Preferences for urban street space reallocation to encourage cycling: A Best-Worst Scaling profile case approach

• Public support was found for cycling infrastructure and traffic restrictions. • Segregated bike lanes were preferred over painted lanes. • Reallocating road space was preferred over losing footpath space. • Removing car parking spaces was the least preferred option. • Perceived infringement on freedom influenced preferences for space reallocation. Traffic restrictions and the construction of cycling infrastructure are effective strategies to reduce private car use and promote active travel in urban areas. However, implementing these measures often involves reallocating existing street space, which can lead to public resistance. This study employed a Best-Worst-Scaling (BWS) profile case approach to examine preferences for different types of street space reallocation to encourage cycling and to explore how these preferences are influenced by psychological factors such as driver and cyclist identities, perceived infringement on freedom, and place attachment. A Britain-based sample of participants (N = 509) evaluated images depicting various configurations of bike lanes, traffic restrictions, and cycle parking, where road or pedestrian space was reallocated to accommodate cycling infrastructure. Participants identified the most and least preferred features of these designs. The findings indicate broad public support for cycling infrastructure and traffic restrictions, although preferences varied significantly across street layouts. Participants particularly opposed the removal of car parking and showed a strong preference for reallocating road space rather than pedestrian space. Both cyclists and drivers favoured segregated cycling infrastructure over painted bike lanes on roads. While place attachment had limited impact on preferences, perceptions of cycling infrastructure as infringing on individual freedom emerged as a significant factor shaping space reallocation preferences. These findings offer insights for policymakers and urban planners, highlighting design strategies that may be more publicly acceptable and identifying areas where resistance to urban redesigns is likely to emerge.