Technical Papers
Dec 13, 2017

Two-Stage Bicycle Traffic Assignment Model

Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 144, Issue 2

Abstract

Cycling has been considered as a healthy, environmentally friendly, and economical alternative mode of travel to motorized vehicles (especially private motorized vehicles). However, bicycles have often been neglected in the transportation planning and travel demand forecasting modeling processes. The current practice in modeling bicycle trips in a network is either nonexistent or too simplistic. Current practices are simply based on the all-or-nothing (AON) assignment method using single attributes such as distance, safety, or a composite measure of safety multiplied by distance. The purpose of this paper is to develop a two-stage traffic assignment model by considering key factors (or criteria) in cyclist route choice behavior. As an initial effort, the first stage considers two key criteria (distance-related attributes and safety-related attributes) to generate a set of nondominated (or efficient) paths. These two criteria are a composite function of subcriteria. Route distance consists of link distances and intersection turning penalties combined to give the distance-related attribute, while route safety makes use of the bicycle level of service (BLOS) measure developed by the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) to determine the safety-related attribute. Efficient paths are generated based on the above two key criteria with a biobjective shortest path algorithm. The second stage determines the flow allocation to the set of efficient paths. Several traffic assignment methods are adopted to determine the flow allocations in a network. Numerical experiments are then conducted to demonstrate the two-stage approach for bicycle traffic assignment. Overall, the results of the Winnipeg network demonstrate the applicability of the two-stage bicycle traffic assignment procedure with the flexibility of using different criteria in the first stage to generate efficient paths and different traffic assignment methods in the second stage to allocate flows.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Mountain-Plains Consortium (MPC) and the Transportation Research Center for Livable Communities (TRCLC) sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of Transportation through their Federal Highway Administration Eisenhower Transportation Graduate Fellowship program, the Research Committee of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University (Project No. 1-ZE5T), the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Minis (NRF-2016R1C1B2016254), and the National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korean government (NRF-2010-0029443). This support is gratefully acknowledged.

