Title: Taking Pedestrian and Bicycle Counting Programs to the Next Level
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Panelists will provide practical guidance for pedestrian and bicycle counting programs based on findings from NCHRP Project 07-19, "Methods and Technologies for Collecting Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume Data."
Presenters:
Presenter: Robert Schneider University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Co-Presenter: RJ Eldridge Toole Design Group, LLC
Co-Presenter: Conor Semler Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
DESIGN OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT S.R.NAGR COMMUNITY HALLSAMADHANA
this ppt is about design of a traffic signal at S.R. Nagar community hall using webster method which is uded to design the time length of red, yellow and green signals.
DESIGN OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT S.R.NAGR COMMUNITY HALLSAMADHANA
this ppt is about design of a traffic signal at S.R. Nagar community hall using webster method which is uded to design the time length of red, yellow and green signals.
This is the presentation I made to our City\'s Transportation and Safety Commission, the Public Safety Commission, and various community organizations in favor of a red light camera system for out City.
Title: Integrating a Health Impact Assessment into District-Wide School Travel Planning
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: Learn about how a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) was used for the first time to guide the formulation of the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Columbus City Schools District-Wide School Travel Plan, which focused on schools and neighborhoods with health inequities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Brian Butler Columbus Public Health
Co-Presenter: Kate Moening Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Co-Presenter: Alex Smith Columbus Public Health
Co-Presenter: Julie Walcoff Ohio DOT
Title: 'Selling' Rural Communities on Cycling
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: This panel will share successful strategies and programs utilized in Oregon and Pennsylvania developed to leverage and promote the economic benefits of cycling in rural communities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sheila Lyons Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Jessica Horning Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Cathy McCollom River Town Program
Title: 'Selling' Rural Communities on Cycling
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: This panel will share successful strategies and programs utilized in Oregon and Pennsylvania developed to leverage and promote the economic benefits of cycling in rural communities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sheila Lyons Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Jessica Horning Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Cathy McCollom River Town Program
Title: Level of Service F for Grade A Streets
Track: Prosper
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Relying solely on Level of Service criteria for street design, which evaluates vehicle congestion, leads to poor outcomes on many of our roadways. LOS F, far from a failure, creates opportunities to reallocate roadway space for more livable street designs. In this session, learn about projects in Cambridge and San Francisco that overcame opposition and generated community support in prioritizing better bicycling and walking over vehicle capacity during the peak hour of travel.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michael Sallaberry San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Jeffrey Rosenblum City of Cambridge, MA
Title: Transportation Studies in the 21st Century: Incorporating all Modes
Track: Sustain
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: In the 21st century, the basic purpose of transportation studies needs to change from making it easier to drive to giving people options other than driving. This session will present case studies of alternatives to the auto-dominated Level of Service traffic impact studies in order to better address bicycling, transit and walking.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michelle DeRobertis Transportation Choices for Sustainable Communities
Co-Presenter: Peter Albert San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Patrick Lynch Transpo Group
Co-Presenter: David Thompson City of Boulder, Colorado
Title: Transportation Studies in the 21st Century: Incorporating all Modes
Track: Sustain
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: In the 21st century, the basic purpose of transportation studies needs to change from making it easier to drive to giving people options other than driving. This session will present case studies of alternatives to the auto-dominated Level of Service traffic impact studies in order to better address bicycling, transit and walking.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michelle DeRobertis Transportation Choices for Sustainable Communities
Co-Presenter: Peter Albert San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Patrick Lynch Transpo Group
Co-Presenter: David Thompson City of Boulder, Colorado
Title: New Tools for Estimating Walking and Bicycling Demand
Track: Sustain
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Walking and bicycling demand estimates can make a stronger case for investing in new facilities and are necessary inputs to important planning tasks. This session presents state-of-the-art tools to predict walking and bicycling demand at varying geographic scales. Tools include: 1) a framework to incorporate walking into regional travel demand models; 2) a method to estimate bicycle and pedestrian traffic based on count data; 3) new mode choice models; and 4) a web-based repository of non-motorized demand analysis tools.
Presenters:
Presenter: Patrick Singleton Portland State University
Co-Presenter: J. Richard (Rich) Kuzmyak Renaissance Planning Group
Co-Presenter: Greg Lindsey University of Minnesota, Humphrey School
Co-Presenter: Jeremy Raw Federal Highway Administration
Where Do I Start? New Tools to Prioritize Investments in Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Most communities have a laundry list of important bike/ped projects. This session will help you understand where to start and provide you with an objective and transparent process to shortlist priority projects. Learn from three expert practitioners and get your program going!
Sustrans Scotland Raising the Standards Day 2017: Monitoring and EvaluationSustrans
Our research and monitoring unit specialists explain how they can help you get the data to answer the questions of what you should invest in to achieve active mobility, by understanding the impact of infrastructure and behaviour change programmes.
This is the presentation I made to our City\'s Transportation and Safety Commission, the Public Safety Commission, and various community organizations in favor of a red light camera system for out City.
Title: Integrating a Health Impact Assessment into District-Wide School Travel Planning
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: Learn about how a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) was used for the first time to guide the formulation of the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Columbus City Schools District-Wide School Travel Plan, which focused on schools and neighborhoods with health inequities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Brian Butler Columbus Public Health
Co-Presenter: Kate Moening Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Co-Presenter: Alex Smith Columbus Public Health
Co-Presenter: Julie Walcoff Ohio DOT
Title: 'Selling' Rural Communities on Cycling
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: This panel will share successful strategies and programs utilized in Oregon and Pennsylvania developed to leverage and promote the economic benefits of cycling in rural communities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sheila Lyons Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Jessica Horning Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Cathy McCollom River Town Program
Title: 'Selling' Rural Communities on Cycling
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: This panel will share successful strategies and programs utilized in Oregon and Pennsylvania developed to leverage and promote the economic benefits of cycling in rural communities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sheila Lyons Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Jessica Horning Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Cathy McCollom River Town Program
Title: Level of Service F for Grade A Streets
Track: Prosper
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Relying solely on Level of Service criteria for street design, which evaluates vehicle congestion, leads to poor outcomes on many of our roadways. LOS F, far from a failure, creates opportunities to reallocate roadway space for more livable street designs. In this session, learn about projects in Cambridge and San Francisco that overcame opposition and generated community support in prioritizing better bicycling and walking over vehicle capacity during the peak hour of travel.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michael Sallaberry San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Jeffrey Rosenblum City of Cambridge, MA
Title: Transportation Studies in the 21st Century: Incorporating all Modes
Track: Sustain
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: In the 21st century, the basic purpose of transportation studies needs to change from making it easier to drive to giving people options other than driving. This session will present case studies of alternatives to the auto-dominated Level of Service traffic impact studies in order to better address bicycling, transit and walking.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michelle DeRobertis Transportation Choices for Sustainable Communities
Co-Presenter: Peter Albert San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Patrick Lynch Transpo Group
Co-Presenter: David Thompson City of Boulder, Colorado
Title: Transportation Studies in the 21st Century: Incorporating all Modes
Track: Sustain
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: In the 21st century, the basic purpose of transportation studies needs to change from making it easier to drive to giving people options other than driving. This session will present case studies of alternatives to the auto-dominated Level of Service traffic impact studies in order to better address bicycling, transit and walking.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michelle DeRobertis Transportation Choices for Sustainable Communities
Co-Presenter: Peter Albert San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Patrick Lynch Transpo Group
Co-Presenter: David Thompson City of Boulder, Colorado
Title: New Tools for Estimating Walking and Bicycling Demand
Track: Sustain
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Walking and bicycling demand estimates can make a stronger case for investing in new facilities and are necessary inputs to important planning tasks. This session presents state-of-the-art tools to predict walking and bicycling demand at varying geographic scales. Tools include: 1) a framework to incorporate walking into regional travel demand models; 2) a method to estimate bicycle and pedestrian traffic based on count data; 3) new mode choice models; and 4) a web-based repository of non-motorized demand analysis tools.
