bicyclists` response to bikeways in yogyakarta

Konferensi Nasional Teknik Sipil 4 (KoNTekS 4)
Sanur-Bali, 2-3 Juni 2010
BICYCLISTS’ RESPONSE TO BIKEWAYS IN YOGYAKARTA
Poei Eliza Purnamasari1, Inacio Maria Deonal De Fatima2 dan Valentine Bemos Nippristira Guling3
1
2
3
C ivil engineering department of atma jaya university, Babarsari Street 44 Yogyakarta
Email: elizapoei@yahoo.com
C ivil engineering department of atma jaya university, Babarsari Street 44 Yogyakarta
Email: deodonna_51@yahoo.com
C ivil engineering department of atma jaya university, Babarsari Street 44 Yogyakarta
Email: va1208_lent@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT
In the 1970s Yogyakarta well-known as a “bicycle city” as bicycle become a major transportation
mode for people. Following the advancement of technology and the improvement of economy, since
1980s the major transportation mode has changed to motorcycle. The increasing number of vehicles
in Yogyakarta result in the increasing of traffic volume, pollution and traffic accidents. Traffic jam,
pollution and traffic accident become one of the major concerned in Yogyakarta. Recently
government try to solve these problems by new bikeways construction. These lanes are especially
designed for the cyclists. The purposes of this research are: 1.) How safe the bikeways for the
bicyclists; 2.) To know the influence of bicycle lanes to the bicyclists in Yogyakarta especially the
usage of these lanes. To get the result more accurately we use the questionnaire method. We do in
two ways: by spreading the questionnaires and interview people. As the results, Respondents choose
’The existence of bikeway goes to proved that governments are seriously concern with bicyclist” as
the first priority for Bikeways purpose attributes, ”I feel secure to ride bicycle on the bikeway” is the
first priority for Safety attributes while the first priority for Physical attributeds was “Bikeway is
paved”.
Keywords: bikeways, bicyclists, safety, governments, Yogyakarta.
1.
INTRODUCTION
In the 1970s Yogyakarta well-known as a “bicycle city” as bicycle become a major transportation mode for people.
Following the advancement of technology and the improvement of economy, since 1980s the major transportation
mode has changed to motorcycle. Transportation mode that can help people to move easier and faster from one
place to another places, consists of the simplest to the modern, from non-engine likes bicycle, pedicab. Cart, to
motor engine likes motorcycle, car, bus, and electric train. The life style of people nowadays from semi romantic life
to pragmatics totality life, they choose motorcycle or car which can carried people move faster then using bicycle, in
the meantime demand of bicycle is gradually decreased while traffic volume and traffic accidents increasing from
year to years (see Table1).
Table 1
Traffic accidents in Yogyakarta City
Year
2000
motorcycle
bicycle
8
1
2001
7
1
2002
107
9
2003
253
13
2004
165
13
2005
175
5
2006
283
5
2007
1075
32
2008
873
41
2009
748
33
Source : Polantas Kota Yogyakarta
When one adds the fact that humans using their feet for traveling, it can be seen that walking and cycling are ideal
ways of traveling from the point of view of energy conservation, environmental green , social equality and reduce
traffic congestion, as a result Government of Yogyakarta try to use new bikeways construction which lead people
Universitas Udayana – Universitas Pelita Harapan Jakarta – Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta
I - 461
Poei Eliza Purnamasari, Inacio Maria Deonal De Fatima dan Valentine Bemos Nippristira Guling
prefer to use bicycle again. These lanes are especially designed for the cyclists. There are three type of bicycle lanes:
1) Permanent bicycle lanes (actually this lane for low speed) which is divided by permanent divider, for example :
Bicycle lane along Mangkubumi St. – A. Yani St. (Malioboro) (Figure 1 )and lane along UGM Boulevard. 2)
Bicycle lane which is using white color painted line connected one campus to another campus (Figure 4). 3)
Bicycle lane which is using yellow dush line for main road of Yogyakarta. (Figure 2 & 3)
The purposes of this research are: 1.) How safe these bikeways for the bicyclists; 2.) To know the influence
of bicycle lanes to the bicyclists in Yogyakarta especially convenience and the usage of these lanes.
Figure 1
Figure 3
2.
Figure 2
Figure 4
LITERATURE REVIEW.
