www.eu-portal.net non motorised transport teaching & learning materials – update 2007 funded...
TRANSCRIPT
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Teaching &Learning Materials – Update 2007
funded within the 6th Framework Programme of the EU as Specific Support Action
Vol. 1
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Definition
Non Motorised Transport (NMT) includes
• Walking, cycling, small-wheeled transport (e.g.skates, skateboards) and wheelchair travel
• These modes provide both recreation and transportation
• NMT are resource efficient travel modes
• Can been seen as part of Mobility Management measures, Transport Demand measures and Travel Awareness
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Objectives and skills
• Know advantages and disadvantages of NMT
• Know the different ways and techniques to improve NMT
• Know different techniques to increase walkability
• Know different techniques to improve cycling conditions
• Be able to give advice when trying to increase NMT
• Be able to provide examples of good practice in NMT
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
NMT in developing countries
Economic growth and urbanisations trends
higher demand of public transport
NMT should be taken into account to improve the efficiency of the public transport system
Direct and indirect benefits of promoting NMT:
• Increased safety
• Economic viability
• Environmental friendly
• Health benefits
• Transport options
SUTP as method of supporting NMT
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Measuring NMT
Measuring has significant influence on transport planning
Conventional transport surveys only count primary mode
Many types of pedestrian activities are ignored
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Measuring NMT
Purpose Frequency Mean Distance Median Distance Mean Duration Percent Mile Mile Minutes
Personal business/shopping/errands 48% 0.44 0.22 11.9 Recreation/exercise 20% 1.16 0.56 25.3 To transit 16% N/A N/A 19.6 To or from school 7% 0.62 0.33 13.3 To or from work 4% 0.78 0.25 14.1 Walk dog 3% 0.71 0.25 19.0 Other 2% 0.57 0.22 14.8 Totals 100% 0.68 0.25 16.4
NHTS Walking Trip Attributes (Weinstein and Schimek, 2005)
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Measuring NMT
Travel Travel Time Trips Miles Percent Hours Percent Trips Percent
Walk 192 2.8% 64 18% 245 25%
Bicycle 34 0.5% 5 1.3% 14 1.5%
Motorcycle/Moped 36 0.5% 1 0.4% 3 0.3%
Car or Truck Driver 3,466 51% 140 39% 401 41%
Car or Truck Passenger 2,047 30% 82 23% 226 23%
Other private vehicles 162 2.4% 7 1.9% 8 0.8%
Public Transit 897 13% 62 17% 92 9.3%
Totals 6,833 100% 361 100% 990 100%
Average Annual Travel by Mode (DfT, 2003)
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Modelling NMT
Factors Comments
Land use density and mix.
Higher density and more mixed population, commercial and employment tend to increase pedestrian travel.
Ease of street crossing. Easier street crossings tend to increase pedestrian travel.
Sidewalk continuity. Sidewalks that do not connect create barriers to pedestrian travel.
Block size. Smaller block sizes tend to increase pedestrian travel.
Street connectivity (grid vs. cul de sac).
Connected streets allow better pedestrian access, which tends to increase pedestrian travel.
Topography. Steep slopes tend to create barriers to pedestrians.
Building orientation.
Commercial buildings oriented toward sidewalks rather than automobile parking tends to increase pedestrian travel.
Trip distance. Walking tends to be used for short (<1 km) trips.
Travel costs
Market trends or Transportation Demand Management measures that increase automobile trip costs may induce shifts from driving to walking.
Factors affecting pedestrian travel
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Modelling NMT (1)
Factors Bicycle Travel Impacts
Age Bicycle use increases into middle age and then decreases. Cyclists tend to have lower average age than non-cyclists.
Gender Men tend to cycle significantly more than women.
Education Bicycle use increases slightly with education.
Students Students are the largest bicycle commuter group. Universities, colleges and schools are major generators of bicycle trips.
Car and License People who do not have a car available are more likely to cycle.
Factors influencing Bicycle travel (based on Levitte, 1999)
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Modelling NMT (2)
Having a Drivers License People who cannot drive are more likely to cycle.
Size of Town A population of less than 100,000 appears to offer a better environment for cycling, and so may have higher rates of cycling than larger cities.
Employment Status Higher unemployment is associated with more cycling.
Professional Status Among employed people, professionals and managers appear more likely to cycle than blue collar and sales workers.
Household Income Utilitarian cyclists tend to have lower average incomes compared with non-cyclists. Recreational cyclists tend to have higher than average incomes.