Presenters:
Presenter: Patrick Singleton Portland State University
Co-Presenter: J. Richard (Rich) Kuzmyak Renaissance Planning Group
Co-Presenter: Greg Lindsey University of Minnesota, Humphrey School
Co-Presenter: Jeremy Raw Federal Highway Administration
Where Do I Start? New Tools to Prioritize Investments in Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Most communities have a laundry list of important bike/ped projects. This session will help you understand where to start and provide you with an objective and transparent process to shortlist priority projects. Learn from three expert practitioners and get your program going!
Sustrans Scotland Raising the Standards Day 2017: Monitoring and EvaluationSustrans
Our research and monitoring unit specialists explain how they can help you get the data to answer the questions of what you should invest in to achieve active mobility, by understanding the impact of infrastructure and behaviour change programmes.
Barbeau enabling better mobility through innovations for mobile devices - o...Sean Barbeau
Presented at the USDOT O
View the recording at http://youtu.be/aXFwVh-gDBc
Mobile phones are quickly reshaping our world. As of November 2014, 97 percent of US households have mobile phones, with the average household owning 5.2 connected mobile devices. Mobile app use on these devices is skyrocketing, with app usage up 76 percent in 2014. These apps can help us make better transportation choices by delivering the right information at the right time & location - from decreasing your wait time for public transportation, to letting you know about traffic incidents before you even leave for your destination, to helping transit riders with special needs get to and from jobs. However, developing new mobile technology that is smart, both in terms of delivering the information at the right moment and conserving limited resources such as battery life and data plans, is not always simple. Research conducted at universities has the potential to break through some of these challenges, which can result in improvements in mobility to everyone.
This presentation discusses the multi-disciplinary innovation process at the University of South Florida, including research funded by the National Center for Transit Research UTC and the Florida Department of Transportation, that has resulted in 14 U.S. patents on location-aware mobile technology and resulted in the deployment of real-world systems. Lessons learned, both during the research itself as well as the technology transfer process to real-world deployments, will be presented.
Facts and figures from CTIA.org
Improving the quality and cost effectiveness of multimodal travel behavior da...Sean Barbeau
Multimodal transportation such as transit, bike, walk, transportation network companies (TNCs) (e.g., Uber, Lyft), car share, and bike share are vital to supporting livable communities. However, current data collection techniques for multimodal travel behavior, including apps built specifically for travel behavior surveys, have limitations (e.g., significant negative impact on battery life, user acquisition) which prevent a better understanding of significant real-world challenges (e.g., multimodal traveler choices, relationships between travel behavior and health).
This webinar discusses the results of a recently completed research project funded by the National Center for Transit Research, “Improving the Quality and Cost Effectiveness of Multimodal Travel Behavior Data Collection”. In this project, the research team developed and deployed a proof-of-concept system to collect multimodal travel behavior data on an ongoing basis directly from users of a popular open-source mobile app for multi-modal information, OneBusAway (OBA). To overcome battery life challenges, the research team used the Android Activity Transition API, which leverages hardware advancements in modern mobile phones.
This webinar presents the technology used to implement this data collection tool, as well as the results of a pilot deployment to 676 beta testing users. Over 10 weeks, 74 users opted into the study without any incentive and contributed 65,582 trips. Key concerns discussed for data collection when conserving battery life include the timeliness and accuracy of data.
A webinar recording of this presentation can be found here:
https://www.cutr.usf.edu/2020/04/cutr-webinar-improving-the-quality-and-cost-effectiveness-of-multimodal/
The final report for this project can be downloaded at:
https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cutr_nctr/13/
Case Studies in Managing Traffic in a Developing Country with Privacy-Preserv...Biplav Srivastava
Simulation is known to be an effective technique to understand
and manage traffic in cities of developed countries. However, in developing countries, traffic management is lacking due to a wide diversity of vehicles on the road, their chaotic movement, little instrumentation to sense traffic state and limited funds to create IT and physical infrastructure to ameliorate the situation. Under these conditions, in this paper, we present our approach of using the Megaffic traffic simulator as a service to gain actionable insights for two use-cases and cities in India, a first. Our approach is general to be readily used in other use cases and cities; and our results give new insights: (a) using demographics data, traffic demand can be reduced if timings of government offices are altered in Delhi, (b) using a mobile company’s Call
Data Record (CDR) data to mine trajectories anonymously,
one can take effective traffic actions while organizing events
in Mumbai at local scale.
This presentation talks about the process of Traffic & Transportation surveys, the bases of delineating Traffic Analysis Zones and the various surveys required to be carried out to understand the traffic behavior of the city.
Protected bike lanes have moved from foreign concept to best practice in U.S. design with remarkable speed (for the transportation world). This session will provide a fast paced overview of the spread of this innovation and the current state of the practice. Leaders of the Green Lane Project and our partners will cover the latest on designs, new research, best practices, analyze trends and share the best lessons from the Green Lane Project study tours.
Learning Objectives:
Participants will be able to define and identify protected bike lanes.
Participants will access peer and professional guidance on how to build a protected bike lane.
Participants will state the pros and cons of building protected bike lanes.
Participants will identify sources for additional information on building protected bike lanes.
Presenter(s)
Presenter: Martha Roskowski PeopleForBikes
Co-Presenter: Linda Bailey NACTO
Co-Presenter: Dan Goodman Office of Human Environment, Livability Team, FHWA
Crashes on limited access roadways typically occur due to drivers being unable to react in time to avoid collisions with vehicles ahead of them either moving slower or merging
unexpectedly. Prevailing traffic stream conditions with high volume and low or variable speed downstream of low volume and high speed conditions can increase the possibilities for such collisions to occur. Real time trajectories of vehicles collected through crowd sourcing methods can give information about the distribution of speeds in the traffic stream by space
and time. Spatio-temporal models relating these observed speed distributions to the occurrence of crashes or near crashes can help to identify crash prone traffic conditions as
they arise, offering the opportunity to warn drivers before crashes occur.
Title: Safer People, Safer Streets, and Safer Policies at USDOT
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute moderated discussion
Abstract: This USDOT panel will provide details on the Department’s new bicycle and pedestrian safety initiative, including information on the Ped-Bike Safety Action Agenda, Road Safety for Transit Patrons initiative, bike-walk assessments, Road Diet Guide, an aggressive research agenda, and local partnerships, including how community members can get involved.
Presenters:
Presenter: Barbara McCann Office of Secretary, USDOT
Co-Presenter: Heidi Coleman National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Co-Presenter: Dan Goodman Office of Human Environment, Livability Team, FHWA
Co-Presenter: Joanne Waszczak Special Assistant, FTA Office of Budget and Policy
O Centro de Excelência em BRT Across Latitudes and Cultures (ALC-BRT CoE) promoveu o Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Workshop: Experiences and Challenges (Workshop BRT: Experiências e Desafios) dia 12/07/2013, no Rio de Janeiro. O curso foi organizado pela EMBARQ Brasil, com patrocínio da Fetranspor e da VREF (Volvo Research and Education Foundations).
2016 D-STOP Symposium ("Smart Cities") session by City College of New York's Alison Conway. Get symposium details: http://ctr.utexas.edu/research/d-stop/education/annual-symposium/
With collaborations with various City divisions and private service providers (in this case Streetlight data providers), our North York mobility innovation team uncovered several surprising suburban travel behaviour, patterns and distributions of trips that lead to meaningful and quantitative multimodal mobility planning. This presentation is a summary of project experiences and describes the key findings.
