Department for Transport

Traffic Advisory Leaflets
01/99: Monitoring Local Cycle Use


Monitoring Local Cycle Use

Introduction
Summary
Background
Overall monitoring programme
Automatic Traffic Counting Equipment
Choosing suitable monitoring sites
When to count
How many days to count
Time of year to count
Monitoring the Overall Level of Cycle Use
TRL REPORT 396 - RESEARCH ON MONITORING CYCLE USE

Inductive loop ATC trials
Roadside interview surveys
DETR's long term traffic counting sites
Other work

Technical enquiries
References

Interview surveys are one of the few methods of obtaining detailed journey information

Introduction

The purpose of this leaflet is to offer general guidance on monitoring cycle use locally. It is based on research carried out by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). More detailed information is contained in TRL reports "Research on monitoring cycle use" and "Guidance on monitoring local cycle use".

Summary

Unlike the established methodology for counting motor vehicles, monitoring cycle use is still in its early stages. The main problem has been the lack of reliable automatic traffic counting (ATC) equipment designed specifically to count cyclists. However, due to growth in demand, partly stimulated by TRL's research in this area, the situation is now improving. Other means of carrying out surveys of cycle use levels (eg cycle parking surveys, road-side interviews, etc) are more established, but need to be undertaken regularly if they are to be an effective means of monitoring. In the future, more highway schemes will be developed that accommodate cycling, both exclusively and as part of wider schemes incorporating other transport modes. An important part of the planning and design process for these schemes is the accurate assessment of cycle flows before and after implementation. The DETR will expect local highway authorities to monitor the cycle use of schemes included within their Local Transport Plans (LTPs).

Image of cyclist being interviewed
Interview surveys are one of the few methods
of obtaining detailed journey information

Background

The National Cycling Strategy (NCS), launched in 1996 and supported by the DETR, included a headline national target of doubling cycle use by 2002, and doubling it again by 2012. This was endorsed by the Government's recent White Papers, "A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone" and "Travel Choices for Scotland". An integral part of the NCS is the expectation that highway authorities will set their own local cycle use targets. However, in order to set sensible targets, highway authorities must first accurately assess the current level of cycling in their areas. Once this has been done and targets set, cycle use levels should be regularly measured to assess progress.

Image of piezoelectric counters and inductive<br>
	       loops at one of 
the DETR's long-term monitoring sites
A combination of piezoelectric counters and inductive
loops at one of the DETR's long-term monitoring sites

Overall monitoring programme

Given the above requirements, the guidance below may be followed when devising a programme for monitoring cycle use locally. Whenever possible, the monitoring programme should include, complement, or take account of the following:-

 

Image of ATC information being collected locally
ATC information can be collected locally,
to assist with calibration of counting equipment

Automatic Traffic Counting Equipment

There are three types of ATC capable of counting cycle flow. The merits and disadvantages of each is discussed briefly below. Increasing the sophistication, such as using vehicle classification, will increase the costs for all three types :-

Image of an inductive loop at the road side
Inductive loops suffer
little wear and tear from heavy vehicles

Choosing suitable monitoring sites

When selecting sites local authorities might wish to consider the following:-

General: Some local authorities have found it helpful to use temporary surface fixed counters, or to undertake short manual counts in order to test the suitability of a site before installing a permanent counter.

Strategic: The sites should contribute to the monitoring programme and not be selected on the basis of convenience alone.

Local: The site layout and traffic characteristics should suit the monitoring equipment chosen.

High Cycle Flows: Sites with high cycle flows should be chosen. This will minimise the variability of the data over a given period of time.

Mixed Traffic Flows: Since most cycling occurs on all-purpose roads, it is important that mixed traffic sites are included in the monitoring programme. However, it should be recognised that the accuracy of ATC data from such sites will be heavily dependent on the site conditions.

Segregated Flows: To complement mixed traffic flow sites, locations where bicycles are segregated from motor vehicles should also be selected. These include cycle tracks, lanes, gaps, etc. The data from these sites will prove more reliable and require less validation.

Counting All Cyclists: As far as possible, sites should be chosen where it is difficult for cyclists to bypass the counter. Where avoidance is known to occur, such as cyclists using a footway, a manual count should be undertaken and an appropriate adjustment made to the ATC data obtained.

Junctions, Bends and Gradients: Some ATCs are not capable of counting cyclists travelling at (say) less than 5mph. Therefore, sites at uphill gradients, bends or junctions should be avoided.

