Mode shift performance measures
GreenDOT Advisory Working Group:
Data and Performance Measures and Mode Shift
March 4, 2015
Agenda
GreenDOT performance measures recap
Desired attributes of mode shift measure
Best practices & innovations in mode shift
measurement
Data and performance measures recap
Process for establishing performance
measures:
Develop outcomes model
Identify measures
Develop methodologies (where needed)
Document metadata (metadata pilot
underway)
Embed data collection in MassDOT’s BAU
collection of performance data
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 3
GreenDOT performance measures
recap
Data and performance measures
workgroup discussed framework and
potential measures in 2014
2014 GreenDOT report contained
outcomes model and list of measures
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 4
GreenDOT performance measures
recap
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 5
GreenDOT performance measures recap
Bicycle and
pedestrian
measures
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 6
Bicycle and pedestrian measures
Measure
Comments
Bicycle and pedestrian miles travelled
Not currently measured on
regular, statewide basis
Commuter mode split
Measure available
Injuries and fatalities by mode
Measure available
The percentage of Massachusetts residents with access to
transit services and pedestrian and bicycle facilities
Measure available (need to
arrangements for collection of
GIS data to ensure ongoing
reliability)
Bicycle facilities at transit stations
Data available need to confirm
approach to collection and
calculation
Number of pedestrian/bicycle design exception approvals
Measure available
MassDOT capital expenditures on bicycle and pedestrian
infrastructure
Not currently measured on
regular, statewide basis
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 7
Towards a mode shift measure
Mode shift goal aspires to
triple travel in
Massachusetts by bicycling,
transit and walking.
Massachusetts mode split, 2010.
2010 Household travel
survey provides a baseline
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 8
Towards a mode shift measure
The proposed GreenDOT
performance measures
assume we will measure
and compare miles
travelled across all modes
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 9
Desired attributes of mode shift
measure
Understand bicycle and pedestrian
movements in a comparable way to
vehicle and transit movements:
Statewide estimate
Repeatable annually
Affordable
Reasonable level of accuracy
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 10
Best practices & innovations in
mode shift measurement
Counting methods overview
State DOTs – MPOs – local municipalities
count programs review
MassDOT’s counting synopsis
MassDOT focused discussion
Feedback questions
Moving forward dialogue
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 11
Counting Methods Overview
Permanent vs. Temporary vs. Combination
Considerations: cost, continuous data vs. “snap shot”
measurement, transferability of device, etc.
Automatic vs. Manual
Considerations: cost (staffing time, training,
installation, maintenance), time frame, accuracy, etc.
Facility type
Bike alone, pedestrian alone, mixed bike and
pedestrian, mixed bike and automobile, roadway
crossings
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 12
Count programs review
Within Massachusetts
MassDOT: individual bicycle/pedestrian count
studies, project based turning movement
counts, annual vehicular counts
MPOs & local municipalities
Outside of Massachusetts
State DOTs – MPOs – local municipalities
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 13
Feedback questions
What bicycle and/or pedestrian focused counting
methods should be added?
What bicycle and/or pedestrian count programs
should be added?
Especially from within Massachusetts
What additional count method attributes should
MassDOT consider?
How should MassDOT approach considering
“combination” counting methods?
