Driverless Vehicles Potential Influence on Bicyclist Facility Preferences

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Driverless Vehicles Potential Influence on Bicyclist Facility Preferences"

Clarissa Golden
6 years ago
Views:

T O B E R 2 6, 2 0 1 6 S E S S I O N # 8 2 - E V A L U AT

1 Driverless Vehicles Potential Influence on Bicyclist Facility Preferences MICHAEL BLAU, MCRP, LCI O T E C O C T O B E R 2 6, S E S S I O N # E V A L U AT I N G T H E P E R F O R M A N C E O F B I K E FA C I L I T I E S

2 Introduction

3 Research Question How will the proliferation of autonomous vehicles affect the built environment for bicyclists and how might it change their behavior, preferences, and perceptions?

4 Trends in Driverless Vehicles & Bicyclist Literature Review

6 Car manufacturers that already offer or are actively working on automated features

9 Bicyclists Behavior determinants Environmental Motorized traffic, available bicycle facilities Weather, topography, urban form Socio-demographic Age, gender, and income Latent Comfort, time, and cost saving Personal attitudes, experience/confidence levels Source:

10 Methodology

11 Data Collection Stated preference survey Web-based format Timeframe: October-November, 2014 Distribution 1,312 responses OSU responses: 767 (58%)

12 Survey Design Scenarios Bike Facilities Intersection Features Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian Crossing Conditions Current Driverless = 24 possible scenarios Street Type 1 Street Type 2 Street Type 3 A quiet, 2 lane residential street with slow traffic and few vehicles A moderately busy, 3 to 4 lane avenue with a mix of local and through traffic, and speeds under 35 miles per hour A major boulevard with more than 4 lanes and lots of traffic travelling over 35 miles per hour

As a cyclist, which of the following facilities

with vehicles 2. Wide shoulder, no bicycle facilities 3.

Buffered bicycle lane with barrier or pavement markings

13 As a cyclist, which of the following facilities (pictured) do you currently prefer for each of the three street types listed below? 1. No bicycle facilities, cyclists share the travel lane with vehicles 2. Wide shoulder, no bicycle facilities 3. Bicycle lane directly next to traffic 4. Buffered bicycle lane with barrier or pavement markings between vehicles and cyclists 5. Cycle track or bicycle path completely separated from vehicular traffic

15 Sample Characteristics Gender N % Female Male Race White Other Age Under Over Education Below bachelor's degree Bachelor's degree or above Familiarity with Driverless Vehicles I have heard about driverless vehicles once or twice I'm fairly familiar with the idea of driverless vehicles I follow the development of driverless vehicles closely I work in a field directly related to driverless vehicles

16 Transportation Characteristics Mode Choice N % Car or other private vehicle 1, Bus or other public transit 55 4 Bicycle 80 6 Walk 88 7 Bicyclist Confidence strong bike confidence medium bike confidence weak bike confidence I never use a bicycle

17 Analysis

18 Street Type Facility Current Conditions (%) Driverless Conditions (%) 1. No bicycle facilities, cyclists share the travel lane with vehicles Street Type 1: A quiet, 2 lane residential street with slow traffic and few vehicles 2. Wide shoulder, no bicycle facilities Bicycle lane directly next to traffic Buffered bicycle lane with barrier or pavement markings between vehicles and cyclists 5. Cycle track or bicycle path completely separated from vehicular traffic No bicycle facilities, cyclists share the travel lane with vehicles Street Type 2: A moderately busy, 3 to 4 lane avenue with a mix of local and through traffic, and speeds under 35 miles per hour 2. Wide shoulder, no bicycle facilities Bicycle lane directly next to traffic Buffered bicycle lane with barrier or pavement markings between vehicles and cyclists 5. Cycle track or bicycle path completely separated from vehicular traffic No bicycle facilities, cyclists share the travel lane with vehicles Street Type 3: A major boulevard with more than 4 lanes and lots of traffic travelling over 35 miles per hour 2. Wide shoulder, no bicycle facilities Bicycle lane directly next to traffic Buffered bicycle lane with barrier or pavement markings between vehicles and cyclists 5. Cycle track or bicycle path completely separated from vehicular traffic

19 Ordered Logit Model LR chi2(17) = Prob > chi2 = 0.00 Log likelihood = Pseudo R2 = 0.19 *Coefficients in bold type are significant at the 95 percent level.

20 Marginal Effects

21 Discussion FA C I L I T Y R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S A D D I T I O N A L R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S

22 Facility Recommendations Preferred Acceptable Unacceptable Pedestrian Facilities Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist Facilities Facilities Facilities Intersections Facilities Intersections Facilities Intersections Street Type 1 (local/ residential) 1st-Sidewalk, landscaped buffer 1st-No facilities 1st- Unsignalized, shared lanes 2nd-Sidewalk, no separation 3rd-No facilities N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Street Type 2 (avenue/ collector) 1st-Sidewalk, landscaped buffer 1st-At-grade cycle track 1st-Bike-friendly AIM 2nd-Signalized, separate lanes 2nd-Sidewalk, fenced buffer 3rd-Skywalk 2 nd -Buffered bike lane 3rd-Bike lane 3rd-Signalized, shared lanes 4th-Sidewalk, no separation 4th-Wide 5th-Subway shoulder 6th-No 5th-No facilities facilities 4th-Car-only AIM 5th- Unsignalized, shared lanes Street Type 3 (boulevard/ arterial) 1st-Skywalk 2nd-Sidewalk, landscaped buffer 1st-Elevated cycle track 2nd-At-grade cycle track 1st-Bike-friendly AIM 3rd-Sidewalk, fenced buffer 3rd-Buffered bike lane 2nd-Signalized, separate lanes 3rd-Car-only AIM 4th-Sidewalk, no separation 5th-Subway 6th-No facilities 4th-Bike lane 5th-No facilities 6th-Wide shoulder 4th-Signalized, shared lanes 5th- Unsignalized, shared lanes

23 Additional Recommendations Public Awareness Campaign Small-scale driverless technology Smart City Program Driverless Vehicle Operating Standards Collision avoidance Source: theoatmeal.com

24 Limitations External validity Facility photos Cost-benefit Street typologies

25 Questions? M I C H A E L B L A U M B L A B U R T O N P L A N N I N G. C O M ( )

Rerouting Mode Choice Models: How Including Realistic Route Options Can Help Us Understand Decisions to Walk or Bike

Portland State University PDXScholar TREC Friday Seminar Series Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) 4-1-2016 Rerouting Mode Choice Models: How Including Realistic Route Options Can Help