2.1. Bicyclist safety
According to K.W. Ogden, Bicycle use varies considerably from country to country, and from city to city. In
the US, bicycling is estimated to account for 5-15 per cent of all urban trips; in Australia, bicycling accounts for
about 2 per cent of work trips and an estimated 7 per cent of all trips; and in Britain bicycling accounts for 4 per
cent of trips. Usage is much higher in some European continental countries; 29 per cent of trips in the
Netherlands, 18 per cent in Denmark, and 11 per cent in Western Germany. In some developing countries such
as China and India, bicycle population and use is far higher and in these countries special facilities are
commonly provided for them because they constitute the bulk of road use. He also mentioned that per person
hour of travel, bicyclists are more than 5 times as likely as car occupants to be killed, while motorcyclists are 30
times as likely to be killed.
2.2. Bicycle facilities
According to K.W. Ogden (1996) A useful taxonomy of bicycle facilities for our purposes is :
I - 462
Universitas Udayana – Universitas Pelita Harapan Jakarta – Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta
Bicyclists’ Response To Bikeways In Yogyakarta
a)
on-street bicycling in mixed traffic. This is by far the most common arrangement. Bicycles and
motor vehicles share the roadspace, with no special provision for the bicyclists. Austroads suggests
that mixed traffic arrangements are satisfactory up to about 3000 veh/d, and with traffic speeds of up to
around 60 km/h (35 mph). (Figure 5) Where the kerb lane is a parking lane, there is the possibility of
providing a shared bicycle-car parking lane (Figure 6). However, the presence of parked cars
represents a hazard to bicyclists, not only because of visibility problems, but also because of the
potential for a car occupant to open the car door in front of an approaching bicyclist. For this reason,
Austroads recommends a minimum width of the shared bicycle-car parking lane of 4 m (about 13 ft)
where speeds are around 60 km/h (35 mph) to 4.5 m (about 15 ft) for speeds of up to about 80 km/h
(50 mph). The lane should be clearly marked as a bicycle facility, and this should be supported by
regulations which prohibit motor vehicles from travelling in this part of the roadway (except of course
for parking).
Figure 5 (Source KW Ogden, 1996)
Figure 6 (Source KW Ogden, 1996)
b) on-street bicycle-only lanes. (Figure 7) An exclusive bicycle lane is a lane created by pavement
markings and signs indicating that it for bicycle use only. It is suitable for roads where speeds exceed
80 km/h (50 mph) and traffic flows exceed about 3000 veh/d. The width of such a lane may vary
according to the number of bicyclists, the traffic volume (especially truck volumes), and the feasibility
of creating the lane within the space available. Austroads suggests that 1.2 m (4 ft) is the absolute
minimum width, although short sections of 1.0 m (3.3 ft) may be provided over a short length at
“squeeze points” (e.g. a road narrowing within a traffic calming scheme). The desirable bicycle lane
width is 1.5m (4.6 ft)
Figure 7 (Source KW Ogden, 1996)
c)
Figure 8 (Source KW Ogden, 1996)
bicycle use of road shoulders (Figure 8) Sealed shoulders on rural roads have safety advantages for
motor vehicles. Where they are provided, they are commonly used by bicyclists, and to this end it may
be appropriate to consider explicitly the needs of bicyclists when they are installed. Conversely, they
may be installed with bicyclists particularly in mind. The minimum width of seal suggested by
Austroads is 1.0 m (about 3 ft) where the traffic speed is less than 60 km/h, rising to a suggested 3.0 m
(10 ft) where traffic speeds exceed 100 km/h (60 mph) or there are substantial volumes of heavy
trucks.
d) Bicycle paths Bicycle paths are distinguished by the absence of motor vehicles. They may be provided
for the exclusive use of bicyclists, such that other users (pedestrians, roller-skaters, etc) are prohibited,
Universitas Udayana – Universitas Pelita Harapan Jakarta – Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta
I - 463
Poei Eliza Purnamasari, Inacio Maria Deonal De Fatima dan Valentine Bemos Nippristira Guling
or they may be provided as intended joint-use facilities; in practice, whether intended or not, most
facilities end up as joint use unless bicycles use is so high as to ensure that it is self-enforcing.
Similarly, they may be provided for recreational uses, for commuter purposes, or for either use; the
difference is not trivial, since the former will perhaps be appropriately located in pleasant surrounding
such as parkland whereas the latter will ideally follow a straighter line, such as alongside a roadway or
a railway (Figure 9),.
