Counts on Campus
Our team went out and conducted counts throughout campus 12 times in order to gain insight on the perceived frequency of micromobility use, the modes that are most often encountered on a typical day, and areas on campus that are in need of traffic signage and infrastructure improvements. The six locations that were chosen were:​
-
the T-intersection between Regents Dr. and Fieldhouse Dr. in front of the Chemistry Building
-
the T-intersection between Campus Dr. and Paint Branch Rd. in front of the Iribe Center
-
the T-intersection between Prienkert Dr. and Lehigh Rd. next to Mowatt Garage
-
the corner intersection of Farm Dr. and Valley Dr. in front of the Eppley Recreation Center
-
the four-way intersection between Campus Dr., Union Ln., and N Library Ln. by the Stamp Student Union
-
the edge of McKeldin Mall by Fancis Scott Key Hall.
Six counts in the morning and six counts in the afternoon were conducted to get a general sense of micromobility usage throughout the day. The counts were conducted between Sept. 27, 2022 and Nov. 2, 2022 and the number of both regular and electric bikes, scooters, and skateboards were counted along with any other mode of micromobility that was seen. Each count session lasted approximately one hour each and was further broken into four 15-minute intervals. The full data can be accessed here.
Results
We found that the most popular forms of micromobility seen during our counts were regular bikes and e-scooters. The percentages of regular bike users and e-scooter users that were counted matched closely to the percentages of people who identified those modes as their preferred way of travel, with 43.4% of regular bikes and 38.4% e-scooters counted compared to 45.0% of regular bikes and a combined 47.5% of scooters and e-scooters reported. The scooter and e-scooter percentages found in the survey are counted together here to take into account that participants did not realize the two options were different. The amount of skateboards counted and reported were also similar at 6.2% and 7.5%, respectively. The two sources of data matching provided us with confidence in the general accuracy of our understanding of the breakdown of micromobility on campus.
Another reason this data was collected was to observe and analyze the behavior of micromobility users when traveling through various weather, traffic, and other external conditions. We found that as the semester progressed, there were fewer people using micromobility on campus, which could be due to a variety of factors like the change in weather or students not showing up to their classes anymore. Additionally, we saw that there was a lot of fluidity between riders on the sidewalk and the road, especially in order to avoid traffic and construction. Since riding on sidewalks is not allowed in normal circumstances, this issue is also something that we found needed to be addressed. Lastly, there seemed to be little regard for pedestrians, the rules, and other micromobility users. The overwhelming majority of users we saw operating on the roads did not heed any STOP signs or pedestrians that were crossing the roads; rather, they chose to weave through any obstacles in order to avoid slowing down. On one occasion, a collision was witnessed by a member of our team occurring between a biker and an electric skateboard user during the ten-minute period when classes change when the number of people crossing intersections drastically increases. The skateboarder fell as a result but quickly got up and resumed their travel with seemingly no major injuries. Again, these findings were consistent with the survey results we gathered and provided the team with ideas for needed traffic signage and questions regarding safety to ask in our module quiz.