Expanding the Scope of the Bicycle Level-of-Service Concept: A Review of the Literature

Abstract

Research into the bicycle level-of-service (BLOS) has been extensively conducted over the last three decades. This research has mostly focused on user perceptions of comfort to provide guidance for decision-makers and planners. Segments and nodes were studied first, followed by a network evaluation. Besides these investigations, several variables have also been utilized to depict the users’ perspectives within the BLOS field, along with other cycling research domains that simultaneously scrutinized the users’ preferences. This review investigates the variables and indices employed in the BLOS area in relation to the field of bicycle flow and comfort research. Despite general agreement among existing BLOS variables and the adopted indices, several important research gaps remain to be filled. First, BLOS indices are often categorized based on transport components, while scarce attention has been paid to BLOS studies in trip-end facilities such as bicycle parking facilities. The importance of these facilities has been highlighted instead within research related to comfort. Second, the advantages of separated bike facilities have been proven in many studies; however, scarce research has addressed the challenges associated with them (e.g., the heterogeneity within those facilities due to the presence of electric bikes and electric scooters). This issue is clearly noticeable within the research regarding flow studies. Furthermore, network evaluation (in comparison to segment and node indices) has been studied to a lesser extent, whereas issues such as connectivity can be evaluated mainly through a holistic approach to the system. This study takes one step toward demonstrating the importance of the integration of similar research domains in the BLOS field to eliminate the aforementioned shortcomings.

Association between network characteristics and bicycle ridership across a large metropolitan region

“…Certainly, the development of measures of 'bicycle level of service' (similar to 'level of traffic stress') has enhanced our understanding of how the actual and perceived environment is conducive and safe for bicycling. 29,30 These measures include such factors as the presence, type and quality of bicycle infrastructure, topography, exposure to and speed of traffic, bicycle volumes, lighting, perceived and objective safety, and end of trip facilities. 29,30 However, as previously described, these measures are often applied to individual street/path segments and challenges exist as to how to utilise these measures to defined AAA bicycle networks.…”

“…29,30 These measures include such factors as the presence, type and quality of bicycle infrastructure, topography, exposure to and speed of traffic, bicycle volumes, lighting, perceived and objective safety, and end of trip facilities. 29,30 However, as previously described, these measures are often applied to individual street/path segments and challenges exist as to how to utilise these measures to defined AAA bicycle networks. Where the connectivity of networks has been considered, the measurement of connectivity has often been limited to the use of graph theory approaches, such as that employed in this study.…”

Electric bike (non)users’ health and comfort concerns pre and peri a world pandemic (COVID-19): A qualitative study

“…Each index considers a specific range of variables and is based on different contexts. Although extensive cycling LOS research has been conducted over the last three decades, electric bike (e-bike) LOS—despite it being a frequent active transport mode—has been less studied in this field ( Kazemzadeh et al, 2020b ).…”

Organization of Urban Transport Organization – Presentation of Bicycle System and Bicycle Infrastructure in Lublin

“…Research into bicycle level-of-service (BLOS) has been extensively conducted in recent years [24,25]. This research is mostly focused on user perceptions of comfort [26][27][28] to provide guidance for decision-makers and planners [17,[29][30][31][32][33] and city databases [34].…”