Modeling the Impacts of Bicycle Facilities on Work and Recreational Bike Trips in Los Angeles County, California
Abstract
Metropolitan planning organizations and other planning agencies increasingly are asked to evaluate proposed bicycle facilities and to select the most promising facilities for funding. The objective was to develop models of utilitarian and recreational bicycling and to implement these models in a unified geographic information system–based framework that the Los Angeles County, California, Metropolitan Transportation Authority could use for planning purposes. Statistical models that evaluate bicycling to work and bicycling for recreation were estimated and implemented in the framework. A logistic regression model was used to estimate bicycle-to-work mode share at the level of census tracts or traffic analysis zones. Furthermore, a pair of disaggregate models was estimated to evaluate bicycle trips made for recreation. The bicycle-to-work model estimation generated parameter estimates that were consistent with previous literature and added to the literature by demonstrating the importance of well-connected and accessible bicycle networks for utilitarian bicycling. The recreational models provide a new way to estimate the impacts of bicycle facilities on leisure or fitness-based bicycle trips. Like the work trip model, the recreational bicycling models show the importance of proximity to trails and the impact of distance as a barrier to reaching the nearest trails on the decision to bicycle for recreation.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
1. Shafizadeh K., and Niemeier D. Bicycle Journey-to-Work: Travel Behavior Characteristics and Spatial Attributes. In Transportation Research Record 1578, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 84–90.
2. Heinen E., Maat K., and Wee B. The Effect of Work-Related Factors on the Bicycle Commute Mode Choice in the Netherlands. Transportation, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2013, pp. 23–43.
3. Heesch K. C., Sahlqvist S., and Garrard J. Gender Differences in Recreational and Transport Cycling: A Cross-Sectional Mixed-Methods Comparison of Cycling Patterns, Motivators, and Constraints. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Vol. 9, 2012, pp. 106–118.
4. Garrard J., Rose G., and Lo S. K. Promoting Transportation Cycling for Women: The Role of Bicycle Infrastructure. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 46, 2008, pp. 55–59.
5. Stinson M. A., and Bhat C. R. Frequency of Bicycle Commuting: Internet-Based Survey Analysis. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1878, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 122–130.
6. Merom D., Miller Y. D., van der Ploeg H. P., and Bauman A. Predictors of Initiating and Maintaining Active Commuting to Work Using Transport and Public Health Perspectives in Australia. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 47, 2008, pp. 342–346.
7. Plaut P. O. Non-motorized Commuting in the US. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 10, 2005, pp. 347–356.
8. Hankey S., Lindsey G., Wang X., Borah J., Hoff K., Utecht B., and Xu Z. Estimating Use of Non-motorized Infrastructure: Models of Bicycle and Pedestrian Traffic in Minneapolis, MN. Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 107, No. 3, 2012, pp. 307–316.
9. Merom D., Pye V., Macniven R., van der Ploeg H., Milat A., Sherrington C., Lord S., and Bauman A. Prevalence and Correlates of Participation in Fall Prevention Exercise/Physical Activity by Older Adults. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 55, 2012, pp. 613–617.
10. Buehler R., and Pucher J. Cycling to Work in 90 Large American Cities: New Evidence on the Role of Bike Paths and Lanes. Transportation, Vol. 39, No. 2, 2012, pp. 409–432.
11. Bovy P. H. L., and Bradley M. A. Route Choice Analyzed with Stated-Preference Approaches. In Transportation Research Record 1037, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1985, pp. 11–20.
12. Stinson M. A., and Bhat C. R. An Analysis of Commuter Bicyclist Route Choice Using a Stated-Preference Survey. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1828, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 107–115.
13. Fraser S. D. S., and Lock K. Cycling for Transport and Public Health: A Systematic Review of the Effect of the Environment on Cycling. The European Journal of Public Health, Vol. 21, No. 6, 2011, pp. 738–743.
14. Vandenbulcke G., Dujardin C., Thomas I., de Geus B., Degraeuwe B., Meeusen R., and Int Panis L. Cycle Commuting in Belgium: Spatial Determinants and “Re-cycling” Strategies. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 45, 2011, pp. 118–137.
15. Pucher J., Buehler R., and Seinen M. Bicycling Renaissance in North America? An Update and Re-appraisal of Cycling Trends and Policies. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 45, No. 6, 2011, pp. 451–475.
16. Aytur S. A., Rodriguez D. A., Evenson K., and Catellier D. J. Urban Containment Policies and Physical Activity. A Time-Series Analysis of Metropolitan Areas, 1990–2002. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 34, No. 4, 2008, pp. 320–332.
17. Badland H. M., Duncan M. J., and Mummery W. K. Travel Perceptions, Behaviors, and Environment by Degree of Urbanization. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 47, 2008, pp. 265–269.