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 14
Moving forward dialogue
Review of bicycle/pedestrian counting
methods and counting programs
Discussion of how bicycle/pedestrian
counts could inform the mode shift metric
www.mass.gov/massdot/greendot
March 4, 2015 – Slide 15
DRAFT_Bicycle Pedestrian Count Summary_GreenDOT_3/4/2015
Methods
Permanent
Automatic
Video recognition software*
Manual
X
X
Pedestrian crossing activation
X
Acoustic slab
X
Active infrared X
Side‐mounted passive infrared detector
X
Overhead passive infrared detector
X
Loop detectors
X
Laser Scanner
X
Radio waves
Combination
Mixed Bike Pedestrian and Bike Alone Alone
Pedestrian
X
Mobile device detection (e.g. Bluetooth, Wi‐Fi)*
X
GPS technology
X
X Mixed Bike and Roadway Automobiles Crossings What is being measured
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Cost (relative)
Accuracy
$$‐$$$, $1,200‐
$15,000
High level
A change in pixels
The number of times a signal is requested
Change of pressure (weight) on pad
A break in an infrared light beam
~$2,000‐$8,000 Medium level
12 ‐ 48% (low on multi‐
$800‐$7,000
use paths)
A change in thermal contrast
1 ‐ 36% (low on trails $2,000‐$3,000 and sidewalks)
A change in thermal contrast
1 ‐ 36% (low on trails $2,000‐$3,000 and sidewalks)
Minimal
Low level
Change in the magnetic field ‐3 ‐ 25% (lower on due to passing of metal
$2,000‐$3,000 multi‐use paths)
Change and reflection of laser Data not pulses
available
Data not available
A break in a radio beam
Changes in the position of mobile devices with "discoverable" Bluetooth and/or WiFi‐enabled devices over time
~$5,600
Lacks rigorous testing
~$2,000‐$8,000 High level
X
Measures movement patterns and time spent in areas
~$2,000‐$8,000 High level
X
User type, travel direction. The loop detector or piezoelectric strips detects bicycles only and $$‐$$: depends the passive infrared counts all on methods users
selected
High level; ~ 40%
N/A
N/A
Loop detector or piezoelectric strips with passive infrared
X
X
Methods
Video recognition software*
X
X
X
X
X
Pneumatic tubes
X
Mobile device detection (e.g. Bluetooth, Wi‐Fi)*
X
A change in pixels
A change in pressure in the tubes
Changes in the position of mobile devices with "discoverable" Bluetooth and/or WiFi‐enabled devices over time
X
X
$‐$$$ Depends on scale of the survey: typical Demographics, routes, purpose cost = $10/interview High level
and opinions
X
X
$‐$$ Depends on scale of the survey: typical Demographics, routes, purpose cost = $3/interview
High level
and opinions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Phone surveys**
Temporary
Automatic
DRAFT_Bicycle Pedestrian Count Summary_GreenDOT_3/4/2015
Online survey
Manual
On‐site survey (manual count)
Manual video survey
Face to face interviews (intercept surveys)
X
X
X
X
Phone surveys**
X
X
Mail‐out survey
X
X
Focus group discussions
X
X
X
X
Methods
X
$1,200‐$8,000 Lacks rigorous testing
‐1.9 ‐ 27.5% (lower in $2,000‐$3,000 mixed traffic)
~$2,000‐$8,000 Lacks rigorous testing
User type, travel direction, user characteristics
$‐$$$
Counts, demographics, behavior, routes
$7,000 Demographics, routes, purposes and opinions
$‐$$$
Demographics, routes, purposes and opinions
$‐$$$
Demographics, routes, purposes and opinions
$‐$$$ Focus on opinions; others can include demographics, routes and purpose
$‐$$
High level: limited by data analyst
High level: limited by data analyst
High level
High level
High level
High level
DRAFT_Bicycle Pedestrian Count Summary_GreenDOT_3/4/2015
Count Method
Agency
Count Frequency
Count Locations
Count Location Type Duration
Paths
Washington State DOT
Manual
Annual
229 sites
3‐hour
Midblock screen lines
Additional Data Site Selection Criteria
Time Period Recorded
Activity area or corridor
Representative locations
Key corridors
Midweek Data not Previous count Sept. AM and available locations
PM
Potential improvement areas
State Departments of Transportation
High‐collision areas
Colorado DOT
Automated
Continuous
Permanent sites: 6
Trails/paths
Rotating temporary sites: 5
Automated
MassDOT
Project based
Over 500 projects
Manual
Automated
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Intersections
Automated: continuous 4 ‐ +24 hour
Automated: varies
Midblock screen lines
Manual: weekday evening and Manual: 2‐hour
weekend afternoon, May and Sept.
