Pedestrian and Bicycle Data Collection: Task 2-Assessment

This document contains the results of a literature review and series of stakeholder conversations via webinar and individual calls undertaken for DTFH61-11-F-00031, “Pedestrian and Bicycle Data Collection.” This document contains two sections: (1) Pedestrian Data Collection, and (2) Bicycle Data Collection. Each section contains a summary of the state-of-the-practice as it existed in Fall 2011 based on available literature and practitioner input. The literature review focused on papers written in English. The review emphasized research conducted during the past decade to ensure that emerging technologies and methods were properly identified. Included in the search was literature discussing how various counting programs are conducted by local governments, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), state departments of transportation (DOTs), and national and international transportation agencies. A presentation containing information on both pedestrian and bicycle data collection practices was disseminated via webinar. Questions aimed at documenting current practice from the practitioners’ viewpoint were included. The webinar was conducted four times. Twenty-five state agencies, eight planning agencies and twenty-one other entities active in collecting, using and or analyzing pedestrian and or bicycle data participated. Subsequent to the webinars, in-depth conversations were held with eight individuals identified as being heavily involved in the collection and or use of pedestrian and bicycle data. The top two reasons for collecting pedestrian counts are: (1) Safety analyses, and (2) Project specific needs (most commonly before and after studies). The two project specific topics which received nearly the same number of votes were: project design and evaluation with before and after studies ranked slightly higher than design. These are the same reasons, along with project selection, that are anticipated to need pedestrian data in the future. There are no generally accepted sampling or factoring processes. The data are typically stored in project specific formats. Pedestrian volumes have been documented to vary by both time of day and day of week. Equipment for counting pedestrians is capable of working under all weather conditions and in both on-road and off-road locations. An area of needed equipment improvement is better identification of numbers of individuals when in groups. The top two reasons for collecting bicycle counts are: (1) Project evaluation (before and after studies), and (2) Safety analyses. Other project specific uses (selection and design) both ranked lower than safety analyses. These are also anticipated to be the principal future needs (and ranking) for bicycle counts. There are no generally accepted sampling or factoring processes. Bicycle volumes have been documented to vary by weather, route conditions, day of week and time of day. Equipment for counting bicycles is capable of collecting information under all weather conditions and in both on-road and off-road locations. Areas of needed equipment improvement include the ability to sort out clusters of bicyclists and to capture composite material frames. Bicycles made from composite materials (primarily carbon fiber) are not detectable by inductive loops, a common type of bicycle count technology.

Language

  • English

Media Info

  • Media Type: Digital/other
  • Features: Appendices; Figures; Tables;
  • Pagination: 162p

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 01640298
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Contract Numbers: DTFH61-11-F-00031
  • Files: NTL, TRIS, ATRI, USDOT
  • Created Date: Jul 5 2017 12:12PM