Title: Maximizing Biking and Walking Access to Transit
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Hear from agencies including King County Metro, Sound Transit, and TriMet about ways they have prioritized better walk and bike connections to transit. These investments can maximize transit ridership, especially important in an era of constrained transit funding, growing multi-modal transport demand, and transitioning land use patterns.
Presenters:
Presenter: Carol Cooper King County Metro Transit
Co-Presenter: Carrie Nielson Fehr & Peers
Co-Presenter: Jeff Owen TriMet
Co-Presenter: Janine Sawyer Sound Transit
Similar to Taking Pedestrian and Bicycle Counting Programs to the Next Level (20)
Title: A Systematic Approach to Bicycle Parking Planning for Cities
Track: Connect
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: Cambridge, MA and Washington, DC have taken a strategic approach to bicycle parking. This session will focus on their planning tools and lessons learned from both the public and private sector.
Presenters:
Presenter: Megan Kanagy Downtown DC Business Improvement District
Co-Presenter: Daniel Clark Dero Bike Rack Company
Co-Presenter: Jeffrey Rosenblum City of Cambridge, MA
Title: Level of Service F for Grade A Streets
Track: Prosper
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Relying solely on Level of Service criteria for street design, which evaluates vehicle congestion, leads to poor outcomes on many of our roadways. LOS F, far from a failure, creates opportunities to reallocate roadway space for more livable street designs. In this session, learn about projects in Cambridge and San Francisco that overcame opposition and generated community support in prioritizing better bicycling and walking over vehicle capacity during the peak hour of travel.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michael Sallaberry San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Jeffrey Rosenblum City of Cambridge, MA
Title: Policies for Pupils: Working with School Boards on Walking and Bicycling Policies
Track: Change
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Engaging schools in walking and bicycling efforts can be difficult given competing education priorities and frequent staff and volunteer turn-over. Attendees will learn about strategies for influencing school boards and policy opportunities at the district level.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sara Zimmerman Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Co-Presenter: Diane Dohm ChangeLab Solutions
Co-Presenter: Bree Romero Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Co-Presenter: Leigh Ann Von Hagen Voorhees Transportation Center, Rutgers University
Title: Policies for Pupils: Working with School Boards on Walking and Bicycling Policies
Track: Change
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Engaging schools in walking and bicycling efforts can be difficult given competing education priorities and frequent staff and volunteer turn-over. Attendees will learn about strategies for influencing school boards and policy opportunities at the district level.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sara Zimmerman Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Co-Presenter: Diane Dohm ChangeLab Solutions
Co-Presenter: Bree Romero Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Co-Presenter: Leigh Ann Von Hagen Voorhees Transportation Center, Rutgers University
Title: Policies for Pupils: Working with School Boards on Walking and Bicycling Policies
Track: Change
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Engaging schools in walking and bicycling efforts can be difficult given competing education priorities and frequent staff and volunteer turn-over. Attendees will learn about strategies for influencing school boards and policy opportunities at the district level.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sara Zimmerman Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Co-Presenter: Diane Dohm ChangeLab Solutions
Co-Presenter: Bree Romero Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Co-Presenter: Leigh Ann Von Hagen Voorhees Transportation Center, Rutgers University
Title: 'Selling' Rural Communities on Cycling
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: This panel will share successful strategies and programs utilized in Oregon and Pennsylvania developed to leverage and promote the economic benefits of cycling in rural communities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sheila Lyons Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Jessica Horning Oregon DOT
Co-Presenter: Cathy McCollom River Town Program
Title: Federal Funding for Active Transportation and Recreation
Track: Connect
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: This session will provide an overview about federal transportation programs that can fund infrastructure for walking and bicycling.
Presenters:
Presenter: Christopher Douwes Transportation Alternatives Program / Recreational Trails Program, FHWA
Co-Presenter: Wesley Blount Office of Planning, Environment & Realty FHWA
Title: A Systematic Approach to Bicycle Parking Planning for Cities
Track: Connect
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: Cambridge, MA and Washington, DC have taken a strategic approach to bicycle parking. This session will focus on their planning tools and lessons learned from both the public and private sector.
Presenters:
Presenter: Megan Kanagy Downtown DC Business Improvement District
Co-Presenter: Daniel Clark Dero Bike Rack Company
Co-Presenter: Jeffrey Rosenblum City of Cambridge, MA
Title: A Systematic Approach to Bicycle Parking Planning for Cities
Track: Connect
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: Cambridge, MA and Washington, DC have taken a strategic approach to bicycle parking. This session will focus on their planning tools and lessons learned from both the public and private sector.
Presenters:
Presenter: Megan Kanagy Downtown DC Business Improvement District
Co-Presenter: Daniel Clark Dero Bike Rack Company
Co-Presenter: Jeffrey Rosenblum City of Cambridge, MA
Schedule:
Wednesday 9/10 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM in Breakout Rooms, 316
Policies for Pupils: Working with School Boards on Walking and Bicycling Policies
Track: Change
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Engaging schools in walking and bicycling efforts can be difficult given competing education priorities and frequent staff and volunteer turn-over. Attendees will learn about strategies for influencing school boards and policy opportunities at the district level.
Presenters:
Presenter: Sara Zimmerman Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Co-Presenter: Diane Dohm ChangeLab Solutions
Co-Presenter: Bree Romero Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Co-Presenter: Leigh Ann Von Hagen Voorhees Transportation Center, Rutgers University
Federal Funding for Active Transportation and Recreation
Track: Connect
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: This session will provide an overview about federal transportation programs that can fund infrastructure for walking and bicycling.
Full Description: Federal programs provide funds to develop transportation, community, and recreation infrastructure for walking and bicycling and to connect communities and promote active living. Attendees will learn how about Federal programs to promote sustainable communities.
Learning Objectives:
Participants will learn about the Federal Partnership for Sustainable Communities.
Participants will learn about the Federal-aid surface transportation programs that benefit pedestrians and bicyclists.
Participants will be able to successfully write a competitive proposal.
Participants will understand how Federal, State, and local programs interact.
Presenter(s)
Presenter: Christopher Douwes Transportation Alternatives Program / Recreational Trails Program, FHWA
Co-Presenter: Wesley Blount Office of Planning, Environment & Realty FHWA
Title: Not Your Grandfather's DOT: The FDOT District 5 and PennDOT Experiences
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute moderated discussion
Abstract: Today's economic realities require the rethinking of conventional transportation approaches. Learn about how Florida and Pennsylvania's Department of Transportation are using new tools, policies, and guides to proactively plan multi-modal transportation solutions.
Presenters:
Presenter: Jane Lim-Yap Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Co-Presenter: Steven Deck Parsons Brinckerhoff
Co-Presenter: Brian Hare PennDOT Program Center
Co-Presenter: Mary Raulerson Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Title: Not Your Grandfather's DOT: The FDOT District 5 and PennDOT Experiences
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute moderated discussion
Abstract: Today's economic realities require the rethinking of conventional transportation approaches. Learn about how Florida and Pennsylvania's Department of Transportation are using new tools, policies, and guides to proactively plan multi-modal transportation solutions.
Presenters:
Presenter: Jane Lim-Yap Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Co-Presenter: Steven Deck Parsons Brinckerhoff
Co-Presenter: Brian Hare PennDOT Program Center
Co-Presenter: Mary Raulerson Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Title: Transportation Studies in the 21st Century: Incorporating all Modes
Track: Sustain
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: In the 21st century, the basic purpose of transportation studies needs to change from making it easier to drive to giving people options other than driving. This session will present case studies of alternatives to the auto-dominated Level of Service traffic impact studies in order to better address bicycling, transit and walking.
