Qualitative comparison of north-american procedures for areawide pedestrian travel measurement

Abstract

<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: xx-small;"><p align="left">There is no standard system for estimating area-wide pedestrian volumes in the United States. As a result, pedestrian volumes cannot be routinely used to guide transportation investments and monitoring measures performance. Vehicle volumes, by contrast, are measured systematically in each state and are reported to the Federal Highway Administration annually to be used in the allocation of federal funds. This paper investigates the advantages and disadvantages of three approaches to the creation of a standard system of pedestrian volume measurement: direct sampling, survey methods, and modeling. Examples of each method are given, and the potential of each to become a national standard is discussed. Of the three approaches, the modeling methods were judged to be most suitable for tracking pedestrian volumes at the national, state, and sub-state level. A standardized pedestrian volume modeling method could make use of existing data sources without generating the need for a new national pedestrian data collection effort.</p></span></span>

The Usability of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) for Pedestrian Observation

“…A more accurate and thorough way of counting manually is by using video cameras or time-lapse photography for they allow subsequent verification. Since Whyte (1980) observed people in public plazas and streets in New York City and ascertained why some places were successful while others were not, video observation has been used in many pedestrian studies (Diogenes et al 2007; Figliozzi et al 2014; Greene-Roesel et al 2008). Unfortunately, video cameras are not only costly but also subject to theft, vandalism, and occasional malfunctions.…”

“…The other approach, automatic count technologies, makes use of devices installed in a set location, so the automatic observation is a practical and less costly method of collecting ongoing and consistent data (SCAG 2013; US FHWA 2013). However, it often results in the collection of inaccurate, limited information (Greene-Roesel et al 2008; Schneider, Arnold, and Ragland 2009). A common source of inaccuracy in automatic counters is occlusion, or undercounting (i.e., only counting one person when multiple users are walking next to each other; Ryus et al 2014).…”

“…The other approach, automatic count technologies, make use of devices installed in set locations, so it is a practical and less costly method of collecting ongoing and consistent data (Southern California Association of Governments [SCAG] 2013; US FHWA 2013). However, it often results in the collection of inaccurate, limited information (e.g., counts, not activities; Greene-Roesel et al 2008; Schneider, Arnold, and Ragland 2009). A more accurate and thorough observation method is the use of video cameras, which allow subsequent verification (Diogenes et al 2007; Figliozzi et al 2014; Greene-Roesel et al 2008).…”

“…However, it often results in the collection of inaccurate, limited information (e.g., counts, not activities; Greene-Roesel et al 2008; Schneider, Arnold, and Ragland 2009). A more accurate and thorough observation method is the use of video cameras, which allow subsequent verification (Diogenes et al 2007; Figliozzi et al 2014; Greene-Roesel et al 2008). However, cameras are costly and subject to theft, vandalism, and occasional malfunctions (Ryus et al 2014; SCAG 2013; US FHWA 2013).…”

Estimating Congestion in a Fixed-Route Bus by Using BLE Signals

“…Methods using an infrared sensor for detecting the passengers have also been proposed [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. In order to measure the number of passengers in airports, Bauer et al proposed the system combining an infrared sensor and mat-type pressure sensor.…”