Pedestrian Data Collection and Consistency in Open Street Maps

May 23, 2018

The Goal – Data Collection and Consistency

Obtain regionally consistent pedestrian asset data that supports:

• potential model improvements for pedestrian travel

• plan monitoring

• consistent evaluation of pedestrian connectivity needs region-wide

• the preservation and maintenance work program

• local needs

Composite Connectivity Index

Sound Transit and King County Metro studyAnalysis included:

Intersection Density Sidewalk CoverageRoute directness Projected increase in transit ridershipSignalized Arterial Crossings Bike Stress

Transit Access Assessments

The Challenge

• Inconsistent data formats between jurisdictions – data sets are difficult to integrate

• Inconsistent information – different data points are collected and not consistent regionally

• Lack of data in some areas

• Longevity of data collection activities and updates

• Challenge of sharing and accessing data in one place

The Challenge

Sidewalk Data Set Example: Inconsistent data formats and lack of detailed information

Polygons Lines on both sidesCenter line with L/R attributes PDF map

No additional data

Step 1: Sidewalk Network in OSM

Start with entering sidewalk data into Open Street Maps (OSM)

1. PSRC contribution: Begin with access to transit locations

2. Prioritize where to begin:• not to overlap what other agencies are doing• suggest high capacity transit and ferries to start

3. Decide on the method: attributes or drawing in the sidewalk network, manual or imports

4. Define essential tags that are needed for step 1

5. Get started…

Why PSRC is choosing Open Street Maps

• Existing transit networks and tools already use OSM networks

• Open source – opportunity for PSRC and partners to

collectively contribute to one data set

• Data in OSM would benefit from analysis tools developed or being developed (AccessMap)

• Provides interoperability and maintainability

TriMet and OpenStreetMap

● TriMet provides transit in

Portland, Oregon region

● Leaders in open source

tools/data

● Helped launch

OpenTripPlanner (OTP) in

2009

● Adopted OSM

in 2011

Madeline Steele

steelem@trimet.org

Street Data Comparison - why TriMet chose OSM

Commercial

● Costly

● Limited control over data

quality and updates

Centerline Files

● Free

● Limited coverage area

● Not designed for routing

purposes

OpenStreetMap

● Free

● Seamless coverage worldwide

● Designed for and supports multi-

modal routing

● Investment in community product for

shared benefits

● More control, higher quality

TriMet 2016

sidewalk tagging

PBOT Growing

Transit

Communities Pilot

Tagged before

2016 (by both

TriMet and broader

OSM community)

Sidewalk Project

Colored streets

have sidewalk tags

© OpenStreetMap Contributors. Esri basemap 11

2017 — Expanding to seven counties

1/1/17: 35.7% complete 4/1/17: 72.2% complete 7/1/17: 85.7% complete

Choosing a Methodology

Pilot study:

• Choose handful of existing or future transit hubs for pilot (places where there is added benefit without overlapping efforts)

• Test various methods (within ½ mile walk shed) and report on time and benefits of each :

• Manual coding of sidewalks as an attribute of the roadway

• Manual drawing in of sidewalks (OpenSidewalks)

• Test import methods

• Report on most appropriate method and how those support work program items

TOC Discussion

What are some locations recommended for sidewalk data collection pilot (that meet the following criteria)?

• existing or future transit hubs/ stations

• places where there is added benefit for transit agency planning

• Places that do not already have existing or planned data collection efforts

Kim Scrivner, PSRC

kscrivner@psrc.org, 206-971-3281

Kim Scrivnerkscrivner@psrc.org