From a safety viewpoint, shared facilities can create problems, particularly in relation to pedestrianbicyclist conflicts. Where possible therefore, shared use facilities should have a longitudinal line to
segregate pedestrian from bicyclists (Figure 10), and be signed accordingly. This also depends upon
the width of the path.
Figure 9 (Source KW Ogden, 1996)
3.
Figure 10 (Source KW Ogden, 1996)
METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
To help evaluate the kinds of bikeways that are being built, primary and secondary data collection were carried out.
Primary data collection comprises : (1) structured interview by using questionnaires; (2) field data measurement for
bicyclists traffic volume, while secondary information were collected from Data collected for this study came from
personal interviews with randomly selected riders using a set of questionnaires. Rider characteristics was measured
by age, sex, nationality and occupation., while nonparametric methods use for mean rank analysis.There are 20
questions in the questionnaire, while these questions could be devided into three groups attributes as follows:
1) Bikeways purpose Attributes, consists of 10 questions :
a. I have known about the bikeway project
b. I have known about the purposes of the bikeway
c. The bikeway has been used by bicyclist
d. Many people turn to use bike Because of the existence of bikeway,
e. Bikeway is not use for parking area
f. The bikeway is not used by another road users except cyclist
g. Many bikeways in Yogyakarta
h. The existence of bikeway goes to proved that governments are seriously concern with bicyclist
i. Bikeway is useful for all road users
j. Bikeway doesn’t disturb the other road users
2) Safety attributes, consists of 5 questions
a. Bicyclist has stopped at waiting zone for bicycle while the traffic light is red
b. Bikeway has reduce the number of accident between bicycle and the other vehicles
c. I feel secure to ride bicycle on the bikeway
d. There are insurances for any loses or accidents of the bicyclist
e. Traffic signs can be seen clearly
3) Physical Attributes, consists of 5 questions
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
I - 464
The width of bikeway is more than 1 meter
The width of the bikeway is enough for 2 bikes to passed
Bike way is paved
Bike way are flat and not perforated
There are a lot of special parking lot for bicycle
Universitas Udayana – Universitas Pelita Harapan Jakarta – Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta
Bicyclists’ Response To Bikeways In Yogyakarta
Field data consists of Type of bicycle lane, length and width of research location and volume of bycycle per hour
(see Table 2)
Table 2
NO.
Type of bicycle lane
1
Bicycle lane with
permanent divider
Bicycle lane with yellow
paint
Bicycle lane with white
paint
2
3
Research
Location
Malioboro St.,in front
of KFC
Dr.wahidin
Sudirohusodo St.
Lembah UGM
respondents by gender
Dimension of Research Location (m)
Effective
Length
Width
Width
45
4.2
2.8
volume (bicycle/hour)
Workday
80
Weekend
95
45
1.5
1.2
52
57
45
1
1
15
27
Nationality of Respondents
men
WNI
14%
w omen
WNA
36%
64%
86%
Figure 11
Figure 12
A total sample size of 77 respondents were analyzed., these were found that 36% of respondents were women and
64% of respondents were men (see Figure 11). Based on a breakdown by Nationality, it was found that 86 % of
respondents are Indonesian while 14% of respondents are foreigners (see Figure 12). For a further breakdown by
age, it was found that 27 respondents are less than or equal to 20 years old, while 3 respondents are over 50 years
old (see Figure 13). While respondents have varied of occupation such as student; employee; unemployed;
housewife; guide; traveller; lawyer; teacher and entrepreneur (see Figure 14).
Occupation of Respondents
Characteristic of respondents by age
respondents
40
30
32
27
20
13
guide
1
trav eller
1
law y er
1
v endor
2
teacher
1
7
entrepreneur
10
2
3
4
housew ife
2
Unemploy ed
0
<=20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
> 50
10
Employ ee
48
Student
Ranges of age
Figure 13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Figure 14
The goal of study by using Kendall’s W Test is to find which factors will become the priority for each attributes by
mean rank (Table 3).Respondents choose ’The existence of bikeway goes to proved that governments are seriously
concern with bicyclist” as the first priority for Bikeways purpose attributes, while ” Many people turn to use bike
Because of the existence of bikeway” is not popular for the respondents. ”I feel secure to ride bicycle on the
bikeway” is the first priority for Safety attributes while “There are insurances for any loses or accidents of the
bicyclist” is the less popular one. Meanwhile. the first priority for Physical attributeds was “Bikeway is paved” and
the less popular factor was “There are a lot of special parking lot for bicycle”
Universitas Udayana – Universitas Pelita Harapan Jakarta – Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta
I - 465
Poei Eliza Purnamasari, Inacio Maria Deonal De Fatima dan Valentine Bemos Nippristira Guling
KENDALL’S W TEST
4.
