Aalborg Universitet Bike Infrastructures Report Silva, Victor ... - VBN

Table 3.2.57: Distribution of respondents by educational level according to their opinion about the street
design solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.
Table 3.2.58: Distribution of respondents by age groups according to their opinion about the street design
solutions (lightning, pavement material, greenery, etc) used in Hans Broges Gade.
3.3 BRYGGEBRO
Table 3.3.1: Absolute and percentage distribution of respondents according to the distance of their residential
location from Bryggebro.
Table 3.2.2: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bicycle at
Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.3: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a
bicycle at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.4 Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bicycle
at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.5: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they walk at Bryggebro
Table 3.3.6: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they walk at
Bryggebro
Table 3.3.7: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they walk at
Bryggebro
Table 3.3.8: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the main trip purpose when riding a
bike in Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.9: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the main trip purpose when
riding a bike in Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.10: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the main trip purpose when riding
a bike in Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.11: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the frequency they ride a bike in
Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.12: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the frequency they ride a
bike in Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro
Table 3.3.13: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the frequency they ride a bike in
Bryggebro for the main purpose mentioned in the Figure 3.3.68, after the intervention in Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.14: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to the level of satisfaction with the design
of Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.15: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to the level of satisfaction
with the design of Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.16: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to the level of satisfaction with the
design of Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.17: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s
design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.
Table 3.3.18: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.
Table 3.3.19: Distribution of the respondents by age group according to their opinion about how the
Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the bicyclist safety aspect.
Table 3.3.20: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the Bryggebro’s
design fulfilled the fast connectivity.
Table 3.3.21: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.
Table 3.3.22: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the
110
110
143
152
152
152
153
153
153
153
153
154
154
154
154
155
155
155
156
156
156
156
157
157
Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the fast connectivity.
Table 3.3.23: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how the
Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.
Table 3.3.24: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
the Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.
Table 3.3.25: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how the
Bryggebro’s design fulfilled the aesthetics aspect.
Table 3.3.26: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic
illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.27: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.28: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how
problematic illegal parking of bicycles is at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.29: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic
is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.30: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.31: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how
problematic is the conflict between different transport modes at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.32: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic
is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.33: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.34: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how
problematic is the existence of obstacles against the cyclists at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.35: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic
is the pavement at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.36: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.37: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how
problematic is the pavement at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.38: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic
is the existence of cracks and ramps at Bryggebro
Table 3.3.39: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.40: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how
problematic is the existence of cracks in ramps and intersections is at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.41: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic
is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.42: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.43: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how
problematic is the lack of awareness of pedestrians for people riding a bike at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.44: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problematic
is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.45: Distribution of the respondents by educational level according to their opinion about how
problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.46: Distribution of the respondents by age groups according to their opinion about how
problematic is signposting and its interpretation at Bryggebro.
Table 3.3.47: Distribution of the respondents by gender according to their opinion about how problem-
157
157
158
158
158
158
159
159
159
159
160
160
160
160
161
161
161
161
162
162
162
162
163
163
163
192 193