• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
We Are Traffic: Creating Robust Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Programs (4-14)
 

We Are Traffic: Creating Robust Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Programs (4-14)

on

  • 344 views

**Revised thanks to participant feedback** ...

**Revised thanks to participant feedback**
As agencies looking to improve bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure have learned, it doesn’t count if it’s not counted. Counting provides information on the level of intersections, paths and roadways—data already available for motor vehicles but lacking for non-motorized travelers. For the first time, Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Monitoring Guide now includes a chapter detailing how to monitor bicycle and pedestrian traffic. These slides explain how to create a robust bicycle and pedestrian count program based on the new guidance. Agencies that show clear evidence of use are more likely to receive funding for projects, so join us and learn how to improve your existing count program or create a new one. Webinar youtube video can be seen at: http://youtu.be/PXzcJRvwPmc

Statistics

Views

Total Views
344
Views on SlideShare
137
Embed Views
207

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

1 Embed 207

http://www.pdx.edu 207

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    We Are Traffic: Creating Robust Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Programs (4-14) We Are Traffic: Creating Robust Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Programs (4-14) Presentation Transcript

    • We are Traffic: Creating Robust Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Programs Krista Nordback, Ph.D., P.E. Oregon Transportation Research and Education Consortium (OTREC)
    • Overview • Introduction • Traffic Monitoring Programs • Non-Motorized Count Programs • Conclusions & Recommendations
    • INTRODUCTION
    • Why measure walking & biking?
    • Why measure walking & biking?
    • Why measure walking & biking? • Funding & policy decisions • To show change over time • Facility design • Planning (short-term, long-term, regional…) • Economic impact • Public health • Safety
    • How many bike and walk? • Surveys – National – Regional – Local • Counts – Permanent – Short duration
    • What good are counts? • Funding! • Facility Level – Change Over Time – Planning and Design – Safety Analysis • Validate Regional Models • Prioritize Projects • Bicycle Miles Traveled (BMT)
    • Signal Timing Vehicle Delay Kothuri, S. M., Reynolds, T., Monsere, C. M., & Koonce, P. (2013). Testing Strategies to Reduce Pedestrian Delay at Signalized Intersections. A Pilot Study in Portland, OR. Paper presented at the 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
    • Signal Timing Vehicle Delay Kothuri, S. M., Reynolds, T., Monsere, C. M., & Koonce, P. (2013). Testing Strategies to Reduce Pedestrian Delay at Signalized Intersections. A Pilot Study in Portland, OR. Paper presented at the 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C. Pedestrian
    • What? People actually bike here? Yes! 200 per day
    • What? People actually walk here? Yes! 400 per day
    • TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAMS
    • State Traffic Monitoring Metro Count Accessed 6/13/13 http://mtehelp.tech-metrocount.com/article.aspx?key=mc5805 Commonly inductive loops Permanent Counters Short Duration Counters Commonly pneumatic tubes
    • Colorado’s Permanent Counters
    • Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)
    • Colorado’s Short Duration Traffic Counts CDOT OTIS Accessed 6/18/13 http://dtdapps.coloradodot.info/Otis/HighwayData#/ui/0/1/criteria/~/184.667/210.864
    • AADT
    • AADT
    • AADT
    • AADT
    • Use AADT to Estimate VMT Sum (AADT X Segment Length) over network to compute Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) COLORADO HIGHWAYS
    • Can we apply these methods to biking and walking?
    • AADB: Annual Average Daily Bicyclists AADT for bicyclists!
    • Traffic Monitoring Guide 2013: Chapter 4 for Non- motorized Traffic
    • NON-MOTORIZED COUNT PROGRAMS
    • The TMG 2013 Approach
    • The TMG 2013 Approach
    • National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project Manual Counts: 2 hours 5 to 7pm Tues, Wed, or Thurs in mid-September http://bikepeddocumentation.org/
    • Passive Infrared Counters
    • Inductive loop counters in bike lanes
    • Combined Bicycle and Pedestrian Continuous Counter
    • Permanent Counters • Pedestrian • Bicycle Infrared Video Image Recognition Radar Pressure Sensor Inductive Loop Video Detection Video Image Recognition Microwave Magnetometers
    • The TMG 2013 Approach
    • Permanent Count Program
    • Permanent Count Program
    • Geographic/Climate Zones
    • Urban vs. Rural
    • Annual Average Daily Bicyclists (AADB) Volume Categories 0 500 1,000 AADB ContinuousCountStations Medium High 600 200 Low
    • Traffic Monitoring Guide 2013 Update, Chapter 4.
    • Permanent Count Program
    • Daily Patterns 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 180% %ofAADB Colorado Example (Bikes only)
    • Hourly Commute Pattern 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 12:00AM 1:00AM 2:00AM 3:00AM 4:00AM 5:00AM 6:00AM 7:00AM 8:00AM 9:00AM 10:00AM 11:00AM 12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00PM 11:00PM %ofAADB City of Boulder Example (Bikes only)
    • Hourly Non-commute Pattern 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0:00 1:00 2:00 3:00 4:00 5:00 6:00 7:00 8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 AverageHourlyVolume Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Source: Pam Johnson, PSU
    • Permanent Count Program
