Understanding Micromobility in New York City: An Examination of Vehicle Type Use and User Behavior in Protected Bicycle Facilities

Abstract

A shift towards the use of micromobility vehicles (MMVs), specifically motorized two-wheeled vehicles in urban mobility networks, has gained significant attention over the past decade. Many have commented on a perceived increase in MMV use in New York City (NYC) in particular, a trend that appears to have accelerated in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and in response to the expansion of high-quality bicycle facilities across the city. However, the extent to which different types of MMVs are used and related rider behavior is poorly understood, forcing policymakers, planners, elected officials, and community members to develop policies and infrastructure with inadequate information. Through direct observation of 9,629 vehicles across five locations, this thesis provides a degree of ground truth and an initial understanding of the prevalence of different MMV types used in protected bicycle facilities in NYC and related user behavior, including commercial application of these vehicles, helmet use, and passenger presence. The findings of this study point to a surprisingly high use rate of motorized MMVs in protected bicycle facilities in NYC, with motorized vehicles comprising nearly three-quarters (73.96%) of all vehicles observed. E-bikes were the largest class of vehicles observed (63.85%), followed by conventional, non-motorized bicycles (25.76%), e-scooters (6.69%), and mopeds (1.96%). Commercial-use vehicles made up nearly one-quarter (23.20%) of observations. A very small proportion of observations were cargo vehicles (2.89%), indicating their limited use for both personal and commercial purposes. Users were significantly more likely to wear a helmet when using a non-motorized vehicle than a motorized one, with helmet use varying substantially across vehicle classes. Modal split of MMV types, commercial use, and cargo vehicle use varied by both location and time of day, pointing to uneven distribution across the mobility network. There were substantial differences between the manual count from this study and automated bicycle counts generated by the New York City Department of Transportation over the same period, indicating a systemic undercounting of MMV use by the automated count system. In response to these findings, a series of recommendations are provided for how NYC and other cities with both developed and developing MMV networks can promote and guide safe, equitable, and sustainable mode shift as micromobility use expands. These proposals include policy and spatial planning improvements that should be part of a response to widespread MMV adoption, and the ongoing transformation of how protected bicycle facilities are used.