Presenters:
Presenter: Michelle DeRobertis Transportation Choices for Sustainable Communities
Co-Presenter: Peter Albert San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Co-Presenter: Patrick Lynch Transpo Group
Co-Presenter: David Thompson City of Boulder, Colorado
Title: What Do The Kids Say? Giving a Voice to Youth Perspectives on Biking and Walking
Track: Sustain
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: Why aren't more children bicycling and walking? Maybe somebody should ask them. With research focusing mostly on adults, little is known about children's perceptions of their environment. This session will invite discussion regarding two projects: Safe Kids Photovoice, a photojournalism project in 10 countries and a Ph.D. dissertation research on youth perceptions of risky versus safe travel behavior.
Presenters:
Presenter: Shannon Sweeney Edward J. Bloustein School, Rutgers University
Co-Presenter: Priti Gautam Safe Kids Worldwide
Co-Presenter: Leigh Ann Von Hagen Voorhees Transportation Center, Rutgers University
Safer People, Safer Streets, and Safer Policies at USDOT
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute moderated discussion
Abstract: This USDOT panel will provide details on the Department’s new bicycle and pedestrian safety initiative, including information on the Ped-Bike Safety Action Agenda, Road Safety for Transit Patrons initiative, bike-walk assessments, Road Diet Guide, an aggressive research agenda, and local partnerships, including how community members can get involved.
Presenter: Barbara McCann Office of Secretary, USDOT
Co-Presenter: Heidi Coleman National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Co-Presenter: Dan Goodman Office of Human Environment, Livability Team, FHWA
Co-Presenter: Joanne Waszczak Special Assistant, FTA Office of Budget and Policy
Title: Maximizing Biking and Walking Access to Transit
Track: Connect
Format: 90 minute panel
Abstract: Hear from agencies including King County Metro, Sound Transit, and TriMet about ways they have prioritized better walk and bike connections to transit. These investments can maximize transit ridership, especially important in an era of constrained transit funding, growing multi-modal transport demand, and transitioning land use patterns.
Presenters:
Presenter: Carol Cooper King County Metro Transit
Co-Presenter: Carrie Nielson Fehr & Peers
Co-Presenter: Jeff Owen TriMet
Co-Presenter: Janine Sawyer Sound Transit
Integrating a Health Impact Assessment into District-Wide School Travel Planning
Track: Prosper
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: Learn about how a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) was used for the first time to guide the formulation of the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Columbus City Schools District-Wide School Travel Plan, which focused on schools and neighborhoods with health inequities.
Presenters:
Presenter: Brian Butler Columbus Public Health
Co-Presenter: Kate Moening Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Co-Presenter: Alex Smith Columbus Public Health
Co-Presenter: Julie Walcoff Ohio DOT
Title: Funding Community-Based Walkability Efforts
Track: Walking Institute
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: How do you pay for a community-based walkability and walking movement? Panelists will explore established and emerging ways to fund walking infrastructure and campaigns, from grants to crowdfunding to municipal measures.
Presenters:
Presenter: Robert Ping Walkable and Livable Communities Institute
Co-Presenter: Stefanie Seskin Smart Growth America
Co-Presenter: Matt Tomasulo Walk [Your City]
Title: Funding Community-Based Walkability Efforts
Track: Walking Institute
Format: 60 minute panel
Abstract: How do you pay for a community-based walkability and walking movement? Panelists will explore established and emerging ways to fund walking infrastructure and campaigns, from grants to crowdfunding to municipal measures.
Presenters:
Presenter: Robert Ping Walkable and Livable Communities Institute
Co-Presenter: Stefanie Seskin Smart Growth America
Co-Presenter: Matt Tomasulo Walk [Your City]
More from Project for Public Spaces & National Center for Biking and Walking (20)
Have you ever wondered how search works while visiting an e-commerce site, internal website, or searching through other types of online resources? Look no further than this informative session on the ways that taxonomies help end-users navigate the internet! Hear from taxonomists and other information professionals who have first-hand experience creating and working with taxonomies that aid in navigation, search, and discovery across a range of disciplines.
This presentation by Morris Kleiner (University of Minnesota), was made during the discussion “Competition and Regulation in Professions and Occupations” held at the Working Party No. 2 on Competition and Regulation on 10 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at oe.cd/crps.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
Acorn Recovery: Restore IT infra within minutesIP ServerOne
Introducing Acorn Recovery as a Service, a simple, fast, and secure managed disaster recovery (DRaaS) by IP ServerOne. A DR solution that helps restore your IT infra within minutes.
0x01 - Newton's Third Law: Static vs. Dynamic AbusersOWASP Beja
f you offer a service on the web, odds are that someone will abuse it. Be it an API, a SaaS, a PaaS, or even a static website, someone somewhere will try to figure out a way to use it to their own needs. In this talk we'll compare measures that are effective against static attackers and how to battle a dynamic attacker who adapts to your counter-measures.
About the Speaker
===============
Diogo Sousa, Engineering Manager @ Canonical
An opinionated individual with an interest in cryptography and its intersection with secure software development.
Sharpen existing tools or get a new toolbox? Contemporary cluster initiatives...Orkestra
UIIN Conference, Madrid, 27-29 May 2024
James Wilson, Orkestra and Deusto Business School
Emily Wise, Lund University
Madeline Smith, The Glasgow School of Art
Taking Pedestrian and Bicycle Counting Programs to the Next Level
1. MOVINGFORWARDTHINKING
Taking Pedestrian and Bicycle Counting
Programs to the Next Level
Lessons from NCHRP 07-19
Robert Schneider, UW Milwaukee
RJ Eldridge, Toole Design Group
Conor Semler, Kittelson & Associates
ProWalk/ProBike/ProPlace
Pittsburgh, PA
September 2014 Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
2. Presentation Overview
Introduction
State of the Practice
Count Applications
Testing Approach and
Findings
Guidebook Overview
Questions and
Discussion
2
Source: Toole Design Group
3. NCHRP 7-19 Research Team
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
– Principal Investigator: Paul Ryus
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
UC Berkeley, SafeTREC
Toole Design Group
McGill University
Quality Counts, LLC
3
4. Project Purpose
Address lack of
pedestrian and
bicycle volume data
Assess data
collection
technologies and
methods
Develop guidance
for practitioners
4
Source: Bob Schneider, UW-Milwaukee
5. Related Work
National Bicycle and Pedestrian
Documentation Project
FHWA Traffic Monitoring Guide
(TMG)
– 2013 edition includes chapter on
non-motorized traffic
– NCHRP research complements
FHWA guide
5
6. State of the Practice
Early Findings
Multimodal Count Applications
6
Source: Bob Schneider, UW-Milwaukee
7. MOVINGFORWARDTHINKING
NCHRP 7-19 Survey (N = 269)
10
20
36
3
11
69
2
35
39
20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Other
University
STATE DOT
U.S. federal agency
U.S. County
U.S. city
Transit agency
Non-profit/advocacy
MPO
Consulting firm
SURVEY RESPONSES
8. NCHRP 7-19 Survey Findings
• Pedestrian and bicycle counts are becoming routine
for cities, MPOs, and State DOTs.
• Manual counts are the most prevalent data collection
method
• Most programs lack formal or dedicated funding
source and rely heavily on volunteers
• Organizations serving larger communities are more
likely to conduct pedestrian and/or bicycle counts.
• Some integration with motor vehicle count databases.
10. NCHRP 7-19 Survey Findings
There is no standard approach for count
programs
Practitioners are looking for more guidance
– Choosing devices
– Selecting locations
– Count intervals and duration
– Temporal/seasonal adjustments
12. Measuring Facility Usage
Transportation system monitoring program
Typically requires collecting counts at set
locations and regular intervals
Critical for tracking progress and measuring
success
12
Change in Walking and
Bicycling Activity at
Washington State Count Sites,
2009–2012
Source: Washington State DOT (2012)
13. Evaluating Before-and-After Volumes
Measure volumes before and after facility is
opened
Forecast usage of planned facilities
13
Before-and-After Bicycle Facility Usage – buffered bicycle lanes on Pennsylvania Ave
Source: Kittelson &
Associates, Portland State
University, and Toole Design
Group (2012)
14. Monitoring Travel Patterns
Developing extrapolation factors
– Extrapolate short-duration counts over longer time
periods
– Control for effect of land use, weather,
demographics, etc.
Evaluating user behavior patterns
– Identify factors that influence walking/biking
– Controllable (land use) and uncontrollable (weather)
factors
14
15. Safety Analysis
Quantifying exposure
– Variety of methods proposed to quantify exposure
– One method compares pedestrian-vehicle collissions
to average annual pedestrian volumes
Identifying before-and-after safety effects
15
16. Mainline
Roadway
Intersecting
Roadway
Reported
Pedestrian
Crashes (1996-
2005)
Mission
Boulevard
Torrano
Avenue 5
Davis Street Pierce Avenue 4
Foothill
Boulevard D Street 1
Mission
Boulevard
Jefferson
Street 5
University
Avenue Bonar Street 7
International
Boulevard 107th Avenue 2
San Pablo
Avenue Harrison Street 2
East 14th
Street
Hasperian
Boulevard 1
International
Boulevard 46th Avenue 3
Solano Avenue
Masonic
Avenue 2
Broadway 12th Street 5
Alameda County Pedestrian Crash Analysis
17. Mainline Roadway
Intersecting Roadway
Estimated Total Weekly Pedestrian Crossings
Annual Pedestrian Volume Estimate
Ten-Year Pedestrian Volume Estimate
Reported Pedestrian Crashes (1996- 2005)
Pedestrian Risk (Crashes per 10,000,000 crossings)
Mission Boulevard
Torrano Avenue
1,169
60,796
607,964
5
82.24
Davis Street
Pierce Avenue
1,570
81,619
816,187
4
49.01
Foothill Boulevard
D Street
632
32,862
328,624
1
30.43
Mission Boulevard
Jefferson Street
5,236
272,246
2,722,464
5
18.37
University Avenue
Bonar Street
11,175
581,113
5,811,127
7
12.05
International Boulevard
107th Avenue
3,985
207,243
2,072,429
2
9.65
San Pablo Avenue
Harrison Street
4,930
256,357
2,563,572
2
7.80
East 14th Street
Hasperian Boulevard
3,777
196,410
1,964,102
1
5.09
International Boulevard
46th Avenue
12,303
639,752
6,397,522
3
4.69
Solano Avenue
Masonic Avenue
22,203
1,154,559
11,545,589
2
1.73
Broadway
12th Street
112,896
5,870,590
58,705,898
5
0.85
Alameda County Pedestrian Crash Analysis
19. Project Prioritization
Identify high-priority locations
for improvements
Identify factors that influence
walking/biking and prioritize
accordingly
Measure improper user
behaviors (i.e., wrong-way bike
riding) to identify areas
needing improvement
19
20. Multimodal Model Development
Multimodal travel
demand modeling is an
emerging field
Potential to estimate
demand over a large
area and forecast
influence of
infrastructure changes
20
Source: City of Berkeley, CA
Pedestrian Master Plan
21. We need these data fields!
Institutionalize Pedestrian & Bicycle Data
A multimodal transportation system requires
collecting data for all modes of transportation
Establish baseline for pedestrian & bicycle safety,
infrastructure, volumes, etc.
X-Street
Traffic
Volume
Mainline
Traffic
Volume
X-Street
Pedestrian
Volume
Mainline
Pedestrian
Volume
22. Challenges to Bicycle and Pedestrian
Counting
Where to count?
When (how long/how
frequently) to count?
What to count?
How to count?
Site/Mode challenges
Who should be counting?
Source: Toole Design Group
23. Arlington County’s automated
bicycle and pedestrian count
program
• First counter Custis Trail:
Fall 2009
• Now 30 automatic counter
stations
• Automatic uploads to
central server
• Web based “dashboard”
• Plans for real-time “totem”
counter display
Case Study: Arlington County, VA
Statistics and graphics courtesy of David Patton
Bicycle & Pedestrian Planner, Arlington County Division
of Transportation
24. NCHRP 7-19 Research Approach
Focus on testing and evaluating commercially
available automated technologies
Assess type of technology as opposed to a
specific product
Cover a range of facility types, mix of traffic,
and geographic locations
Evaluate accuracy through the use of manual
count video data reduction
24
26. Motor Vehicle Data Collection
Inductive Loops
Pneumatic Tubes
Manual Count Boards
Video cameras
ITS integration
In-vehicle sensors (toll
tags)
Photo Credit: Federal Highway Administration
27. Auto versus Multimodal Counts
Key differences:
– Differences in demand
variability
– Ease of detection
– Experience with
counting technology
27
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
0 6 12 18 24
Hourly Volume (veh/h)
Hour Starting
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Annual Weekday Average
28. Motor Vehicle Data Collection
Constrained; somewhat
predictable
Source: Toole Design Group
29. Bicycle Data Collection
Constrained environments
easy to monitor
Complex environments
harder to define
Detection
Source: Toole Design Group
30. Pedestrian Data Collection
Constrained environments
easy to monitor
Detection
People tend to make
their own path
Source: Toole Design Group
31. Motor vehicle data
collection
• Widely collected
• Easy to track vehicle
movements
• Predictable patterns and
routes
• Years of trend data to
analyze
Bicycle and pedestrian
data collection
• Sparsely collected
• Difficult to track and
tabulate movements
• Unpredictable paths of
travel
• Weather and seasonal
impacts
• Lack of historical data
Challenge: Site/Mode characteristics
35. Passive Infrared (IR)
Detect pedestrians and
cyclists by infrared
radiation (heat) patterns
them emit
Passive infrared sensor
placed on one side of
facility
Widely used and tested
35
Source: Toole Design Group
36. Active Infrared (IR)
Transmitter and
receiver with IR beam
Counts caused by
“breaking the beam”
36
Source: Steve Hankey, University of Minnesota
37. Radio Beam
Radio signal between
transmitter and receiver
Detections occur when
beam is broken
Not previously tested in
literature
Some distinguish bikes
from peds
37
Source: Karla Kingsley, Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
39. Pneumatic Tubes
Tube(s) stretched across
roadway
When a bicycle rides over
tube, pulse of air passes
through tube to detector
39
Source: Karla Kingsley, Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
40. Inductive Loops
Generate a magnetic field
that detect metal parts of
bicycle passing over loop
In-pavement or
temporary surface loops
40
Source: Toole Design Group
41. Piezoelectric Sensor
Emit an electric signal
when physically deformed
Typically embedded in
pavement across travel
way
41
Source: Toole Design Group
43. Combination
Use one technology to detect all others plus
another technology to detect bicyclists only
Provide bicycle and pedestrian counts
separately
43
Photo Sources: Bob Schneider, UW-Milwaukee
44. Manual Counts
Most common type of counting, to date
Capture many different locations
Record pedestrians & bicyclists separately
Can count road crossings
Capture user characteristics
(gender, helmet use,
behavior, etc.)
Photo by Robert Schneider, UW-Milwaukee
45. Washington State DOT Pedestrian & Bicycle Counts
Source: Cascade Bicycle Club. Washington State Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project, Prepared for the Washington State Department
of Transportation, February 2013.