Trails
Continuous
Continuous
2, 12, 24‐hour
Midweek Sept.
Annual sites: 30
Minnesota DOT
Annual
Manual
3 years
Midblock screen lines
Three year sites: 300
Agencies
Data not available
Data not available
Near planned projects
Varies
Potential improvement areas
Sidewalk riding
High traffic locations
Range of facility types
Near planned projects
DRAFT_Bicycle Pedestrian Count Summary_GreenDOT_3/4/2015
Regional Planning Commissions
Municipalities
Massachusetts
Oregon DOT
Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission
Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization
Automated
Approximately 17,700 riders, 2013 (one year 400,000 license individual purchased in bicycle trips, 5 2014)
million bicycle miles traveled
Varies
5 regional trail counts
Manual
Continuous
Continuous
Entire trips
2, 3, 4‐hour
Weekday and Weekend May ‐ Sept. AM and PM
Data not available
Trails/paths
2011‐Present
7 bicycle lane counts
Intersection/mi
dblock screen lines
500+ counts
Varies
Trails
Bike routes
Data not available
Manual
1975 ‐ Present
Cap Cod Planning Commission
Manual
Varies, volunteer based
Not available
Varies
Cambridge
Manual
2‐years
17 sites
Intersections 2‐hour
Medford
Manual
Biannual
7 sites
Intersections 2‐hour
Somerville
Manual
Biannual
36 sites
Intersections 1‐hour
Varies
Varies
Varies, Varies, Child in recommends 2‐ recommends carrier
hour
Summer
Midweek Data not Sept. AM and available
PM
Midweek May/Sept. Gender
AM and PM
Spring/Fall Data not AM and PM available
Trails
Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission
Automated
2010‐2011
Data not available
Agencies
Midblock screen lines
Data not available
2, 12, and 24‐
hour
Midweek Sept.
Sidewalk riding
Data not available
Varies, selected by volunteers but the CCPC does provide a list of priority locations
Data not available
Data not available
Data not available
High traffic locations
Range of facility types
Near planned projects
Regional Planning Commissions
DRAFT_Bicycle Pedestrian Count Summary_GreenDOT_3/4/2015
Sidewalk riding
Mid‐Ohio Regional Planning Commission
Manual
Biannual
Intersections
2‐hour
Morning and midday
Gender
Weather
Potential improvement areas
High‐collision areas
San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Automated
Annual, 100‐
150 sites
Manual
Outside Massachusetts
22 sites
Activity areas/corridors
Representative locations
Key corridors
Previous count locations
Minneapolis Public Works Department
Automated
Automated: 16 sites
Automated: continuous
Intersections
Manual: 41 sites
Annual and 3‐
year
Manual
Manual: 2‐hour
Annual: 20 sites
Trails
3 year: 300 sites
Midblock screen lines
2, 12, and 24‐
hour
Wrong‐way New bicycle riding
facilities
Automated: Heavy continuous Sidewalk transit/pedestrian riding
sites
Manual: Turning midweek movement High bicycle traffic
Sept. PM Helmet use
High traffic locations
Midweek Sidewalk Range of facility types
Sept.
riding
Near planned projects
Municipalities
High bicycle collision rates
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Manual
2002‐2004, 2010‐2011
Intersections/c
100‐150 counts
rossings
Agencies
2‐hour
Midweek Sept./Oct. midday or AM and PM
On the local or regional bicycle network
Data not available
Proximity to major transit facilities
Proximity to schools and colleges/universitie
s
DRAFT_Bicycle Pedestrian Count Summary_GreenDOT_3/4/2015
Proximity to attractions/destinat
ions
Automated: loop detectors
Continuous
Portland Bureau of Transportation
Manual
Annual 14 automated sites
4 automated bridge sites
156 manual sites
Agencies
Bridges
Automated: continuous
Automated: continuous
Bicycle delay Bridges
Helmet use Trails
Paths Manual: Gender
Manual: 2‐hour midweek July‐
Turning Sept. PM
Intersections movement
Bike routes
Geographic diversity