Bikeways purpose Attributes
Mean
Rank
Safety Attributes
Mean
Rasnk
Physical Attributes
The existence of bikeway goes to
proved that governments are
seriously concern with bicyclist
Bikeway doesn’t disturb the other
road users
I have known about the bikeway
project
6,52
I feel secure to ride bicycle on the
bikeway
3.34
Bikeway is paved
6,48
Traffic signs can be seen clearly
3.22
6.03
Bikeway has reduce the number of
traffic accident
2.88
Bike way are flat and not
perforated
The width of the bikeway is
enough for 2 bikes to passed
The bikeway is not used by another
road users except cyclist
5,85
2.78
The width of bikeway is
more than 1 meter
2.7
Bikeway is useful for all road users
5,84
Bicyclist has stopped at waiting
zone for bicycle while the traffic
light is red
There are insurances for any loses
or accidents of the bicyclist
2.78
There are a lot of special
parking lot for bicycle
2.41
Bikeway is not use for parking area
5,82
I have known about the purposes of
the bikeway
5,80
Many bikeways in Yogyakarta
5,03
The bikeway has been used by
bicyclist
4,24
Many people turn to use bike
Because of the existence of bikeway
3,38
Mean
Rank
3.57
3.31
3.01
CONCLUSIONS
From this study, it can be concluded that 36% of respondents were women and 64% of respondents were
men. For a further breakdown by age, it was found that 27 respondents are less than or equal to 20 years old,
while 3 respondents are over 50 years old. While respondents have varied of occupation such as student;
employee; unemployed; housewife; guide; traveller; lawyer; teacher and entrepreneur.
Respondents choose ’The existence of bikeway goes to proved that governments are seriously concern with
bicyclist” as the first priority for Bikeways purpose attributes, while ” Many people turn to use bike Because
of the existence of bikeway” is the less popular for the respondents.Meanwhile ”I feel secure to ride bicycle
on the bikeway” is the first priority for Safety attributes, “There are insurances for any loses or accidents of
the bicyclist” is the less popular one. The first priority for Physical attributes was “Bikeway is paved” and the
less priority for respondents was “There are a lot of special parking lot for bicycle”
REFERENCES
C. Jotin Khisty; B.Kent Lall. (1997). Transportation Engineering, An Introduction, Prentice Hall.
Edgard K. Morlok,(1985), Pengantar Teknik dan Perencanaan Transportasi, Erlangga, Jakarta.
Fakultas Ekonomika, Bisnis Universitas Gadjah Mada, Paguyuban Onthel Djogjakarta. 2009.”Survey sikap
masyarakat kota Jogjakarta terhadap rencana pembangunan jalur sepeda”.
Http://www.kamase.org/?=p441
Herbert S. Levinson; Robert A. Weant (1982); Urban Transportation Perspectives and Prospects; Eno Foundation
for Transportation, Inc; Westport; Connecticut.
Hitoshi Yamakawa (1994), The Role of Possibilities for Bicycle Transportation in The Post-Motorization age,
IATSS Research, (Volume 18, No 1), Japan
K.W.Ogden, (1996), Safer Roads: A Guide to Road Safety Engineering, University Press, Cambridge
Nurgiyantoro, burhan,gunawan, marzuki. (2000). STATISTIK TERAPAN UNTUK PENELITIAN ILMU-ILMU
SOSIAL. Gadjah mada university press, Yogyakarta
Paul H. Wright; Norman J. Ashford, 1989, Transportation Engineering Planning and Design, Third Edition, John
Wiley & Sons, Canada.
Rodney Tolley (1997), The Greening of Urban Transport, Edition II, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
Santoso, singgih, 2001. SPSS VERSI 10. PT. Elex Media Komputindo,Jakarta
Susan Hanson, 1995, The Geography of Urban Transportation, Second Edition, The Guilford Press, New York
Simon P. Washington, Matthew G.Karlaftis, Fred L.Mannering. (2003), Statistical and Econometric Methods For
Transportation Data Analysis, A CRC Press, Washington.D.C.
I - 466
Universitas Udayana – Universitas Pelita Harapan Jakarta – Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta