Portland State University PDXScholar Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations Nohad A. Toulan School of Urban Studies and Planning 11-17-2010 Health, Transportation and Bicycling: Connecting the Dotted Lines Jennifer Dill Portland State University, jdill@pdx.edu Let us know how access to this document benefits you. Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac Part of the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Citation Details Dill, Jennifer, "Health, Transportation and Bicycling: Connecting the Dotted Lines" (2010). Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations. 26. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/usp_fac/26 This Presentation is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Urban Studies and Planning Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. For more information, please contact pdxscholar@pdx.edu.
Health, Transportation and Bicycling: Connecting the Dotted Lines Jennifer Dill, Ph.D. Assoc. Prof., Portland State University Director, Oregon Transportation Research & Education Consortium (OTREC) University of Vermont, November 17, 2010
Health and Bicycling
Increasing rates of obesity % of adults 20+ obese 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 34% 31% 23% 15% 1976-1980 1988-1994 1999-2000 2005-2006 Ogden CL, Carroll MD, McDowell MA, Flegal KM. Obesity among adults in the United States no change since 2003 2004. NCHS data brief no 1. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2007. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db01.pdf
Obesity & Inactivity Death Tobacco smoking High blood pressure Overweight-obesity (high BMI) Physical inactivity High blood glucose High LDL cholesterol High dietary salt Low dietary omega-3 fatty acids High dietary trans fatty acids Alcohol use Low intake of fruits and vegetables Low dietary polyunsaturated fatty 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Deaths (000) Danaei G, Ding EL, Mozafarrian D, et al. The preventable causes of death in the United States: Comparative risk assessment of dietary, lifestyle, and metabolic risk factors. PLoS Medicine 2009; 6(4): http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000058
Cyclists can meet PA objectives Jennifer Dill, Bicycling for Transportation and Health: The Role of Infrastructure, Journal of Public Health Policy, 30 (SI): 95-110, 2009.
Health benefits, but also risks
How do we increase cycling?
Socio-Ecological Model Demographics Physical Environment Walking/ Bicycling Behavior Psychosocial factors
What does the research say? Reviewed 139 studies Pucher, Dill, and Handy, Infrastructure, Programs, and Policies to Increase Bicycling, Preventive Medicine, Jan 2010, Vol. 50, S.1, pp. S106-S125.
What does the research say? Generally, not enough Several studies (but not all) found positive associations with bike lanes, paths, boulevards, cycletracks, and traffic calming Effects can vary depending upon type of cyclist Independent effects of other infrastructure (e.g. parking, bike boxes, signage) difficult to detect Likely play important supportive role, as do policies and programs
What is possible? The most compelling evidence we found came from communities that have implemented a fully integrated package of strategies to increase bicycling. Pucher, Dill, Handy, 2010.
Increase in Bike Share of Trips in Cities Around the World 45 40 35 35 37 38 40 40 Percent of Trips 30 25 20 15 10 5 5 10 8 14 25 23 15 27 29 25 25 0 Berlin ('90-'07) Boulder ('90-'06) Odense ('94-'02) Freiburg ('82-'07) Muenster ('82-'01) Amsterdam ('70-'05) Copenhagen ('98-'05) Groningen ('90-'05)
Increase in Bike Share of Trips in Cities Around the World 7.0 6.0 6.0 Percent of Trips 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.6 1.8 1.2 0.8 1.0 2.5 3.2 4.3 0.8 1.0 1.1 0.0 London ('03-'06) Barcelona ('05-'07) Paris ('01-'07) Bogota ('95-'07) Minneapolis ('80-'08) Portland ('90-'08)
What s up with Portland?