18. Beenackers M. A., Foster S., Kamphuis C. B. M., Titze S., Divitini M., Knuiman M., van Lenthe F. J., and Giles-Corti B. Taking Up Cycling After Residential Relocation: Built Environment Factors. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 42, No. 6, 2012, pp. 610–615.
19. Badland H., Knuiman M., Hooper P., and Giles-Corti B. Socio-ecological Predictors of the Uptake of Cycling for Recreation and Transport in Adults: Results from the RESIDE Study. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 57, No. 4, 2013, pp. 396–399.
20. Moudon A. V., Lee C., Cheadle A. D., Collier C. W., Johnson D., Schmid T. L., and Weather R. D. Cycling and the Built Environment, a US Perspective. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 10, 2005, pp. 245–261.
21. Badoe D. A., and Miller E. J. Transportation–Land Use Interaction: Empirical Findings in North America, and Their Implications for Modeling. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 5, No. 4, 2000, pp. 235–263.
22. Foster C., Panter J., and Wareham N. Assessing the Impact of Road Traffic on Cycling for Leisure and Cycling to Work. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2011, pp. 61–66.
23. Moritz W. Survey of North American Bicycle Commuters: Design and Aggregate Results. In Transportation Research Record 1578, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 91–101.
24. Niemeier D., Rutherford G., and Ishimaru J. An Analysis of Bicyclist Survey Responses from the Puget Sound Area and Spokane. Report 95.4. Washington State Transportation Commission Innovations Unit, Olympia, Wash., 1995.
25. Beck M. J. H., and Immers L. H. Bicycle Ownership and Use in Amsterdam. In Transportation Research Record 1441, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994, pp. 141–146.
26. Hope D. Nonrecreational Cycling in Ottawa, Canada. In Transportation Research Record 1441, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994, pp. 147–150.
27. Aultman-Hall L., Hall F. L., and Baetz B. B. Analysis of Bicycle Commuter Routes Using Geographic Information Systems: Implications for Bicycle Planning. In Transportation Research Record 1578, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 102–110.
28. Ashley C., and Banister C. Cycling to Work from Wards in a Metropolitan Area. 1. Factors Influencing Cycling to Work. Traffic Engineering and Control, Vol. 30, No. 6, 1989, pp. 297–302.
29. Jones T. Getting the British Back on Bicycles—The Effects of Urban Traffic-Free Paths on Everyday Cycling. Transport Policy, Vol. 20, 2012, pp. 138–149.
30. Howard C., and Burns E. K. Cycling to Work in Phoenix: Route Choice, Travel Behavior, and Commuter Characteristics. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1773, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 39–46.
31. Abraham J. E., McMillan S., Brownlee A. T., and Hunt J. D. Investigation of Cycling Sensitivities. Presented at 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2002.
32. Larsen J., and El-Geneidy A. A Travel Behavior Analysis of Urban Cycling Facilities in Montréal, Canada. Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2011, pp. 172–177.
33. Stinson M. A., and Bhat C. R. Comparison of the Route Preferences of Experienced and Inexperienced Bicycle Commuters. Presented at 84th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2005.
34. Hyodo T., Suzuki N., and Takahashi K. Modeling of Bicycle Route and Destination Choice Behavior for Bicycle Road Network Plan. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1705, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 70–76.
35. Pucher J., Buehler R., Merom D., and Bauman A. Walking and Cycling in the United States, 2001–2009: Evidence from the National Household Travel Surveys. American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 101, No. S1, 2011, pp. S310–S317.
36. Shtatland E. S., Moore S., and Barton M. Why We Need an R2 Measure of Fit (and Not Only One) in PROC LOGISTIC and PROC GENMOD. Presented at 25th Annual Conference of SAS Users Group International (SUGI), Indianapolis, Ind., April 9–12, 2000.
37. Hu H., Choi S., Wen F., and Walters G. Exploring a Method of Estimating Vehicle Miles of Travel. Presented at 51st Annual Meeting of the Western Regional Science Association, Poipu, Kauai, Hawaii, 2012.
38. Ben-Akiva M., and Lerman S. R. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1985.
39. Dill J., and Carr T. Bicycle Commuting and Facilities in Major U.S. Cities: If You Build Them, Commuters Will Use Them. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1828, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 116–123.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: January 1, 2014
Issue published: January 2014
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 125
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 8
- Analyzing the Behavior and Growth of Cycling in Four North American Ci...
- To bike or not to bike: Exploring cycling for commuting and non-commut...
- Could there be spillover effects between recreational and utilitarian ...
- Do psycho-attitudinal factors vary with individuals’ cycling frequency...
- Incorporating bicycling demand into pavement management systems for co...
- To play but not for travel
- Cycling, car, or public transit: a study of stress and mood upon arriv...
- Low-wage jobs-housing fit: identifying locations of affordable housing...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