46. Existing Market Technology
• Passive infrared
• Active infrared
• Radio beam
• Pneumatic tubes
• Inductive loops
• Piezoelectric sensors
• Combination devices
• Manual Counts
• Automated video
• Emerging technologies
Understanding Count Technologies
Classify Bicycle Only Everything
Sources: Toole Design Group
48. Related Work
Topics related to quantifying pedestrian & bicycle
activity, but not covered:
– Bluetooth and WiFi detection
– GPS data collection
– Cell/smartphone data collection
– Radio frequency ID (RFID) tags
– Bike sharing data
– Pedestrian signal actuation buttons
– Surveys
– Presence detection
– Trip generation
48
50. Study Technologies and Site Locations
Technologies
– Passive infrared
– Active infrared
– Pneumatic tubes
– Inductive loops
– Piezoelectric
– Radio beam
– Combination of
technologies
50
Site Locations
– Portland, OR
– San Francisco, CA
– Davis, CA
– Berkeley, CA
– Minneapolis, MN
– Washington, D.C.
– Arlington, VA
– Montreal, Canada
51. Washington, D.C. and Arlington, VA
Key Bridge separated path
– Passive Infrared
– Pneumatic Tubes
– Passive Infrared with inductive loops
51
Source: Toole Design
Group
52. Minneapolis, MN
Midtown Greenway
multiuse path
– Active Infrared
– Passive Infrared
– Radio Beam
– Inductive Loops
– Pneumatic Tubes
52
Source: Toole Design Group
53. Eastbank Esplanade
multiuse path
– Passive Infrared
– Pneumatic Tubes
– Radio Beam
Portland, OR
53
Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
54. San Francisco, CA
Fell Street Bicycle Lane
– Passive Infrared
– Pneumatic Tubes
– Inductive Loops
54
Source: Frank Proulx, UC Berkeley SafeTREC
56. Measures to Evaluate the Quality of Count
Data from Technologies
Accuracy: The magnitude of the difference
between the count produced by the technology,
and actual (“ground-truth”) count.
(Typically depends on user volumes, movement patterns, traffic mix, and environmental
characteristics)
Consistency (Precision): The remaining variability in
the count data after being corrected for expected
under- or over-counting, given specific conditions.
(Typically depends on the counting technology itself, how a specific vendor uses the
technology in a particular product, and quality of installation)
56
62. Passive Infrared
Easy installation
Mounts to existing pole/surface or in purpose-built
pole
Potential false detections from background
Possible undercounting due to occlusion
62
63. Passive Infrared
Average undercount rate
8.75%
Differences between
products tested
Correction function could
account for facility width
Accuracy not affected by
high temperatures
63
64. Active Infrared
Moderately easy
installation – requires
aligning transmitter and
receiver
Single device tested –
accurate and highly
precise
64
65. Pneumatic Tubes
Tested BSCs – bicycle specific counters
Primarily tested tubes on multi-use paths and
bicycle lanes
Issues with site on 15th Avenue in Minneapolis
– Tube nails came out of ground
– Severe undercounting and overcounting
– Removed sensors from data set
65
66. Pneumatic Tubes
Fairly high accuracy at
very high volumes
Accuracy rates not
observed to decline with
aging tubes
Future research in mixed
traffic settings
66
67. Radio Beam
Required mounting devices 10’ apart
Tested two products: one that distinguished
bicyclists and pedestrians (product A), one that
did not (product B)
67
68. Radio Beam
Product B higher
accuracy
Product A – low
precision and
lower accuracy
Occlusion errors
Temperature,
lighting, rain
issues
68
69. Inductive Loops
Permanent (in ground) or temporary (on
surface)
Bypass errors
– Cyclists passing
outside bike lane
– Loops leaving gaps
in detection zone
69
70. Inductive Loops
Accurate and precise
Errors with age of
loops not detected
Higher volumes
slightly affect
accuracy
No substantial
difference between
permanent and
temporary loops
70
72. Piezoelectric Strips
Tested one existing
device, due to
difficulties procuring
equipment
Data suggests device is
not functioning very
precisely or accurately
Caution – data from
single device not
installed by research
team
72
73. Combination Counter
Passive infrared +
inductive loops
Each device also
assessed separately
Inferred pedestrian
volumes (Total – bikes)
Occlusion errors and
undercounting
High rate of precision
73
74. Accuracy Calculations
74
Average percentage deviation (APD): overall
divergence from perfect accuracy
(undercounting rate)
Average of the absolute percentage deviation
(AAPD): accounts for undercount/overcount
cancelation (total deviation)
75. Research Conclusions
Device Undercounting Rate Total Deviation
Passive Infrared (2 products) 8.75% 20.11%
Active Infrared 9.11% 11.61%
Pneumatic Tubes 17.89% 18.50%
Radio Beam 18.18% 48.15%
Inductive Loops 0.55% 8.87%
Piezoelectric Strips 11.36% 26.60%
75
Automated counter accuracy:
76. Research Conclusions
Factors influencing accuracy
– Proper calibration and installation
– Occlusion
– Vendor differences
Factors not found to influence accuracy
– Age of inductive loops or pneumatic tubes
– Temperature
– Snow/rain (limited data)
76
77. Guidebook Organization
Quick Start Guide
1. Introduction
2. Non-Motorized Count Data Applications
3. Data Collection Planning and Implementation
4. Adjusting Count Data
5. Sensor Technology Toolbox
Case Studies
Manual Pedestrian and Bicyclist Counts: Example Data Collector
Instructions
Count Protocol Used for NCHRP Project 07-19
Appendix D. Day-of-Year Factoring Approach
77
Appendices
78. 2. Non-Motorized Count Applications
Measuring facility usage
Evaluating before-and-after data
Monitoring travel patterns
Safety analysis
Project prioritization
Multimodal modeling
Source: Kittelson & Associates,
Portland State University, and Toole
Design Group (2012)
Before-and-After Bicycle Facility Usage –
buffered bicycle lanes on Pennsylvania Avenue
For each
application:
Details
Case Studies
78
79. 3. Data Collection Planning & Implementation
Covers:
1. Planning the count
program
2. Implementing the
count program
Provides examples,
detailed guidance,
checklists
Source: Toole Design Group.
79
80. Common Strategy: Manual + Automated
Geographic Coverage
A Few
Locations
Many
Locations
Count Duration
Continuous Automated
Short-Term Manual
81. Comparison of Counting Technologies
Characteristic
Passive
Infrared
Active
Infrared
Pneumatic
Tubes
Inductive
Loops
Piezoelectric
Sensor
Passive IR +
Inductive
Loops
Radio Beam
(One
Frequency)
Radio Beam
(High/Low
Frequency)
Automated
Video1
Manual
Counts2
Type of users counted
All facility users Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians only Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles only Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians vs. bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles vs. automobiles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Characteristics collected
Different user types Yes Yes Yes Yes
Direction of travel3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
User characteristics4 Yes Yes
Types of sites counted
Multiple-use trail segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sidewalk segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle lane segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cycle track segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Shared roadway segments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from median)5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from end of crosswalk) Yes Yes
Intersections (identify
turning movements) Yes
Notes: (1) Existing “automated video” systems may not use a completely automated counting process; they may also incorporate manual data checks of automated video processing.
(2) Includes manual counts from video images.
(3) Technologies noted as “Yes” have at least one vendor that uses the technology to capture directionality.
(4) User characteristics include estimated age, gender, helmet use, use of wheelchair or other assistive device, pedestrian and bicyclist behaviors, and other characteristics.
(5) Roadway crossings at medians potentially have issues with overcounting due to people waiting in the median. Median locations were not tested during this project.
