PRACTICAL MONITORING OF CYCLING
Mark StrongTransport Initiatives LLP
Transport Initiatives LLPOffice 4
145 Islingword RoadBrighton BN2 9SH
0845 345 7623www.transport-initiatives.com
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Summary
Paper based on work by Transport Initiatives for Essex County Council reviewing locations for bicycle monitoring in five towns in the county
Brief review of cycle monitoring research and techniques
Use of manual and automatic methods including Automatic Cycle Counters (ACCs)
Process for establishing a good cycle monitoring programme
Examples of sites
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Why monitor?
Trends – to detect changes and trends in cycle usage over time
Baseline – to establish a starting point for use in target setting and comparison with future surveys
Information – to provide details on the levels and characteristics of cycling
Scheme-related – to investigate the effect on cycling of new measures such as cycling schemes or changes in policy
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Why monitor? And especially to measure progress
against LTP targets
But remember: monitoring is only a proxy for real levels of cycling since much cycling happens when or where there is no counting
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Background
Cycle monitoring techniques differ widely between local authorities
Authorities must use existing research and best practice to set up a monitoring strategy
But most general guidance for traffic monitoring uses information based on research into motor vehicles flows
Key study in 1999 by TRL gives some guidance on monitoring D G Davies, P Emmerson & A Pedlar, Transport Research Laboratory (1999) “TRL 395 – Guidance on monitoring local cycle use”
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Good monitoring requires large sample sizes and survey conditions to be controlled
These requirements have generally not been met for cycle monitoring in the UK: Manual surveys generally carried out without
controlled conditions (or even record of conditions)
Counts often in locations with very low cycle flows.
Most findings more valuable as a ‘snapshot’ of cycling than measurement of long-term trends
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Implications of TRL research Number of “counting periods” depends on a
range of factors, especially estimated levels of cycle use
Sites with 100-250 cyclists/day require at least 15 periods to detect an annual change of 20% (i.e. 250% increase in cycling over 5 years)
e.g. Essex County Council LTP target is 160% - number of count periods required is approx: 30 for sites with >250 cyclists/day 50 for sites with 100-250 over 100 for sites with <100 cyclists/day.
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
No theoretical reason why this level of monitoring could not be carried out using manual surveys
But practical reasons of cost rule it out In practice statistically robust cycle
monitoring requires the use of ACCs to: give continuous data on cycle flows provide sufficient count periods to establish a
robust trend even allowing for errors or malfunctions
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Guidance (or lack of it)
Little or no guidance on the number of counters required in an area to provide robust data
TRL study recommends that authorities should install “at least one, and preferably several” ACCs (but no definition of “several”)
No distinction between different sizes and types of authorities or areas
No guidance on how large authorities such as shire counties can determine trends in cycling in towns or other discrete areas
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Local authority examples
Local Authority Approx. population
(2001 census)
Number of ACCs
Counters per million population
Nottingham City Council 267,000 15 56
Gloucestershire County Council 565,000 25 44
Lincolnshire County Council 647,000 26 40
Hampshire County Council 1,240,000 46 37
Portsmouth City Council 187,000 7 37
Oxfordshire County Council 605,000 20 33
Surrey County Council 1,059,00034
(LTP 28)32
(LTP 26)
Cambridgeshire County Council 550,000 14 25
Essex County Council 1,311,000 17 13
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Monitoring techniques Automatic Cycle Counters (ACCs)
Accurate, robust, relatively cheap Problems:
Coincidence Failure to cross the counting device False positives No details about demographics of cyclists or nature
of journey
Manual monitoring Interviews Destination surveys
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
ACC methods
Inductive LoopMost
widespread method
But problems!
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Types of ACC
Radar Infra-red Piezoelectric tube Video/CCTV
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Suggested good practice Empirically-based model for good practice in
the provision of ACCs for settlements of different sizes
Range to allow for local variation, e.g. density of network or specific section of route
Ratios may seem high but should be balanced against other areas with little or no provision
Model not intended to be used to set the overall level of ACCs across whole county (made up of dispersed settlements of varying sizes) or large cities of >400,000
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Suggested level of provision
Population of discrete
settlement
Suggested number of counters
Approx. counters per million population
< 25,0002 - 3
(statistically robust only where there is a high level of cycling)
120
25,000 - 50,000 3 – 4 110
50,000 - 100,000 4 – 6 80
100,000 - 150,000 6 – 9 65
150,000 - 200,000 8 – 12 60
200,000 - 250,000 11 – 15 59
250,000 - 300,000 14 – 17 57
300,000 - 400,000 17 – 20 55
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Manual monitoring
Traditional method for monitoring cycling levels
As discussed, not appropriate for establishing long-term trends mainly due to the costs
However still has a number of functions: Calibration of ACCs More detailed information on a range of
characteristics e.g. gender or age Counts at short notice Counts at complex sites, including details of
turning movements
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
TRL recommendations for manual monitoring1. Count when flows are high/highest2. Count during good weather3. Count during BST, preferably between May and
October inclusive4. Where cycle journeys are primarily for utility,
count on weekdays and avoid public/school holidays
5. Where cycle journeys are primarily for leisure, weekends and holiday periods may be appropriate times to count
6. Comparison counts should be undertaken at the same time of year
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Existing situation in Essex
2005 Essex Traffic Monitoring Report - 17 ACCs (plus 3 ACCs not used by Essex - district, Sustrans etc.)
Monitored for 2 weeks every quarter – only just statistically valid
Average daily cycle flows from 38 to 339 Plus manual counts on 3 yearly basis (9 – 250
cyclists) Month changed from Sept to Aug between
counts!
