Bicycle lane priority: Promoting bicycle as a green mode even in congested urban area

Saeed Asadi Bagloee, Majid Sarvi, Mark Wallace

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

Abstract

The main obstacles to boosting the bicycle as a mode of transport are safety concerns due to interactions with motorized traffic. One option is to separate cyclists from motorists through exclusive bicycle priority lanes. This practice is easily implemented in uncongested traffic. Enforcing bicycle lanes on congested roads may degenerate the network, making the idea very hard to sell both to the public and the traffic authorities. Inspired by Braess Paradox, we take an unorthodox approach to seeking latent misutilized capacity in the congested networks to be dedicated to exclusive bicycle lanes. The aim of this study is to tailor an efficient and practical method to large size urban networks. Hence, this paper appeals to policy makers in their quest to scientifically convince stakeholder that bicycle is not a secondary mode, rather, it can be greatly accommodated along with other modes even in the heart of the congested cities. In conjunction with the bicycle lane priority, other policy measures such as shared bicycle scheme, electric-bike, integration of public transport and bicycle are also discussed in this article. As for the mathematical methodology, we articulated it as a discrete bilevel mathematical programing. In order to handle the real networks, we developed a phased methodology based on Branch-and-Bound (as a solution algorithm), structured in a less intensive RAM manner. The methodology was tested on real size network of city of Winnipeg, Canada, for which the total of 30 road segments - equivalent to 2.77 km bicycle lanes - in the CBD were found.

LanguageEnglish
Pages102-121
Number of pages20
JournalTransportation Research, Part A: Policy and Practice
Volume87
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 May 2016

Keywords

  • Bicycle network design
  • Bilevel programing
  • Braess Paradox
  • Branch-and-bound
  • Electric-bike (or E-bike)
  • Shared bicycle

Cite this

@article{9873527250dd4b17a60d84a960eaae36,
title = "Bicycle lane priority: Promoting bicycle as a green mode even in congested urban area",
abstract = "The main obstacles to boosting the bicycle as a mode of transport are safety concerns due to interactions with motorized traffic. One option is to separate cyclists from motorists through exclusive bicycle priority lanes. This practice is easily implemented in uncongested traffic. Enforcing bicycle lanes on congested roads may degenerate the network, making the idea very hard to sell both to the public and the traffic authorities. Inspired by Braess Paradox, we take an unorthodox approach to seeking latent misutilized capacity in the congested networks to be dedicated to exclusive bicycle lanes. The aim of this study is to tailor an efficient and practical method to large size urban networks. Hence, this paper appeals to policy makers in their quest to scientifically convince stakeholder that bicycle is not a secondary mode, rather, it can be greatly accommodated along with other modes even in the heart of the congested cities. In conjunction with the bicycle lane priority, other policy measures such as shared bicycle scheme, electric-bike, integration of public transport and bicycle are also discussed in this article. As for the mathematical methodology, we articulated it as a discrete bilevel mathematical programing. In order to handle the real networks, we developed a phased methodology based on Branch-and-Bound (as a solution algorithm), structured in a less intensive RAM manner. The methodology was tested on real size network of city of Winnipeg, Canada, for which the total of 30 road segments - equivalent to 2.77 km bicycle lanes - in the CBD were found.",
keywords = "Bicycle network design, Bilevel programing, Braess Paradox, Branch-and-bound, Electric-bike (or E-bike), Shared bicycle",
author = "Bagloee, {Saeed Asadi} and Majid Sarvi and Mark Wallace",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.tra.2016.03.004",
volume = "87",
pages = "102--121",
journal = "Transportation Research, Part A: Policy and Practice",
issn = "0965-8564",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Bicycle lane priority : Promoting bicycle as a green mode even in congested urban area. / Bagloee, Saeed Asadi; Sarvi, Majid ; Wallace, Mark.

In: Transportation Research, Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 87, 01.05.2016, p. 102-121.

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bicycle lane priority

T2 - Transportation Research, Part A: Policy and Practice

AU - Bagloee,Saeed Asadi

AU - Sarvi,Majid

AU - Wallace,Mark

PY - 2016/5/1

Y1 - 2016/5/1

N2 - The main obstacles to boosting the bicycle as a mode of transport are safety concerns due to interactions with motorized traffic. One option is to separate cyclists from motorists through exclusive bicycle priority lanes. This practice is easily implemented in uncongested traffic. Enforcing bicycle lanes on congested roads may degenerate the network, making the idea very hard to sell both to the public and the traffic authorities. Inspired by Braess Paradox, we take an unorthodox approach to seeking latent misutilized capacity in the congested networks to be dedicated to exclusive bicycle lanes. The aim of this study is to tailor an efficient and practical method to large size urban networks. Hence, this paper appeals to policy makers in their quest to scientifically convince stakeholder that bicycle is not a secondary mode, rather, it can be greatly accommodated along with other modes even in the heart of the congested cities. In conjunction with the bicycle lane priority, other policy measures such as shared bicycle scheme, electric-bike, integration of public transport and bicycle are also discussed in this article. As for the mathematical methodology, we articulated it as a discrete bilevel mathematical programing. In order to handle the real networks, we developed a phased methodology based on Branch-and-Bound (as a solution algorithm), structured in a less intensive RAM manner. The methodology was tested on real size network of city of Winnipeg, Canada, for which the total of 30 road segments - equivalent to 2.77 km bicycle lanes - in the CBD were found.

AB - The main obstacles to boosting the bicycle as a mode of transport are safety concerns due to interactions with motorized traffic. One option is to separate cyclists from motorists through exclusive bicycle priority lanes. This practice is easily implemented in uncongested traffic. Enforcing bicycle lanes on congested roads may degenerate the network, making the idea very hard to sell both to the public and the traffic authorities. Inspired by Braess Paradox, we take an unorthodox approach to seeking latent misutilized capacity in the congested networks to be dedicated to exclusive bicycle lanes. The aim of this study is to tailor an efficient and practical method to large size urban networks. Hence, this paper appeals to policy makers in their quest to scientifically convince stakeholder that bicycle is not a secondary mode, rather, it can be greatly accommodated along with other modes even in the heart of the congested cities. In conjunction with the bicycle lane priority, other policy measures such as shared bicycle scheme, electric-bike, integration of public transport and bicycle are also discussed in this article. As for the mathematical methodology, we articulated it as a discrete bilevel mathematical programing. In order to handle the real networks, we developed a phased methodology based on Branch-and-Bound (as a solution algorithm), structured in a less intensive RAM manner. The methodology was tested on real size network of city of Winnipeg, Canada, for which the total of 30 road segments - equivalent to 2.77 km bicycle lanes - in the CBD were found.

KW - Bicycle network design

KW - Bilevel programing

KW - Braess Paradox

KW - Branch-and-bound

KW - Electric-bike (or E-bike)

KW - Shared bicycle

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962276494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.tra.2016.03.004

DO - 10.1016/j.tra.2016.03.004

M3 - Article

VL - 87

SP - 102

EP - 121

JO - Transportation Research, Part A: Policy and Practice

JF - Transportation Research, Part A: Policy and Practice

SN - 0965-8564

ER -