Electrical Interference: Inductive loops should not be positioned close to potential sources of electrical or radio interference. Metal bridges, buried cables, rail lines, etc can adversely affect the data from an inductive loop.

Power Supply: Where electrical interference is not an issue, permanent ATC sites should have access to a mains power supply. Sites running on battery power can be more expensive in the long term. However, some battery changes may be carried out during routine maintenance visits, to minimise running costs.

When to count

Unless high intermittent peak flows are envisaged (eg at schools, factories, etc), daily flows should be recorded. Hourly flows should also be recorded, since this would be compatible with other traffic data. Periods shorter than this may be useful for junction or signal design purposes. For manual counts it should be borne in mind that, as a general rule of thumb, the results from a series of short peak period counts will be statistically more robust than a 12 hr count on a single day. This is because urban cycle traffic tends to be for commuting and educational purposes, and is therefore more peaked than motor vehicle traffic.

Image showing that screenlines and cordon counting stations
	       should be located where cycle flows are concentrated<font size=
Screenlines and cordon counting stations
should be located where cycle flows are concentrated

How many days to count

Short term counts may be used to estimate long term traffic flows. The quality of this estimate is dependent upon the following:-

In order to accurately detect changes in cycle flows, a statistically significant number of counts needs to be carried out. The information in Table 1, derived from national cycle count data, can be used as a first step towards selecting an appropriate sampling programme. For example, to detect an annual change of 20% in a flow exceeding 250 bicycles/day, with 90% confidence, at least 7 counts must be carried out every year.

table 1: Number of counts required to accurately detect a given change in cycle flow

Time of year to count

Unlike the case of monitoring motorised traffic flows, there is a relatively small body of cycling flow data on which to produce factors to convert short periods to annual averages, or to compare counts from one period of the year with another. When monitoring cycle flows, and until such data is available, the following points should be kept in mind:-

Monitoring the Overall Level of Cycle Use

There are two ways to monitor overall cycle use trends in a particular area. The first is to set up a system of cordons or screenlines, incorporating MCCs, on a regular basis, at similar times of the year. The data derived from this can be supplemented with that obtained from long-term ATCs. The main disadvantage of this approach is that cyclists may "leak through" the cordon by using minor roads and footpaths. This may lead to underestimates of cycling and uncertainties over observed changes through time. Nevertheless, cordon or screenline counts are probably the most practical way for a local authority to monitor cycling trends from one year to the next.

An alternative to the above is to take a random, or at least stratified random, sample of all roads, and cycle tracks and paths to estimate the absolute level of cycling, and then repeat these counts at suitable intervals. This is the method used, in part, by the DETR to estimate national cycle-kilometres. Given an estimate of the cycle-kilometres on any given road type, and knowing the length of road of that type, then the total cycle-kilometres for the area can be calculated. Repeat surveys could then be used to estimate changes in cycle kilometres. The main drawback with this method is that the uncertainty of year-by-year values could so great as to mask all but the largest changes in cycling levels.

Image of a typical pneumatic tube counter system installed by the
	       London Research Centre (cyclists on the footway would not be counted)
Typical pneumatic tube counter system installed by the
London Research Centre (cyclists on the footway would not be counted)

TRL REPORT 396 - RESEARCH ON MONITORING CYCLE USE

The first stage of the research involved sending out a questionnaire to 54 local authorities, primarily in an attempt to discover the extent to which cycling was monitored in their areas - fifty-six percent responded. 41% said that they had introduced cycle use targets, and 45% said that they intended to do so. Regular cycle counts were carried out by 63%.

Authorities were also asked to estimate cycle use levels in their area. On the basis of this information, 6 local authorities, each with varying levels of cycling activity, agreed to assist with on-road trials. Two were selected from the top 25% of authorities (based on number of cycling journeys to work in 1991), 2 from the middle 50% and 2 from the lowest 25%. The authorities were: Somerset County Council (Taunton); Norfolk County Council (Norwich); London Borough of Hackney; Surrey County Council (Guildford); Birmingham City Council; and Hyndburn District Council & Lancashire County Council (Hyndburn).

Inductive loop ATC trials

A total of 18 inductive loop ATC sites were installed and run in these areas. The main purpose of these trials was to estimate the accuracy of the ATCs. This was done by validating the ATC data with manual counts. Table 2 gives a sample of the results.

ATCs installed at off-road sites, such as cycle tracks, generally performed better than those used on all-purpose roads. There was a general tendency for the ATC data to under-count the total number of cycles. The main reason for this was masking of cycles by motor vehicles. There was also some under-counting of cycles on off-road sites. This was caused by some cyclists arriving simultaneously at the ATC by travelling two or more abreast, resulting in only one being counted. Common to some on and off- road sites was the tendency of some cyclists to bypass ATC loops completely, eg by travelling on the footway of an all purpose road, or by using the pedestrian part of a shared use cycle track.

