We know that thousands of people every day use micromobility to get around the Upper West Side for all manner of reasons [2.1]. We wanted to learn more about their motivations, needs, and concerns, as well as the experiences of people who don’t use micromobility, whether by choice or circumstance.
In coordination with Council Member Gale Brewer's office, we conducted an online survey of folks who live, work, go to school, or otherwise frequent the Upper West Side of Manhattan and NYC Community Board District 7. We hoped to gain a better understanding of their experiences getting around the UWS, whether by wheeled micromobility or other means, and how street design, infrastructure, and other conditions inform those experiences.
Studies consistently show that better micromobility infrastructure creates safer streets for all users [2.2] and affords more people the choice of using micromobility for transportation, especially women, children, and families — all of which leads to cleaner, quieter, and more equitable public space and a happier, more cohesive community.
Some key takeaways:
Women and older adults ride less often and feel more vulnerable than other demographics;
Motor vehicles are by far the greatest concern among both micromobility users and pedestrians;
All demographics, by a large margin, would use micromobility more often if the infrastructure was better.
Explore the full results below.
QUANTITATIVE DATA RESULTS
By the numbers
1. Many riders do not feel confident using micromobility on the Upper West Side, with women and older adults feeling particularly vulnerable
If micromobility is to be a viable transportation choice for everyone, the infrastructure needs to accommodate a wide range of abilities and comfort levels. We wanted to know how respondents currently feel using micromobility [2.3]. Only 14% of respondents report that they feel Strong and Fearless riding micromobility in NYC, including only 8% of women(+) and adults 66 and older. Overall, about a third of all groups, with the exception of men, self-identified as Interested but Concerned, suggesting the current infrastructure isn’t supporting everyone. One’s personal level of confidence shouldn’t be the limiting factor in their transportation choices.
+ includes Non-binary/Non-conforming and Transgender
2. Women and seniors ride significantly less than men under 66, but many families ride with kids regularly
Frequency of riding can shed light on the viability of micromobility as a transportation choice. Unsurprisingly, people who identify as more confident using micromobility tend to ride more often. In our survey, men ride almost twice as much as women, which tracks with national data. And 70% of adults over age 66 who answered our survey ride infrequently or never, suggesting there is work to do culturally and infrastructurally to make cycling inclusive to all ages [2.4]. On the encouraging side, 81% of respondents who ride with kids ride frequently or regularly, suggesting they have chosen micromobility as a primary mode of transportation for their family, despite incomplete infrastructure.
3. A majority of all respondents in every demographic would ride more often with better infrastructure
An overwhelming majority of respondents who use micromobility devices on the UWS (78% overall) would do so more often if there was better infrastructure. This includes 85% of men, 70% of respondents identifying as Strong and Fearless, and 91% identifying as Enthused and Confident. Over 94% of people who ride with kids, an already committed group based on other survey responses, said better infrastructure would allow them to ride even more often.
4. If users perceive infrastructure to be low quality, they use it less; especially among women and New Yorkers over 66
How people perceive and experience micromobility infrastructure informs how likely they are to use it. More than 40% of respondents described the existing infrastructure as “Not Very Good” or “Awful”. That number was more than 50% for both women(+) and adults over 66, and more than 70% for people who identify as Interested but Concerned (26% of all respondents). These numbers suggest there are serious inequities in the accessibility and utility of the current micromobility infrastructure.
5. Moving vehicles and obstructed bike lanes cause concern for nearly 95% of riders
Global studies have consistently found that proximity to cars, trucks, and other motor vehicles is the greatest fear and concern among people who use micromobility. Our survey results strongly support that data at the local level. Nearly 95% of respondents who use micromobility on the UWS cited Moving Cars and Trucks as a concern, and three out of four respondents said this was a Major Concern. The numbers were similar for Illegally Parked Cars and Trucks as well as Obstructed Bike Lanes. Street Design in General was a concern for 88% of respondents, and the Condition of Streets/Bike Lanes was a concern for 87% of folks who responded. All told, this data bears out what we know anecdotally: the lived experience of micromobility users on the UWS is inherently stressful, owing to the ubiquitous presence of automobiles.
6. Nearly three-quarters of pedestrians on the Upper West Side consider moving vehicles a safety concern
The pedestrian experience on the UWS isn’t much better than that of micromobility users. 87% of respondents cited Moving Cars and Trucks as a concern and six out of ten said this was a Major Concern. Around 80% of respondents expressed concern about illegally parked vehicles, obstructed or narrow sidewalks, and street design in general. As pedestrians, 65% of respondents found people riding bikes or other micromobility devices to be a concern, and a third of respondents cited this as a Major Concern. Better micromobility infrastructure would address this and increase predictability by providing adequate space for all users to safely and comfortably coexist. [2.5]
7. Personal bicycles and Citi Bikes (both electric and non-electric) are the Upper West Side’s most common modes of micromobility
Our survey found that bicycles continue to be the most common form of micromobility by far, with only 8% of respondents saying they use other types of devices, such as electric scooters or skateboards. Smaller wheels tend to have a harder time on bumpy and uneven surfaces, which could in part explain the low number. (Future user counts might give us a better sense of these proportions). Less than 20% of respondents said they ride e-bicycles, though this survey likely did not reach working cyclists who rely more heavily on these devices. Finally, nearly half of respondents use Citi Bike and contributed to the 2.4 million unique Citi Bike trips recorded on the Upper West Side in 2022.