Trip Length Cycling is most common for short (<5 mile) trips.
Parking Fees Commuters who must pay for parking may be more likely to bicycle.
Facility Conditions
Bicycle facilities (paths and lanes) and roadway conditions considered favourable to cycling tend to increase bicycle travel.
Factors influencing Bicycle travel (based on Levitte, 1999)
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Modelling NMT (3)
Trip distance Cycling tends to be used for moderate (<5 km) trips.
Travel costs
Market trends or Transportation Demand Management measures that increase automobile trip costs may induce shifts from driving to bicycling.
Bicycle Parking
Bicycle parking may affect some cycling decisions, particularly the availability of high-security, covered bike storage at worksites.
Community values
Some communities appear to accept and support utilitarian cycling more than others.
Factors influencing Bicycle travel (based on Levitte, 1999)
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Walking
Walkability should take into account:
• Pedestrian network quality (quality of paths, sidewalks, street crossings).
• Pedestrian network connectivity (how well sidewalks and paths are connected, and how directly pedestrians can travel to destinations).
• Security (how safe people feel while walking).
• Density and accessibility (distance between common destinations, such as homes, shops, schools, parks).
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Cycling
Reconstructed trend lines of the bicycle share in the total of car, moped and public transport movements, 1920-1995
(in %)
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Cycling - Explanation model for developments in bicycle use
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Cycling – Benchmarking cycling policies
NATCYP
• a benchmark program directed by Velo Mondial, supported by DG TREN of the European Commission, and with five participating countries; Czech Republic, England, Finland, Scotland and The Netherlands.
3 main aspects:
• The choice of the appropriate indicators for an efficient and productive assessment and comparison
• A more in-depth exchange of experiences on specific topics of interest using a site visit.
• The compilation of conclusions and recommendations for this stage, and the identification of other countries who are interested to be involved in a further stage of this program.
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Cycling – Benchmarking cycling policies
BYPAD (www.bypad.org) • a European benchmarking and quality management tool for improving local cycling policy .
Elements to keep in mind are the following:
• history of cycling policy in your city
• spatial structure of your city
• bicycle use
• safety
• who is involved / responsible in cycling policy ?
• Which action programs on cycling are running now (infrastructure, training, education, …)
• Budget for executing cycling policy
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Cycling – Benchmarking cycling policies
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Cycling
Velo.Info: The European Network for Cycling Expertise
• an EU funded project launched within the 5th FP.
The goals and objectives were described as:
• Create a critical mass of expert knowledge that covers the best references on planning for cycling.
• Make use of state of the art information technologies: there will be developed a database with cycle knowledge in al kinds of policy fields. This database is available on the Velo.Info website and works with a powerfull search engine.
• Guarantee high-level quality development through the co-operation of the European stakeholders.
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
SPICYCLES (2006-2008)
• a STEER project launched in 2006
• aims to realise that the minor role the bicycle still plays in the overall transport systems
• To solve the problem, there is a need for an articulated strategy that tackles the issue from different but equally important perspectives.
Cycling
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
SPICYCLES: 6 participating cities
• Barcelona,
• Berlin,
• Bucharest,
• Göteborg,
• Ploiesti,
• Rome
www.spicycles.velo.info
Cycling
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
National differences
Country Car Transit Cycling Walking Other
Austria 39% 13% 9% 31% 8%
Canada 74% 14% 1% 10% 1%
Denmark 42% 14% 20% 21% 3%
France 54% 12% 4% 30% 0%
Germany 52% 11% 10% 27% 0%
Netherlands 44% 8% 27% 19% 1%
Sweden 36% 11% 10% 39% 4%
Switzerland 38% 20% 10% 29% 3%
UK 62% 14% 8% 12% 4%
USA 84% 3% 1% 9% 2%
Source: Pucher and Lefevre, 1996
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Examples and study sites
Civitas Initiative in Ploiesti
Urban planning and development includes also infrastructure for cycling and walking which is a novelty in Ploiesti.
• Implementation of a package of modern solutions, offering better design, access and security for pedestrians and cyclists
• Increase city viability.
• Improving of the convenience and safety of pedestrians/cyclists
• Enhancing the pedestrian/cycling environment.
• Encouraging the use of transport resources with lower pollution emissions
www.eu-portal.net
NON MOTORISED TRANSPORT
Exercises
1. Fill out a walkability tool for your city / municipality
2. Give an example of a method for benchmarking cycling policies
3. Sum up initiatives to improve NMT