82. Characteristic
Passive
Infrared
Active
Infrared
Pneumatic
Tubes
Inductive
Loops
Piezoelectric
Sensor
Passive IR +
Inductive
Loops
Radio Beam
(One
Frequency)
Radio Beam
(High/Low
Frequency)
Automated
Video1
Manual
Counts2
Type of users counted
All facility users Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians only Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles only Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians vs. bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles vs. automobiles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Characteristics collected
Different user types Yes Yes Yes Yes
Direction of travel3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
User characteristics4 Yes Yes
Types of sites counted
Multiple-use trail segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sidewalk segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle lane segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cycle track segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Shared roadway segments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from median)5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from end of crosswalk) Yes Yes
Intersections (identify
turning movements) Yes
Notes: (1) Existing “automated video” systems may not use a completely automated counting process; they may also incorporate manual data checks of automated video processing.
(2) Includes manual counts from video images.
(3) Technologies noted as “Yes” have at least one vendor that uses the technology to capture directionality.
(4) User characteristics include estimated age, gender, helmet use, use of wheelchair or other assistive device, pedestrian and bicyclist behaviors, and other characteristics.
(5) Roadway crossings at medians potentially have issues with overcounting due to people waiting in the median. Median locations were not tested during this project.
Comparison of Counting Technologies
83. Characteristic
Passive
Infrared
Active
Infrared
Pneumatic
Tubes
Inductive
Loops
Piezoelectric
Sensor
Passive IR +
Inductive
Loops
Radio Beam
(One
Frequency)
Radio Beam
(High/Low
Frequency)
Automated
Video1
Manual
Counts2
Type of users counted
All facility users Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians only Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles only Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians vs. bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles vs. automobiles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Characteristics collected
Different user types Yes Yes Yes Yes
Direction of travel3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
User characteristics4 Yes Yes
Types of sites counted
Multiple-use trail segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sidewalk segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle lane segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cycle track segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Shared roadway segments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from median)5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from end of crosswalk) Yes Yes
Intersections (identify
turning movements) Yes
Notes: (1) Existing “automated video” systems may not use a completely automated counting process; they may also incorporate manual data checks of automated video processing.
(2) Includes manual counts from video images.
(3) Technologies noted as “Yes” have at least one vendor that uses the technology to capture directionality.
(4) User characteristics include estimated age, gender, helmet use, use of wheelchair or other assistive device, pedestrian and bicyclist behaviors, and other characteristics.
(5) Roadway crossings at medians potentially have issues with overcounting due to people waiting in the median. Median locations were not tested during this project.
Comparison of Counting Technologies
84. Characteristic
Passive
Infrared
Active
Infrared
Pneumatic
Tubes
Inductive
Loops
Piezoelectric
Sensor
Passive IR +
Inductive
Loops
Radio Beam
(One
Frequency)
Radio Beam
(High/Low
Frequency)
Automated
Video1
Manual
Counts2
Type of users counted
All facility users Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians only Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles only Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians vs. bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles vs. automobiles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Characteristics collected
Different user types Yes Yes Yes Yes
Direction of travel3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
User characteristics4 Yes Yes
Types of sites counted
Multiple-use trail segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sidewalk segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle lane segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cycle track segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Shared roadway segments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from median)5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from end of crosswalk) Yes Yes
Intersections (identify
turning movements) Yes
Notes: (1) Existing “automated video” systems may not use a completely automated counting process; they may also incorporate manual data checks of automated video processing.
(2) Includes manual counts from video images.
(3) Technologies noted as “Yes” have at least one vendor that uses the technology to capture directionality.
(4) User characteristics include estimated age, gender, helmet use, use of wheelchair or other assistive device, pedestrian and bicyclist behaviors, and other characteristics.
(5) Roadway crossings at medians potentially have issues with overcounting due to people waiting in the median. Median locations were not tested during this project.
Comparison of Counting Technologies
85. Characteristic
Passive
Infrared
Active
Infrared
Pneumatic
Tubes
Inductive
Loops
Piezoelectric
Sensor
Passive IR +
Inductive
Loops
Radio Beam
(One
Frequency)
Radio Beam
(High/Low
Frequency)
Automated
Video1
Manual
Counts2
Type of users counted
All facility users Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians only Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles only Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians vs. bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles vs. automobiles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Characteristics collected
Different user types Yes Yes Yes Yes
Direction of travel3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
User characteristics4 Yes Yes
Types of sites counted
Multiple-use trail segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sidewalk segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle lane segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cycle track segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Shared roadway segments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from median)5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from end of crosswalk) Yes Yes
Intersections (identify
turning movements) Yes
Notes: (1) Existing “automated video” systems may not use a completely automated counting process; they may also incorporate manual data checks of automated video processing.
(2) Includes manual counts from video images.
(3) Technologies noted as “Yes” have at least one vendor that uses the technology to capture directionality.
(4) User characteristics include estimated age, gender, helmet use, use of wheelchair or other assistive device, pedestrian and bicyclist behaviors, and other characteristics.
(5) Roadway crossings at medians potentially have issues with overcounting due to people waiting in the median. Median locations were not tested during this project.
Comparison of Counting Technologies
86. Characteristic
Passive
Infrared
Active
Infrared
Pneumatic
Tubes
Inductive
Loops
Piezoelectric
Sensor
Passive IR +
Inductive
Loops
Radio Beam
(One
Frequency)
Radio Beam
(High/Low
Frequency)
Automated
Video1
Manual
Counts2
Type of users counted
All facility users Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians only Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles only Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians vs. bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles vs. automobiles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Characteristics collected
Different user types Yes Yes Yes Yes
Direction of travel3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
User characteristics4 Yes Yes
Types of sites counted
Multiple-use trail segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sidewalk segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle lane segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cycle track segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Shared roadway segments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from median)5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from end of crosswalk) Yes Yes
Intersections (identify
turning movements) Yes
Notes: (1) Existing “automated video” systems may not use a completely automated counting process; they may also incorporate manual data checks of automated video processing.
(2) Includes manual counts from video images.
(3) Technologies noted as “Yes” have at least one vendor that uses the technology to capture directionality.
(4) User characteristics include estimated age, gender, helmet use, use of wheelchair or other assistive device, pedestrian and bicyclist behaviors, and other characteristics.
(5) Roadway crossings at medians potentially have issues with overcounting due to people waiting in the median. Median locations were not tested during this project.
Comparison of Counting Technologies
87. Characteristic
Passive
Infrared
Active
Infrared
Pneumatic
Tubes
Inductive
Loops
Piezoelectric
Sensor
Passive IR +
Inductive
Loops
Radio Beam
(One
Frequency)
Radio Beam
(High/Low
Frequency)
Automated
Video1
Manual
Counts2
Type of users counted
All facility users Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians only Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles only Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Pedestrians vs. bicycles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycles vs. automobiles Yes Yes Yes Yes
Characteristics collected
Different user types Yes Yes Yes Yes
Direction of travel3 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
User characteristics4 Yes Yes
Types of sites counted
Multiple-use trail segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Sidewalk segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bicycle lane segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cycle track segments Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Shared roadway segments Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from median)5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Roadway crossings (detect
from end of crosswalk) Yes Yes
Intersections (identify
turning movements) Yes
Notes: (1) Existing “automated video” systems may not use a completely automated counting process; they may also incorporate manual data checks of automated video processing.
(2) Includes manual counts from video images.
(3) Technologies noted as “Yes” have at least one vendor that uses the technology to capture directionality.
(4) User characteristics include estimated age, gender, helmet use, use of wheelchair or other assistive device, pedestrian and bicyclist behaviors, and other characteristics.
(5) Roadway crossings at medians potentially have issues with overcounting due to people waiting in the median. Median locations were not tested during this project.