8. Hired and private cars are by far the least common ways of travel
New Yorkers are inherently multi-modal. The number of respondents who both walk and bike as primary modes of transport were virtually identical at 77%. Nearly nine in ten respondents take the subway and buses, while fewer than one in ten get around by private car. This last number is striking in relation to how cars, and car infrastructure, dominate street space; it suggests many motor vehicle trips on the Upper West Side are not serving local needs but merely passing through.
QUALITATIVE DATA RESULTS
In their own words
Over 300 respondents shared their thoughts on this optional prompt. More than half of the responses, far more than any other theme we identified, named protection and separation from motor vehicles as the single most important change to the existing infrastructure that would make them more comfortable using micromobility. We enjoyed reading through these responses as they give valuable, real-world insight into how to make micromobility more inclusive and make our streets safer for all users.
Protected bike lanes
The word “protected” appeared in 1 of every 3 responses, meaning, rather explicitly, protection from motor vehicles. This tracks with the 95% of respondents who said moving cars and trucks were a concern when using micromobility.
Separated bike lanes
Similar to the need for protection, separation from moving motor vehicles was a common theme. These two things—protection and separation—often go hand in hand, but can also be distinct treatments that make micromobility more inclusive and equitable.
Fewer Cars
We know from our survey that mixing with cars and other motor vehicles is the biggest deterrent to using micromobility. One solution that many responses suggested, apart from protection and separation, is to simply have fewer cars on the street in the first place.
Crosstown protected bike lanes
Many responses highlighted the need for safe ways to get across town, including a desire for protected crosstown bike lanes. The current crosstown infrastructure includes paint in a few locations and nothing else, leaving riders to figure out the best routes based on their personal knowledge and risk tolerance.
Two-way bike lanes
The need for two-way bike lanes was highlighted in a few responses. We observed a fair amount of “salmoning”, or riding in the wrong direction, in our field survey. Wrong-way riding tends to happen when it is the intuitive thing to do, even if the infrastructure doesn’t allow it. Creating two-way bike lanes along these corridors, as suggested here, could be an effective way to address that.
Wider bike lanes
Cycling has more than doubled since the first protected bike lane was installed on the Upper West Side in 2010, and a more diverse array of devices than ever before are being ridden at various speeds, yet the bike lane widths remain the same. Several responses highlighted wider bike lanes as a solution to align the infrastructure to current and future use.
Crossing Central Park
Though our questionnaire was focused primarily with on-street infrastructure, a few responses noted the difficulty in getting across Central Park and named this as the one change that would support them to ride more.
Other interesting ideas
Of the more than 300 responses to this question, some didn’t coalesce into a theme but were still interesting and thought-provoking.
More than 60% of respondents (220) chose to share their thoughts to this optional, open-ended prompt. Many respondents shared personal experiences and detailed ideas for making the streets safer for everyone. We grouped the responses into themes, which allowed us to peer a little more closely at the lived experience of micromobility users and pedestrians in navigating the current infrastructure together.
Better Micromobility Infrastructure
We received many thoughtful responses, drawing on personal experience, identifying problems with the current cycling infrastructure and offering solutions on how to improve it. By far the most common theme, about 50% of responses to this question, could be categorized broadly as a call for better micromobility infrastructure.
Streets for People
Several responses focused on giving more street space to people—both pedestrians and micromobility users. About 3/4 of respondents to our questionnaire identified as both a pedestrian and a micromobility user, and as these responses suggest, these groups would be natural allies.
Obstructions / Illegal Parking
Another common theme was concern about cars obstructing bike lanes or otherwise parking illegally. As our field survey in the next section shows, our volunteers found over 50% of blocks of unprotected bike lanes to be obstructed when they were observed, versus just over 10% of blocks on protected bike lanes. Any obstruction creates a dangerous condition as many of these comments illustrate.
Crosstown bike lanes
As with the prompt above, a few comments highlighted the need for crosstown bike lanes, with some suggestions for where they might go.
Driver behavior
Of course, behind the wheel of every car is a driver, and we received several responses about driver behavior. Aggressive, distracted, or inconsiderate drivers can create uncomfortable and unsafe conditions that discourage people from using micromobility.