Portland vs. Other US Regions 2.5% % Commuting by Bicycle (2006-08) 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Data from U.S. Census, 2006-08 American Community Survey
Growth in Bicycling in Portland 300 250 Bikeway Miles Bridge Bicycle Traffic 18000 16000 14000 Bikeway Miles 200 150 100 50 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 Bridge Bicycle Traffic (daily) 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year City of Portland, Portland Bicycle Count Report 2009 0
Bicycle Traffic vs. Crashes 18000 16000 14000 Reported Bicycle Crashes Bridge Bicycle Traffic Reported Crashes/Bridge Traffic 360 320 280 Daily Bridge Bicycle Traffic 12000 10000 8000 6000 240 200 160 120 Reported Crashes & Crash Rate 4000 80 2000 40 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year 0
Research in Portland The Role of Traditional Network Facilities Innovative Infrastructure Psychology
BikeGPS Study Research questions How does the built environment influence bicycling behavior? What routes do cyclists take? Phases Random phone survey of Portland, OR region adults GPS
Barriers to cycling more Do any of the following environmental barriers keep you from biking or biking more? Of people who want to cycle more, % of category that identified this barrier Non-cyclist Recreation Only Infrequent Utilitarian Too much traffic 60% 65% 40% No bike lanes or bike trails 33% 47% 28% No safe places to bike nearby 33% 38% 18% Too many hills 28% 36% 32% Distances to places are too great 26% 29% 27% Poorly maintained streets or rough surfaces 27% 20% 10% No interesting places to bike to 26% 20% 14% n (weighted) 168 81 90 24
GPS data collection 164 people in 2007 Keep GPS for 7 days Take on all bike trips (a few exceptions) Not representative sample of the population Participant entered some data Trip purpose and weather If taking bike on transit
Follow up on-line survey Accuracy of route Route choice decisions Missing data
Trip destinations Other 1% School 1% Work related 3% Dining 3% Exercise 7% Home 33% Shopping 7% Personal business 8% Social/recreation 12% Work 25% Excludes trips involving transit
Actual Trips Shortest Paths
Cyclists are going longer distances to use bicycle infrastructure 100% 90% 14% 6% 4% 80% 10% 15% 70% 18% 9% Bike paths Bike boulevards 60% Minor & Secondary arterials, with bike lanes 50% 9% 30% Primary arterials/highways, with bike lanes Minor streets & unimproved roads, no bike lanes 40% Secondary arterials, no bike lanes 30% 29% 21% Primary arterials/highways, no bike lanes 20% 10% 16% 15% 0% 3% Actual Routes (6,131 miles) Shortest Path Routes (4,629 miles) Excludes trips involving transit, trips with the main purpose of exercise, organized rides, and trips starting and ending at the same place
The Relative Value of Facilities Bridge w/ sep. bike facility Bridge w/ bike lane Prop. AADT 30k+ w/o bike lane Prop. AADT 20-30k w/o bike lane Prop. AADT 10-20k w/o bike lane Prop. bike path Prop. bike boulevard Unsig. cross AADT 20k+ exc. right turn (/mi) Unsig. cross AADT 10-20k exc. right turn (/mi) Unsig. cross AADT 5-10k exc. right turn (/mi) Unsig. cross AADT >= 10k right turn (/mi) Left turn, unsig., AADT 20k+ (/mi) Left turn, unsig., AADT 10-20k (/mi) Stop sign (/mi) Traffic signal exc. right turns (/mi) Commute Non-commute Prop. upslope >= 6 % Prop. upslope 4-6 % Prop. upslope 2-4 % Turns (/mi) Relative to riding in a bike lane -500 0 500 1000 1500 Distance Value (%)
The Relative Value of Facilities Bridge w/ sep. bike facility Bridge w/ bike lane Prop. AADT 20-30k w/o bike lane Prop. AADT 10-20k w/o bike lane Prop. bike path Prop. bike boulevard -45-29 -18-29 -16-26 -11-18 22 37 140 137 Unsig. cross AADT 20k+ exc. right turn (/mi) Unsig. cross AADT 10-20k exc. right turn (/mi) Unsig. cross AADT 5-10k exc. right turn (/mi) Unsig. cross AADT >= 10k right turn (/mi) Left turn, unsig., AADT 20k+ (/mi) Left turn, unsig., AADT 10-20k (/mi) Stop sign (/mi) Traffic signal exc. right turns (/mi) 32 6 10 4 7 4 7 23 43 9 16 1 1 2 4 62 Commute Non-commute Relative to riding in a bike lane 4 Turns (/mi) 7-100 -50 0 50 100 150 Distance Value (%)
Innovative Infrastructure
Evaluation of Bike Boxes at Signalized Intersections Jennifer Dill, Ph.D., PSU Urban Studies & Planning Director, Oregon Transportation Research & Education Consortium Christopher Monsere, Ph.D., P.E. PSU Civil & Environmental Engineering
Why Bike Boxes? Right Hook Collision
Bike Boxes in Portland 9 - Green Bike Boxes 3 - Uncolored Bike Boxes
Do Users Understand the Markings?