Comparison of Counting Technologies
88. INSTALLATION CHECKLIST: ADVANCE PREPARATION
Site visit to identify the specific installation location. Specifically, note poles that will be
used, where pavement will be cut, or where utility boxes will be installed to house
electronics. Verify that no potential obstructions (e.g., vegetation) or sources of
interference (e.g., doorway, bus stop, bicycle rack) are present.
Obtain and document necessary permissions. Permits or permissions may include right-of-
way encroachment permits, pavement cutting permits or bonds, landscaping
permits, or interagency agreements. Obtaining these permissions may take up to
several months, particularly if other agencies are involved.
Create a site plan. Develop a detailed diagram of the planned installation on an aerial
photo or ground-level image documenting the intended equipment installation
locations and anticipated detection zone (after installation this will be useful for
validating equipment either visually or with video monitoring). This diagram may be
useful for obtaining installation permissions and working with contractors. Figure 3-6
provides an example site plan.
Hire a contractor if necessary (or schedule appropriate resources from within the
organization).
Arrange an on-site coordination meeting involving all necessary parties (e.g., staff
representing the organization installing the counter, permitting staff, contractors). If
possible, a vendor representative should be on hand or available by phone. It may
take several weeks to find a suitable time when everyone is available.
Check for potential problems. Problems with the site may include interference from
utility wires, upcoming constructions projects, hills, sharp curves, nearby illicit
activity, and nearby insect and animal activity. Some of these conditions can be
identified from imagery, but they should also be evaluated in the field.
89. INSTALLATION CHECKLIST: ADVANCE PREPARATION
Site visit to identify the specific installation location. Specifically, note poles that will be
used, where pavement will be cut, or where utility boxes will be installed to house
electronics. Verify that no potential obstructions (e.g., vegetation) or sources of
interference (e.g., doorway, bus stop, bicycle rack) are present.
Obtain and document necessary permissions. Permits or permissions may include right-of-
way encroachment permits, pavement cutting permits or bonds, landscaping
permits, or interagency agreements. Obtaining these permissions may take up to
several months, particularly if other agencies are involved.
Create a site plan. Develop a detailed diagram of the planned installation on an aerial
photo or ground-level image documenting the intended equipment installation
locations and anticipated detection zone (after installation this will be useful for
validating equipment either visually or with video monitoring). This diagram may be
useful for obtaining installation permissions and working with contractors. Figure 3-6
provides an example site plan.
Hire a contractor if necessary (or schedule appropriate resources from within the
organization).
Arrange an on-site coordination meeting involving all necessary parties (e.g., staff
representing the organization installing the counter, permitting staff, contractors). If
possible, a vendor representative should be on hand or available by phone. It may
take several weeks to find a suitable time when everyone is available.
Check for potential problems. Problems with the site may include interference from
utility wires, upcoming constructions projects, hills, sharp curves, nearby illicit
activity, and nearby insect and animal activity. Some of these conditions can be
identified from imagery, but they should also be evaluated in the field.
90. EQUIPMENT MONITORING CHECKLIST
Sensor height. Is the sensor still mounted at the correct height?
Sensor direction. Is the sensor still pointed in the correct direction?
Clock. Is the device’s clock set correctly?
Cleaning. Remove dirt, mud, water, or other material that may affect the sensor or other
vital components.
Battery. Is the remaining battery life sufficient to last until the next scheduled visit?
Obstructions. For example, is vegetation growing too close to the device?
Unanticipated site problems. For example, is the pole being used for bicycle parking, or
are people congregating in the area (as opposed to walking past the counter)?
Pedestrian or bicycle detection. Are pedestrians or bicyclists passing through the
counter’s detection zone being counted? If not, can the counter’s sensitivity be
adjusted in the field, or does it need to be removed for repairs?
Download data. Use the same export option consistently to ease the data management
burden back in the office.
Securement. Are the installation elements and locking devices still secure and durable?
Poorly secured or loose fitted devices are more vulnerable to theft and vandalism.
91. EQUIPMENT MONITORING CHECKLIST
Sensor height. Is the sensor still mounted at the correct height?
Sensor direction. Is the sensor still pointed in the correct direction?
Clock. Is the device’s clock set correctly?
Cleaning. Remove dirt, mud, water, or other material that may affect the sensor or other
vital components.
Battery. Is the remaining battery life sufficient to last until the next scheduled visit?
Obstructions. For example, is vegetation growing too close to the device?
Unanticipated site problems. For example, is the pole being used for bicycle parking, or
are people congregating in the area (as opposed to walking past the counter)?
Pedestrian or bicycle detection. Are pedestrians or bicyclists passing through the
counter’s detection zone being counted? If not, can the counter’s sensitivity be
adjusted in the field, or does it need to be removed for repairs?
Download data. Use the same export option consistently to ease the data management
burden back in the office.
Securement. Are the installation elements and locking devices still secure and durable?
Poorly secured or loose fitted devices are more vulnerable to theft and vandalism.
92. 4. Adjusting Count Data
Sources of counter inaccuracy
Measured counter accuracy
Counter correction factors
Expansion factors
Example applications
Occlusion error
92
93. Linear
Correction Factors
Table 4-2. Simple Counter Correction Factors Developed by NCHRP Project 07-19
Sensor Technology
Adjustment
Factor Hours of Data
Passive infrared 1.137 298
Product A 1.037 176
Product B 1.412 122
Active infrared† 1.139 30
Radio beam 1.130 95
Product A (bicycles) 1.470 28
Product A (pedestrians) 1.323 27
Product B 1.123 39
Pneumatic tubes* 1.135 160
Product A 1.127 132
Product B 1.520 28
Surface inductive loops* 1.041 29
Embedded inductive loops* 1.054 79
Piezoelectric strips† 1.059 58
Notes: *Bicycle-specific products.
†Factor is based on a single sensor at one site; use caution when applying.
97. Summary: Key Issues for Practice
Consider automated + manual counts
Determine whether to use permanent or mobile
counters (or both)
Accuracy of devices & service vary by vendor
Results are useful for general corrections, but best
practice is to conduct local ground-truth counts &
make specific corrections
Consider approvals and site characteristics when
selecting a count site
How critical is accuracy?
97
98. Suggested Research
Additional testing of automated technologies
– Technologies not tested or underrepresented
– Additional sites and conditions
Extrapolating short-duration counts to longer-duration
counts
Adjustment factors for environmental factors
Uniform approach(es) for FHWA TMG?
98
99. Questions and Discussion
Contact Information
– Conor Semler, Kittelson & Associates, Boston, MA
csemler@kittelson.com, 857.265.2153
– Robert Schneider, UW-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI
rjschnei@uwm.edu, 414.229.3849
– RJ Eldridge, Toole Design Group, Washington, DC
reldridge@tooledesign.com, 301.927.1900 x107
99
101. Plan the Count Program
Specify the data collection purpose
Identify data collection resources
Select count locations & determine timeframe
Consider available counting methods
102. Implement the Count Program
Obtain necessary permissions
Procure counting devices
Inventory and prepare devices
Train staff
Install and validate devices
Calibrate devices
Maintain devices
Manage count data
Clean and correct count data
103. Three Types of Data Adjustments
Cleaning erroneous data involves identifying when a count is likely to
represent a time period when an automated counter was not
observing the intended pedestrian or bicycle movements. Data from
these time periods are discarded or replaced by better estimates.
Correcting for systematic errors involves applying a correction
function that removes the expected amount of under- or
overcounting for a particular counting technology (often due to
occlusion).
Expanding short counts to longer time periods involves applying an
expansion factor to a count collected for a short time period. The
expansion factor is based on the type of activity pattern assumed to
exist at the site, and it can account for the effects of weather on
pedestrian and bicycle volumes.