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Study methodology
Desk assessment & site visits Factors for site choice:
Location on a cycle route Ability to differentiate cycle traffic from
motorised vehicle traffic Locations where relatively high cycle flows occur
or might be expected to occur in the future Points where cyclists are channelled in some way
and hence cannot avoid crossing the detection zone (or could be channelled e.g. ASL)
General comments on cycling also made
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Prioritisation
Based on site visits and suggested number of ACCs in each town
Sites plotted on GIS Three levels of priority:
Priority 1 Core network of ACCs for LTP baseline Priority 2 Increased level of monitoring of
cycling, to be installed if funds permit Priority 3 Optional sites, to be used to determine
level of cycling on specific routes NB recommended sites located to pick up
main expected cycle flows hence not necessarily evenly distributed
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Case study - Colchester Historic town in the east of Essex Population of around 156,000 Currently 5 ACCs 1 counter was not functional at the time of
inspection for at least a year due to construction works
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Colchester
Existing sites
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Colchester
15 potential new sites
Blue – proposed ACCGreen – other (manual
count)
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
ColchesterSite no. Priority
OS grid reference
Location
CO/03 existing 6017 2241 Either existing location or at Toucan crossing of A134
CO/06 1 5993 2263 Cycle lane, n. of Westway / North Station Road roundabout
CO/07 1 5999 2261 Cycle/pedestrian crossing of Cowdray Avenue
CO/08 2 5990 2257 Underpass crossing of Westway, e. of Sheepen Road
CO/09 1 5994 2257 Cycle lanes, North Bridge
CO/10 1 5997 2257 Crossing of River Colne n. of weir
CO/11 2 5994 2255 Bus/taxi/cycle lane, junction of North Hill / Northgate St
CO/12 2 5999 2251 Queen Street cycle lane
CO/13 3 5994 2266 Cycle track at Mile End Road / A134 Relief Road bus gate
CO/14 1 5993 2271 Cycle track in new development, east of Mile End Road
CO/15 2 6011 2271 Cycle track crossing of Spring Close, High Woods
CO/16 1 5985 2249 Lexden Road cycle lanes
CO/17 2 5980 2248 Cycle track crossing of Norman Way by school
CO/18 3 5984 2253 Path from Sussex Road
CO/19 1 6006 2253 Crossing of East Street (west of East Bridge)
CO/20 3 6020 2240 Wivenhoe Trail west of Essex University
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Colchester - recommendations Recommended minimum of 11 ACCs in
Colchester i.e. an increase of 6 Non-functioning ACC on route to
Wivenhoe should be replaced Possible extra site on cycle track in the
residential development on former hospital site but MUST be in conjunction with improvements to track
Total number of new counters required would therefore be 7
Improved cycle parking at station and regular (monthly) monitoring
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Strategic recommendations Frequency of monitoring a minimum of
two weeks in every month (giving 168 days’ counts each year), and ideally continuous
All sites to be visited regularly on a six-monthly basis
ACCs with very low, erratic or static patterns of usage should be visited as soon as possible
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Strategic recommendations If ACC site is affected by development,
provision of a replacement must form part of planning conditions / S106 agreement
Minor sites on one-for-one basis Major sites should include sufficient ACCs to
monitor cycling levels as a result of the travel plan associated with development
All ACCs provided as part of development should be installed as early as possible, ideally before the commencement of works
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Detailed recommendations 24 new counters Additional 4 counters replaced or
relocated New total of 41 counters across the county
as a whole (including the 4 sites not covered by this study)
New level of provision in Essex would lie in the centre of the range of good practice (32 counters / million population)
Approx capital cost £90,000
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Detailed recommendations
BasildonMinimum of 6 ACCs (increase of 5)The existing ACC should be relocated and integrated into the Essex data collection process
BraintreeMinimum of 4 ACCs (increase of 3)The existing Flitch Way ACC should be integrated into the Essex data collection process
ChelmsfordMinimum of 11 ACCs (increase of 4)The counter on the APU campus should be relocated elsewhere on the site
ColchesterMinimum of 11 ACCs (increase of 7)The non-functioning ACC on the route to Wivenhoe should be replaced
Harlow Minimum of 5 ACCs (increase of 4)
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Detailed recommendations All sites to use either inductive loops or
radar units with standard counting equipment
If inductive loops used these must extend the full width of the surface that might be used by cycles
Precise location of ACC site to be determined after discussions with the counter supplier or manufacturer
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Detailed recommendations Regular programme of counting cycles
parked at stations and other key destinations should be introduced
Existing programme of manual surveys should be replaced by a more focused programme to support ACC network and provide detail on cycling journey characteristics
Roadside interviews of cyclists should be established in the five main towns to establish a baseline split for trip purposes
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Basildon
Loop on cycle side only (by secondary school)
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Basildon
Eastern end of link to town centre from Westgate
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Basildon
Cycle track at hospital
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Braintree
Install ASLs to channel cyclists
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Chelmsford
ACC sited on path to left of new access road leading to low counts
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Chelmsford
ACC sited on closed path through University campus
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Chelmsford
Chelmer Park
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Chelmsford
Loop on one side of path only
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Chelmsford
ACC to be sited at railway bridge (route to University)
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Chelmsford
ACC to be sited on shared use path by Leisure Centre
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Chelmsford
Monthly manual surveys at station
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Colchester
Two counters in Castle Park
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Colchester
Former location of ACC on Wivenhoe Trail (ringed)
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Colchester
North Bridge cycle lanes
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Colchester
Bus/taxi/cycle lane at edge of town centre
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Harlow
ASDA underpass
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Examples of existing and proposed sites Harlow
Priority crossing at entrance to hospital
Transport Practitioners’ Meeting 2006
Problems of success!