Motorist Survey If you approached an intersection with a red light where should you stop your car? 9% in box <1% either 1% don t know 89% 2% in box 1% either 3% don t know 94%
Do Users Behave as Intended?
Motorist Encroachment in the Bike Box % of motor vehicles arriving on red signal encroaching in the bike box All Encroachments 23% 28% Minor Moderate 5% 3% 13% 12% Color No Color Major 10% 8%
Location of Stopped Cyclist in Box 450 400 B (in box, bike lane area) 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 A (in box, in front of MV lane) C (bike lane behind box) D (other) No other bike present A (in box, in front of MV lane) C (bike lane behind box) Bike in Location B 73% of cyclists stop ahead of motor vehicle (A or B), though only 9% in front (area A)
Are the markings improving safety?
Motor Vehicle Encroachment in Crosswalk % of motor vehicles arriving on red signal encroaching in the crosswalk Control p=0.265 10% 13% No Color p=0.000 6% 19% Before After Color p=0.000 6% 25%
Cyclist Encroachment in Crosswalk % of cyclists arriving on red signal encroaching in the crosswalk Control p=0.813 20% 23% No Color p=0.046 13% 23% Before After Color p=0.000 25% 41%
Conflicts between motorists and cycles 16 14 Before Number of Conflicts 12 10 8 6 4 After 2 0 NW Bway & Hoyt NW Everett & 16th SE 11th & Hawthorne SE 7th & Hawthorne SW 3rd & Madison SW Bway & Taylor W Burnside & 14th Ave No conflicts before or after at three bike box intersections and both control intersections.
Motorist Survey Do you think the bike box has made driving safer or more dangerous at the intersections?) All motorists Motorists who are not cyclists A lot safer 16% 13% A little safer 36% 29% No difference 18% 17% A little more dangerous 9% 11% A lot more dangerous 3% 4% Don t know 18% 27% n 717 219 42%
Bicyclist Survey Do you think the bike box has made the intersection safer for you as a cyclist? A little more dangerous 2% I don't know 8% No difference 13% A lot safer 20% A little safer 57%
Conclusions Findings supporting boxes Compliance and understanding is high Pedestrians are benefitting from reduced crosswalk encroachment Conflicts fell Yielding behavior increased Improved perceptions of safety Unclear findings Increase in bike lane encroachment
Next Up: CycleTracks
The Role of Psychology
Theory of Planned Behavior Attitude Toward Act or Behavior Subjective Norm Behavioral Intention Behavior Perceived Behavioral Control Source: Ajzen 1991
Model Results Southwest 0.23 0.5 Bicycling Walking Transit Southeast Northeast Southwest Southeast Northeast Southwest Southeast 0.16 0.22 0.25 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.31 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.42 0.39 Perceived Behavioral Control Social Norms Attitudes 0.51 0.66 Northeast 0.11 0.67 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 Regression Coefficient
Conclusions & Questions
Contact information jdill@pdx.edu web.pdx.edu/~jdill Initiative for Bicycle & Pedestrian Innovation www.ibpi.usp.pdx.edu Oregon Transportation Research & Education Consortium www.otrec.us