag.

Goudappel en Coffeng, Rijkswaterstaat (1981, 4) Onderzoek verkeersveiligheid demonstratie-fietsroute Den Haag, Eindrapport.

Dienst der Gemeentewerken ’s-Gravenhage (1984) Evaluatie demonstratie-fietsroute, Den Haag.

Goudappel Coffeng (2011) Fietssnelwegen 1 maart: Wat levert het op, Toelichting berekeningen, Goudappel Coffeng, Deventer.

295

Grotenhuis, D.H. ten (1987) The Delft Cycle Plan – Characteristics of the concept, Proceedings Velocity 87, CROW, Ede. Hartman, J.B. (1987) How to provide a cycle network of good quality, when minimizing costs, Proceedings Velocity 87, CROW, Ede. Horst, A.R.A. van der, R.M.M. Sijmonsma (1978) Gedragswaarnemingen op de Demonstratie Fietsroutes in Den Haag en Tilburg, 1.: De ontwikkeling van een meetinstrument, Instituut voor Zintuigfysiologie TNO, Soesterberg.

Instituut voor Zintuigfysiologie TNO, Rijkswaterstaat (1981) Onderzoek vormgeving demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg, Samenvatting, conclusies en aanbevelingen.

Instituut voor Zintuigfysiologie TNO, Rijkswaterstaat (1982) Onderzoek vormgeving demonstratiefietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg Eindrapport.

Katteler, H., O. Förg, W. Brög (1984) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Verplaatsingsgedrag, vooronderzoek, Instituut voor toegepaste sociologie & Sozialforschung Brög, Nijmegen.

Katteler, H., O. Förg, W. Brög (1985) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Marges voor het fietsgebruik, vooronderzoek, Instituut voor toegepaste sociologie & Sozialforschung Brög, Nijmegen.

Katteler, H., E. Erl, O. Förg, W. Brög, J. Kropman (1987) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Vervoermiddelgebruik en keuzebeperkingen, Instituut voor toegepaste sociale wetenschappen & Sozialforschung Brög, Nijmegen.

Kho, P.J. (2006) Fietsstraat Venkelstraat, Uitslag gebruikersonderzoek, Gemeente Haarlem, Haarlem.

Kropman, J., J. Neeskens (1986) Evaluatie fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Plantagebrug, verwachte effecten, Instituut voor toegepaste sociale wetenschappen, Nijmegen.

Ligtermoet, D. (2006) Fietsstraten, het modieuze voorbij, Een overzicht van nieuwe toepassingen, Fietsverkeer nr.

14.

Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat (1977) Demonstratie-project fietsroute Tilburg, The Hague.

Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat (1998) Eindrapport Masterplan Fiets, Samenvatting, evaluatie en overzicht

296

van de projecten in het kader van het Masterplan Fiets, 1990-1997, The Hague.

Ministry of Transport and Public Works (1986) Evaluation of the Delft Bicycle Network, Summary report of the before-study, The Hague.

Ministry of Transport and Public Works (1987) Evaluation of the Delft Bicycle Network, Final summary report, The Hague.

Ministry of Transport and Public Works (1993) Facts about cycling in the Netherlands, The Hague.

Mobycon, Fietsberaad, Ligtermoet & Partners, Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat (2009), Cycling in the Netherlands.

MuConsult (1993) Lange termijn effecten fietsroutenetwerk Delft, Mobiliteitseffecten: Samenvatting, Utrecht.

Rijkswaterstaat Dienst Verkeerkunde, Instituut voor Zintuigfysiologie TNO (1980) Demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag / Tilburg – Studiegroep vormgeving, Eindrapport gedragsobservaties.

Schafer, A. (1998) The global demand for motorized mobility, Transportation Research A. 32 (6), pp. 455-477.

Schneider, F., P. Mayerhofer, J. Kiesewetter (1988) Ein Simulationsmodell für Oberösterreich: Eine Untersuchung wirtschaftspolitischer Massnahmen anhand eines nach Sektoren disaggregierten ökonometrischen Regionalmodells, Universitätsverlag Rudolf Trauner, Linz.

Transecon (2003) Deliverable 5, Socio-Economic Impact Assessment, Newcastle.

Van den Broecke, Rijkswaterstaat (1980) Belevingsonderzoek demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg, Samenvattend rapport.

Van den Broecke, Rijkswaterstaat (1981) Evaluatie van opzet, organisatie, uitvoering, demonstratie demonstratie-fietsroutes Den Haag – Tilburg, Amsterdam.

Velde, R.R. van der, E. Bos (2008) Shared space Haren, Evaluatie en integratie, Concept, Grontmij, Haren.

Wilmink, A. (1987) The effects of an urban bicycle network, results of the ‘Delft project’, Proceedings Velocity 87, CROW, Ede.

297

298

RECOMMENDATIONS

299

The recommendations are divided in 3 sections which represent the research packages developed in the project Interventions to the Bicycle Infrastructure.

Bike Infrastructures The results indicate that fast connectivity, attractive landscape and safety – in this order of relevance – are strategic dimensions of a design solution that must be taken in consideration by architects, planners and engineers.

Statistic analysis re¬veals how the relationship between age group and travel purpose can further enhance future biking infrastructures, for example younger cyclists are more likely to be travel¬ing to study or school, whereas the older cyclists are trav¬eling to work. Therefore future infrastructures could cater for this division creating faster, safer and less congested bike lanes.

