Cycle network and route planning guide

The cycle network planning process

Print version: Chapter 13: Monitoring (PDF, 86 KB, 2 pages)

Monitoring

13.1 Introduction

This section describes the monitoring required, particularly once the implementation of the cycle network plan has started.

13.2 Features to monitor

The following features should be monitored and included in an annual or biennial report on cycle network development:

Physical works programmes.

Cycle use and modal share.

Cycle crashes.

Satisfaction levels regarding cycle facilities.

Cycle facilities’ condition.

Cycle network implementation.

LOS improvements.

13.3 Pragmatic approach

For efficiency purposes, monitoring and surveys of cycling should be integrated with similar local authority or RCA activities where possible.

13.4 Physical works programmes

As discussed in section 12.2.1, physical works programmes should be monitored to identify opportunities to include provisions for implementing sections of the cycle network, or for otherwise satisfying cyclists’ needs.

Planned general or reactive maintenance works (including storm damage repair) should be monitored on a monthly, or as appropriate, basis. Meanwhile, the infrastructure and maintenance works programme of Transit New Zealand and adjacent local authorities should be monitored at least annually.

13.5 Cycle use

The number of cyclists using key sections of the network should be counted annually to:

• detect any changes in cycle use that may affect cycle network implementation priorities
• collect data to support funding applications.

Installing continuous automated counters on key routes provides some control data for monitoring cycle use on the network. This can also be used for scaling short-term or seasonally affected counts and for calculating modal split.

Individual locations do not need to be counted every year. A rolling five-year programme of cycle counts will be adequate for monitoring and design purposes.

Cyclists’ trip patterns are important clues to the effectiveness of cycle network planning. If these differ significantly from those envisaged by network planners, it may indicate the need for a change of approach.

13.6 Cycle crashes

Cycle crash data should be monitored annually in order to detect:

• any new or growing hazards that may require urgent attention, or an adjustment to the cycle network implementation priorities
• any problems associated with recently completed cycle facilities
• whether cyclists’ safety is increasing or decreasing.

13.7 Satisfaction levels

A sample of all road users (including pedestrians) should be surveyed annually or biennially in order to identify the degree of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with provisions for cyclists in the study area. This survey is probably best included in a local authority’s residents’ survey, if it has one. A more specific survey of cyclists is also desirable.

13.8 Cycle facilities’ condition

The condition of existing cycle facilities should be monitored and any necessary maintenance programmed and carried out.

A system for cyclists to report hazards could be implemented, for example by freepost reply cards, email, the internet or phone hotlines.

Some European towns pay cyclist advocacy groups to conduct regular condition surveys.

13.9 Cycle network implementation

It is important for cycle network planning and maintenance purposes to maintain an up-to-date plan and schedule of the sections of the cycle network that have been implemented. From these, the percentage of the ultimate network completed can be calculated and compared with the planned progress, and reported where appropriate.

13.10 Level of service

The LOS of critical sections of the network (see section 9.5) can be monitored periodically to determine whether cycling conditions have deteriorated to an extent that upgrading should be given a higher priority.

13.11 Benchmarking

Several towns in Europe participate in benchmarking surveys to assess the adequacy of RCA policies and the performance of their networks in relation to the network attributes listed in Table 3.1.

These can be used to monitor progress in improving cycling conditions, and to compare network performance with other comparable centres that have taken part.

Bicycle Policy Audit (BYPAD), is offered by specialist consultants throughout Europe.

This process involves questionnaires completed by politicians, municipal officials and cyclists’ representatives. The auditor then facilitates the development of quality aims and measures for the future on the basis of the assessment results. More information is available at www.bypad.org

The Dutch Cyclists Union (Fietsersbond) also conducts benchmarking surveys called the Cycle Balance for the Dutch Government. This involves surveying cyclist representatives and the local authority’s officers. An instrumented bicycle is used to ride a sample of routes between randomly selected homes and common cyclist destinations. These are compared with car travel for the same trip. Cities are rated on their directness, delays to cyclists, road surface quality, noise levels, competitiveness with the car, bicycle modal share (for trips under 7.5 kms), bicycle injury rates, cyclist satisfaction and documented cycling policies. The project is described in Borgman (1993). The score table of 125 Dutch towns can be viewed on www.fietsbalans.nl (Dutch language).

13.12 Plan review

The monitoring results should be assessed at least every three years and the cycle network plan and programme adjusted as appropriate. Whether the plan is yielding value for money should also be assessed.

< previous | next >

Page created: 30 September 2004