Keep me safe—evaluation of safety perception of different bicycle facilities

Abstract

Bicycle traffic constitutes a central aspect of present and future inner-city traffic. Therefore, cyclists’ safety is increasingly the focus of research. A current discussion is whether a structural separation between bicycle and motorized traffic using light segregation improves road safety and the perceived safety of cyclists compared to a design using markings or other forms of light segregation. The field study was conducted on a street in Zurich that is a source of conflict for cyclists with motorized traffic by implementing four different forms of light segregation and examining their influence on the safety assessment. The (1) colored bicycle lane was supplemented by (2) a continuous line, (3) light segregation that still allows cyclists or cars to ride over them (discs), and (4) light segregation with guide beacons that do not allow cyclists nor cars to ride over them. A video-based traffic analysis was conducted for each stage to assess the conflicts between cyclists and motorized traffic. Regarding safety perception, cyclists were asked before and after each conversion about their general safety assessment and perception of the specific street section. Moreover, the conversions were presented to participants via pictures before they were implemented in order to assess if a safety assessment based on pictures is comparable to a perceived safety perception in reality. Objectively, fewer adaptive actions were recorded for all three conversions compared to the initial design. Significant differences were found between the conversions regarding perceived safety, with the light segregation using discs being rated as the safest. The safety assessment based on pictures, however, revealed no significant differences. These results are a basis for further research on safety assessments and the relationship between objective and subjective safety for cyclists.