References

Akar, G., and Clifton, K. J. (2009). “Influence of individual perceptions and bicycle infrastructure on decision to bike.” Transp. Res. Rec., 2140, 165–172.
Ben-Akiva, M., and Bierlaire, M. (1999). “Discrete choice methods and their applications to short term travel decisions.” Handbook of transportation science, R. W. Hall, ed., Springer, New York.
Bovy, P., and Fiorenzo-Catalano, S. (2007). “Stochastic route choice set generation: Behavioral and probabilistic foundations.” Transportmetrica, 3(3), 173–189.
Broach, J., Gliebe, J., and Dill, J. (2011). “Bicycle route choice model developed using revealed preference GPS data.” Proc., Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Chen, A., Chootinan, P., Ryu, S., Lee, M., and Recker, W. (2012). “An intersection turning movement estimation procedure based on path flow estimator.” J. Adv. Transp., 46(2), 161–176.
City of Winnipeg. (2013a). “2006 mobility by neighborhood.xls in 2006 Census.” ⟨http://winnipeg.ca/census/2006/Selected%20Topics/default.asp⟩ (Jan. 13, 2014).
City of Winnipeg. (2013b). “Winnipeg cycling map.” ⟨http://www.winnipeg.ca/publicworks/MajorProjects/ActiveTransportation/maps-and-routes.stm⟩ (Jan. 13, 2014).
Climaco, J. C. N., and Martins, E. Q. V. (1982). “A bicriterion shortest path problem.” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 11(4), 399–404.
Daskin, M. S. (1995). Network and discrete location: Models, algorithms, and applications, Wiley, New York.
Dial, R. B. (1979). “A model and algorithm for multicriteria route-mode choice.” Transp. Res. Part B, 13(4), 311–316.
Dial, R. B. (1996). “Bicriterion traffic assignment: Basic theory and elementary algorithms.” Transp. Sci., 30(2), 93–111.
Dial, R. B. (1997). “Bicriterion traffic assignment: Efficient algorithms plus examples.” Transp. Res. Part B, 31(5), 357–379.
Dill, J., and Carr, T. (2003). “Bicycle commuting and facilities in major US cities: If you build them, commuters will use them.” Transp. Res. Rec., 1828, 116–123.
Dowling, R. G., et al. (2008). “Multimodal level of service analysis for urban streets.”, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Ehrgott, M., Wang, J., Raith, A., and van Houtte, A. (2012). “A bi-objective cyclist route choice model.” Transp. Res. Part A, 46(4), 652–663.
Emme/4 [Computer software]. INRO Consultants, Montreal.
Gabriel, S. A., and Bernstein, D. (1997). “The traffic equilibrium problem with nonadditive path costs.” Transp. Sci., 31(4), 337–348.
Harkey, D. L., Reinfurt, D. W., and Knuiman, M. (1998). “Development of the bicycle compatibility index.” Transp. Res. Rec., 1636, 13–20.
HCM (Highway Capacity Manual). (2010). “HCM2010.” Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Hood, J., Sall, E., and Charlton, B. (2011). “A GPS-based bicycle route choice model for San Francisco, California.” Trans. Lett. Int. J. Transp. Res., 3(1), 63–75.
Hopkinson, P., and Wardman, M. (1996). “Evaluating the demand for new cycle facilities.” Transp. Policy, 3(4), 241–249.
Hunt, J. D., and Abraham, J. E. (2007). “Influences on bicycle use.” Transportation, 34(4), 453–470.
Intel Visual FORTRAN XE [Computer software]. Intel Software, Santa Clara, CA.
Kang, L., and Fricker, J. (2013). “A bicycle route choice model that incorporate distance and perceived risk.” Proc., Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Klobucar, M., and Fricker, J. (2007). “Network evaluation tool to improve real and perceived bicycle safety.” Transp. Res. Rec., 2031, 25–33.
Lee, K. H., Won, D. H., and Ko, E. J. (2015). “The multiple impacts of the neighborhood environment on the use of public bicycles by residents: An empirical study of Changwon in Korea.” Int. J. Urban Sci., 19(2), 224–237.
Lowry, M., Callister, D., Gresham, M., and Moore, B. (2012). “Assessment of community-wide bikeability with bicycle level of service.” Transp. Res. Rec., 2314, 41–48.
Mekuria, M., Furth, P., and Nixon, H. (2012). Low-stress bicycling and network connectivity, San José State Univ., San Jose, CA.
Menghini, G., Carrasco, N., Schüssler, N., and Axhausen, K. W. (2010). “Route choice of cyclists in Zurich.” Transp. Res. Part A, 44(9), 754–765.
Nagurney, A. (2000). “A multiclass, multicriteria traffic network equilibrium model.” Math. Comput. Model., 32(3–4), 393–411.
Nagurney, A., and Dong, J. (2002). “A multiclass, multicriteria traffic network equilibrium model with elastic demand.” Transp. Res. Part B, 36(5), 445–469.
Nagurney, A., Dong, J., and Mokhtarian, P. L. (2001). “Teleshopping versus shopping: A multicriteria network equilibrium framework.” Math. Comput. Model., 34(7–8), 783–798.
Nagurney, A., Dong, J., and Mokhtarian, P. L. (2002). “Multicriteria network equilibrium modeling with variable weights for decision-making in the information age with applications to telecommuting and teleshopping.” J. Econ. Dyn. Control, 26(9–10), 1629–1650.
Northrop, K. (2011). “Bicycle commuter trends in the US graphic representation.” ⟨http://www.webikeeugene.org/2011/03/07/bicycle-commuter-trends-in-the-us-graphic-representation/⟩ (Dec. 20, 2014).
Pankow, J., Figliozzi, M., and Bigazzi, A. (2014). “Evaluation of bicyclists exposure to traffic related air pollution along distinct facility types.”, Portland State Univ., Portland, OR.
Raford, N., Chiaradia, A., and Gil, J. (2007). “Space syntax: The role of urban form in cyclist route choice in central London.” Proc., Transportation Research Board 86th Annual Meeting, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
Raith, A., Wang, J., Ehrgott, M., and Mitchell, S. (2014). “Solving multi-objective traffic assignment.” Ann. Oper. Res., 222(1), 483–516.
Sener, I., Eluru, N., and Bhat, C. R. (2009). “An analysis of bicycle route choice preferences in Texas, US.” Transportation, 36(5), 511–539.
Serafini, P. (1986). “Some considerations about computational complexity for multi objective combinatorial problems.” Recent advances and historical development of vector optimization, Springer, Berlin, 222–232.
Skriver, A. J. V., and Andersen, K. A. (2000). “A label correcting approach for solving bicriterion shortest-path problems.” Comput. Oper. Res., 27(6), 507–524.
Stinson, M. A., and Bhat, C. R. (2003). “An analysis of commuter bicyclist route choice using a stated preference survey.” Transp. Res. Rec., 1828, 107–115.
Tung, C. T., and Chew, K. L. (1992). “A multicriteria Pareto-optimal path algorithm.” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 62(2), 203–209.
Ulungu, E. L., and Teghem, J. (1995). “The two phases method: An efficient procedure to solve bi-objective combinatorial optimization problems.” Found. Comput. Decis. Sci., 20(2), 149–165.
Wardrop, J. G. (1952). “Some theoretical aspects of road traffic research.” Proc. - Inst. Civ. Eng., 2(1), 325–378.
Winters, M., Davidson, G., Kao, D., and Teschke, K. (2011). “Motivators and deterrents of bicycling: Comparing influences on decisions to ride.” Transportation, 38(1), 153–168.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 144Issue 2February 2018

History

Received: Mar 29, 2017
Accepted: Jul 14, 2017
Published online: Dec 13, 2017
Published in print: Feb 1, 2018
Discussion open until: May 13, 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Seungkyu Ryu
Postdoctoral Student, Dept. of Transportation Engineering, Ajou Univ., Suwon 442-749, Korea.
Anthony Chen [email protected]
Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ., Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong (corresponding author). E-mail: [email protected]
Jacqueline Su
Master Student, Dept. of Urban Planning, Univ. of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656.
Keechoo Choi
Professor, Dept. of Transportation Engineering, Ajou Univ., Suwon 442-749, Korea.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share