    • 12 Possible groups Commute Non-Commute In Between 3 Daily Patterns
    • 12 Possible groups Commute Non-Commute In Between 3 Daily Patterns 2 Weekly Patterns Commute Non-Commute
    • 12 Possible groups Commute Non-Commute In Between 3 Daily Patterns 2 Weekly Patterns Commute Non-Commute 2 Annual Patterns Commute Non-Commute
    • 12 Possible groups Commute Non-Commute In Between 3 Daily Patterns 2 Weekly Patterns Commute Non-Commute 2 Annual Patterns Commute Non-Commute
    • 12 Possible groups Commute Non-Commute In Between 3 Daily Patterns 2 Weekly Patterns Commute Non-Commute 2 Annual Patterns Commute Non-Commute
    • 12 Possible groups Commute Non-Commute In Between 3 Daily Patterns 2 Weekly Patterns Commute Non-Commute 2 Annual Patterns Commute Non-Commute
    • Commute Urban Plains Non-commute Mountain Non-commuteHigher Week- ends? Rural Mtn Trail? Weekly Pattern Location Yes Yes NoNo
    • Permanent Count Program
    • Factoring Method Adapted from Traffic Monitoring Guide AADB = Cknown* D * M Cknown = 24-hour count D = Daily Factor M = Monthly Factor
    • Factoring Method Adapted from Traffic Monitoring Guide AADB = Cknown* D * M Cknown = 24-hour count D = Daily Factor M = Monthly Factor
    • Monthly Factor M = AADB MADB where MADB = Ave daily bike count in that month
    • Monthly Factor M = AADB MADB where MADB = Ave daily bike count in that month June = 500 1,000
    • Monthly Factor M = AADB MADB where MADB = Ave daily bike count in that month June = 500 1,000 = 0.5
    • Monthly Factor M = AADB MADB where MADB = Ave daily bike count in that month June = 500 1,000 = 0.5 Daily counts in June are twice AADB.
    • Groups: Mountain Non- Commute Front Range Non- Commute Commute January 3.9 1.5 February 3.2 2.0 March 1.3 1.2 April 2.2 1.1 1.1 May 1.0 0.8 0.9 June 0.5 0.8 0.7 July 0.4 0.8 0.8 August 0.5 0.7 0.7 September 0.7 0.8 0.8 October 1.7 1.0 1.0 November 1.5 1.4 December 2.5 2.3 Colorado Monthly Factors
    • Permanent Count Program
    • How many counters/group? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314 PrecisionofMonthlyFactors Number of Counters Non-Commute Factors Commute Counters Average
    • Permanent Count Program
    • The TMG 2013 Approach
    • The TMG 2013 Approach
    • The TMG 2013 Approach
    • Short Duration Count Program
    • Short Duration Count Program
    • Turning Movement Counts
    • Segment Count A B
    • Short Duration Counters • Pedestrian • Bicycle InfraredManual Manual Pneumatic Tube Counters
    • Traffic Monitoring Guide 2013 Update, Chapter 4.
    • Short Duration Count Program
    • Potential Selection Criteria • Variety of facility types Path On-street
    • Potential Selection Criteria • Variety of land uses – Central business district – Residential – School/University • Technology related criteria
    • Short Duration Count Program
    • Count Duration 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0 200 400 600 %ErrorofAADBEstimates Count Duration (hours)
    • Count Duration 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0 200 400 600 %ErrorofAADBEstimates Count Duration (hours) 1 week
    • Short Duration Count Program
    • Schedule Counts 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Absolute%ErrorinAADB Estimates Month
    • Schedule Counts 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Absolute%ErrorinAADT Estimate Month May to October best for Midwestern Climate
    • The TMG 2013 Approach
    • Factoring Method Adapted from Traffic Monitoring Guide AADB = Cknown* D * M Cknown = 24-hour count D = Daily Factor M = Monthly Factor
    • AADB
    • VMT for bicycles
    • CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
    • Summary • Traffic Monitoring Guide Approach: – Permanent Count Program – Short Duration Count Program – Compute AADT for Bikes and Pedestrians
    • On-line Guide www.pdx.edu/ibpi/count
    • Recommendations • Both permanent and short duration count programs are needed. • Continuous counters are needed! • Prefer 1 week short count • Short duration counts in high volume months – May to October (Midwestern climates) • Integrate bike/ped counts into traffic data for preservation and access
    • Balance Permanent and Short Duration Programs PERMANENT COUNT PROGRAM SHORT DURATION COUNT PROGRAM
    • Iterative Process
    • Iterative Process
    • Example
    • 1st Year PERMANENT COUNT PROGRAM SHORT DURATION COUNT PROGRAM 1 Permanent Counter 20 Manual Count Sites
    • 2nd Year PERMANENT COUNT PROGRAM SHORT DURATION COUNT PROGRAM 1 Permanent Counter 12 Automated Short Duration Sites (one week per site + transfer time) Rotate 1 counter all summer
    • 3rd Year PERMANENT COUNT PROGRAM SHORT DURATION COUNT PROGRAM 5 Permanent Counters 24 Automated Short Duration Sites (one week per site + transfer time) Rotate 2 counters all summer
    • 4th Year PERMANENT COUNT PROGRAM SHORT DURATION COUNT PROGRAM 6 Permanent Counters 60 Automated Short Duration Sites (one week per site + transfer time) Rotate 5 counters all summer
    • 10th Year PERMANENT COUNT PROGRAM SHORT DURATION COUNT PROGRAM 14 Permanent Counters 360 Automated Short Duration Sites (one week per site) on 3 year rotation Rotate 10 counters all summer on 3 year rotation
    • On-going Work • Colorado, Vermont, Minnesota, Oregon, North Carolina, Washington State DOT’s are developing programs. • TRB Bike/Ped Data Subcommittee https://sites.google.com/site/bikepeddata/home • FHWA to include bike/ped counts in Travel Monitoring Analysis System (TMAS) • NCHRP 07-19: Bike/Ped Data Methods & Technologies • Google Group for future discussion! • OTREC’s Bike/Ped Data Archive
    • TRB Bike/Ped Data Subcommittee
    • Questions? Krista Nordback Nordback@pdx.edu 503-725-2897 Guide to Bicycle & Pedestrian Count Programs http://www.pdx.edu/ibpi/count