When deciding to implement or improve a bike infrastructure, the particular qualities and potentials of different bike typologies should be analyzed in order to decide what kind of bike infrastructure would be appropriate to be implemented.

Different typologies or a conjugation of typologies can be ef¬ficiently used for commuting. Again, what seems to be important is how fast the infrastructure connects the cyclists, how attractive is the landscape and how safe it is to ride a bike in the infrastructure.

National Survey For the period 2010-2014 it is expected that more than 2 billion Danish kroner will be invested in bike-promoting initiatives in Denmark. Some projects are inventive by testing out new initiatives and the magnitude of projects alone represents a golden opportunity to obtain valuable knowledge upon the cycling effects of various bikepromoting initiatives. This could significantly improve the basis for the future prioritizing of bike-promoting projects.

Performing such evaluations requires that before/after registrations on relevant parameters is performed.

The national questionnaire indicates that the municipalities only to a limited extent perform before/after registrations that allow scientifically based before-after studies of effect to be performed. Consequently, it seems relevant to build an incentive structure that ensures that the municipalities make such registrations – especially when initia-

300

tives with little or none existing documentation of effects are implemented.

The national Cycling Fund holds promise of such an incentive structure, as those receiving financial support from the funds must make evaluations of the effects of the supported projects. However, in this case it is highly unfortunate that no systematic evaluation program/ scheme has been implemented. Setting up standards for the evaluations would allow for comparison of effects between projects and furthermore it would enable the application of meta-analysis to uniform projects. The latter would significantly improve the quality of the evaluations and the estimates of the effects, making it possible to test whether or not the effects are significant. Furthermore, it also makes it possible to test, if the effects of given projects are homogenous, thus producing knowledge reflecting if the effects varies with local characteristics, project details, geography etc.

Consequently, it can be recommended: 1. That an incentive structure for performing evaluations of effects is implemented, e.g. by demanding that projects which receive financial support from the government are implemented, alike test projects requiring dispensation from current legislation such as allowing right turn for cyclists in the red-phase at signalized intersections.

2. That a systematic evaluation scheme is implemented ensuring that meta-analysis can be applied in order to estimate the likely effects of given treatments, the significance of effect and the homogeneity of effects.

Consequently, it can be recommended: 1. That an incentive structure for performing evaluations of effects is implemented, e.g. by demanding that projects which receive financial support from the government are implemented, alike test projects requiring dispensation from current legislation such as allowing right turn for cyclists in the red-phase at signalized intersections.

2. That a systematic evaluation scheme is implemented ensuring that meta-analysis can be applied in order to estimate the likely effects of given treatments, the significance of effect and the homogeneity of effects.

Dutch References From the Dutch experience and research a number of recommendations can be given to other countries.

1. The promotion of bicycle use is only credible and successful if cycling is a practical, relatively fast and convenient mode of transport. We recommend the five main requirements for planning and designing bicycle infrastructure that are generally adopted by the Dutch professionals: coherence, directness, attractiveness, safety, and comfort.

2. Promotion of the bicycle should include improving the perception of the conditions by (potential) cyclists. Improving the perception of conditions results in increased bicycle use beyond the increases associated with improving the actual conditions.

3. Minimizing travel times between origins and destinations is important in designing bicycle infrastructure. First, the detours compared to crow-fly distances should be small, implying a high density of the cycle network. Second, the average speed that cyclists can achieve should be high and delays at traffic lights and other bottlenecks should be minimized, for instance by bicycle-friendly phasing of traffic lights and giving right of way to cyclists at intersections.

two sided one directional cycle tracks are generally preferred to one sided two directional tracks. Only when one sided two directional tracks substantially reduce the need to cross busy roads, should this be considered the best solution. â&#x20AC;˘ In the urban context bicycle and motorized modes can be mixed on condition that traffic volume is not too high and speeds are harmonized (i.e. car speeds are limited to the speed of the bicycles). Bicycle streets and shared space solutions are good examples of mixed facilities that meet the quality requirements for cycling.

6. A good design of intersections is essential. Intersections are the most important cause for delays and most accidents where cyclists are involved happen at intersections. Specific design elements such as table crossings are recommended to accommodate safely the right of way for cyclists. The ramps of these crossings should be about 5 m from the edge of the cycle track so as to promote a proper interaction between car drivers and cyclists.

4. Urban bicycle routes should preferably be traced through traffic restrained areas because cyclists prefer undisturbed and convenient cycling conditions.

5. The Dutch studies give information about when segregation of cycling facilities is preferable and when not.

There is an ongoing international debate on the usefulness and need of segregated facilities. It is well known that a certain type of (often masculine) assertive cyclist activists, mainly in Anglo Saxon countries, challenge the need of segregation, often with road safety arguments.

The lessons from the Dutch studies on this point are: â&#x20AC;˘ Generally, segregation is preferred if there are large differences between the speeds of the different road users and traffic volumes are fairly high. In particular, off-road bicycle paths are highly desirable for busy main roads, both for safety reasons and undisturbed travelling. The bicycle paths should be comfortable and have sufficient capacity for uncongested cycling. In urban conditions,

301

BIKE INFRASTRUCTURES

VICTOR ANDRADE, HENRIK HARDER, OLE B. JENSEN, JENS OVERGAARD MADSEN

302

303