{"id":8236,"date":"2022-10-17T14:04:15","date_gmt":"2022-10-17T12:04:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/supercykelstier.dk\/concept\/?page_id=8236"},"modified":"2024-08-14T15:27:28","modified_gmt":"2024-08-14T13:27:28","slug":"route-evaluations","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/supercykelstier.dk\/concept\/impact-assessment\/route-evaluations\/","title":{"rendered":"Route evaluations"},"content":{"rendered":"

A route evaluation of a cycle superhighway is a comprehensive assessment of the route’s effects and of whether the objectives of the cycle superhighway have been achieved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Cycle Superhighway Collaboration in the Capital Region has developed guidelines for which measurements should be conducted and which methods should be used. This ensures that results can be compared before and after construction, across routes, and in the subsequent development over time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Evaluation objectives<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In the development of a route evaluation, several objectives are often formulated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The objectives of the Cycle Superhighway Collaboration in the Capital Region are linked to the collaboration’s quality goals for a cycle superhighway: Coherency, accessibility, comfort, safety, and security<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Read more about quality goals here<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

In the following, the typical objectives under each quality goal that are included in a cycle superhighway evaluation are described, along with the methods used to asses them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Objectives for the five quality goals<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

Coherency <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Coherency involves ensuring better connectivity between business- , educational-, and residential areas as well as public transportation hubs. The objectives aim to increase the number of users and their satisfaction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Parameters<\/strong><\/td>Expected results<\/strong><\/td>Methods<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Increase in cycling traffic<\/td>10-20 % increase in cycling traffic<\/td>Machine counts of cyclists (tube counts, measured in average weekday daily traffic)<\/td><\/tr>
Modal shift from other modes of transport to cycling<\/td>Minimum 10 % of new cyclists on the route has shiftet mode from cars to bicycles<\/td>Stop-interviews<\/td><\/tr>
Satisfaction with connection to public transport<\/td>Satisfaction is valued as a minimum 4 on a scale of 1-5, where 5 is the maximum level of satisfaction. <\/td>Stop-interviews<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

Accessibility <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Accessibility is about making it easy to get around. Objectives for accessibility typically involve reducing ‘stop time’ and ensuring high user satisfaction with maintaining a steady speed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Parameters<\/strong><\/td>Expected results<\/strong><\/td>Methods<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Satisfaction with the possibility to upkeep a steady pace<\/td>Satisfaction is valued as a minimum of 4 on a scale of 1-5, where 5 is the maximum level of satisfaction<\/td>Stop-interviews<\/td><\/tr>
Improved ‘stop time’ and stop frequence<\/td>Less minutes in stop og less stops at junctions (less stop frequences)<\/td>Measurement of traveling time and stop frequency (Cycle-throughs on three types of cycles)<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

Comfort <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Comfort particularly involves the quality of the pavement and a high level of operation and maintenance, so the objectives for this typically revolve around pavement assessments \u2013 both through measurement equipment and user satisfaction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recommended objectives<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Parameters<\/strong><\/td>Expected results<\/strong><\/td>Methods<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Measurement of pavement quality shows improvement or comfort<\/td>Minimum 80 % of the pavement on the stretch is categorised as medium-level or high-level comfort<\/td>Measurement of comfort (Cycle-through with measurement equipment mounted on a test-bike)<\/td><\/tr>
Satisfaction with the pavement on the route<\/td>Satisfaction is valued as a minimum of 4 on a scale of 1-5, where 5 is the maximum level of satisfaction<\/td>Stop-interviews<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

Safety <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

The objective of a safe route is to minimize the risk of accidents and collisions – both between cyclists and other road users, between cyclists themselves, and solo accidents. Police-reported accidents are assumed to represent only 14% of all cyclist accidents1<\/a><\/sup>Christiansen, H., & Warnecke, M-L: Risiko i trafikken 2007-2016, 2018. Link<\/a><\/span>, so it can be difficult to assess the actual safety of a route based on this data alone. Therefore, it is recommended to rely on users’ own reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recommended objectives<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Parameters<\/strong><\/td>Expected results<\/strong><\/td>Methods<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Percentage of users who indicate they have experienced accidents<\/td>Maximum 2 % of respondents have been involved in an accident in the past year<\/td>Stop-interviews<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

Security <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Security regards the users’ own sense of security. Therefore, objectives for this focus on users’ experience and satisfaction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recommended objectives<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Parameters<\/strong><\/td>Expected results<\/strong><\/td>Methods<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Satisfaction with security on the route<\/td>Satisfaction is valued as a minimum of 4 on a scale of 1-5, where 5 is the maximum level of satisfaction<\/td>Stop-interviews<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Timeline for route evaluations<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

When a new cycle superhighway is being planned, or if major upgrades are planned for an existing route, the evaluation of the project must be considered and planned well in advance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A cycle superhighway route evaluation consists of a pre-assessment<\/strong> and a post-assessment<\/strong>. There are often several years between these assessments, but they are carried out at the same time of the year to ensure comparability. To avoid holidays and summer\/winter extremes in weather conditions, which can affect cycle traffic, measurements are typically conducted in September.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The measurements for the pre-assessment is conducted in September before construction begins to establish a baseline. The post-assessment should be conducted again in September 1-1.5 years after the route has been launched as a cycle superhighway. Ideally, there should be at least one year between the launch and the evaluation to ensure that users have had time to discover and adapt to the upgrades on the route, and the effects on cycle traffic, safety, and satisfaction can begin to be observed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Cycle Superhighway Collaboration in the Capital Region always seeks external assistance to conduct route evaluations to maintain a degree of independence in the results and assessment of the route. The collaboration has been conducting route evaluations since 2010, starting with the evaluation of the first route, the Albertslundruten. Most of the same parameters are evaluated today as back then, but some methods have been adjusted and refined over the years as experience grow and new technologies are developed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

