Evaluation of Munich`s Cycle Route Planner

mobil.TUM 2016  International Scientific Conference on Mobility and Transport  Transforming Urban Mobility
Evaluation of Munich’s Cycle Route Planner
Data Analysis, Customer Survey and Field Test
Dipl.- Geogr. Florian Paul, Prof. Dr. - Ing. Klaus Bogenberger – Universität der Bundeswehr München
Route Sample of the Cycle Route Planner
Spatial Distribution of Route Requests
Data Analysis
Customer Survey
 Evaluation of the MVV-Bicycle Route Planner:
Analysis of 136,000 Single Route Requests
(multiple answers)
89,983
- 33 Trip Protocols of 11 Cyclists
Advice for Leisure Trips
Advice for Trips to Work
56,1%
Without a Precise Intention
28,8%
80000
65,549
60000
46,739
40000
38,614
23,5%
For Orientation on a Digital Map
13,6%
32,640
27,070
26,163
N = 17
N = 19
10,5%
To Compare Distance and Journey
Time with Motorized Traffic
3,8%
"Which Route are you going to cycle in the
future?"
"Which Route-Option is most similar to your
"Standard-Route"?"
94,301
17,6%
17,6%
Others
20000
15,8%
0%
1,072
0
Apr 15
Mai 15
Jun 15
Jul 15
Aug 15
Sep 15
Okt 15
Nov 15
Dez 15
Jan 16
Feb 16
Mrz 16
monthly trend
 High share of origins and destinations in the municipal area,
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
 Likelihood of 60.4% of actually cycling a route that was
recommended by the route planner
23,5%
57,9%
35,3%
15,8%
5,9%
low share in the suburban region
"What is the likelihood for really cycling a route, which was calculated in the route planner? "
N = 142
30
Fastest Route
Green Route
Familiy Route
None
Fastest Route
Green Route
Family Route
Standard-Route
Combination of Routes
Share of Origin Inputs
20,9%
Share of Destination Inputs
27,4%
Number of Mentions
25
 Highest impact on selected trips:
= 60.42%
20
15
Traffic Lights, Junctions and Trouble Spots with Car Traffic
10
5
0
Suburban Region
10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100%
Share of Likelihood
"Which external conditions had a strong impact on this trip?"
 Preconditions to use the bicycle more frequently: highest
approval rates for categories, representing a better bicycle
infrastructure and bicycle safety
"Would you use the bicycle more frequently for your daily trips, if...?"
N = 244
250
35
1
30
25
2
20
15
3,00
3,09
1
200
1,7
1,66
150
0
1,96
2
2,19
2,28
2,39
2,5
50
2,7
2,87
0
...a cycle highway ...the quality of ...the bicycle could ...the bicycle could ...the risk for
would exist?
cycle paths would be bettere/secure be better/secure accidents would
be improved e.g. stored at home? stored at work?
be very low?
winterservice,
lighting, green
wave?
Not assessable
No, certainly not
No, rather not
...the weather
would have no
influence?
3,52
3,90
1,83
100
3,31
5
1,5
3
3,25
10
...there is a E-Bike ...there is no car
available?
available?
Yes, eventually
Yes, certainly
...there is not
public transport
station close-by?
3
Average
4
Construction Sites
not assessable
Traffic Lights
no impact
Junctions
low
High Traffic Volume
rather low
Trouble Spots with Car
Traffic
high
Bad Bicycle
Infrastructure
very high
 Further research on bicycle accident data &
delay caused by traffic lights
average
Average Ranking
Municipal Area
5%
Single Answers
Suburban Region
Number of Mentions
Municipal Area
0%
72,6%
79,1%
Average Ranking
Number of Calculations
109,173
93,112
routes of the Cycle Route Planner
N = 132
70,5%
100000
 Implementation of Field Test to verify and evaluate selected
"For which reason did you use the Cycle Route Planner?"
140000
120000
Field Test
 Main purpose of using the Cycle Route Planner:
Leisure Trips & Trips to Work
Cycle Route Planner - Route Calculations per month
114,407
Sample of Route Recommendations