Cyclists’ heterogeneous parking preferences and their implications for bicycle parking facilities

Abstract

Understanding bicycle parking behavior is essential when planning bicycle parking facilities. This is necessary in order to meet the needs of cyclists, to effectively promote cycling, and to prevent fly parking of bicycles. Therefore, this paper analyzes cyclists’ parking preferences regarding the type and placement of bicycle parking facilities. The study is based on a stated preference experiment (n = 2,960) on the bicycle parking choice behavior of university students and employees of RWTH Aachen University, one of the largest universities in Germany. The analysis employs a mixed logit model to estimate the influence of facility type and user-specific factors, the willingness to pay for parking facilities, and the relevance of cycling detours and walking distances. The results indicate that cyclists are more than twice as sensitive to walking distances than to cycling detours. Furthermore, they have a general preference for bicycle parking stations and covered versus uncovered parking racks, as well as a reluctance to use informal parking facilities. While previous research has shown that groups of cyclists have different preferences and parking behaviors, it has been unclear what factors influence group membership. This paper shows that student and employment status and the resale value of the bicycle are important user-specific factors influencing the choice between parking facilities. Furthermore, there is a notable willingness to pay for bicycle parking, especially among those with expensive bicycles. The considerable variation in preferences among cyclists underscores the importance of considering the heterogeneity of cyclists when planning parking facilities to optimize their utility.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 4 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.