After the route evaluation is completed, the route is monitored annually through bicycle counts every September and route inspections to track the development of cycle traffic and the condition of the cycle superhighway<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Read more about yearly bicycle counts here<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n
Read more about route inspections here<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Methods for evaluations<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Many methods can be used to measure the effectiveness and impact of cycle superhighways, and they are continually evolving. Most methods have advantages and disadvantages, which is why it’s important to carefully consider the choice of method.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most importantly, the method is durable enough to be used in both a pre-assessment and a post-measurement several years later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based on experience with different route evaluation methods, the Cycle Superhighway Collaboration in the Capital Region utilizes the following methods for route evaluations of the Capital Region’s cycle superhighways.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Evaluation methods<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

Bicycle counts <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

The bicycle counts are conducted as automated bicycle counts (using pneumatic tube counters) evenly distributed along the route, with at least one counting location in each municipality or approximately 3-4 km between each counting location. Counts are typically conducted during the first week of September, always at the same time of year and at the same counting locations in both the pre- and post-evaluations, to ensure the best possible basis for comparison. Bicycle counts on cycle superhighways are always reported in UHDT (week day average daily traffic).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is recommended that counts are logged in Mastra<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n

Comfort measurements <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Comfort measurements are conducted by cycling through the route with measuring equipment (accelerometers) mounted on a test bike. The cyclist positions themselves as close as possible to where other cyclists typically ride on the path. The smoothness of the surface is measured by the number and size of vibrations recorded. The accelerometer measures vertical acceleration five times per second while simultaneously recording the GPS position once per second.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The route is cycled through five times in each direction. Based on these five runs, the results are presented as an average per 10 meters using digital maps with color-coding indicating sections categorized as good asphalt, moderately good asphalt, moderate asphalt quality, and poor asphalt quality.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n
\n

Measurement of travel time and stop frequency <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

To conduct a travel time measurement, the route is cycled through using three types of bicycles: regular bike, e-bike, and speed pedelec.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

During the cycling with each type of bike, the following speeds are attempted to be maintained: regular bike (20 km\/h), e-bike (25 km\/h), and speed pedelec (35 km\/h).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The measurement is repeated on each type of bicycle five times in each direction. Subsequently, the total stop time on the route and the frequency of stops at the route’s intersections can be measured.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n
\n

Accident recordings <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

In the planning of a cycle superhighway, it can be a good idea to gather information on police-recorded accidents for the past minimum of 5 years to map potentially accident-prone areas along the route. This registration can advantageously be included in the pre-evaluation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The reason police-recorded accidents are no longer part of a standard evaluation of a cycle superhighway is that the accident numbers are relatively small, and more than one year’s registration (preferably five years) should ideally be collected at the post-measurement to avoid significant statistical uncertainty. Additionally, studies show that the police-recorded accidents involving bicycles represent only 14% of all cycling accidents2<\/a><\/sup>Christiansen, H., & Warnecke, M-L: Risiko i trafikken 2007-2016, 2018. Link<\/a><\/span>. In other words, this method struggles to evaluate the actual accident development on the route.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Therefore, evaluations of cycle superhighways now rely on users’ own reports. This method also carries a high level of statistical uncertainty but is expected to more accurately reflect the proportion of commuters who have experienced accidents on the route.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n
\n

User questionanaire survey <\/i><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

User questionanaire surveys are performed to get insights into user’s experience of cycle superhighways.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the Cycle Superhighway Collaboration in the Capital Region, it is agreed that there should be an aim of a minimum of 400 respondents per evaluation as a starting point to have a data foundation that is statistically valid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To reach the target group of the cycle superhighways, which are commuters, a questionnaire surveys among users are conducted during rush hours between 7-9 AM in the morning and between 3-5 PM in the afternoon. The surveys are conducted at relevant locations distributed along the route. Often, this location can be at a ‘natural’ stop, such as an intersection, where the users stop or slow down anyway, so they are not interrupted in the middle of a stretch. In some cases, there may be selected locations where special measures or improvements have been made, where it may also be relevant to conduct questionnaires.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since it can be difficult to find time to conduct a full questionnaire with users during rush hours, commuters are offered the opportunity to answer an online questionnaire. They do this by providing their contact information (email-address), after which they receive a link to the survey, which they can fill out at a convenient time. Users will be asked to answer the questions in regards to the trip they made when they were asked to participate in the survey. This method has shown great response rate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The user questionnaire surveys are intended to shed light on the user’s experience of the route, satisfaction level, reasons for choosing it, and more. It’s important that the questions framework is relatively fixed and follows the same content in both pre- and post-assessments. This way, the results from the survey can be used to paint a picture of the current route users and their satisfaction. At the same time, the data can also be used to compare across multiple routes and provide an overall picture for all the routes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Examples of questions for route evaluations:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n