Initially it was found that, in the absence of a mains power supply, battery life on the ACT counters could be limited to as little as two weeks. During the course of, and as a direct result of the trials, the counter manufacturer was able to modify the system to extend battery life.

It should be noted that much was learned by TRL and the local authorities through the trials. Those considering installing ATCs should not be put off by the discrepancy between ATC and MCC figures given in Table 2. ATCs installed in accordance with the manufacturer's current instructions and the recommendations provided in this leaflet should show much greater accuracy than the figures suggest.

Table 2: Sample of Validation counts at TRL study sites

Roadside interview surveys

Roadside interviews of cyclists were also undertaken in a variety of locations in Birmingham and Hackney, including public roads, canal towpaths and cycle paths on disused railways. Cyclists in Birmingham were given a postal questionnaire to complete. Generally, cyclists were only too willing to stop and be interviewed, except at very busy times. However, this was not the case in London where most of the cyclists concerned were working as couriers. Wet weather also reduced the willingness of cyclists to stop. In Birmingham, a total of 810 questionnaires were handed out to cyclists on a screenline cutting across roads, on and off-road cycle paths, cycle tracks and a canal towpath. This revealed that 82.5% of cycle trips were for commuter purposes; most cyclists would cycle more if there were less traffic and more facilities on the road; and 95% cycle at least 2-3 times per week. The results of the Hackney roadside survey were not available when the TRL reports and this leaflet were prepared.

DETR's long term traffic counting sites

Cycle counting data from the DETR's Long Term Traffic Counting Sites was examined. About fifty of these sites are capable of distinguishing between cycles and other traffic through the use of piezoelectric strips. The main purpose of this exercise was to estimate the implications of long term variations in cycle flow. To do this, three years of data for five of the sites, from 1994 to 1996, was analysed to identify any relevant factors. The results of this study have been used to provide advice on the sampling regime required to monitor changes for any given site. Figure 1 illustrates the degree to which motor traffic varies from cycle flows during a typical year.

Figure 1: Monthly variation in motorised vehicleand cycle flows

 

Other work

The TRL report also includes details of other cycle monitoring work carried out by Greater Manchester Transportation Unit, Surrey County Council, Somerset County Council, Cambridgeshire County Council, Nottinghamshire County Council, University of Sunderland, and Sustrans. Most of this work involved ATC/MCC surveys, cycle parking counts at schools and town centres, roadside interviews and employment surveys.

Technical enquiries

Charging and Local Transport Division CLT4,
3/22, Great Minster House,
76 Marsham Street,
London SW1P 4DR
Tel. 0171-676 2147
Fax. 0171-676 2210
e-mail phil.philippou@dft.gsi.gov.uk

References

Cycling in Great Britain, DETR. TSO, 1996

"Research on monitoring cycle use", TRL Report 396. TRL, 1999.

"Guidance on monitoring local cycle use", TRL Report 395. TRL, 1999.

(Contact number for TRL Reports: 01344 773131)

The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions sponsors a wide range of research into traffic management issues. The results published in Traffic Advisory Leaflets are applicable to England, Wales and Scotland. Attention is drawn to variations in statutory provisions or administrative practices between the countries.

The Traffic Advisory Unit (TAU) is a multi-disciplinary group working within the Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions. The TAU seeks to promote the most effective traffic management and parking techniques for the benefit, safty and convienience of all road users.

The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions The Scottish Office Y Swyddfa Gymreig The Welsh Office
Requests for unpriced TAU publications to: Charging and Local Transport Division, Zone 3/23, Great Minster House 76 Marsham Street, London, SW1P 4DR.
Telephone 0171 676 2478
mailto:talªdotditm3.demon.co.uk
Within Scotland enquiries should be made to:
The Scottish Office, Development Department, Victoria Quay, Edinburgh, EH6 6QQ,
Telephone 0131 244 0847
Within Wales, enquiries should be made to:
Welsh Office, Highways Directorate, 2nd Floor, Cathays Park, Cardiff, CF4 5PL,
Telephone 01222 825 111

Published 1 June 1999
Return to Traffic Advisory Leaflets: Cycle Facilities Index
Return to Traffic Advisory Leaflets Index
Return to Road Network Index
Return to Roads Index
Return to Home Page
Web Site Terms