Man and his transport behaviour. Part 2b Non‐motorized travel and the regional structure of land‐use

Summary Referring to the hypotheses at the beginning, the following results can be stated: 3.1. Mobility of people living in locations favoured for the purpose of settlement (central area, fringe area, regional centres) is as much as 20% higher than in the rural areas. 3.2. The average length of trips shows large differences. It differs from about 5 km per trip in the central area up to 6 to 8 km in the fringe area and the regional centres to about 11 km in the rural area. The hypothesis referring to this is confirmed in its entirety: people living in the rural areas on an average have to cover substantially longer distances, especially compared with people living in regional centres and especially in case of trips leading to establishments such as schools, shops, recreation centres. Chances of non‐motorized travel are significantly lower in rural areas because of the essentially longer trips. 3.3. Only verified in part is the hypothesis relative to the mean duration of trips. The mean duration per trip differs only about 15%. The average time expended for the sum of all trips per day is nearly identical in all parts of the region because the higher duration of trips is combined with a lower mobility, resulting in nearly the same product. When viewed more closely, in case of the rural areas some negative aspects concerning the duration of trips are also found. This particularly relates to the high amount of time spent on trips to education. 3.4. Modal‐Split: The share of non‐motorized travel differs from 26 to 53%. In the central area, parts of the fringe area and in the regional centres, a great part of all trips is made by non‐motorized means. Correspondingly, the share of motor‐car travel is low. In rural areas the share of non‐motorized travel goes down to 26%; in contrast share of motor‐cars goes up to more than 50%.