Expanding use of micromobility devices (MDs) can bring sustainability and accessibility benefits, but also degrade comfort and safety for other path users. While we know that travellers are uncomfortable sharing facilities with certain types of MDs, the underlying factors that cause discomfort are poorly understood, hindering strategies to integrate MDs into active transportation networks. The objective of this study is to identify the primary considerations for comfort in sharing off-street paths with various types of MDs. We analyze 1,232 open-text comments from intercepted path users in metropolitan Vancouver, Canada who rated their comfort and then provided clarifying comments. Structural Topic Modelling (STM) was used to identify the latent topics discussed by participants when explaining their comfort ratings. The primary considerations were high MD speeds or speed differentials between users, described as either a device attribute or operator choice. Concerns about operators were nearly as prevalent as concerns about device attributes, and focussed on vehicle operation (speed, swerving, riding abreast, not warning when approaching) or subjective riding style (aggressiveness, attentiveness, courtesy), rather than sociodemographic attributes of the operator. These concerns were consistent across MD types, although the assessments of motorized MD users implied a heightened duty of care. Beyond these concerns, the comments reflected a general aversion toward motorized devices on off-street shared paths. We conclude that integrating new MDs into urban transportation systems without degrading the non-motorized travel experience requires targeted strategies to 1) manage MD speeds, 2) reduce inconsiderate or aggressive riding behaviour, and 3) separate motorized from non-motorized travellers where possible. Further research is required to investigate the efficacy of specific design, education, or enforcement interventions to advance these goals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
ghane et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: